May 17-22, 2013
May 17 03:10 Gov. Dayton breaks progressive tax pledge May 17 12:09 Peggy Noonan: No ordinary scandal May 18 22:52 Gas tax increase dead in the water May 19 03:50 Childcare unionization liveblog May 19 14:30 NLRA prohibits childcare unionization May 20 06:16 Let's unravel the AP scandal May 20 07:12 What's wrong with SCSU's rightsizing May 21 04:25 Time to total up the DFL's damage May 22 01:52 GOP flyaround notes
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Gov. Dayton breaks progressive tax pledge
When Mark Dayton ran for governor in 2010, he criticized Tom Horner's cigarette tax increase proposal. He constantly talked about the need for making Minnesota's tax system more progressive. Apparently, Gov. Dayton doesn't have the same priorities as then-Candidate Dayton :
Dayton is now backing a cigarette tax increase from $1.23 per pack now to $2.52, more than he initially proposed. The money from the stocking tax would be diverted to a stadium reserve fund. Smoking will not be allowed at the new Vikings stadium, due to open in time for the 2016 season.
Earlier this year, Dayton proposed a cigarette tax hike of 94 cents a pack. In now backing a $1.29 per pack hike, he's moving even further from his previous opposition to cigarette tax increases of any kind. When running for governor in 2010, he called cigarette tax hikes "money out of the pockets of working people and poorer people ."
Candidate Dayton was right. Sin taxes are regressive. The devil is in the details but I'm skeptical of this proposal being the solution to the Vikings stadium mess. This post highlights the fact that past cigarette tax increases produce revenue shortfalls. How will that solve the Vikings stadium problem?
Further, this literally means that Gov. Dayton is building a stadium for billionaires on the backs of the middle class and working poor. If it isn't bad enough to have the middle class pay for a billionaire's football stadium, which it is, if shrinking revenues isn't bad enough, then here's another thing that makes this terrible: This cigarette tax increase will increase black market sales of cigarettes while eliminating customers for convenience stores.
Forget about this not being a perfect solution to a big problem. Forget about this being a less-than-perfect solution to the Vikings stadium problem. This isn't a solution to the Vikings stadium problem. What's worst is that it doesn't solve that problem while creating a problem for small businesses.
That's the definition of terrible policymaking.
Posted Friday, May 17, 2013 3:10 AM
No comments.
Peggy Noonan: No ordinary scandal
Peggy Noonan's article about the IRS scandal is her best writing in some time. She nails it when she talks about how the IRS became a political instrument in the Obama administration's hands:
The Journal's Kim Strassel reported an Idaho businessman named Frank VanderSloot, who'd donated more than a million dollars to groups supporting Mitt Romney. He found himself last June, for the first time in 30 years, the target of IRS auditors. His wife and his business were also soon audited. Hal Scherz, a Georgia physician, also came to the government's attention. He told ABC News: "It is odd that nothing changed on my tax return and I was never audited until I publicly criticized ObamaCare." Franklin Graham, son of Billy, told Politico he believes his father was targeted. A conservative Catholic academic who has written for these pages faced questions about her meager freelance writing income. Many of these stories will come out, but not as many as there are. People are not only afraid of being audited, they're afraid of saying they were audited.
All of these IRS actions took place in the years leading up to the 2012 election. They constitute the use of governmental power to intrude on the privacy and shackle the political freedom of American citizens. The purpose, obviously, was to overwhelm and intimidate - to kill the opposition, question by question and audit by audit.
It is not even remotely possible that all this was an accident, a mistake. Again, only conservative groups were targeted, not liberal. It is not even remotely possible that only one IRS office was involved. Lois Lerner, who oversees tax-exempt groups for the IRS, was the person who finally acknowledged, under pressure of a looming investigative report, some of what the IRS was doing. She told reporters the actions were the work of "frontline people" in Cincinnati. But other offices were involved, including Washington. It is not even remotely possible the actions were the work of just a few agents. This was more systemic. It was an operation. The word was out: Get the Democratic Party's foes. It is not remotely possible nobody in the IRS knew what was going on until very recently. The Washington Post reported efforts to target the conservative groups reached the highest levels of the agency by May 2012 - far earlier than the agency had acknowledged. Reuters reported high-level IRS officials, including its chief counsel, knew in August 2011 about the targeting.
