The way the legislative session turned out was the only way it could have turned out. I'm sure I came across as a bit a of Gloomy Gus when commenting during the session, but there just wasn't a different scenario than what we ended up with. Like everyone else who hangs out here, I would have liked a better outcome. I would have been as happy as anyone else, but also surprised, and questioning whether I know as much about politics as I think I do.
When looking at the players, what they wanted, and their leverage, a few things were clear. The DFL wanted several things, like more funding for health care for the poor, lower costs for higher education, ... I'm sure you can all fill in the ellipses. Pawlenty, with whom Republicans were determined to go over the cliff, wanted basically (more on the "basically" later) one thing: to be able to come out with no tax increases.
It sounds like I'm stating the obvious, but follow me for a moment. The DFL had a lot of places where they could compromise. Yes, they wanted to fix all the bad roads and they're getting only a few fixed, but that's still better than none. Some shallower cuts for K-12 is different from deeper cuts for K-12, and so on. Moreover, DFLers had been setting expectations by telling their base the cuts would be brutal even if there were tax increases. Republicans however couldn't give on taxes one bit not merely because that was their attitude, but because all they wanted was no tax increases. That means if they had compromised on any one tax increase, even a small one, even if it was popular, they would have lost everything. They would have been portrayed by the media as caving in, and their base would turn on anyone who voted to raise taxes since the one expectation they had was absolute opposition to taxes.
No, they don't like compromise anyway, but the point is they put themselves in a political box where they had zero room for compromise; the DFL did have room. That's the first thing that pretty much guaranteed the DFL would do the vast majority of the compromising.
We've heard it from Paul Wellstone, Keith Ellison, and every progressive leader out there - we're stronger when we work together. Why then have we perfected the circular firing range, pointing our fiercest criticism at each other rather than targeting the true problem?
Case in point: 2010 Legislative Session. Blogger Joe Bodell protests, the legislature should have refused to deal (just keep forcing the Gov to use his veto pen) and "special summer sessions" would be more to Joe's liking. Yeah, that would show our Gov, he really hates to use the veto pen!
Let's play this out. Special summer sessions = still no change with the added bonus of chaos for local government (i.e. cities) and others who depend on state funding streams. I have personal experience here as a City Councilmember - dealing with uncertainty is no good for taxpayers or city services. Governor Pawlenty lost the unallotment lawsuit! Did the DFL majority capitulate by affirming the unallotment cuts? NO - they are correctly focused on the future and our tremendous state deficit, not rehashing the past.
I take Joe's comments seriously - I know they reflect real conversations happening all over this state. But why are progressives unhappy? We don't have the power we need to make real change. We get that power with a change in Governor!
When your objective is to stop government from doing its work, when you don't care if the court system functions or people get medical treatment or we are protected by adequate police and fire service, your job is easy - just sit on your hands, cover your ears and eyes and say no.
When you care if government works, the stakes are higher and "no action" is not an option. Thank you Margaret Anderson Kelliher, and our DFL legislators, for caring that government works, for containing the chaos caused by our unallotting Gov, and for keeping your eye on the prize - the Governor's office.
To fellow progressives. My advice? Vote in the primary for Margaret Anderson Kelliher! Then, let's set this general election GOTV operation on fire. Unite!
(Mr. Cox writes: "Republicans certainly did no harm to those at the top. Everyone else pretty much got creamed." -- yep. - promoted by TwoPuttTommy)
By Wayne Cox
Governor Tim Pawlenty and Republican leader Rep. Kurt Zellers gave one of their "black is white" press briefings after Pawlenty agreed to a budget deal Sunday night. They claimed the principle they followed in the budget deal was "do no harm."
That must mean no harm to Governor Pawlenty's hope of gaining the Republican nomination for President. Most Minnesotans, however, will find tough times just got tougher--for vulnerable people, for businesses, for hospitals, for cities, for school children, for jobs and for taxpayers.
