Rep. Murray only serves his caucus

Published 11:21 am Wednesday, October 10, 2012

Saturday’s political debate at the Freeborn-Mower Cooperative was especially instructive if, like me, you wanted to figure out why District 27A Rep. Rich Murray would vote with his radical Republican caucus more than 90 percent of the time. I understood Murray to lead off by telling us there is a “huge problem at the state capital.” That he was put on this earth to serve his constituents by resolving this huge problem. OK, how will Murray resolve this huge problem?

Murray said we need to cut regulations and taxes. Murray copies George Bush. I would however prefer the President Clinton economic development style that boomed our economy instead of Murray’s belief that we need the President Bush economic development style that busted our economy. Murray wants Minnesota’s future economic development to look like the Bush years.

Murray voted to shut down the state government, voted for decreased LGA funding (causing increased property taxes, Murray said our local elected officials just need to be “smarter” with LGA money), voted to rob the school district’s funding (Murray claims this robbery allows him to boast that he brought home a surplus), and opposed the expansion of Medicaid so how he would cover those uninsured is he would promote “wellness,” and basically you could see pretty much Murray’s march toward voting 100 percent with his Republican Party caucus should he be re-elected.

Email newsletter signup

I was thinking about Murray’s destructive voting when he said several times during the debate that he works across the aisle in St. Paul plus locally he “works with” community people. To do what exactly? Did he stand up to his caucus and stop the school funding robbery? No. Did he stand up to his caucus when his caucus shut down the state government? No. Did he stand up to this caucus and against the elimination of the homestead tax credit? No. Basically, Murray serves his caucus and not his constituents.

Shannon Savick’s presentation and answers at the debate clearly demonstrate that we have a candidate who will truly serve the needs of House District 27A. Shannon Savick will not detract us from the most important issue of economic development and job creation with needless red herring issues like whether or not we should become a “right to work” state, that we should disenfranchise voters by changing the state constitution, or recklessly shut down the state government to serve her caucus.

Shannon Savick is one of the many courageous women who pioneered a breakthrough of the glass ceiling in the corporate workplace. Shannon Savick has a history of evolving from a member of the  Republican Party, to an Independent and now a true Democratic Farmer Labor Party representative for the House seat of District 27A. You can believe Shannon Savick when she says she will work across the aisle.

A vote for Shannon Savick is a vote to stop the destructiveness of the radical Republican Party caucus.


Ted Hinnekamp

Albert Lea