March 5-6, 2011
Mar 05 06:09 Where's the GOP Budget? Coming SOON!!! Mar 05 07:46 Are Tax Increases Inevitable? Mar 05 12:50 Bakk IS the Problem Mar 06 06:14 Jesse Jackson: Morally Bankrupt Race-Baiter Mar 06 07:04 NFL, NFLPA: Get This Resolved Mar 06 07:58 Different Presentation, Same Mitt Mar 06 15:32 Will Josh Mandel Defeat Sherrod Brown?
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Where's the GOP Budget? Coming SOON!!!
The DFL has repeatedly complained that their Republican counterparts haven't presented a budget yet. According to John Pederson's newsletter, the GOP budget will be out within the next 2-3 weeks:
Senate and House Republicans will introduce our budget plans in the coming weeks. Our majorities have set the most aggressive committee deadlines in recent years to ensure that solving the budget deficit will be done with precedence.
This confirms the information I've gotten from 3 other legislators I've spoken with. When the GOP budget comes out, Minnesotans will be able to judge which party believes in a Twentieth Century government and which party has jumped into the Twenty-first Century.
The Republican legislature has passed a number of bills that are transforming Minnesota state government. This week, they sent 2 major pieces of legislation to Gov. Dayton: alternative teacher licensure and Dan Fabian's permitting reform legislation.
The DFL could've passed those bills anytime the past 4 years. They didn't. Now the GOP legislature is reforming state government so businesses can thrive and qualified industry professionals can share their knowledge with students.
With an impressive bunch of positive accomplishments already to brag about, why shouldn't the DFL expect the GOP to produce an impressive budget?
Let's be clear about something: The DFL's whining is more about creating a storyline that Republicans just aren't up to the job and that Minnesota needs to return the DFL to the majority. They won't admit that the GOP is passing legislation that will make life better for Minnesotans.
This GOP legislature isn't resting on its laurels either:
Lawmakers will introduce an initiative for performance pay and funding in state government on Monday. Members of the Senate Energy committee will continue hearing a measure lifting the ban on importation of energy derived from coal plants located outside the state. This is an important issue for consideration of Minnesota's future energy needs.
The unions will oppose performance pay for state employees. For some inexplicable reason, they're opposed to paying people according to their accomplishments rather than on their seniority. This is an integral part of the DFL's twentieth century thinking. People who do great things should be rewarded.
I've received alot of positive feedback on Sen. Pederson. He's making quite a mark as a freshman. I even heard that he outbattled Senate veteran Sandy Pappas during a debate.
As his list of accomplishments piles up, the odds of his winning re-election increase. I expect Bruce Hentges to run again. This time, though, I'm confident he'll get beat by a bigger margin than he lost by in 2010.
Posted Saturday, March 5, 2011 6:09 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 05-Mar-11 09:40 AM
Ah, same old DFL songbook, same old rusty voices singing from it. Remember when Tom Emmer didn't have a budget plan because he hadn't released one? Then when he DID release it, and it balanced, all you heard was crickets, followed by thunderous claims of "it can't work"? That's what's going to happen here. When the GOP budget comes out, and it makes sense, and it gets passed, these people will switch from Hymn #1-- they can't do it-- to hymn #2-- they shouldn't do it-- and finally hymn #3-- good thing we went along with it or it would have been awful.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 05-Mar-11 12:29 PM
Jerry, You're spot on with your analysis. Wait until you see my next post. It's on Sen. Bakk's diatribe. You'll have fun with that, Jerry.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 05-Mar-11 12:48 PM
Gary:
Why aren't they asking governor Dayton to propose a new budget. After all since the democrats rejected his tax increases governor Dayton is proposing spending $4 billion too much.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 05-Mar-11 03:05 PM
Walter, He's revising his budget at least twice a week. What more do you want?
Are Tax Increases Inevitable?
Last night, Mike Hatch used Almanac's Roundtable to repeat his claim that "it isn't a matter of whether we'll raise taxes. It's a matter of which taxes we'll raise."
Just for the sake of argument, let's say that his claim is right. If he's right, is that a bad thing? I'd argue it isn't. Bear with me as I explain.