By rejecting the Medicaid option, Governor Pawlenty blocked efforts to do right by the tens of thousands of Minnesotans he had placed in health care limbo. He rejected a plan that would have returned financial stability to health care and hospital services. He rejected the 20,000 private sector jobs that the plan the DFL sought would have provided. He turned his back on $1.4 billion of desperately needed federal dollars. He seems to think federal aid is tainted money. He's right. It's money that taint coming here.
(As noted previously, diaries from campaigns and candidates aren't just welcome; they're encouraged. - promoted by Joe Bodell)
by Matt Entenza
The governor's pen is all that comes between us and taxes. It's undeniable. Just not in quite the way our governor and his party want us to think it is.
For years, the GOP message machine has told us they're the last line of defense between us and "some of the highest taxes in the country." Unfortunately, if anything has contributed to tax problems in the last seven years, it's precisely our governor's and GOP legislators' disingenuous take on taxes.
This week, I traveled Minnesota telling the truth about Gov. Pawlenty's unallotments: that they force local tax increases. Our communities can't cut basic services as far as Gov. Pawlenty's cuts would force us to, and he and the GOP know it. For years, they've played with terminology, creating "fees" that are really taxes, and knowingly forced the hand of local governments to raise property taxes to pay for fire departments, police departments, road repairs and other things we all count on. In other words, our taxes have increased - the governor and his party have just given themselves the fiscal equivalent of plausible deniability.
A tax is not a tax is not a tax. Minnesota property taxes are regressive. A larger share of the burden falls on those with a lesser ability to pay. And our taxes have become more regressive over the years, as the more progressive income tax has fallen as a share of total collections. State aid to cities, or local government aid, came about because it's more efficient at funding basic services than local levies are. LGA is smart; it's responsible. It's very Minnesotan.
But the way things are, according to the House Research Department (the nonpartisan office that provides data to the Minnesota House of Representatives), your property taxes are likely to increase between 2.9 and 5.2 percent. In some places, the number is much higher. Taconite cities? More than 10 percent. And if you live in Minneapolis or St. Paul, your percentages may be lower than some, but you'll see big dollar-amount increases.
Gov. Pawlenty and his legislative backers know we can't cut basic services as far as their budget maneuverings would force us to. But Minnesotans also can't bear property tax hikes as high as would be required to bridge the gap - meaning we will see cuts to basic services throughout the state, and some harsh ones. More than one Minnesota municipality has flirted with the idea of eliminating emergency services. If that isn't a scary scenario, I don't know what is. Some conservatives want us to believe that these types of examples are hyperbole. They're not.
Our governor has always been good at politics. It's in making good policy for Minnesota that he's been challenged. In 2005, then-Senate Majority Leader Dean Johnson and I forced Gov. Pawlenty to a government shutdown in order to preserve some of the crucial services Minnesotans count on. It wasn't a perfect solution, but Gov. Pawlenty got the message. It saved thousands of people from cuts that bleed.
Of course, Gov. Pawlenty isn't running for re-election. Minnesota will have new leadership in 2011. We cannot continue down Tim Pawlenty's path. I challenge the emerging GOP candidates for Tim Pawlenty's job to tell Minnesotans what they'll do differently. Regressive financial shell games are not the way forward. They don't make our communities stronger. They don't provide better education to our kids. They don't make us safer. They cost us.
Sen. Scott Dibble (DFL-Mpls) is still fuming mad about the session. You can read his opinion on the budget and unallotment here. I talked with him to fill in a little more about the session.
"I think he's squandered 8 years as Governor," Scott exclaimed. "What Governor wants to harm the University by dramatically underfunding it year after year. He's systematically underfunded our infrastructure. He only recently jumped on the Northstar [rail line] band wagon after opposing it for years. He vetoed the Central Corridor plan last year."
Scott didn't say it, but I will. a bridge fell down under Pawlenty's watch ... when he was more concerned with making sure they spent as little money as possible.
"What has he accomplished?" Scott asked rhetorically. He has accomplished nothing except to spread fear and divide Minnesotans for short-term political gains according to Scott.
Pawlenty can't even point to not raising taxes as an accomplishment.
