Showing posts with label Minnesota House. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Minnesota House. Show all posts
The St. Cloud Times today offered readers several dueling letters over who is to blame for the failures of the recently ended legislative session. While I am of the belief that no side is without blame, it becomes very difficult to express that sentiment when the echo chambers of the local Republican Party refuse to acknowledge even the smallest level of fault.

Gary Gross, who represents the propaganda machine for the local conservative movement, provides ample spin and distortion with his humorously titled, DFL Leadership CLEARLY to Blame for the Poor Legislative Session.

3. Under Speaker Margaret Kelliher’s leadership, the House collected $181,120 in out-of-session, tax-free per diem. Under DFL Leader Larry Pogemiller’s leadership, senators collected $143,500 in out-of-session, tax-free per diem.

How convenient it is to try connect the names of the two DFL leaders in the legislature to per diem payments. It's not like any Republican members of the legislature took per diem payments, right? Certainly, the fiscally responsible likes of Steve Gottwalt gave back his 2008 per diem which amounted to $6689, right? One wonders how Mr. Gottwalt took in nearly $1200 more than Larry Haws in 2008. His must have been "legitimate" uses of per diem as opposed to those "illegitimate" uses made by the DFL.

2. Because the Legislature refused to trim more from their stamp allowance from 5,500 stamps per legislator per year to 3,500 per legislator per year, Minnesota’s taxpayers won’t save $350,000 for this and next year.

Really? The best that the Republican leadership could come up with in cutting the budget was a stamp allowance cut? Again, rather than play politics over a VOLUNTARY allowance, it would have been nice of the Republicans to unilaterally give up their stamp allowance. Did that happen? I suspect not.

1. While it’s technically true that the DFL-dominated Legislature sent Gov. Tim Pawlenty a balanced budget, it’s only because the DFL reconvened the conference committee on taxes at 10:30 on the last night. During that meeting, the DFL did a total rewrite, which was debated less than 15 minutes in the House and Senate combined.
Well here is some interesting spin. Given that this last minute tax bill was the SECOND to be sent to Governor Pawlenty, it appears as though Gary does not want to admit that "technically" the DFL-dominated Legislature balanced the budget TWICE!

Gross was coupled with the partisanship over people representative, Steve Gottwalt. The same Gottwalt who spent the remaining hours of the legislative session twittering about how this was all the fault of the DFL majorities. The crux of the letter being, it is all their fault so please do not blame us. Apparently, when a Republican denies all responsibility and blames the DFL it is called "accountability" but when the DFL returns charges of "accountability" it is little more than blame. At some point it would be nice to hear someone say that they share blame in this whole process. Perhaps if Mr. Gottwalt spent less time twittering on the House floor about how much this whole thing is the fault of the DFL to really work with them we might all appreciate the results.

No reform, misplaced priorities and tax increases. Even now, there is time to work out other solutions, and Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s invitation to the Democrats is open, as it was from the start of the session.

If the Democrats could interrupt their Tour of Blame long enough to really work with the governor, we might all appreciate the results. If they cannot or will not, rest assured, Pawlenty will balance the budget without more state spending and tax increases.

Again, let's be clear that the Governor offered what was essentially an ultimatum. If you don't do things my way then I will go it alone. Taxes will surely rise but rather than a shared sacrifice at all levels of the economic spectrum, the middle and lower income brackets will see a rise in their share of the tax bill through local property taxes.

The third letter, in this battle of the blame, was submitted by Senator Tarryl Clark. While I tend to agree with her assessment of unallotment, I do wish that she or someone on my side of the aisle or any side of the aisle would admit that there is a certain level of failure on all sides. With all due respect to Senator Clark, as soon as the Governor made this unilateral move to employ unallotment I would have camped outside his office and negotiated with him 24 hours a day for the remaining days. I don't imagine it would have worked given that he appeared unwilling to budge but it would have given that DFL far more authority to claim that they tried and that it was clearly the intransigence of this Governor that caused the breakdown.

In the budget-setting toolbox, unallotment is the sledgehammer. It just pounds dents in one part of the state’s budget. It does not give a governor the ability to enact policy or to make changes that might result in increased quality, efficiency or service to taxpayers. Using unallotment as a main budget setting tool is a bad idea, and little more than bad results can be expected.