Let's suppose the GOP will pass a budget that balances without raising income taxes. According to DFL ideology, that means property taxes automatically jump. But do they?
Dave Kleis would argue that statement isn't accurate. He's got 3 years of proof to verify his argument. R.T. Rybak has 3 years of proof saying Hatch is right.
The difference is that Kleis prioritized spending while actually saying no to things. Rybak didn't prioritize spending, which meant that he didn't say no to his special interest allies often enough.
Therefore, it's accurate to say that Minneapolis's property taxes jumped as a direct result of local decisionmaking.
Assuming Hatch is right, that means Minneapolis got punished because they voted for a mayor and city council that made foolish spending decisions. Doesn't that mean that the rest of the state is spared paying additional taxes to cover for the sins of irresponsible mayors?
R.T. Rybak will complain that they're getting their LGA cut and that that isn't fair. I'd flip that and ask R.T. Rybak what's so fair about Minnesota's job creators getting taxed at the highest rate in the nation so mayors can continue making foolish spending decisions. What's fair about that?
More important, isn't raising taxes counterproductive to Minnesota's economy?
Now that that's been argued out, let's return to Realityville, a city that Mr. Hatch obviously isn't acquainted with. Thankfully, Jen DeJournett was there to acquaint Mr. Hatch with Realityville.
She said that local spending decisions drive property tax increases, not state tax policy. She argued forcefully that tax increases aren't inevitable because local units of government, just like state government, has the ability to make spending decisions based on a clearly defined set of priorities.
By living within the state's means, they're exposing the reckless spending habits of R.T. Rybak and Chris Coleman. If those cities choose to keep electing mayors and city councils that won't set better priorities, that's their business. It's just that outstate Minnesota is tired of subsidizing St. Paul's and Minneapolis's stupidity.
"Their decisions, their consequences" should become Outstate Minnesota's battle cry.
Think of it as a local version of saying no to a California bailout. It's time these politicians got the message that we won't bail them out for their stupidity. PERIOD.
Posted Saturday, March 5, 2011 7:46 AM
Comment 1 by Gretchen Leisen at 05-Mar-11 10:49 AM
Gary, you are spot on with your comparison of the Twin Cities to California's budget woes. Fiscally responsible cities and their citizens should not have to pay for the spendthrift politicians who are elected over and over again in the liberal bastians of our state.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 05-Mar-11 12:32 PM
The DFL is always quick to lecture people about right & wrong until their allies are inflicting pain on the rest of us...Then it's crickets. The DFL can take a long walk off a short pier on that one.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 05-Mar-11 12:45 PM
Gary:
Another way you can show this is part of your property tax bill goes to the county. Hennepin county probably suffered more in state not to mention federal cuts than the state. Yet last year the county didn't vote for a property tax increase.
Mind you the county has been aggressive in asking the employees to take leave without pay and their managers are always being asked to prepare options for budget cuts.
Too bad the hennepin county board can't take over running the city of minneapolis for us.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Bakk IS the Problem
I can understand why Rep. Thissen doesn't want to associate with Sen. Bakk more than he has to. Here's a transcript of his portion of Thursday's DFL press conference:
BAKK: I understand that they don't want to have any conference committees. Their bench isn't very deep. And I just kinda wonder what does the session look like when we get into conference committee. Normally, we'd have 8 or 9 conference committees on the budget on all the different subject areas and then a tax conference committee. Maybe their bench isn't deep enough to have that kind of a process.
And if it's not, how do you get input from the public in the conference committee on all the provisions that you're working through? I don't know but, at least from the onset, it doesn't look like we're going to have a process like we've had in the past and maybe that's ok. But I guess we'll find out at the end of the day. It certainly would be different from where we've been in the past.
RACHEL STASSEN-BERGER: When you say that their bench isn't very deep, do you mean that they don't have enough subject matter experts to populate all the different conference committees? Is that what you meant?
BAKK: I think that's absolutely right. I mean, you need, assuming that Democrats won't vote for their budget bills, their all-cut budget bills, you know if they have, say, 9 conference committees open, where are they going to spread their, they have 16 members who have some sort of experience here, 17 if you include Magnus, how do you populate the 20 that have some experience in 8 or 10 conference committees? That's pretty difficult.
