March 20-21, 2013
Mar 20 02:59 Is Sen. Bakk abandoning a sinking ship? Mar 20 03:44 Rep. Lien evades tax increase vote question Mar 20 11:04 Another temporary tax? Does anyone believe them? Mar 20 19:43 Cut This, Not That Mar 21 00:34 Franken, Klobuchar vote to keep People's House shut Mar 21 02:31 Raise taxes first, figure the rest out later Mar 21 08:30 Funding only priorities? Not with the DFL
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Is Sen. Bakk abandoning a sinking ship?
This morning, the Senate DFL will unveil their budget targets. Then, according to a loyal reader of LFR who works at the Capitol, Sen. Bakk will hop on a plane for Argentina, where he's taking a hunting trip.
Several questions pop to mind, starting with who's paying for the trip. With legislators making $31,140 a year, not including per diem and housing allowance, it isn't likely that Bakk could afford this type of trip on his own expense. If he isn't paying for this vacation, who is?
This is the type of vacation only 1 percenters can afford. Then you factor in that Sen. Bakk is taking this vacation right when the legislative schedule is heating up.
It must be nice to jet off on a vacation you can't afford while leaving a busy job right when things are heating up. (Is this what the DFL thinks of as a shared sacrifice?)
If you're wondering if I'll talk about the sinking ship question, the answer is no. That was just to get everyone's attention. After all, it isn't every day that the Senate Majority Leader takes an expensive vacation during the session.
Posted Wednesday, March 20, 2013 2:59 AM
Comment 1 by maddmedic at 20-Mar-13 10:00 AM
An his career before becoming a tax payer funded 'legislator'?
Labor official...
Go figure..
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 20-Mar-13 02:12 PM
Is there an easter recess coming up? Maybe he scheduled it during the easter recess.
Of course you will think if he thought he was going to be Senate majority leader and his vote might be needed he would've planned it after the session ended.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 3 by Chad Q at 20-Mar-13 04:32 PM
Where else can someone work 4 months out of the year and go on vacation during those 4 months? Bakk must think he's president of the United States.
Comment 4 by Nick at 21-Mar-13 02:03 AM
Argentina? Wow, that's not cheap. I remember the roundtrip flights alone to Chile from Minneapolis St. Paul last year cost me around $1200. So is Sen. Bakk using a private jet is he flying commercial?
Comment 5 by Nick at 21-Mar-13 02:03 AM
*or is he flying commercial?
Comment 6 by Mari at 21-Mar-13 11:09 AM
So, I'm wondering -- does Sen. Bakk know something about the 2nd Amendment legislation that we don't know? Is he leaving right before a possible forced Up or Down vote on the latest concoction of gun control bills to avoid voting? He is one of the Dems who has been very outspoken that he is strong on 2nd Amendment rights. Or does he already know that there are too many Dems voting with Repubs. to trounce these bills so he feels "safe" in skipping what is a REALLY important vote. Either way, if that vote happens and he is NOT present, I am VERY disgusted with him.
Rep. Lien evades tax increase vote question
Watching this interview was painful:
The interviewer tried repeatedly to get Rep. Dennis Lien to answer whethere "there was any circumstance" where he might vote for Gov. Dayton's business-to-business sales tax increase. Rep. Lien repeatedly said that he didn't think it was wise to make a pledge on how he would vote.
Several times, Rep. Lien talked about the need to look at the budget in its totality (that's quite the dodge, isn't it?) rather get hung up on the details.
It's worth noting that this interview was conducted on March 7, at least 6 weeks after Gov. Dayton first submitted his Mulligan Budget. Rep. Lien certainly had time to study the proposal. He repeatedly said that he'd listened to businesses in his district. He acknowledged they had concerns about Gov. Dayton's sales tax proposal.
Despite that information, Rep. Lien wouldn't tell his voters whether their concerns would determine his vote. That's a stunning thing. If he's had the time to study the proposal and he's listened to businesses who've expressed reservations about the business-to-business sales tax, what's left to do before making a decision?
It isn't like the interviewer was asking him to sign a pledge to never, under any circumstance, raise taxes. The interviewer simply wanted Rep. Lien to make up his mind on this specific policy. That isn't too much for Lien's constituents to ask. Instead, Rep. Lien chose to not tell his constituents what he'd do on a matter of import to them. (That's the polite way of saying Rep. Lien acted like a weasel.)
Posted Wednesday, March 20, 2013 3:44 AM
No comments.
Another temporary tax? Does anyone believe them?
Throughout the years, the DFL has proposed a number of temporary tax increases. Some, like the state sales tax, are still with us nearly half a century later. A hefty percentage of those taxes were renewed because the DFL could always find another 'investment' to use the money on.