President Obama's high-profile 'announcement' that Jack Lew had asked for and accepted the resignation for the acting IRS commissioner was insulting. He's leaving in 2 weeks anyway.
There's too many instances of the IRS going after Republicans to ignore. There've been too many times where Republicans were targeted by multiple offices of the IRS to think this is the work of 2 rogue agents in Cincinnati. I wrote here about Michele Bachmann's explanation of how the IRS bureaucracy works. She said it was apparent a week ago that the official White House statement was fiction.
The president speaks in the passive voice. He attempts to act out indignation, but he always seems indignant at only one thing: that he's being questioned at all. That he has to address this. That fate put it on his plate.
This fits his pattern. When Jeremiah Wright first became news, Sen. Obama said that he couldn't criticize his rants. Then Wright criticized Obama. Wright got shoved under the proverbial bus in a New York minute.
That's the pattern. After 5 years of watching the Tyrant From Chicago, we shouldn't be surprised that he'd use the IRS as a weapon against his political enemies.
Posted Friday, May 17, 2013 12:09 PM
No comments.
Gas tax increase dead in the water
This article is fantastic news for Minnesotans:
DFL legislative leaders say plans to raise the gas tax for road projects and a metrowide sales tax for transit projects are dead for the year. "I would say they're probably both dead," said DFL Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk.
Senate leaders have been pushing to increase the gas tax to pay for additional road and bridge projects. But historically high gas prices and opposition from Governor Dayton has proved too big of an obstacle.
There's still next year but that'll be a tricky subject. Will the DFL want to raise more taxes heading into an election year? Speaker Thissen's statement is interesting:
DFL House Speaker Paul Thissen suggested there was discomfort in raising gas and sales taxes at a time when they're also raising other taxes to balance the budget and spend more on schools.
That's an interesting statement considering the fact that the DFL insists that they're only taxing the rich. If the DFL Tax Bill is only taxing the rich, a gas tax increase wouldn't be an additional tax on the middle class. Likewise, the metro-wide sales tax wouldn't be a major addiotional tax.
The bad news is that Gov. Dayton, Speaker Thissen and Senate Majority Leader Bakk have agreed to a new Tax Bill :
Although a new fourth-tier income tax rate on the state's highest earners has been part of the mix since the start of budget negotiations, it has been unclear until tonight what that rate would be, 9.85 percent. That is higher than the House's original position of 8.84 percent and lower than the Senate's proposal of 10.7 percent. The 2 percent surcharge on those taxpayers to pay off the money the state owes the schools has been dropped. Gov. Mark Dayton said that money will be allocated this biennium toward a payment, and he expects to have the debt paid off during the next biennium.
While new taxes on alcohol have been dropped from the bill, cigarette smokers are likely to pay about $1.60 a pack more, a House position. Additionally, smokers could be subject to new taxes announced today to fill any funding shortfall to pay the state's share of the stadium for the Minnesota Vikings.
Right now, 19% of cigarettes sold to smokers come from the black market, the internet, other states or gaming casinos. When this cigarette tax increase goes into effect, 30% of cigarettes will be sold through the black market, the internet, other states or gaming casinos. Meanwhile, convenience stores will lose customers, which will result in smaller profits and fewer jobs.
Simply put, this cigarette tax will shrink cigarette tax revenue to the state because people will change their buying habits.
Further, the income tax increases will be stifling. In addition to the higher tax rate, small businesses will get hit with fewer deductions and a sales tax increase will be levied on warehouses, electronic repairs and telecommunications.
Finally and most importantly, the DFL's tax increase and their budget won't strengthen Minnesota's economy because it only focuses on the middle class. This budget hurts businesses. You can't be create jobs if you hate the employers. It's that simple.