The state’s budget desperately needs an overhaul, but the mechanic who took over the job is flailing a hammer. That will not bode well for Minnesota’s taxpayers.

Beyond the blame game, this legislative session is indicitive of what happens when one side decides that they will not compromise with the other. As I have always said, I am an unabashed liberal but also a firm pragmatist who believes that compromise is the key to good governance and creating a system in which the government can be a force for good for all people.
10:16 PM | Posted in , ,
In an interesting turn of events in the legislative session, Governor/King Pawlenty decided to fore go that whole legislature thing and those silly election things. He has taken it upon himself to elevate the nearly super minority Republican Party and his own plurality election victories to a position in which they, and only they, make decisions on how to solve the current budget crisis.

From the DFL Press Release:

“Good government requires artful negotiation and compromise among elected leaders with differing views. The Founders of the nation and of our state understood the need for checks and balances so that no individual could impose his or her views on everyone else except through the democratic process. Yet Governor Pawlenty, with support from a narrow minority in the Minnesota House, is willing to ignore the constitutional process and nullify the last election if the Legislature won’t cave in to his demands.

“Governor Pawlenty is not acting like a leader in a constitutional democracy. The DFL-led Legislature is delivering on their campaign promise of fiscal accountability, and has delivered a budget that makes tough but fair choices in tough times. Legislative leaders held listening sessions across Minnesota and took the people’s views into account in fashioning that budget. But Governor Pawlenty has walled himself away, barely deigning to meet even with the people’s elected representatives, let alone hear the people themselves. Governor Pawlenty is acting more like a monarch than an elected leader.



We need more in this state than political gamesmanship and trickery to subvert the established separation of powers.

We need your help to make sure that he receives a strong message in the coming days - he will not decide the future of this state by himself.

Instead of taking a balanced approach, Pawlenty borrows, shifts and cuts so deeply that it results in the loss of thousands of private-sector jobs, negatively affecting Minnesota's working families.

This weekend in neighborhoods throughout Minnesota, we'll be going door-to-door encouraging folks to call Governor Pawlenty. With so much at stake, we need as many Minnesotans as possible to call the governor and ask him to stop being so stubborn and come to the table.

We'll be handing out a flyer that encourages Minnesotans to call Governor Pawlenty to tell him that we want a balanced approach to a balanced budget. Click here to download a copy for yourself to distribute.

Here is a list of locations where DFLers will gather to talk to their neighbors to encourage them to call Governor Pawlenty. Please consider joining them at NOON on Sunday.

Rochester

Olmstead DFL Office
401 16th Ave NW
Rochester, MN 55901

Contact: Jaime Tincher
jtincher@dfl.org
651-251-6310

Eagan

Dunn Bros Coffee
1012 Diffley Road
Eagan, MN 55123

Contact: Kent Berg
kberg@dfl.org
651-315-4809

Minnetonka

Minnetonka Community Center
14600 Minnetonka Blvd.
Minnetonka, MN 55345

Contact: Kent Berg
kberg@dfl.org
651-315-4809

St. Paul

***This event is on Saturday, May 17 at 9:30 am***

A Fine Grind Coffee Shop
2038 Marshall Ave
St. Paul, MN 55104

Contact: Beth Commers
bethcommers@donjek.com
651-227-3922

Woodbury

Woodbury City Hall
8301 Valley Creek Road
Woodbury, MN 55125

Contact: Warren Claflin
wclaflin@dfl.org
651-894-3146

If you'd like to organize a group to walk in your area, please contact Jaime Tincher, (651) 251-6310 or jtincher@dfl.org.

Regardless of if you can make it Saturday or Sunday, please consider taking the very important step of calling the Governor right now.

By making just one phone call in the coming days, you can help save 10,000 private sector jobs, keep 110,000 Minnesotans from losing health insurance and cut wasteful government spending. Will you do that?

Call Governor Pawlenty right now at (651) 296-3391 or 1-800-657-3717.

Tell him you want a balanced approach to a balanced budget.

It is time to let our Governor know that subverting the legislative process is not acceptable!
Representative Larry Haws sent out a press release today about the passage of HF1301, Omnibus Public Safety Policy Bill:

HAWS VOTES FOR OMNIBUS PUBLIC SAFETY POLICY BILL

ST. PAUL, MN – State Representative Larry Haws joined House legislative leaders to pass the Omnibus Public Safety Policy Bill (House File 1301)134 to 0 votes.

