Programs! Get your Program Here!

As Joe Soucheray would put it, the "Lodge" will hold its annual convention starting this Thursday, February 4th.  To help us think the proper thought and soften us up for DFL tax and spending increases, the Minneapolis Star Tribune published two Editorials today.

The first was another predictable column by Editorial Writer and Columnist Lori Sturdevant.  It seems that during a Minnesota Public Radio debate among gubernatorial candidates last week, this "lightning round" yes or no question was posed: "Would you sign a bill raising state taxes?"  She didn't like the question.

I rooted for the candidates to reject those instructions. I hoped someone would say that Minnesotans should have learned by now that it's not smart for governors to lock themselves into yes-or-no promises about taxation during campaigns, years before the circumstances of their governorship unfold. I wanted a candidate to acknowledge what recent experience teaches: that campaign tax promises can contribute to governance gridlock. Or to interject that Minnesota is overdue for tax reform.

And she really didn't like the answers.

Most of the DFL and Independence Party candidates tried to squeeze a few caveats and qualifiers into answers that were some version of "yes" or "yes, if." Some clearly itched to say more. Every Republican uttered a simple, unqualified "no."

Which is to say that her liberal friends said yes and the GOP said no.  We all know her politics, which include embracing an ever expanding State government, and the tax increases to pay for it.  But before she berates those of us who disagree, she should look at what happens when one of us does compromise, agreeing to a tax increase, knowingly incurring the base's wrath.  Nothing.  Are we thanked?  Are we praised?  No, all we get is "where's the rest of it?"  And that's why even the malleable Governor Pawlenty isn't on board for any more tax increases.

Now, the other Editorial, cleverly disguised as a news article.

A quick scan of the words and phrases used tells you what's in store: fraught with peril, deep cuts, desperate need for jobs, time-honored, spreading the wealth, economy is improving (!), grim, politically unpalatable, watch tuition soar, and polishing his national profile.

Yes, the risk is to Republicans who won't increase taxes and draw the public's ire by reducing services.  The Democrats will wear the white hats, trying to preserve all those essential, duplicative, overpriced state services. Or so Staff Writer Baird Helgeson would have us believe.

Comments

[Hiram]

"Are we thanked? Are we praised?"

Maybe the goal for people running for public office should be to do what's right, not that which invites thanks or praise.

Republicans, if they have their way, will reduce services. The deficit constitutes 20% of the budget, and since what the budget consists of basically is health care and schools, if there is no new revenue, those things will be cut. Drastically.

[Hiram]

"Roughly 75 percent of the budget goes to education, aid to local governments and health and human services. Cut health and human services, and the state can lose federal funding. Cut aid to cities, and property taxes rise. Cut higher education, and watch tuition soar."

I don't think anyone disagrees with this. It's a statement of the basic reality of the state budget. In fact, I think the author of the piece is holding back here; we have to understand that further cuts in health and human services are going to do a lot more than result than in the loss of federal funding.

[Speed Gibson]

Do we need two agencies to administer Health and Human Services? Is every service essential? Higher Ed is a maze of duplication. How about closing the completely non-essential St. Paul U of M campus, for example?

Outsourcing?

We don't have to cut services to save money, and now's the best time to clean house.

[Hiram]

No doubt administration will take a hit but that just scratches the surface. And closing down a bunch of college campuses, not just St. Paul, would only scratch a little deeper.

[Hiram]

Concerning outsourcing, a lot of health and human services money goes to private nursing homes. What could be done there is to find a lot of ways to merge and close them down. That's part of the duplication and waste people like to talk about in the abstract, but don't seem to want to consider in what it actually means for real people. But in this case, the result of duplication and inefficiencies is that we have our relatives nearby, closer to the communities in which they have always lived. And merger and consolidation means moving people into larger homes which may not exist now, and which raise their own issues concerning level of care. With the aging of the population and the slow economic recovery, this is an issue which is going to increase in significance, and a big reason health and human services costs are growing 20% a year.