Tags: Tax Increases , Cigarette Tax , Sales Tax , Gas Tax , Mark Dayton , Tom Bakk , Paul Thissen , Convenience Stores , Unemployment , Vikings Stadium , DFL
Posted Saturday, May 18, 2013 10:52 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 19-May-13 05:12 PM
Huh, they think we are taxed enough already? I hope ever smoker in the state can find a black market to buy their smokes or quits smoking so this state receives 0 dollars from their huge tax. Liquor taxes will be back on the table next year when the smoking tax doesn't bring in the money they have already spent.
2014 is going to be the truth teller in what will happen to Minnesota. If people do not vote out the democrats for their over reach of power this session, it is game over for the state.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 19-May-13 11:37 PM
I disagree Chad. I don't want every smoker in Minnesota to buy their cigarettes on the black market because that means convenience stores would get hurt mightily. I just want the DFL, including Gov. Dayton, to get their ass kicked next November. That's the best remedy.
Comment 2 by Jeff Baumann at 19-May-13 08:47 PM
To be fair, the Democrats don't want or expect to raise more money by raising cigarette taxes. They want the whole tobacco industry to go away, but they know they cannot simply outlaw it.
Childcare unionization liveblog
I've been tracking the childcare unionization debate for about an hour. First, it's important to summarize what's happened thus far. First, Rep. Kresha submitted an A-39 amendment, requiring a size 14 font. Rep. Nelson, DFL-AFSCME, said that the union's literature met that standard so the amendment was frivolous. Rep. Nelson then urged a red vote. After a long round of questioning from Rep. Kresha, Rep. Franson and Rep. Peppin.
Rep. Nelson's standard line was that this was covered by BMS regulations and that "the BMS has been doing this for 40 years and they've been doing a fine job."
Later, Rep. Peppin returned from talking with child care providers outside the House floor. She held up a card that didn't meet the standard Rep. Nelson said it would meet.
Finally, Rep. Sarah Anderson asked if any audits had been done on the elections. When Rep. Nelson said he wasn't sure if the BMS had audited these elections, Rep. Anderson then asked how Rep. Nelson knew that they'd been doing a fine job. Rep. Nelson didn't have an answer for Rep. Anderson's question.
3:35 -- Rep. Peppin: "There's nothing in the BMS (Bureau of Mediation Services) rules that address font size." She then asks why Rep. Nelson won't agree to the amendment.
3:38 -- Rep. Franson offers an A-78 amendment. Rep. Franson says that SF778 disenfranchises child care providers if they don't care for CCAP children.
3:45 -- DFL votes to disenfranchise potential childcare voters.
4:30 -- Rep. Sarah Anderson just finished giving a stirring speech in which she said Rep. Nelson was "rigging the election to get the result you want."
Posted Sunday, May 19, 2013 4:33 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 19-May-13 12:39 PM
Gary:
I think you missed this, but when I looked at the Star Tribune article Elliot S. AFSCME Council 5 leader made a comment like, "Once you join an union that is a step to build for middle class America"
So apparently based on that Rep Nelson's attitude even though you're a small business owner who only cares about making their business work on it's own you're not middle class until you get the label that you're an union member and you lose income by paying dues when you shouldn't have to pay dues.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
NLRA prohibits childcare unionization
Rep. Franson introduced a letter from the law firm of Seaton, Peters & Revnew. Douglas P. Seaton wrote the letter. Rep. Franson read this section from the letter:
The family child care providers affected by the proposed legislation can only be properly described as private sector under the HLRA and can not be converted to "public employees" simply by saying so. Federal law mandates that it is an unfair labor practice for an employer to "...dominate or interfere with the formation or administration of any labor organization or contribute financial or other support to it..." 29 U.S.C. 158 (a)(2) Yet the legislation purports to create a framework to form a union of employers and business owners and as such, is directly contrary to Section 8(a)(2)'s prohibition against employer interference financial contribution to a union. The election called for in the legislation would provide for representation of these employers by unions, giving the employers an impermissable voice in the administration of a union.
