September 24, 2017
Sep 24 01:48 You can't defund the legislature Sep 24 03:54 About Gov. Dayton's line-item veto Sep 24 10:53 Today, I won't watch the NFL Sep 24 20:44 Questioning the Wilfs' spin Sep 24 22:52 The Enbridge hearings begin
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
You can't defund the legislature
When Paul Gazelka stepped to the podium at Friday's press conference, one of the first things Sen. Gazelka said was "both mediation and why we sued was because the governor can't defund the House and the Senate. That's the issue. The issue isn't how far we can run. We have a 2-year budget that we have to fund that we have to fund all the way to July, 2019." I hadn't seen this press conference but I'm happy that I'm on the same wavelength as Sen. Gazelka. I wrote about that identical principle earlier this week.
Another thing that caught my attention happened when Sen. Gazelka said "We went back in our notes and found that the governor absolutely said that he'd support the tax bill as is on the Saturday before the end. It would have been a shock had he not signed that bill." Let's examine that a minute.
In 2011, GOP legislative leaders met with Gov. Dayton on June 30 to make a final attempt at reaching a budget deal before the midnight end of the biennium. When Gov. Dayton agreed to a budget deal that didn't include tax increases, legislative leaders went back to their caucuses to tell them that they'd hammered out a deal that didn't include tax increases. When Speaker Zellers and Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch returned to Gov. Dayton's office, Gov. Dayton told GOP leadership that he'd rejected the deal that he'd initially signed off on.
After a 2-week shutdown, Gov. Dayton agreed to the budget that the GOP leadership had proposed on June 30. When he finally accepted the deal, Gov. Dayton admitted that he didn't realize Republicans had stripped out the controversial language from their proposal.
This year, Gov. Dayton signed off on the GOP Tax Relief Bill. Now he wants the GOP to renegotiate their tax relief bill in exchange for him signing a bill funding legislative operations. Sound familiar? If you answered yes, it's because Gov. Dayton has shown a habit of reneging on deals that he's initially signed off on.
Here's the GOP press conference from last Friday:
I'd recommend watching Gov. Dayton's' press conference, too. Watch the difference between Gov. Dayton's attitude and GOP leadership's attitude. Gov. Dayton looked peevish and petulant. Speaker Daudt and Sen. Gazelka looked like adults.
Like in other years, GOP leadership will be waiting to pass a bill to restore funding for the legislature when the legislature opens in February. It's still debatable whether Gov. Dayton will sign that bill. If Gov. Dayton vetoes it, Speaker Daudt should immediately schedule an override vote. Let's see if DFL legislators would vote to not fund themselves. If they stick with Gov. Dayton, rural DFL legislators should expect to be tied to Gov. Dayton. They should also start writing their concession speeches or their retirement speeches.
If the DFL sides with Gov. Dayton, it will be proof that they're Democrats first and that representing their constituents ranks way down their list of priorities.
Posted Sunday, September 24, 2017 1:48 AM
No comments.
About Gov. Dayton's line-item veto
When Gov. Dayton whined about being lied to about the House's and Senate's reserves being enough to allow them to operate until the 2018 session starts, he said that the legislature could then attempt to override his veto. That's a rather duplicitous statement made during a speech when he accused Republicans of lying to him, "to Minnesotans and to the Supreme Court." It's duplicitous because he knows the chances of a single DFL legislator voting against him is virtually non-existent if not actually non-existent.
Further, Gov. Dayton knows that his line-item veto didn't just zero out the legislature's budget for 3 months or 6 months. Gov. Dayton's line-item veto eliminated funding for the entire biennium . Saying that the legislature has the option of overriding his veto is duplicitous because, while technically available, the reality is that it isn't a realistic option. It's worth noting that legal theories don't exist in a vacuum. It isn't honest to say that the legislature can override his veto when everyone knows that the DFL won't supply a single vote to override.
During his press conference, Gov. Dayton said that the "2017 Tax Bill will seriously jeopardize Minnesota government's future and financial stability." Notice that he didn't say anything about the Tax Bill's benefits to families, hard-working small businesses and farmers. That's a pretty clear insight into Gov. Dayton's governing philosophy. It's the DFL's governing philosophy, too.
By comparison, when Speaker Daudt spoke about the impasse, he said that "we consider ourselves to be in survival mode. The Governor has literally eliminated our funding. The Court has given us funding through October 1st. We do have some funds that we can use beyond that. We will look at any other option to make sure that people have a voice here at the Capitol in their elected representatives. We feel very strongly about upholding Minnesotans' constitutional right to 3 branches of government."
The difference in tone between Gov. Dayton and Speaker Daudt was sharp. Gov. Dayton sounded like a petulant child throwing a hissy fit. Speaker Daudt sounded like an adult.
Posted Sunday, September 24, 2017 3:54 AM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 24-Sep-17 08:10 AM
I can't imagine DFLers voting to cut off their own pay and lay off their staffs. Party loyalty, yes, but job suicide?
Miss the sidebar of recent comments.
Today, I won't watch the NFL
Throughout this weekend, NFL players criticized President Trump for saying what most of the nation thinks: that they wish these prima donnas would get out of the business of politics. This morning, a couple dozen players took a knee during the playing of the national anthem before the Baltimore Ravens-Jacksonville Jaguars football game in London.