Because Pawlenty has slashed Local Government Aid (LGA) year after year, cities and counties have been forced to raise property taxes through the roof to pay for basic things like police, fire and schools.
But the bullying bill exemplifies Pawlenty's duplicity and bad faith negotiations according to Scott. It exemplifies how the Governor "fundamentally doesn't care" about this state or the people in it who are suffering.
(I'd like to thank Sen. Dibble for his comments, I'll have a post up soon discussing this post and more of his reflections on the legislative session overall. - promoted by The Big E)
Our session has just concluded and I'm sorry to report that the governor has forced an outcome that will result in drastic cuts to the most basic services and the fundamental investments our state makes in its quality of life and in its future.
From the start, the legislature repeatedly offered solutions that struck a balance between spending reductions and stabilizing revenue sources so we could start on a path toward rebuilding our vital services in future years. Thousands of citizens showed up at town hall meetings, thousands more called and wrote. They asked that this be the prudent approach we take, as our state has in every single previous crisis. In response, the legislature delivered a balanced and responsible budget to the governor. He promptly vetoed it and announced that he would go it alone.
I confess to being in a state of shock at Tim Pawlenty's intransigence, utter lack of compassion and total disinterest in building a successful future for Minnesotans...
The DFL had wanted 2.6 billion dollars of the 8.7 deficit raised through permanent revenue raises, not one-time shifts (late payments) or borrowing from future payments. The wealthiest 10% of Minnesota pay 10.4% in overall taxes while the average Minnesota pays 11.1%. The DFL proposed fourth tier taxes would have taxed the richest more in income tax, the people who can best afford it, would pay more. The estimates that I heard, said this means that a family earning $300,000 would pay about an additional $109 a year!. Compared to severely reduced emergency health care in the state and other drastic cuts, that would affect even the rich, how can Pawlenty morally defend this?
Note that the Governor has never compromised on raising permanent tax revenue. And your ideas about budget cuts, the governor will take the idea on phone "message" line. I wonder if anyone even listens to this line. Obviously, the governor will not have public hearings, because the public is generally shut out. It has been clear that governor has planned to use "unallotment" to shut out the legislature unless the legislature did exactly as told. When the DFL "compromises", the governor speaks as though the DFL authored the idea, like the DFL compromise on education tax shift. Basically, the governor is using "line item veto" and the emergency "unallotment" to basically become the dictator or king of Minnesota. Republican Governor Pawlenty has become a Bush-style decider.
Congratulations to the legislature! The legislature sent a balanced budget and all bills were sent to the governor in a timely manner. The governor never planned to compromise to accept permanent a more fair tax increase on the richest. The Republican spin machine is in full force. The ownership interests of mainstream media will soft pedal what Pawlenty did. Until the last moment, Republican Pawlenty protected the richest from even a $109 tax increase!
Despite landslide losses in the last two elections, despite bringing our country to it's knees, all Republicans do is continue to repeat their same tired, trite sayings. It's the brittle, old thinking that got us into all the various messes from which we are now suffering.
And threaten.
They love to threaten anyone who stands against them. When they were in the ascension and once in power, their threats had electoral consequences. Now, not so much.
Republicans have been crushed in two consecutive elections. Not a single Republican in either the House or the Senate voted for the budget. And yet, it appears they have been holding back. Unless Democrats allow Republicans to filibuster health care, then Republicans will stop holding back and do something so tottaly ultra mega awesome that they will get back into power. Or, at least that is what Republican Senate Mike Enzi says:
The matter [reconciliation] is guaranteed to be a major partisan sticking point when the two chambers meet to hammer out a final version of next year's spending plan. If it passes, it would allow the Senate to pass Obama's proposed health care reform without the threat of a Republican-led Senate filibuster.
Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyoming, speaking for most of his GOP Senate colleagues, warned Tuesday that if a health-care "reconciliation winds up in the budget bill, it'll be like a declaration of war. ... I hope that that wedge doesn't get thrown in there."