It appears as though private employers can't be converted to being public employees just because the DFL says so.
Throughout the night, childcare providers lobbied legislators when the legislators entered the hallways.
At one point in the debate, Rep. Mike Nelson, DFL- St. Louis Park, spoke on Rep. Ron Kresha's amendment mandating the print on all unionization drive literature have "at least 14 point font" characters.
Rep. Nelson held up a card that he said the unions were handing out. He said that the card easily passed that test, adding that the amendment was frivolous. Minutes later, Rep. Joyce Peppin returned from talking with the childcare providers still in the Capitol hallway at 4:05 am.
She held up another card that the childcare providers gave her. She then said that much of the print on the card was a small font size.
Time after time during the font size debate, Rep. Nelson said that the BMS, aka the Bureau of Mediation Services, "has been doing these elections for 40 years and they've been doing a fine job."
Finally, Rep. Sarah Anderson, R-Plymouth, asked if the BMS's work had ever been audited. Rep. Nelson admitted that he didn't know if they'd been audited, at which point Sarah Anderson asked "Then how do you know that they've been doing a fine job?"
The DFL held steady on each of the first five amendments, defeating the GOP amendments with either 69 or 70 votes. (They needed 68 votes to defeat.)
It's important that I state this about Rep. Peppin's holding up the union literature with fine print. I don't think Rep. Nelson is a liar. I think AFSCME gave him the card he held up and told him that's the size of the font they'd be using. I further think he simply bought their story. Finally, I don't have any trouble believing that AFSCME wouldn't hesitate in lying about this. These aren't nice people. Let's remember this :
Last month, Dawn Bobo, owner of Village Dollar Store in Union Grove, Wis., was asked to display a pro-union sign in her window. Ms. Bobo, a self- described conservative Republican, refused and received a letter from the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees asking her to reconsider.
'Failure to do so will leave us no choice but do [sic] a public boycott of your business,' the letter said.
That's right. AFSCME threatened to undermine a business owner's ability to make a living if the owner didn't support them. AFSCME Council 5 is the Minnesota union pushing childcare unionization.
Posted Sunday, May 19, 2013 2:30 PM
Comment 1 by #6 at 20-May-13 06:27 AM
Welcome to the Police State.
Let's unravel the AP scandal
This past week, lots of pundits from across the political spectrum have warned Republicans not to overreach on the AP story. They're warning that this is a national security issue. That isn't exactly accurate. It's time to unravel the DOJ's disgusting behavior.
At the heart of the scandal is this statement from Attorney General Holder:
Here's what Attorney General Holder said that isn't accurate:
HOLDER: This was a serious leak, a very, very serious leak. I've been a prosecutor since 1976 and I have to say that this is among, if it isn't the most serious leak, it is among the top 2 or 3 leaks I've ever seen. It put the American people at risk. And that is not hyperbole. It put the American people at risk and trying to determine who was responsible for that required very agressive action.
First, this wasn't a leak. Here's the real story :
Although the Justice Department has not explained why it sought phone records from the AP, Pruitt pointed to a May 7, 2012, story that disclosed details of a successful CIA operation in Yemen to stop an airliner bomb plot around the one-year anniversary of the May 2, 2011, killing of Usama bin Laden.
The AP delayed publication of that story at the request of government officials who said it would jeopardize national security.
"We respected that, we acted responsibly, we held the story," Pruitt said.
Pruitt said the AP published the story only after officials from two government entities said the threat had passed. He said the administration still asked that the story be held until an official announcement the next day, a request the AP rejected.
This wasn't a leak. The AP apparently got word that the CIA asset wasn't in danger. The CIA said they wanted another day to issue a press release on spoiling this terrorist plot. At that point, the AP decided that they didn't need to hold their story any longer.
It's believable that the CIA was upset that they didn't get to issue their press release first. Based on the fact that the DOJ hasn't disputed the AP's statements, it's fair to assume that the AP acted appropriately in terms of taking the national security and intelligence gathering needs of the nation into serious, sober consideration.