When Speaker Thissen announced the House DFL's proposal for an income tax surcharge , the first question people should've asked was whether they trusted Thissen and the DFL enough to believe this surcharge wouldn't be extended in the name of 'investing' in this or that DFL special interest ally wish list item.
Minnesota House Democrats are asking the state's highest earners to dig even deeper to bail out the state from its financial woes, proposing a temporary income tax surcharge that would catapult Minnesota to one of the nation's highest taxed states.
House DFLers want the top 1 percent of earners, those netting more than $500,000, to come up with about $854 million over the next two years to repay public schools. The move would smooth out the state's finances and allow DFLers to make good on a signature campaign pledge. The surcharge could blink off sooner if the debt was repaid earlier.
The more likely scenario is that the DFL budget won't balance and that they'll extend the tax surcharge to balance the budget.
People are taxed enough already. If the DFL passes this surcharge, that will be another tax increase on successful small businesses. When 2012 ended, an onslaught of tax increases kicked in as a result of the ACA. Then the Obama tax hike jacked the top federal income tax rate from 35% to 39.6%. That's just the federal tax increases. Add to that Gov. Dayton's creating a new top tax bracket that raises the top rate from 7.85% to 9.85%. Add into that Speaker Thissen's tax increase, which might kick Minnesota's top tax rate into the 11% range.
This statement is disgusting:
'The bill we owe toward schools is past due,' said House Speaker Paul Thissen, DFL-Minneapolis. 'And the right thing to do is to pay them back.'
Speaker Thissen's statement is disgusting in its dishonesty. The GOP legislature passed a bill last year that would've paid off the school shift last year. Then-Rep. Thissen voted against it. Then Gov. Dayton vetoed the bill. Speaker Thissen isn't being honest about this. If he was so worried about paying off the school shift, he should've voted for the GOP bill last year.
This is just his attempt to institute another tax increase under the guise of it being temporary. Why trust someone who supposedly supports paying off the school shift now but didn't a year ago? What was the transformative event that caused him to change positions? Was it his getting the Speaker's gavel? That isn't likely because he was silent when Gov. Dayton unveiled his Mulligan Budget. Both of Gov. Dayton's proposed budgets called for paying off the school shift in 2017.
Why didn't Speaker Thissen speak out then about the need to pay off the school shift quickly?
What's likely is that Speaker Thissen waited for the dust to settle to propose another tax increase. He watched the firestorm that Gov. Dayton's sales tax increase created. It isn't a stretch to think that he's hoping people will let him off the hook by calling the tax increase temporary.
In 2006, I wrote this post about Mike Hatch's acceptance speech after getting the DFL endorsement for governor:
Hatch gave his task an initial shot in a rambling acceptance speech that punched some of the right buttons. He cast Pawlenty as too stingy with education, responsible for large class sizes and rising college tuition. He tagged him for an inadequate response to soaring health care costs and the emerging biosciences industry. He promised more state investment in those things. Significantly, he said, 'we can do this without raising taxes.'
I wrote then that people shouldn't trust Hatch when he said he'd increase "state investments" without raising taxes. I simply asked "Does anyone believe him"?
Speaker Thissen's saying this income tax surcharge is temporary is another moment where Minnesotans of all political stripes should ask whether they believe Thissen.
I won't trust people that didn't care about the school shift a year ago, didn't care about paying off the school shift as recently as February but who suddenly is the champion of paying off the school shift ASAP now that a tax increase is attached to it. In situations like this, it's wise to remember Cy Thao's now-infamous admonition :
When you guys win, you get to keep your money. When we win, we take your money.
Thao isn't more liberal than Thissen. He's just more honest than Thissen.
Tags: Paul Thissen , Income Tax Surcharge , School Shift , Tax Increases , Income Tax , Sales Tax , Mark Dayton , Mike Hatch , Cy Thao , DFL President Obama , Affordable Care Act
Posted Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:04 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 20-Mar-13 02:17 PM
Somebody should point out to Paul that if I only have $40,000 in income I have to limit myself to $40,000 in spending. So if the state only has $36 billion then spend only $36 billion. And if you want to pay back the school shift then make the first $1.3 billion you spend.
See how easy it is Paul!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by #6 at 20-Mar-13 10:23 PM
If I'm not mistaken, the 1/2 % sales tax was a temporary tax. 20+ years, it's still here.
Cut This, Not That
Cut This, Not That is another name for Sen. Coborn's Sequester This agenda. This video of his interview with FNC's Brian Kilmeade should get every person upset regardless of their political affiliation:
There's no such thing as acceptable wasteful spending. That critter doesn't exist. If the taxpayers' money isn't being spent efficiently on high priority things, then it shouldn't be spent.
Spending money on social media outreach is a travesty. Spending money on social media outreach instead of on air traffic controllers isn't justifiable. Cutting White House tours instead of cutting "wine and beer train tours" is outrageous. These are decisions that we're better off having a seventh grader make than letting this administration make.