RSB: Does that mean you don't respect their freshmen very much?
BAKK: I think it just means they don't know alot yet about their subject matter areas. I think if they were to tell you the truth, they'd probably tell you the same thing. I mean, that's why Parry wouldn't answer a question on the floor when Cohen asked him a question.
I think it's gonna be interesting when we get to the floor with those budget bills and Sen. Hann presents his Health and Human Services bill and Sen. Berglin starts asking him questions about the provisions or the spreadsheet and you can kinda go down the bills, I think it'll be an interesting floor debate.
I wouldn't characterize my comments as mean, Rachel. I mean, the point is even Julianne, even Julianne on the floor today said that we have a very progressive tax system. Well, that's simply not true. We have a regressive tax system. I mean, you can ask anybody. It's one of the least regressive tax systems in the country but she said it was very progressive. That's plain not accurate.
I mean, that's one of their more senior members, the chair, I think, of the tax conference committee.
I think their depth of knowledge, because of their inexperience and the fact that they've been in the minority, they haven't been involved in the process, you wouldn't expect them to have the depth and the experience that the senior members of the Senate have. That's not being critical. That's just what you'd expect because they haven't had the experience.
If there's anything that's unmistakeable, it's that Sen. Bakk is emblematic of the problem with Minnesota state government. He's been trapped inside it so long that he can't see that he's part of the problem.
Why would anyone, regardless of political affiliation, think that not getting fresh perspectives isn't a positive thing? A fresh set of eyes often is the catalyst to seeing what's been right in front of you.
Let's put this into real life terms. Amy Koch and John Pederson are small businesspeople. On any given day, they've likely dealt with HR questions, health care issues, regulations, safety laws and any other number of things. And they've been dealing with these things for better than a couple decades.
According to Sen. Bakk's theory, Sen. Koch and certainly Sen. Pederson don't have the requisite experience to navigate a conference committee, much less bring valuable insight into the process.
Is that really a position that he's willing to defend if he'd thought things through first? I'd hope it isn't because that's a position that he'd get beaten up over.
There's a couple other things that need highlighting in Sen. Bakk's temper tantrum. Sen. Bakk said that Sen. Parry wouldn't answer Sen. Cohen's question because he didn't have the requisite expertise to answer Sen. Cohen's question. That isn't why Sen. Parry didn't answer.
The real reason was because it was clear to anyone watching that Sen. Cohen was attempting to pick a fight. This wasn't an inquiry to gain insight into the legislation. It was an attempt to stir up trouble.
That's why the request was swiftly rejected.
Finally, there's Sen. Bakk's statement about Sen. Hann not being able to handle Sen. Berglin's health care questions, with the inference being that Sen. Berglin would eat Sen. Hann's lunch on health care issues.
My first, impolite, response to that suggestion would sound something like this: "You're kidding, right?" I'd love seeing that debate because Sen. Hann would more than hold his own against Sen. Berglin.
Sen. Bakk acts like Berglin and Cohen are gods because of their experience. That isn't surprising considering how that's the union's mentality.
I'll take talent over experience anytime and in a heartbeat. That isn't a difficult choice in my mind.
Frankly, I'm looking forward to some of these fights down the stretch. This GOP freshman class is exceptionally talented. It'd be a mistake for Sen. Bakk to misunderestimate their abilities.
Posted Saturday, March 5, 2011 12:50 PM
No comments.
Jesse Jackson: Morally Bankrupt Race-Baiter
After reading this post , there's one thing that's inescapable. That Jesse Jackson is morally bankrupt isn't news. That he'd traipse all over MLK's grave while rallying the thugs in Madison is news. He should be ashamed of himself. He won't be, though, because this is just another act in his race-baiting schtick.
Then the mayor introduced Jackson to tumultuous applause.
'Collective bargaining is what democracy looks like,' Jackson said. 'The right to be at the table is what democracy looks like.'
Jackson revved up the Madison crowd, which was in a fighting spirit already.
'I congratulate you for your staying power,' he said, 'for your commitment to hold on and hold out, and for your focus to stay nonviolent.'
Jackson then made a comparison between the civil rights movement and the current labor struggle in Wisconsin.