I don't know when I'll watch another NFL football game. It might not be this year. These spoiled brats are protesting who-knows-what. I'm not certain they know why. What's certain is that many have bought the Black Lives Matter BS in its entirety. Last year, when players for the then-St. Louis Rams ran out of the tunnel with the 'Hands up, don't shoot' gesture, they got criticized by St. Louis police officers . At the time, the police officers issued a statement, saying in part "The St. Louis Police Officers Association is profoundly disappointed with the members of the St. Louis Rams football team who chose to ignore the mountains of evidence released from the St. Louis County Grand Jury this week and engage in a display that police officers around the nation found tasteless, offensive, and inflammatory. Five members of the Rams entered the field today exhibiting the "hands-up-don't-shoot" pose that has been adopted by protestors who accused Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson of murdering Michael Brown. The gesture has become synonymous with assertions that Michael Brown was innocent of any wrongdoing and attempting to surrender peacefully when Wilson, according to some now-discredited witnesses, gunned him down in cold blood."
This morning, the NFL stopped being a sports league. They became a full-time political organization associated with the Democratic Party. That description fits the NBA, too. I won't waste my time on either political organization. When the NFL sits on its hands while 5 marginal-at-best football players disrespect men and women who risk their lives trying to protect society, they've stopped being football players. They've become ill-informed progressive activists. At that point, they've become sheep in Al Sharpton's 'congregation'.
Here's hoping that people who normally watch the NFL find something else to do this afternoon. Here's hoping, too, that TV ratings continue dropping and that stadiums have lots of empty seats today. Instead of watching the NFL today, I'll spend a good portion of the afternoon watching my Minnesota Twins move closer to clinching their first playoff spot since 2010. After that, I'll watch the Minnesota Lynx try to recapture their WNBA championship that they win every other year.
Will I miss the NFL? Most likely, I'll miss it a little. Hopefully, missing the games will be cathartic.
Posted Sunday, September 24, 2017 10:53 AM
No comments.
Questioning the Wilfs' spin
After NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and DeMaurice Smith, the executive director of the NFLPA, criticized, NFL owners tried limiting the PR hit the NFL will take for taking a knee rather than standing at attention for the National Anthem by releasing statements. Zygi and Mark Wilf issued this statement .
The statement says "Professional sports offer a platform unlike any other, a platform that can bring people from a variety of backgrounds together to impact positive change in our society. As owners, it is our job to foster an environment that recognizes and appreciates diversity of thought and encourages using this platform in a constructive manner. Rather than make divisive statements, we believe in promoting thoughtful, inspiring conversation that unifies our communities. We are proud of our players, coaches and staff for the important role they play in our community, and we fully support their constitutional right to respectfully and peacefully express their beliefs."
With all due respect to the Vikings, that statement is spin. For instance, saying that "we believe in promoting thoughtful, inspiring conversation that unifies our communities" is BS. When the St. Louis Rams' wide receivers came out of the tunnel and did the 'hands up, don't shoot' gesture, was that the Wilfs' idea of promoting thoughtful, inspiring conversation that unifies our communities"?
Steve Bisciotti, the owner of the Baltimore Ravens, took a different approach:
"We respect their demonstration and support them 100 percent. All voices need to be heard. That's democracy in its highest form."
I wonder if Mr. Bisciotti would feel the same way if one of his employees spoke out of turn for one of his other companies, especially if that employee's statement hurt Mr. Bisciotti's business. I'm betting that Mr. Bisciotti wouldn't have the same attitude with his less famous employees who hurt his business. And make no mistake about this. Mr. Bisciotti's NFL 'employees' are hurting his business.
Like Zygi Wilf, Commissioner Goodell is an East Coast progressive. They live inside the East Coast progressive echochamber. Witness the surprise that Commissioner Goodell had when the public criticized him for his Ray Rice suspension. He didn't have a clue that the penalty was inadequate. It wasn't until he realized that the NFL was experiencing a PR nightmare that he revised the penalties.
The NFL ratings will continue to take a hit. There might be some fluctuations but the trend will be unmistakable. Until the NFL and the Vikings start understanding what people expect, their PR problems and their product will suffer.
Posted Sunday, September 24, 2017 8:44 PM
No comments.
The Enbridge hearings begin
The environmentalists' newest dog-and-pony show, aka the Enbridge Line 3 Pipeline Project, hearings start this week . It's guaranteed that environmental activists will turn out in big numbers, thanks to the Dayton-Rothman Commerce Department's gift.
When the Commerce Department provided testimony to the Public Utilities Commission, they said that "the project isn't needed and won't benefit Minnesota." I question the validity of that testimony since it closely resembles the statements made by Steve Morse, the executive director of the Minnesota Environmental Partnership, about the Pipeline project. That's basis enough to question whether the Dayton-Rothman Commerce Department is essentially being run by special interest organizations opposed ideologically, not scientifically, to the project.
In their testimony, the Dayton-Rothman Commerce Department states that refineries are running near capacity, which, in their opinion, is proof that another pipeline isn't needed. Why doesn't the Commerce Department and the Minnesota Environmental Partnership think that that's proof that we need to increase refining capacity, not reduce pipeline capacity?
The testimony is short-sighted in another way. Does anyone think that this oil won't get shipped via a different pipeline if this pipeline project is rejected? If the PUC rejects this pipeline project, will the oil company simply shut down their operations in Alberta? Or will they simply start working with a different state to build a different pipeline? I'd submit that the latter scenario is most likely.
If that's the case, why would the DFL shortchange construction unions and Minnesota's small towns in northern Minnesota? Should this man essentially have a 1-man veto over infrastructure projects?
The DFL frequently accuses Republicans of ignoring science. Isn't that what the DFL is doing in opposing this project? After all, Republicans aren't foolish enough that fossil fuel usage has leveled off and will start declining. That's what Gov. Dayton's Commerce Department and the MEP argue. The chances of that happening are remote. The chances of the MEP's predictions being accurate are even more unlikely.
Posted Sunday, September 24, 2017 10:52 PM
No comments.
