Tom Forsythe, Guest Column

Yes. The Minnesota Chamber can be critical of government.

Yes. Our members are often among the first to question the need for more government spending. We chafe at the &8220;politics&8221; of government decision-making. Our tenacity in the pursuit of alternative solutions is sometimes criticized.

But we have broad shoulders. We can take the criticism, because we are all about making Minnesota a better place to live and work.

We seek to protect the economy of Minnesota and the economic interests of all Minnesotans. That&8217;s important for everyone to understand. At the core, we advocate spending that is strategic and accountable to taxpayers.

For example, we supported the proposed $35 billion in overall spending, an increase of nearly 10 percent over the prior two years. Happily, the Legislature stuck close to that target. It&8217;s unfortunate, however, that lawmakers largely missed the opportunity to restructure programs to deliver greater value for our taxes.

Again, Minnesota Chamber members asked the tough questions. We challenged the Legislature&8217;s seemingly uncontrollable urge to raise state spending given the projected $2.2 billion general fund surplus.

Here&8217;s why.

Health care costs are skyrocketing, yet few seem willing to make the hard choices to fix a broken system. Universal access for the 7 percent of Minnesotans uninsured is a laudable goal, but it would accomplish little if cost and quality are not addressed in tandem. If we do not address runaway health care costs, none of us will be able to afford health insurance. That&8217;s why we supported a new Health Care Transformation Task Force. We will push it to advance bold and innovative recommendations.

The Legislature&8217;s failure to deliver a long-term transportation funding solution was our biggest frustration. The Minnesota Chamber led the &8220;Vote Yes&8221; campaign to dedicate the motor vehicle sales tax in 2006, and we advanced a balanced and substantive package to address road, bridge and transit projects in 2007.

The Legislature, unfortunately, took an &8220;all or nothing&8221; approach &8212; and Minnesotans wound up with nothing. The session adjourned with no new money for transportation. We will work again to secure meaningful funding for transportation in 2008.

Reliable and affordable energy is another necessity. We helped forge leading initiatives on renewable energy and energy conservation, though still being uncertain about the long-term impact on ratepayers, That&8217;s why we inserted measures that allows these mandates to be adjusted

if regulators see the costs are hurting Minnesota&8217;s competitive position.

Companies of all sizes struggle to find qualified workers. That&8217;s why we also seek greater accountability for our investments in education. We believe a portion of teacher pay should be tied to K-12 student performance. In higher education, we support a greater percentage of tuition assistance following the student, rather than the institution.

We opposed increasing the statewide property tax. Such taxes on commercial/industrial properties would eventually be passed along to consumers and employees. We also lobbied against establishing the nation&8217;s highest income tax rate for the wealthiest Minnesotans, a burden that also would hit smaller businesses that run their business income through their personal income tax returns. The result would be less money for owners to grow their companies and pay employees.

That discussion was indicative of the session. Every time we cautioned against higher taxes or additional general fund spending, the refrain was predictable: What&8217;s wrong with another $50 here or $200 there? Minnesotans should absorb these costs to enhance our quality of life. In total, legislators proposed hefty increases in spending despite the budget showing a surplus with the current level of revenues.

All Minnesotans would have felt the impact. You bet we spoke out.

In the end, the proposed increase in general fund taxes and most of the additional spending unraveled, though spending still will increase by 10 percent over the next two years. Of course, most families and businesses would welcome the prospect of their incomes growing that much.

We wish we had made more progress on our state&8217;s top priorities. But raising taxes wasn&8217;t the way to get there.

Somebody had to speak up. Somebody has to protect our jobs and our economy.

The Minnesota Chamber welcomes that role. We&8217;ll be back at it next year. Count on it.

Tom Forsythe, vice president of corporate communications at General Mills, Minneapolis, is the 2006-07 chairman of the Minnesota Chamber Board of Directors.