Wow-I wonder what Enzi means by a "declaration of war." Will that mean Republicans won't vote for any Democratic legislation? Will they call war veterans traitors? Will they suppress Florida and Ohio voters in a successful attempt to steal elections? Will it mean they will try to impeach President Obama? Will they act like such jerks that we will wax them in a third straight election?
As we approach the end of the Minnesota legislative session, what will Minnesota Republicans do to get their way? All they hope to do this session is prevent the DFLers from accomplishing anything.
They need to prevent 3 House members from caving on a number of issues and overriding gubernatorial vetoes that are sure to come.
Aside from Ron Carey, Republicans in the legislature are smart enough to realize that they are powerless and that threats against DFLers are simply a waste of time. Since it seems that they must threaten someone, it'll probably be one of there own.
Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty has a history of covering up deficits with accounting gimmicks. Like most Republicans he prefers running up debts while cutting taxes for the wealthy. He presided over the largest education cuts in the states history in 2003.
Now that we're facing a massive budget shortfall, what does he do? He runs for President.
Gov. Tim Pawlenty proposes to increase eduction funding by more than $100 million over the next two years - Democrats argue the governor's budget won't balance...
(HometownSource.com)
Is Pawlenty just trying position himself for a Presidential run? The House is proposing holding levels as they are and the Senate is proposing a 3% cut. According to Pawlenty's own website, he'd use one-time federal stabilization money:
Dusty Trice brought it up and I couldn't help taking a look for myself. And wouldn't you be surprised what I found. Gov. Tim Pawlenty was for term limits before he was against them.
But he wasn't just for term limits, he actually went so far as to introduce a bill. This means he really meant it. Back when he was a turd-flinging back-bencher.
This was a year before he became a serious politician. A year before he was elected Minority Leader in the House. A year before he understood how much he liked power.
No person may file to be a candidate for election to a term in the house of representatives or senate that, if served, would cause the person to serve more than ten consecutive years in the legislature.
(From HF30 as introduced Jan. 10, 1997)
That's all well and good, Timmeh, but your bill also included term limits for Governor as well. Where do you stand on term limits now? We all know you like the sound of Three Term Timmeh.
No person may file to be a candidate for election to a third consecutive term as governor or to a third consecutive term as lieutenant governor.
(From HF30 as introduced Jan. 10, 1997)
A whole lot of people in the "new media" and some in the traditional media are paying attention to the Minnesota House's proposed media policy. They are getting upset with what they perceive as 1st Amendment infringements. In particular they blame Rep. Tony Sertich (DFL-Chisholm), Chair of the Rules and Legislative Administration Committee.
GOP Senate communications director Michael Brodkorb and Jason Barnett from TheUptake.org agreed that more transparency, not less, is what's really needed at this pivotal time. DFL Majority Leader Rep. Tony Sertich (DFL-Chisholm) continues to show his concern for the authenticity of various media categories - implicitly this seems to be about preventing nettlesome partisan "trackers" from taping embarrassing quips for campaign ads.
The Sergeant's office wants all kinds of odd info about the goals, views and ties of journalists applying for the seemingly new lanyard item, the "Committee Hearing Room Pass." Unfortunately, the most troubling aspect of the application form is the patently impossible stuff it demands journalists agree to!
(Politics in Minnesota)
While Sertich is coming across as an opponent of the 1st Amendment, Rep. Jeff Hayden (DFL-Mpls) is stepping up as a champion for the new media. Hayden wants to make sure that everyone gains access. He realizes that they have to allow bloggers they consider legitimate along with the trackers and looneys.
The one and only thing that should get someone kicked out is behaving like a jerk.
I spoke with Rep. Jeff Hayden (DFL- Mpls) about what's going on with the Minnesota House of Representatives' media policy. The House currently doesn't have a policy on how to deal with bloggers or any other kind of new media.
"We're going to open up the committee hearings for new media," Hayden said. He said it was only a matter of making sure that everyone who wanted to attend a committee hearing could. "There will be an area for all media and we'll just make sure that there's room for everyone else, too."