"This is a good public safety policy bill that provides some positive provisions that will go a long way to keeping Minnesota on track with public safety issues that impact us all,” said State Representative Larry Haws.

The Omnibus Public Safety Policy Bill contains a number of provisions that would strengthen requirements on predatory offenders, ease mandates on state agencies during these tough budget times, and assist local agencies in times of emergencies.

"This bill contains some legislation I co-authored to ensure that felons have an advantage to ‘game the system’ so they can work it out to not go to prison but to a county jail," said State Representative Haws. "This is a real savings to the County taxpayer while extending justice to Minnesotans. I also authored legislation that clarifies current law that sentences imposed for assaulting a correctional officer must run consecutively, not concurrently, to any remaining sentence. Sentencing guidelines will be in place to prevent folks from taking advantage of the system and face just punishment.”

There isn't much to say about a bill that apparently everyone liked. It is nice to see though, a brief moment of pure bipartisanship...
While I applaud the effort to keep children safe from predator's that lurk on the internet, it seems like an unworkable proposition to make it illegal for them to access social networking sites. Such is the case with House File 130 being co-authored by Representative Severson (R).

How does one effectively police this type of situation? The only way someone is found to be an online sexual predator is typically after the damage has been done. If your goal is keeping children safe, we need to find ways to stop the initial predatory act.

After this point, how many resources will it take to police their internet usage and online memberships? How much liability is there on the part of these sites to keep predator's such as the ones described in this bill of of their membership rolls? These are but some of the questions that I have when dealing with laws of this nature.

I would suggest that a far more effective solution would be continued and increased education for those youngsters who are most vulnerable to being seduced by an online predator. Related to this legislation is a recent study (although somewhat controversial) that makes the claim that children are safer online than we had previously thought. In fact, the study indicates that children are far more likely to be harrassed and bullied online by someone they know than be subject to an online sexual predator.
There are plenty of issues on which Steve Gottwalt (R) and I disagree but the process of governance works best when you find those issues that you do agree upon and work together. Such is the case with House File 224.

I question the need to put a Constitutional Amendment out there for what appears to be no other reason than reacting or over reacting to the current recount process. However, the one piece of the legislation that I think is common sense is the formation of retention elections for judges in the state.

As it is, there are very few people in the state who pay even the slightest attention to judicial candidates on the ballot. My theory has always been that if I haven't heard of them then they must be doing just fine and deserve to remain seated. A retention election would essentially put my theory into practice. Rather than a process by which people use any number of schemes to pick their judicial vote, they can simply decide yes or no on should this person keep their seat. Let's hope this bill gets the attention it deserves...
Earlier this month I posted a DFL press conference introducing House File 2 which will drastically change the way public education in Minnesota is financed. In order to get a clearer picture of this legislation, I sent off some questions to one of the bills co-authors, Representative Larry Haws. I have taken the liberty of mixing his answers with some of my own commentary:

The key benefit of this new system will be a simplification of public school funding coupled with increases in state aid and reductions in property taxes. The current system creates a situation in which those areas that can continually raise the property tax revenue to adequately fund schools are doing so while those economically impoverished areas are left with substandard services, not because they don't care about education but because their populations simply cannot handle property tax load. It is creating a system of haves and have nots in public education.

One of the key components that I like and that Haws explained in his response email is the phase in portion of the legislation. Rather than a simple switch over and influx of money into the system, the new Minnesota Miracle is open ended and its phase in period will be determined as it travels through committee and floor analysis.

Sec. 41. PHASE-IN.
Subdivision 1. Baseline revenue. A school district's baseline revenue equals the
revenue amounts for the aid appropriations calculated under Minnesota Statutes, section
126C.20, calculated using the current year's data and the revenue formulas in place in
Minnesota Statutes 2008.
Subd. 2. New revenue. A school district's new revenue equals the revenue amounts
for the aid appropriations calculated under Minnesota Statutes, section 126C.20, calculated
using the current year's data and the revenue formulas in place under this act.
Subd. 3. Phase-in schedule. A school district's revenue amounts for the revenue
formulas listed in subdivisions 1 and 2 equals the district's baseline revenue plus the
percent of the difference specified in subdivision 4 multiplied by the number of years
of the phase-in specified in subdivision 5.
Subd. 4. Percentage. The phase-in percentage equals ... percent.
Subd. 5. Years of phase-in. The new revenue under this section is phased-in over
.. years.
EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective July 1, 2009.