President Obama has essentially said that spending cuts are off the table. How can he justify spending money on these things while laying off air traffic controllers and shutting down White House tours for students? The simple answer is he can't justify these decisions.
In fact, the stench from shutting down the White House tours that Harry Reid actually called for a vote to open the White House tours. Unfortunately, Democrats voted to keep the tours closed :
Senators voted Wednesday to keep the White House closed to public tours, turning back a GOP-led effort to free up money to open the building back up after the sequesters.
The vote was just one of a series of high-profile votes the Senate was taking Wednesday afternoon as it plowed toward passage of a bill to fund the government through the rest of this fiscal year.
That's fine. Now every Democrat will have to explain why they voted to keep "the People's House" tours closed:
But Democrats objected, saying it was a show vote that was note going to accomplish what Mr. Coburn said it would. They also said canceling park service heritage money would hurt their home states.
They defeated Mr. Coburn's amendment on a 54-45 vote, with nearly every Republican voting to reopen the White House and with almost all Democrats voting to back Mr. Obama's decision.
Simply put, this was a good faith effort on behalf of Republicans to do what's right by the people of this nation. Shutting "the People's House" when it could've been avoided shows what the Democrats' highest priority is. Hint: their highest priority isn't making smart budgetary choices. Hint: The Democrats' highest priority doesn't have anything to do with doing what's right by America's young people.
Apparently, they'd rather vote against students getting tours of the White House than voting to cut truly disgusting wasteful spending. Apparently, they'd rather pretend that wisely cutting a pittance from the federal budget is crippling the federal government. The Senate Democrats' hissy fit notwithstanding, the reality is that Sen. Coburn, Sen. Paul and Sen. Lee have dismantled the Democrats' arguments that the federal budget has been cut to a shell of its former self.
As Sen. Coburn has clearly shown, there are tens of billions of dollars of wasteful spending that still need eliminating. This isn't a fair fight. Despite the fact that Republican senators have exposed the waste, despite the fact that even the NY Times and Washington Post have turned against this administration and their Democrat enablers, Democrats still insist on fighting this fight. It's a free country. If they want to get their brains bashed in some more, I guess that's their right. Jay Carney seems particularly adept at peddling this manure:
Tags: Sequester This , Tom Coburn , Mike Lee , Cut This, Not That , Rand Paul , GOP , Harry Reid , Jay Carney , White House Tours , Secret Service , Democrats
Posted Wednesday, March 20, 2013 7:43 PM
No comments.
Franken, Klobuchar vote to keep People's House shut
In a stunning, disappointing development, Sen. Franken and Sen. Klobuchar voted against restarting the White House tours :
Democrats objected, saying it was a show vote that was not going to accomplish what Mr. Coburn said it would. They also said canceling park service heritage money would hurt their home states.
They defeated Mr. Coburn's amendment on a 54-45 vote, with nearly every Republican voting to reopen the White House and with almost all Democrats voting to back Mr. Obama's decision.
It's appalling that Sen. Franken and Sen. Klobuchar voted against opening the People's House (that's Michelle Obama's term for the White House) to public tours. It's disgusting that Sen. Franken and Sen. Klobuchar hid behind their 'leadership' in saying that Sen. Coburn's amendment was a gimmick.
If anyone in the Senate has shown themselves to having solutions to DC's spending addiction, it's been Sen. Coburn. He's literally found hundreds of billions of dollars of wasteful spending in the last 6 months. He's put together charts showing duplicative federal programs worth $364.5 billion of spending. Some of the spending is justified. Most of it isn't.
This is just another vote that shows Sen. Klobuchar is Ms. Bipartisanship. She's a popular political partisan hack. People didn't think that Sen. Franken was Mr. Bipartisanship. Still, Minnesotans had the right to expect him to protect them against this arrogant administration's mishandling of sequestration.
This video shows how partisan Sen. Franken and Sen. Klobuchar are:
Rather than fighting for saving hundreds of millions of dollars, Sen. Franken and Sen. Klobuchar fought to keep White House tours closed. Why would they do that if they genuinely cared about the middle class? Some of these families that aren't being permitted to take a White House tour might be on their first trip to DC. Perhaps some of them won't have another opportunity to tour the White House.
That's what Sen. Franken and Sen. Klobuchar voted against. They voted with the elitists in the White House. They voted against the working families who wanted to take a once-in-a-lifetime tour of the White House.
Based on Wednesday's vote and their votes for the middle class tax increases in the PPACA, why shouldn't people think that these senators don't care about the middle class the way they say they do?
Tags: White House Tours , President Obama , Amy Klobuchar , Al Franken , Harry Reid , Sequestration , Democrats , Sequester This , Cut This, Not That , Tom Coburn , Pork , GOP
Posted Thursday, March 21, 2013 12:34 AM
No comments.
