This is a response to a letter from Rep. Alice Hausman.

In your letter to the editor you did have a few issues right, but much is wrong with your assumptions to fix the state’s problems. First, there is no mention of cutting spending anywhere in your letter. Minnesota spends more than it takes in. It has the dubious distinction of being one of the 10 worst states for business to operate in. We have a spending problem, a regulation problem and a taxation problem; the state cannot live within its means.

Currently, Minnesota taxes its residents and businesses higher than the national average. This is not a business-friendly environment, nor is it friendly toward its residents with all the fees and taxes the average working resident must bear in support of a bloated, overbearing state government.

The bonding bill would create few jobs temporarily, but after the project is completed, then what? Who will pay the bill? This has been tried at the federal level with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, needless to say, that did not deliver what was advertised, nor was it efficient.

On the state level, let’s look at the Legacy Amendment that passed in 2008, even MPR, hardly conservative in view, has noted in an article dated Oct. 25, 2011, “a quarter of the $456 million allocated in the first two years of the Legacy Amendment is missing from the state website required to be the resource for displaying where and how the tax money is spent, according to an MPR News analysis.”

This lack of accountability, transparency and openness is disturbing at both levels. We, the taxpayers, are not an object to be milked for pet projects or revenue shortages at the state or federal level. In fact it’s not Minnesota’s job to create or manufacture jobs by state spending. We, the people of Minnesota, are responsible for creating this problem, by electing people who promote government-inspired cures for government-caused problems.

Looking at your current votes I find you are no friend of accountability, innovation, letting the people having a say in their government or reducing state spending. You did, however, vote yes for a tax increase for the wealthiest Minnesotans. I am not wealthy by any means, but I am one of the 53 percent paying taxes. We need a limited government state and federal, lower taxes, reduction of onerous regulations, reductions to wasteful spending.

We can either have more of the same nanny-state regulations, taxes, lack of growth and governmental activism, the end results are people voting with their feet and leaving the state, or become a place sought out to do business, invest, and grow wealth and jobs. This is only possible with the reduction in onerous state and federal taxes, regulations and mandates, the choice is ours this next election, choose wisely.

 

Randy Kruckeberg

Mankato