'This is the week we went across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma for the right to vote,' he said. 'We have gone from Wallace trying to deny us the right to vote to Walker trying to deny workers the right to bargain. We have gone from Wallace to Walker.'
How dare that race-baiter make such disgusting comments. Saying that "collective bargaining is what democracy looks like" is disgusting. First, 14 Democratic senators left the state to stop the democratic process. They wouldn't accept the outcome of last November's elections.
Is that "what democracy looks like"? I don't think so.
Second, if "collective bargaining is what democracy looks like", then Washington, DC, the heart of the federal government, doesn't look very democratic. The vast majority of federal employees don't have collective bargaining rights and they certainly don't have the right to strike.
This is just another example of Mr. Jackson playing fast and loose with the truth.
Is democracy a place where money is taken from workers, often against their will, so that PEUs can elect people whose allegiance is to the unions, not their constituents?
I'm certain that isn't what democracy looks like. It might pass for Chicago-style democracy looks like but it isn't what genuine democracy looks like.
Saying that Gov. Walker is "trying to deny workers the right to bargain" is a flat-out lie and Jackson knows it. The legislation that will eventually be signed into law gives workers the right to bargain. It just doesn't give them the right to set work rules or establish health insurance monopolies that bankrupt school districts with their own health insurance policies.
As bad as that is, comparing Gov. Walker with a disgusting racist like George Wallace is even worse. George Wallace was almost as morally reprehensible as Jesse Jackson is.
MLK said that we should strive for a world where people "are judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin." It's impossible to argue with that. In Jackson's case, though, it's impossible to measure his character because he doesn't have any.
Nothing outrageous is offlimits when Jackson lets loose with one of his diatribes. No comparison is too disgusting to get a crowd worked up. His job the last 20 years is to be a race-baiting huckster. He hasn't been a man of the cloth in 30 years. That's why I won't call him Reverend. Further, he isn't a man of character.
I'd love hearing Mr. Jackson explain what character traits, if any, Gov. Walker has in common with Gov. Wallace. That's because I'm not certain they have any character traits in common.
Saying that the unions and activists had stayed nonviolent is technically true but it's terribly misleading. The video of activists cornering Sen. Grothman shows that the incident didn't turn violent. Still, their intent to intimidate was obvious.
Mr. Jackson might 'fire up the faithful' but he's turning off Main Street Americans. His attacks are despicable untruths. His wrapping himself in great moral causes is nothing more than his attempt to hide his moral shortcomings.
At some point, the 14 fleebagger senators will return from Illinois. That's when votes will be taken and bills be passed that solve Wisconsin's budget crisis.
Until then, the Fleebagger 14 and Jesse Jackson will be the focus of attention. That won't help Democrats in 2012 and beyond.
Posted Sunday, March 6, 2011 6:14 AM
No comments.
NFL, NFLPA: Get This Resolved
Until this afternoon, I've stayed silent about the NFL labor strife but it's time to end that silence. First, let's get these things straight:
1) I don't like either the NFLPA or the NFL owners as a group. There are a number of great owners and some honorable union members but, as a group, they don't impress me.
2) David Doty should be removed from the case because he's proven that he isn't a neutral arbiter. He's a players judge at a time when an impartial judge is needed. Better yet, it'd be better if this thing just stayed out of the judicial system.
There are some principles that I think shouldn't be negotiated, starting with the 18 game schedule. Because of the speed of the game, the size of the athletes, etc., 18 games is like begging for a league where linemen, fullbacks, special teamers and linebackers would have a career of 3-4 years.
The reason this shouldn't be part of the negotiations is because this isn't just a league issue. It's a safety burden on society issue.
How many players would be a burden on society because of their chronic ailments, their issues with concussions and other things that would rob them of their youth and their career?
Make no mistake about this: Changing the season from 16 to 18 games will increase the number of concussions suffered. As a result, that will create greater stress on the nation's neurological system resources.
The NFL is attempting to buy off the players by saying that the longer schedule will give more players an opportunity. As a fan, I couldn't care less about giving more players an opportunity. I don't watch the NFL to see second-stringers make a play or two. I watch to see the spectacular plays from Drew Brees, Adrian Peterson and Larry Fitzgerald.
