Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 8 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Editorial: Pawlenty could have fixed the problem
Published Monday, November 16, 2009
Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s proposed hard cap on state spending is destined to fail. The governor knows it, too. That means the proposal is a waste of time. That’s a shame, because Minnesota’s model of government needs fixing, and Pawlenty could have been just the right mechanic.
Here’s why Pawlenty’s idea is DOA: Twenty times, voters in various states have considered Taxpayers Bill of Rights or TABOR laws. Twenty times, voters have rejected those laws — in Maine and Washington, as recently as last week.
Granted, Pawlenty’s proposed constitutional amendment isn’t a true TABOR law. But it is a rigid cap on spending; more important, it would have to pass the Minnesota Legislature before it could be put on the ballot.
Both the Senate and House have DFL majorities. DOA.
Does the Minnesota model still offer a big enough “quality of life” differential over low-tax states such as South Dakota?
That’s the question Minnesotans should be asking. And for Democrats especially, Job 1 should be figuring out how to get to “Yes.”
Are Minnesotans getting good returns on their tax dollars? If Pawlenty asked that question, he’d find solid support for cutting those areas of state government for which the answer is “no.”
— Grand Forks Herald, Nov. 8
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?
Comments
Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on November 16, 2009 at 2:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's a good article, but the headline is wrong. As the article states--"Both the Senate and House have DFL majorities. DOA." So now it's Pawlenty's problem that the DFL can't produce a balance budget, and keep their spending in check to do so? That's just crazy.
The article goes on to say "That’s the question Minnesotans should be asking. And for Democrats especially, Job 1 should be figuring out how to get to “Yes.”
Again, the article mentions that it is the DEMOCRATS that need to figure out how to balance the budget--yet inexplicably, the headline would seem to blame Pawlenty? Liberal Bias? Was this the original headline in the Grand Forks paper?
Finally--"Are Minnesotans getting good returns on their tax dollars? If Pawlenty asked that question, he’d find solid support for cutting those areas of state government for which the answer is “no.”
Pawlenty already asked that question--the answer WAS "NO"--and he is actually DOING something about it.
Why would the newspaper write a headline blaming Pawlenty--and have him described correctly within the text?
Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on November 16, 2009 at 2:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ernie, your wasting your time if you are trying to convince the Liberals, they just don't understand, if Pawlentys name is mentioned you know the Liberals will always play the blame game and make him responsible, you know, like they do with Bush.
Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on November 16, 2009 at 6:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yeah, but sometimes SANE people read these posts! (laugh)
Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 16, 2009 at 8:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Good article....... I am surprised it was printed and not suppressed.
You know you cannot blame the DFL for anything, they are all victims, victims I say, they have majorities on both houses and still blame somebody else for their incompetent failures.
The DFL has little in common with the average minnesotan that pays the taxes, that support their wasteful ways, but for some strange reason they get elected because of party alliance.
The DFL say they are for the little people, when they get elected, then the turn around and oppress the little people, with higher taxes, guberment programs for all, in the name of being progressive.
Some how I fail to see how being progressive has brought us any progress.
Posted by newyankee (anonymous) on November 17, 2009 at 6:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am amazed at how easy it is to amend the state constitution to dedicate additional taxes or expand some role of government but when it comes to any sort of limit on government we see the left and the press resist. The reasoning is that it is to difficult to limit spending to the taxes collected. You would hope common sense would limit spending to what money you have on hand, but we have seen little of that for some time.
Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on November 17, 2009 at 9:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Warhog, you have to remember how die hard Democrat the state of Minnesota is until you live in another state. Growing up my parents sort of brain washed me into being a Democrat but luckily the light came on for me.
Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on November 17, 2009 at 9:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So Bush is not to blame at all for where the country is now?
Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on November 17, 2009 at 10:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Lefty--what does "George Booosh" have to do with Minnesota Donks inablility to balance their budget?
Donks love to "Blame Bush"--but under him, the stock market went to record highs. When the Donks took control of Congress, it has been all downhill.
Donks love to "Blame Bush"--but for the last two years, it was the Donks in control of spending. How's that working out for ya?
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
The Tribune encourages healthy, respectful dialogue in the spirit of community enlightenment. It's OK to disagree, but be courteous and civil. Name-calling, vulgarity and claims of criminality are subject to removal.
(Requires free registration.)