Directly from the email:

Here are a few specifics and benefits of the bill:

  • Increases formula allowance to $7500, indexed to implicit price deflator.
  • Uses a scalable blueprint that can be phased in over several years.
  • Equalizes the pupil weighting system for students in kindergarten through high school to 1.0.
  • Enhances compensatory aid and funding for English language learners.
  • Fully funds voluntary all-day kindergarten
  • Fully funds state special education costs by removing existing caps.
  • Includes a levy referendum offset of $500 per pupil in districts with levies; provides $500 per pupil to districts without a levy in place.
  • Accounts for declining enrollment in every geographic region of the state.
  • Includes innovation and accountability measures including a requirement that a district use 5 % of its basic revenue for innovative, research-based programs to improve academic performance.
  • Creates a new school bond agricultural credit equal to 66 percent of the property tax on agricultural properties attributable to school bond levies. This will help promote equitable funding to rural districts, as it will help rural districts more easily pass referenda--if school districts and voters agree that they are needed.

Unfortunately, in this economic climate I am not sure how much enthusiasm there will be to this kind of wholesale overhaul of the current system. The bill appears to be sound and take into account just this kind of issue with its phase in but only time will tell if it can gain momentum in the state legislature. My hope is that my representative, Larry Haws, will help make this bill happen.
One of the current bills working its way through the Minnesota House of Representatives, is meant to examine and possibly eliminate unnecessary or burdensome state mandates placed on lower levels of government in the state of Minnesota.

Section 1. ELIMINATING STATE MANDATES.
Subdivision 1. Intent; purpose. To ensure that public services are delivered as
cost-effectively as possible, it is the intent of the legislature to eliminate unnecessary
state regulations and mandates. By July 1, 2010, mandates or regulations that result in
unnecessary paperwork, are redundant, or contain outdated or irrelevant requirements
shall be eliminated or revised. Requirements that are necessary to protect the health
and well-being of Minnesotans or that are necessary to meet federal requirements shall
not be eliminated.
Subd. 2. State mandate review. Any county, city, school district, professional
association, or other entity affected by state mandates may submit to the legislature a
list of mandates that are required by state statute or rule that the entity determines to be
unnecessary or in need of reform. The legislature shall review the mandates that have
been submitted.


Representative Haws (DFL) has been on the state mandates kick ever since his first election to the Minnesota House and I applaud him for making good on this particular promise. Any time that we can reevaluate programs, rules, and regulations to make things run more smoothly we should do that. In fact, this bill should be more than a one time event. We should be carrying out these evaluations on a yearly basis. My only problem with such legislation is the possibility that certain mandates that are effective and useful to one part of the state will be cut entirely if another part of the state deems them unnecessary. My hope is that these mandate reviews will take this possibility into account and the result will be effective government throughout the state.
A while back I had the opportunity to exchange a few emails with some local representatives in order to find out about their priorities for the upcoming legislative session. Representative Hosch (DFL) made it clear that his primary focus is improving health care and that it is from that that other problems and issues could be addressed.

He currently is working with Representative Seifert (R) and Representative Thissen (DFL) to, as I understand the legislation, provide oversight to rural health care cooperatives whose goal is controlling costs and improving access to vital health services.

I sent off some questions to Representative Hosch so that he might explain this legislation:
*Is this legislation addressing a specific problem in the health care system?
*How, specifically, does this legislation improve access to health care in rural areas?

Typically, I am of the opinion that we need large scale reform of the health care system whether through single payer or universal health care. However, I am also a pragmatist and realize that if the choice is between fixing part of the problem or fixing nothing because we can't come to an agreement over the solutions, then we need to be fixing the parts that we can agree upon.
I did not catch the entire state of the state address yesterday. However, I have been able to cobble together some thoughts from the snippets I did hear and from the thoughts of others around the blogs.