That's the front end of this scandal. The next part is what makes this one of the most disturbing scandals in recent history. Based on what we know from the first part of the scandal, we know that there wasn't a need for urgency in stopping a leak that might've compromised a CIA asset in the Middle East. That means the DOJ wasn't entitled to grab the records it did without telling the AP about this massive grab of AP phone records. That means the DOJ was obligated to going to court to apply for a search warrant and for the AP to contest the scope of DOJ's phone records grab.
The federal government's need to protect intelligence-gathering assets in harms way isn't disputed. In fact, the AP apparently acted responsibly in this respect.
Now that we've determined these basic, undisputed facts, it's time to question DOJ's actions. Did the DOJ need to sieze 2 months of the AP's phone records? Did DOJ need 2 months of phone records of over 100 AP reporters and editors? If it didn't, why did DOJ sieze these sensitive records, especially without giving the AP the chance to contest the DOJ's actions?
Unless new facts emerge that support DOJ's actions, Americans of all political stripes should question DOJ's ham-handed behavior in this matter.
UPDATE : Follow this link to read more on the DOJ-AP scandal.
Tags: Department of Justice , Eric Holder , National Security , CIA , Terrorist Plot , First Amendment , Fourth Amendment , Investigation , Scandal
Posted Monday, May 20, 2013 6:16 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 20-May-13 10:35 AM
Gary:
A couple of questions you might want to ask or follow up on here.
One, did the Bush Administration at least in such a heavy handed method ever go looking for a source like Holder is doing?
Two, if this leak was so severe and so bad as Holder is claiming wouldn't I have been trying to get this information back in May 2012 when the leak occurred?
Three, wasn't this one of many stories where the Obama administration was being accussed by it's critics of them leaking it to the public to make them look good and that they had the war on terror under control?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Bob J. at 20-May-13 01:54 PM
Walter, it's even worse than that. Your second point brings to mind a question that should be asked directly to both Holder and his boss:
"If there was a national security leak of such significance that you felt the need to threaten the First Amendment rights of a major news organization, why would you not feel the need to inform the President of such a leak, since he said he found out about your investigation on television?"
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 21-May-13 05:11 PM
Bob:
Don't you know that is standard procedure unless it's lobbying for an issue that Obama cares about he isn't briefed on anything.
Though that question might make a liberal's brain meltdown! After all that makes sense for something that Holder should've done.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 4 by Bob J. at 23-May-13 10:18 AM
Indeed I do, Walter! He's fully in the loop about basketball players coming out of the closet ... not so much about anything else.
What's wrong with SCSU's rightsizing
Thanks to an honorable employee at St. Cloud State, we're getting a pretty good picture of what's happening at St. Cloud State. Here's that employee's story about SCSU's declining enrollment:
Enrollment Declines and Trying to Make Lemonade
by Silence Dogood
The lifeblood and health of a university is its enrollment. If enrollment is going up, things are good and if it's going down, someone is usually going to take the blame. The fall enrollments at St. Cloud State University (as taken from SCSU's own news releases) are plotted in the Figure below. (editor's note: WordPress wouldn't permit the downloading of the graphic.)
From Fall 2005 to Fall 2010, the enrollment looks like the stock price for Apple rising with no end in sight. These were the good times. Shortly after Provost and Vice President Devinder Malhotra arrived on campus in July 2009, the university began a process of "Strategic Program Appraisal" followed almost simultaneously by an academic reorganization of the university. Some of this was necessitated by the anticipated loss of Federal Stimulus funds. The overall goal was to cut the university's annual spending by over 12 million dollars a year. Clearly, this was not something that was going to be fun.
The Enrollment Management Committee (EMC) predicted an FY'11 (Summer 2010 through Spring 2011) FYE enrollment of 15,000. There is some confusion in the way enrollment is counted. Traditional headcount is used when you want to inflate the numbers. However, not all undergraduate students take a full 30-credit load so the total number of undergraduate credits generated divided by 30 gives the undergraduate FYE enrollment. The actual FYE enrollment was 14,993 so the prediction was off by 7 FYE students. All in all, with a 0.05% error you would have to say the prediction was right on the money - remember more students means more tuition and that equals more money!