Raise taxes first, figure the rest out later
If Minnesota's general fund budget wasn't important, watching the DFL legislature would be comical. Unfortunately, watching the DFL put a budget together has been anything but a laughing matter. This quote from Sen. Tom Bakk offers a scary insight into the DFL budgeting process:
Bakk said details of the Senate tax proposal have yet to be worked out. But he said income tax increases on top earners and a cigarette tax increase are certainties.
The Senate DFL leadership says that they're planning on offering property tax relief. They just don't know which taxes they'll have to raise to pay for the property tax relief. This is Keystone Cops material. It's remindful of Minnesota Department of Revenue Commissioner Myron Frans looking surprised when he said that kids mowing lawns, shovelling sidewalks or babysitting would be subject to Gov. Dayton's sales tax increase on services.
Commissioner Frans and Sen. Bakk sound frighteningly alike. They both are confident they want to raise taxes. They're certain they want to provide property tax relief. They just haven't figured what other taxes will have to be increased and by how much to offer property tax relief.
What this means is that tax increases is the answer to their questions even before they knew what the questions would be. The smart thing to do is figure out what's needed for basic services like infrastructure, education and public safety, then figure out how to pay for those things.
The DFL starts with the premise that they haven't taken enough money out of the private sector to pay for their special interest allies. Then they get their special interest allies' wish lists, then figure out how to pay for their spending. If that doesn't sound responsible to you, think of yourself as thoughtful. It doesn't sound responsible because it isn't responsible.
Raising taxes first (some might say first, last and always), then figuring out what to spend it on isn't the brightest way of putting a budget together.
Tags: Tax Increases , Cigarette Tax , Income Tax , Property Taxes , Tom Bakk , Special Interests , DFL
Posted Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:31 AM
No comments.
Funding only priorities? Not with the DFL
This editorial in the Fairmont Sentinel proposes something that's sure to upset DFL legislators:
The state should not be a greedy, grasping thing. It should seek low, broad, consistent, limited revenue that it uses to fund priorities. And only some things should be priorities.
The thought that government shouldn't attempt to be all things to all people is a concept foreign to the DFL's moneygrabbers. They couldn't pay off all their special interest allies if we exercised fiscal restraint.
Fiscal restraint fits with paying off special interest allies about as well as the proverbial round peg fits into the proverbial square hole. Fiscal restraint is the enemy of special interests' wish lists and agencies urging the legislature to make them whole again.
Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota believe they have found the goose that lays the golden eggs. Not only are they proposing a fourth-tier tax bracket that would raise rates on the highest-earners; this week they rolled out a proposed surcharge on incomes above $500,000. It must be nice to feel free to play with other people's money without a pang of conscience.
The DFL doesn't have a conscience when it comes to tax increases. Whether they're proposing regressive tax increases like Gov. Dayton's cigarette tax or whether they're proposing progressive tax increases like Gov. Dayton's income tax increase or Speaker Thissen's income tax surcharge, the DFL feels right at home in hiking all Minnesotans' taxes.
That's before talking about Gov. Dayton's ill-advised sales tax increases on everything from car repairs to haircuts to kids mowing lawns, shovelling sidewalks or babysitting.
Only after taking tons of heat from the business community did Gov. Dayton drop that ill-advised proposal.
Two things are becoming clear about Gov. Dayton and the DFL legislature. First, they're anti-small business. Their cigarette tax increase will hurt retailers, depriving them of potential customers who buy their cigarettes through the internet, casinos or in other states. Those are customers who would've bought a pack of gum, some snacks and a soft drink when they bought their cigarettes.
Second, it's clear the DFL legislature and Gov. Dayton don't care whether they're raising taxes on "the rich who aren't paying their fair share" or whether they're proposing taxes on the middle class and working poor. This isn't opinion. It's irrefutable fact. The DFL's tax increase agenda speaks for itself.
This speaks for itself, too:
Here's what House Speaker Paul Thissen had to say about the surcharge: "Our plan acknowledges that the bill we owe to our schools is past due. We owe our school kids over $800 million and the right thing to do is pay them back."
It isn't likely that Speaker Thissen is that worried about the school shift. If he was that worried about repaying the schools, he should've voted for the GOP bill last year that would've paid off the entire school shift. He didn't, which says everything about Speaker Thissen's insincerity.
With the DFL and Gov. Dayton, tax increases go hand-in-hand with paying off their special interest allies. The thought of funding only the state's priorities doesn't sit well with the DFL. That's why we can't afford their form of governance.
Tags: Income Tax Surcharge , Income Tax , Sales Tax , Cigarette Tax , Tax Increases , Paul Thissen , Mark Dayton , DFL , Retailers , Small Businesses , Limited Government , Conservatism
Posted Thursday, March 21, 2013 8:30 AM
No comments.