Floor sessions are another matter, but that mainly has to do with space. For example, at a popular session like the opening session it is simply a matter of there only being so much space for the media.
The bottom line: Hayden is hopeful that the policy will treat new media, like bloggers, equitably.
"Mr. Chair, are we still in America?" spluttered an indignant Sen. Julia Ortman (R-Chanhassen). "I'm wondering where I'm at. I find that to be very offensive. An insult to everyone who drives a car. An insult to me because I drove to the Capitol alone today. I find that very insulting."
Maybe what she really was saying is:
"I drove to the capitol alone today and I'm offended by my own lifestyle that is bad for America!"
Why was Sen. Ortman in high dudgeon?
Because Julian Marshall, Asst. Professor of Engineering at the University of Minnesota appeared before the Senate Transportation Committee on Tuesday to testify on SF549, The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals and Strategies bill, and displayed a poster like this one. It was bad enough for the global-warming denying Republicans to have to listen to all kinds of facts about the impact of global warming in Marshall's report, but to then be confronted with humor? Completely uncalled for according to Sen. Ortman.
And doesn't it suck when on of your own talking points is thrown back in your face?
Remember the Republicans chanting "Drill Baby Drill" as part of their campaign to gift the oil companies more cheap drilling leases? They kept talking about not sending money to people who hate us and attack us? Don't we want to stop our addiction to foreign oil? I suppose the answer is "no" if it means carpooling, more funding for mass transit solutions, more wetlands and reductions on emissions of greenhouse producing gases. Republicans always oppose that.
Yesterday, the Rules and Legislative Administration Committee met to discuss an issue close to my heart, media access on the House floor and in Committees. Currently, the House has no policy regarding media access. Until recently, it didn't need one. But now with the newspapers near or in bankruptcy (and the consequent drastic coverage reductions) and the ascension of citizen journalists, they need to figure this out.
What if one of we bloggers from MN Progressive Project showed up to watch a Committee hearing or the floor proceedings tomorrow. Well, we might get sent home. Maybe not. There is no policy, but I have a sneaking suspicion.
"We are working hard right now to develop a policy," said Rep. Jeff Hayden (DFL-Mpls), Vice Chair of the Rules and Legislative Administration Committee. He wants to make sure that all media including bloggers and video bloggers have access to the floor and all committees.
There are space concerns, for popular hearings or floor proceedings they may not be able to allow everyone who is interested direct access. How do they balance mainstream journalists and blogger access to the state capitol proceedings?
Hayden wants to make this based upon circulation/readership, but "how do we sort it out" is the question vexing him. Circulation/readership seems reasonable, but I'm concerned that some new, dedicated blogger can get access, too. The problem, as I see it, is that some legislators (and sadly, possibly many) don't get it and probably don't want to. Hopefully, the types don't rely to heavily on any bleating from the established (and I would argue dying) media.
Time will tell and Rep. Hayden will keep me posted.
Mike McIntee of The Uptake was kind enough to pass along this statement from the MN Society of Professional Journalists:
Sen. Scott Dibble (DFL-Mpls) is still fuming mad about the session. You can read his opinion on the budget and unallotment 
The DFL had wanted 2.6 billion dollars of the 8.7 deficit raised through permanent revenue raises, not one-time shifts (late payments) or borrowing from future payments. The wealthiest 10% of Minnesota pay 10.4% in overall taxes while the average Minnesota pays 11.1%. The DFL proposed fourth tier taxes would have taxed the richest more in income tax, the people who can best afford it, would pay more. The estimates that I heard, said this means that a family earning $300,000 would pay about an additional $109 a year!. Compared to severely reduced emergency health care in the state and other drastic cuts, that would affect even the rich, how can Pawlenty morally defend this?
But he wasn't just for term limits, he actually went so far as to introduce a bill. This means he really meant it. Back when he was a turd-flinging back-bencher.
That's all well and good, Timmeh, but your bill also included term limits for Governor as well. Where do you stand on term limits now? We all know you like the sound of Three Term Timmeh.