In the Spring of 2011, the EMC predicted an FYE enrollment for FY'12 of 14,770 (a drop of 230 FYE). Much of the predicted decrease was based on the closure of numerous programs (the largest of which was the accredited aviation program) and the poor press surrounding reorganization. (Who really thought cancelling homecoming was a good idea?) However, the EMC said the enrollment decrease could be much larger.
The Provost didn't like the EMC's prediction and increased the FYE enrollment prediction to 14,870 - an increase of 100 FYE from the EMC's projection. As a result, the predicted FYE decline for FY'12 was only 130 FYE students or 0.8%. The actual decline turned out to be MUCH LARGER.
At the same time, without any involvement or consultation with the EMC, the Provost, with the stroke of a pen, tried to increase the size of the Division of General Studies (DGS) program to 850 students from its targeted enrollment of approximately 500 students. For those who don't know, the DGS program is basically a community college within the university for students who do not meet the normal admission requirements. The obvious explanation for the expansion of the DGS program, of course, was to counteract the anticipated downturn in new entering students for Fall 2011.
On August 19, 2011, Provost Malhotra disbanded the EMC. Normally, joint faculty-administrative committees are formed and disbanded through a discussion at Meet and Confer. In this case, it was just an email.
After five years of continuous enrollment growth, enrollment in the Fall of 2011 was down 5.9%. It is even more striking when compared with the increase of 3.5% from Fall of 2010 - combining for a two year decrease of 9.4%! The obvious solution: find someone to blame!
The person they found was Dr. Mahmoud Saffari, Associate Vice President for Enrollment Management. On September 20, 2011, Dr. Saffari was given notice that his contract "will end on 90 days from date of letter."
After the decline in enrollment in Fall 2011, since there was no longer an EMC to project enrollments, Provost Malhotra essentially assumed complete control and he predicted "As SCSU progresses through its transition stage, Malhotra says there is hope for a 1 percent increase in enrollment for next year."
Instead of a 1 percent "bump" (Malthotra's own words), the enrollment declined for Fall 2012 by 4.5%. I guess that the good news is that nobody got fired this time.
At the Budget Advisory Committee meeting on February 26, 2013, the enrollment projection for Fall 2013 was given to be a 2.5% decline. At the Budget Advisory Committee meeting on April 30, 2013, the projected decline grew to a range of 2.8-3.2%. However, the impact of returning students, which accounts for more than three-fourths of the enrollment was not fully taken into consideration in projecting the decline. One administrator at the meeting predicted that when the retention of the returning students was factored in the decline would more likely be in the 5-7% range.
After Dr. Saffari was dismissed, he asked, as the administrative contract allows, for the reasons for his dismissal. The letter given to Dr. Saffari, which lists the reasons for his termination came from Provost and Vice President Devinder Malhotra. Dr. Saffari has given permission to release one of the reasons because it is specifically related to the issue of enrollment. From the October 31, 2011 letter from Provost Malhotra: "During my tenure as provost you have not produced a satisfactory strategic enrollment management plan, despite my continual counsel to you to focus on data analytics and statistical predictive models."
Dr. Saffari's dismissal is being challenged in the courts as well as being investigated by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) so some details have to be omitted. However, if the development of an enrollment management plan was so important that it led to Dr. Saffari being dismissed, why hasn't the university produced an enrollment management plan in the twenty months since Dr. Saffari's dismissal? Maybe, that wasn't really the reason?
Additionally, after more than a year since the dismissal of Dr. Saffari, the presentation made on 'data analytics' by Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education and Student Support Services Miguel Martinez-Saenz at Meet and Confer basically confirmed that students with higher ACT scores and higher class rank are more successful and have higher retention rates. I only hope we didn't pay too much for that gem of wisdom.
If the data for fall enrollments at SCSU for Fall 2011 and Fall 2012 (as taken from SCSU's own news releases) are added along with a projected decline of 5% for fall 2013 the Figure shown below is obtained.