If the NFL goes to an 18 game schedule, the quality of their product will shrink with time. No thanks.
Get this resolved. The owners & the NFLPA are making out like bandits already. If they leave the basic structure intact, they'll continue making out like bandits.
Is it that difficult to figure out? Let's hope not.
Posted Sunday, March 6, 2011 7:04 AM
No comments.
Different Presentation, Same Mitt
This NYTimes article told me what I already suspected: that Mitt's changing his campaign tactics but that it's the same Mitt, just with more baggage to defend:
Mr. Romney is trying to present a more relaxed image to combat impressions that he is unapproachable and stiff. He has not been seen in a necktie for months, not in television appearances, meetings with donors or political dinners, including the one Saturday evening, where he was one of the few men wearing an open-collared shirt.
Mitt is who he is: a northeastern flip-flopper. He can change his attire all he wants but it doesn't change who he is. Yes, he's got private sector experience. Yes, he's had some achievements there.
That said, the minute he got involved with governing, he experienced more difficulty, starting with MittCare.
In the early maneuvering for the 2012 race, Mr. Romney has aimed his fire at Mr. Obama rather than any of his prospective Republican rivals, attacking the president as a weak leader who pursued a European-style big-government agenda for his first two years in office instead of focusing on jobs.
I'm still not convinced Mitt isn't comfortable with big government policies. Until that changes, he has no shot at winning the nomination. Frankly, I think that's a bridge too far for him. Even if he starts talking about cutting spending, who's going to believe him? It isn't like he hasn't changed his presentation a few times.
Romney's problem is that he can't convince the activists that he's got core beliefs. Activists think that he's got legislative priorities but they question whether he'll fight for them or whether he'll simply repackage himself to fit the situation.
The things that haunted him in 2008 still haunt him now. That and he's added the MittCare baggage are more than enough to sink him.
Posted Sunday, March 6, 2011 7:58 AM
No comments.
Will Josh Mandel Defeat Sherrod Brown?
After the political upheaval in Ohio in 2010, Democrats should be worried. That especially includes Sherrod Brown. It's looking likely that he'll face rising GOP star Josh Mandel in 2012. Chris Cillizza's article highlights why Sen. Brown should be worried:
Mandel crushed incumbent Treasurer Kevin Boyle (D) in November, his first state-wide race. He has a compelling back story: He says he was inspired to go into public service by his grandparents, both Holocaust survivors, and that his time in the Marines "really shaped me as a leader, the leadership traits and principles that are hammered into us."
The young Republican was helped by ethical scandals surrounding the Democrat, and a great Republican year in the state.
"The truth is that they were kind of running against the perfect opponent in the perfect year," said Democratic consultant Greg Hass. But Mandel was elected treasurer with a greater margin than any of the other state-wide executive candidates. He also managed to win a seat in the state legisture in 2006 in a northeastern district where registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans two to one.
I paid attention to Mandel during the 2010 election cycle. I'm thinking of him as Ohio's Marco Rubio. He's that talented politically. He's got a compelling life story that naturally attracts people to him.
There's a reason why he won a legislative seat in a district where D's outnumber R's by a 2:1 margin. That doesn't happen if you're just another cookie-cutter politician. That only happens if you're a talented politician that transcends party identification.
I haven't heard of any polling for this race. That said, I can't imagine this race not being tilted a little in the Republicans' direction. Sen. Brown voted for the stimulus and O'Care twice each. I'm betting that those votes won't sit well with 2012 voters.
I'm betting that Sen. Brown will get hurt by President Obama's shrinking popularity. Couple that with the distinct possibility that Gov. Kasich's reforms will be improving Ohio's economy and you've got conditions that put Sen. Brown's re-election chances at uphill or challenging at best.
If I'm a Democratic strategist or if I'm working at the DSCC, I'm worried because I know that I've got to contest that seat knowing that it's going to be expensive. Knowing that it'll be expensive is one thing. Knowing that it's likely to be futile would bother me most. The combination of expensive and futile isn't the type of combination that excites strategists.
It's too early to say that Mandel is the frontrunner but it isn't too early to say this will be a hotly contested race with a good possibility of a GOP pickup.
Posted Sunday, March 6, 2011 3:32 PM
No comments.