As usual, Pawlenty and the Republican caucuses in both the House and the Senate are more interested in rigid ideology than placing ALL options on the table and finding the least painful combination of all those options. Nobody likes a tax increase but that doesn't mean it should be removed from consideration. Neither do people like to see massive cuts in state programs but those ought not be taken off the table either.

What we need is some targeted tax fairness in this state. To continue forcing the burden of financing programs on the backs of middle income Minnesotans is unconscionable. I am more than willing to pay my fair share but others should be required to pay their fair share as well.

Tim Pawlenty wants to continue claiming that the QComp program is a merit pay system when it is NOT and has NEVER been...

The DFL leadership in the House and Senate sent out a press release response to the Pawlenty speech. As usual, I am proud to live in the district of Senator Tarryl Clark:

"We need jobs, not slogans," said Senate Assistant Majority Leader Tarryl Clark. "The House and Senate will continue to focus on building our economy by helping to create and retain jobs while streamlining government. We look forward to seeing the governor's budget later this month and getting public input so we can get a more complete view of how his vision for the state will affect people."
DFL leaders this week held a press conference to discuss the introduction of House File 2. The bill would change the system by which we finance education.



It sounds a little too good to be true and I will not be holding my breath this session hoping that this new system will be implemented. However, I did send off an email to Representative Larry Haws (DFL) to answer some of the questions I have about the bill.
6:21 PM | Posted in ,
A bill floated into the Labor & Consumer Protection Division in the Minnesota Legislature today whose purpose appears to be giving those people who have subprime mortgages that are heading into foreclosure the opportunity to defer said foreclosure.

"Emergency Help For Homeowners in Foreclosure: IMPORTANT: You are eligible to have the foreclosure of your home stopped until at least (end of deferment period). The state of Minnesota recently passed a law that lets homeowners stop a foreclosure sale. To qualify, you must currently live at the home in foreclosure and intend to live at the home until the end of the deferment period. You will also need to complete and sign a special form (called an "affidavit") and provide that affidavit to us at the following address: (insert address in the state of Minnesota). There are many government agencies and nonprofit organizations that can help you complete this affidavit. For the name and telephone number of an organization near you, please call the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) at (insert telephone number/Web site). The state does not guarantee the advice of these agencies. Do not delay dealing with the foreclosure because your options for foreclosure deferment end with the foreclosure sale."

Someone is going to have to help me out on this one because the way I read it is that there is no restructuring of the mortgage or stopping of the foreclosure so that the occupant might be able to remain in the home. It is simply to delay the occupants from being removed from the home. Aside from giving them more time to find a new residence, what is the purpose of this bill? Also, my reading indicates that there is a sunset for this bill which would mean someone applying for deferment towards the end of this act would not be afforded much time.

While it seems like a good idea, I am somewhat confused about how this will positively affect those people struggling with a subprime mortgage.
��
I received this legislative update from Representative Larry Haws. It is refreshing to see that my representation in the state legislature is focused on the important matters of our day rather than petty attacks and inconsequential matters. Keep up the great work, Larry!

Legislative Update from Rep. Larry Haws: January 9, 2009

This week we convened the 2009 Legislative Session and all minds are focused on dealing with the projected record-large multi-billion dollar budget shortfall for the next two-year budget cycle.

We are facing challenging budget negotiations that will require legislative leaders to reach across the aisle and help each other find solutions to move Minnesota toward a more stable and prosperous economy. [emphasis mine]

Our budget deficit will drive most of the key decisions we will be making this year. Everything is on the table for consideration and whatever choices or decisions are made about balancing the budget, participation of all parties and voices (yours included) will be needed. [emphasis mine]

I encourage all of you to participate in finding solutions to the challenges before us. The Minnesota House of Representatives has created a Budget Solutions Comment Page on its website http://www.house.mn to give Minnesotans an easy and direct way to communicate their ideas with state leaders as they work to eliminate a projected budget deficit of more than $5 billion. Several hundred ideas have already been received. These ideas will be forwarded to committee chairs, and many will be considered in committees and added to bills that will be introduced on the House floor. Budget solutions will also be accepted by mail or phone: Minnesota Budget Solutions, Minnesota House of Representatives, 470 State Office Building, 100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., St. Paul, MN 55155, 800-685-8907.