First, it's alarming that the Dr. Malholtra's enrollment predictions haven't been close to accurate, especially compared with Dr. Saffari's projections. It's certainly legitimate to question whether Dr. Malholtra's 'projections' aren't fiction devoid of any scientific basis.
Next, it's important to put these enrollment statistics in the context of St. Cloud State's declining revenues. This post highlights President Potter's decision on the Wedum Foundation apartment complex:
Coborn's Plaza apartments have been a well-kept secret since they opened in the fall of 2010. Even getting accurate occupancy numbers during the first two years was difficult and only given in whispers with those hearing the secrets being sworn to secrecy. Some of that secrecy ended November 13, 2012 when Len Sippel, Interim Vice President for Finance and Administration, released the list of approved funding for permanent investments that included $2,250,000 for the 'Coborn's Welcome Center .'
Losing $2,250,000 in 2 years isn't good news for SCSU. Compared with the lost revenues from the University's declining enrollment, though, the apartment is small potatoes. Each FYE spends $8,000 a year. The drop from an FYE enrollment of 15,000 to an FYE enrollment of 13,480 is a loss of $12,160,000. That easily outdistances the money SCSU lost on the apartment deal.
Finally, what's most disturbing is the reason given for Dr. Saffari's termination:
F
rom the October 31, 2011 letter from Provost Malhotra: "During my tenure as provost you have not produced a satisfactory strategic enrollment management plan, despite my continual counsel to you to focus on data analytics and statistical predictive models."
Now we learn that Dr. Malholtra hasn't put this information together. If that's why Dr. Saffari was terminated, and I don't believe it is, then it should be cause for Dr. Malhotra's termination, too, because what's good for the goose is good for the gander, too.
Declining enrollment isn't a scandal. It happens at all universities. Dr. Saffari's termination, however, might be a legitimate scandal, especially considering the documentation Dr. Malholtra sent to Dr. Saffari. The financial mismanagement at SCSU, however, is troubling.
Originally posted Monday, May 20, 2013, revised 18-Oct 6:52 PM
Comment 1 by Crimson Trace at 20-May-13 10:37 AM
Let's see...yelling administrators, doctored transcripts, Coborn Apartment boondoggle, and now nose diving enrollments. Is there any good news left at SCSU? "I think I'll take doctored transcripts for 500, Alex!"
No doubt, doctored student transcripts is the clear winner and may be up for an Emmy. Reminds me of John Boehner and the IRS scandal: "Who is going to jail?"
Time to total up the DFL's damage
With Minnesota's 2013 legislative session in the books, it's time to total up the DFL's damage to Minnesota's economy. The tax increases will hurt Minnesota's economy the most are the business-to-business sales taxes on warehousing and telecommunications. The warehouse tax has been tried in several states, including Massachusetts. It's been quickly repealed because it does lots of damage in a short period of time. I suspect that the DFL will repeal the warehousing tax early next session. If they don't, the damage that tax will do will be considerable, both in terms of economic damage and in political terms.
Another tax increase that will hurt Minnesotans is the cigarette tax increase. In Chicago, where the cigarette tax is high, 75% of cigarette packs don't have a tax stamp on them. That's how many cigarette smokers buy their cigarettes on the black market in Chicago. Follow this link for more on cigarette tax avoidance.
Another way that the DFL hurt the middle class they claim to fight for is through the energy bill, which I wrote about here . Here's what Rep. Mike Beard, the premier authority on energy issues in the Minnesota legislature, said about the DFL's energy bill:
House Democrats passed their hugely controversial Energy Policy omnibus bill this week that increases even more aggressive, unfunded renewable and solar mandates on utility companies.
Besides huge technological difficulties implementing the new law, it will increase electric costs for all ratepayers (homeowners, businesses, hospitals, you name it) and decrease the reliability of our state's energy sources.
This bill benefits, to the best of my knowledge, a few Minnesota solar companies that rely on a mandated pool of government money to survive, even though they have over three decades of federal mandates throwing hundreds of billions of dollars at their industry.