Important dates to keep in mind as the 2009 Legislative Session proceeds:
  • On January 15, Governor Pawlenty will outline his priorities for the 2009 Legislative Session in his State of the State Address.
  • By January 27, the governor will propose his two-year state budget to eliminate the multi-billion dollar gap between projected spending and anticipated revenue.
  • In the last week of February, an updated state economic forecast on the budget shortfall will provide legislators with information that will be used in our final budget bills during March to mid-May.
  • On May 18, the Legislature will adjourn to meet our constitutional deadline. We will provide a final budget for the governor?s signature.
  • If a budget agreement is not reached, the current two-year budget will expire on July 1 and the next probable step will involve a special session to reach a budget resolution that will work for lawmakers and Minnesotans.


Sincerely,

Rep. Larry Haws

I encourage everyone to go to the suggestions page at the Minnesota House site and provide their solutions to this current crisis. We can achieve pure democracy with everyone providing input and participating in the process.
Buzz Snyder, the chairman of the District 14 DFL, has a wonderful LTE in the St. Cloud Times today about the myopic priorities of Representative Dan Severson (R).

So when the Times asks my District 14A Rep. Dan Severson what his top priorities are for the current legislative session, how does he respond?

In a Sunday Times news report, he said we need to politicize the judiciary more by letting judges campaign freely, and then allow their impeachment when we don’t like how they judge.

Oh, and we need to curb the obvious epidemic of voter fraud (who knew?) by requiring state-issued picture IDs at the polls.

This is like Custer fretting at the Little Big Horn that he lost his comb in all the ruckus. Or the Titanic captain, as the last lifeboat is lowered, worrying whether there is enough caviar for the rest of the voyage.

I beseech Severson to instead focus his attention on solutions for the actual (as opposed to the imaginary) problems facing our state and his constituents.

People’s lives are being devastated daily by this economic crisis.

He is in a position of leadership. Please lead.

The best part of the whole thing is to read through the comments. Gary Gross aka "Ray4746" spent the day breaking out the talking points in defense of Severson. The echo chamber surely earned his salary today...

While I applaud the efforts of Snyder, I caution people NOT to be surprised that the guy who has been more concerned about making divorce more difficult than any economic issue would continue ignoring real issues.

Caught the fun over at Let Freedom Ring, the fun interviews by Dan Ochsner of local legislators.

"The Ox", interviewed Representative Dan Severson and Senator Michelle Fischbach, both took a nice shot at Senator Tarryl Clark.
Both legislators talked about Tarryl Clark's taking $30,000+ in per diem in the context of the legislature needing to show leadership in cutting costs with the oversized deficit.
It's true.  Senator Clark, took $30,314.89 in per diem and alternate compensation last year.

$12,864 total in per diem, $9312 during session and $3552 in the interim.
$4,053.19 in mileage.
$10,830 in lodging.
$1,517.70 in travel.
$1,050 for an intern.

She's also in a high profile leadership position within the Senate that requires some pretty extensive travel.

Fiscal conservative legislator Dan Severson made a pretty sizable haul, for someone throwing stones in his glass house, $24,015.41.

$7315 in per diem.
$941 in district travel.
$12,868.47 in lodging.
$2,140.94 in mileage.
$750 in other expenses.

Come on Dan, cut down on some of those lodging expenses!  Maybe they should just sleep in their offices until they get the State's work done?  Kind of like this Congressman from Utah.

Senator Fischbach, a strong fiscal conservative when the money isn't going to her pocket, fared pretty well too, per diem wise.

Fischbach hauled in a whopper...$26,832.98!

$9,888 in total per diem, $9,312 in session and $576 in the interim.
$2,331.25 in mileage.
$1,375 in communications.
$12,738.73 in lodging.
$600 on an intern.

For the record, I believe these per diem and alternate compensation bits are backdoor pay increases and have always opposed them.  So while Severson and Fischbach call out Clark on her per diem and alternate compensation, I would hope that Severson and Fischbach hold themselves to the same standard.




Dear Dan,

In the St. Cloud Times today, you made the following statement:
I was very pleasantly surprised with what I and some others believe we heard from Sen. Tarryl Clark, the assistant Democrat Senate leader, and Rep. Larry Hosch, House Democrat assistant leader. They indicated raising taxes in these tough economic times would not be good.