The DFL's energy bill, passed in the name of global warming, will drive up electricity prices:
REP. BEARD: I still have a picture of a poster in my office that Jimmy Carter's administration put out in 1978, thirty-five years ago, that by the year 2000, fully 20% of our power would come from solar PB. He dropped $12,000,000,000 on that adventure. And what do we have to show for it? Nothing. One tenth of 1% today, thirty-five years later, is solar PB. And so we're going to take another run at that windmill, and I'm not talking about the ones on Buffalo Ridge. We're picking winners and losers and we're desperately hoping that these are winners this time.
In short, the DFL raised taxes on the middle class by raising the cigarette tax. The middle class will get hurt through higher electric bills thanks to their energy bill. The DFL passed that bill to satisfy another of their special interest allies, namely environmental extremists.
Finally, their multitude of tax increases on small businesses will chase some businesses from Minnesota. Other businesses will keep part of their operations here while expanding their businesses in states more hospitable to businesses.
After proclaiming that the GOP's budget was filled with gimmicks, especially including the school shift, the DFL's budget failed to pay off the school shift. In 2012, the GOP legislature passed a bill that would've paid off the school shift, which Gov. Dayton promptly vetoed. After refusing to pay off the school shift, Speaker Thissen had the audacity to say that their budget didn't include shifts or gimmicks.
Thanks to the DFL legislature, Minnesotans will have fewer dollars in their pockets and capital will continue leaving Minnesota at an alarming rate .
Tags: Paul Thissen , Tax Increases , Cigarette Tax , Sales Tax , Inventories , Telecommunications , Solar Energy Mandates , Electric Bills , Middle Class Squeeze , Class Warfare , DFL , Election 2014
Posted Tuesday, May 21, 2013 4:25 AM
No comments.
GOP flyaround notes
Tuesday morning, GOP legislators, led by House Minority Leader Kurt Daudt and Senate Minority Leader David Hann, visited the St. Cloud Regional Airport to discuss the just-ended session. After brief presentations by Daudt and Hann, they opened things up for questions.
Rep. Daudt first noted that the DFL legislature raised taxes by "$2.1 billion" and fees by another $300,000,000. Sen. Hann and Rep. Daudt both talked about not needing that tax increase to solve a $627,000,000 deficit. Both legislators spoke about the need to spend money more wisely, with Sen. Hann noting that the DFL didn't include any reforms in their budget or policy bills.
When asked about the $400,000,000 in property tax relief, Rep. Jennifer Loon verified that most of the relief came in the form of increased payments to cities and counties. When asked if LGA payment increases helped cities like Duluth, St. Paul and Minneapolis just spend more rather than provide property tax relief, Sen. Hann and Rep. Daudt said that there's a history of that. Adding to that, Sen. John Pederson said that, while the DFL was screaming about people's property taxes going up, St. Cloud's property taxes were actually going down.
Another piece of legislation that was brought up was the energy bill. The bill passed in the House but, ultimately, it didn't pass in the Senate. Still, it's almost a guarantee that the DFL will bring it up early in 2014. Sen. Pederson said that one of the Senate DFL's selling points for the legislation was that it would lower electric rates. Republicans questioned that talking point by asking why northern Minnesota needed the carve-out if their rates were dropping.
The most chilling part of the press conference was hearing Teresa Bohnen, the president of the St. Cloud Chamber of Commerce talk about how businesses are hurting and that the tax bill won't help with that. Afterwards, Rep. Daudt said that businesses are planning ahead for the tax increases. He then said that that's why job growth is slowing down. Rep. Daudt said that we won't see a spike in unemployment but that we're likely to see job creation stagnate.
The other point they made was that, while the middle class won't get directly hit with tax increases, the middle class will get hit with higher priced products as a result of the tax increases on "the rich." Rep. Jeff Howe said that the warehousing tax will trigger higher prices, adding that that tax increase "wasn't well thought out."
Posted Wednesday, May 22, 2013 1:52 AM
No comments.