Excuse me? You "believe" you heard Senator Clark and Representative Hosch say that "raising taxes in these tough economic times would not be good"? Perhaps you could tell us in full context what they actually DID say rather than creating little more than hearsay and rumor.

I understand that you and Representative Seifert would rather set up the terms by which you will later blame than actually coming to the table and making compromises like legitimate public servants. It would be helpful though if you didn't use statements which have already been debunked, even by your own echo chamber (although that acknowledgment and subsequent apology has been conveniently scrubbed).

Unfortunately, I am less and less hopeful as you and your tool, Gary Gross, continue to use these political tactics before even making attempts at working towards solutions.

I am less and less hopeful as Representative Seifert continues to indicate that he is taking his ball and going home. When your leadership indicates within 48 hours of hearing about the problem that you will not be doing anything helpful to solve the problem and will go so far as to vote against any budget bill then your team becomes the problem and NOT the solution.
12:06 PM | Posted in ,
It looks increasingly likely that the budget deficit this year will be solved without the help of Republican Marty Seifert. I posted earlier today comparing the DFL and Republican Caucus press conferences this past week. During those press conferences it was clear that the DFL would be open to any and all ideas to solve the overwhelming budget deficit. To be fair, it appeared as though Senate Minority Leader Senjem was ready and willing to work towards a solution.

Unfortunately, the problem will be House Minority Leader Seifert. On Midmorning with Kerri Miller, Seifert made the following claims in reference to the budget and budget cuts:

"I probably will not be voting for any of these cuts"


So, he is prepared to vote against any budget long before those budgets have even been developed? Miller did ask about this statement, and his response:

"The budget bills come up I will be giving suggestions, ideas and the like on how to balance the budget but I can tell you that the political road is littered with the bodies of house republiacns who made tough decisions on balancing the budget and, both in the house and senate caucus, I would say that in the last 20 years and this is going to sound partisan to people but the Democrats did not have to make the difficult decisions on balancing these budgets, like in '03. We lost 13 people in '04 and lost 19 people in '06 with the rhetoric of all the aweful cuts and fee increases that we put in place. I will be helpful in trying to put suggestions out there but with 87 members of their caucus and 68 needed to pass a bill the voters put those folks in charge and I ... we will help, we will get ideas out there, we will give suggestions and amendments and the like, but we will be the loyal opposition." [Emphasis Mine]


So, let me get this straight, Seifert is going to offer suggestions but then vote NO on the budget anyway because (in his mind) the last time he and other Republicans voted to make cuts they were "punished"? This is perhaps the most juvenile and unhelpful stance I have ever seen any politician take on the issues. With pouty foot stomping rhetoric like this the Republicans deserve to be ignored and left out of the process because it is clear they have no interest in coming to a solution. The anonymous source who directed me to the interview takes a more generous tone:

During these unprecedented times, we need bipartisanship and a sense of cooperation to address our challenges, not obstructionism, politics, and road blocks. I also think any GOP member who campaigned on working with others should be asked if they support their leaders vow to vote no on everything.


That goes for both Republicans AND Democrats! I truly hope the current work together to find a solution and everything is on the table mantra of the Democrats will be followed. Unfortunately, they appear to already be up against Dr. NO and his Republican House Caucus. If the Republicans have already made up their minds to vote NO with their fearless leader, then it becomes very difficult to find a meaningful compromise.

The full interview:
[The above exchange occurs at roughly 48:00 in the broadcast]
��
This week the projected budget deficit for the state of Minnesota was released and stands at nearly $5 billion. The DFL Caucus from the House and the Senate gathered for a press conference and the Republican Caucus from the House and the Senate gathered for a woe is me session with the press.


Senator Senjem (R) expressed a willingness to work with the DFL to solve the issues but he was quickly followed by Marty Seifert who spent the rest of the time blaming the DFL and whining about how his party had been beaten down because they made "tough" decisions.

The 25 minute DFL press conference revolved around jobs and working families and what it would take to get the state back on track. Time and time again the phrase "everything is on the table" was uttered by the leadership.

The 11 minute Republican press conference revolved around how government is bad and the DFL is bad yet offered few solutions apart from gutting the health and human services budget. Is it any wonder why their caucus has diminished so dramatically over the past few years? When you offer no solution other than gutting government people start to look for some middle ground.