Advantage: Tom Emmer

I think I've seen, heard, and read enough to where I now have a preference for the GOP endorsement for Governor.  It's a slight preference in that I won't be at all disappointed with either front-runner.  But my preference is for Tom Emmer.

Mostly, I think it's that Emmer dreams bigger dreams than does his very worthy rival Marty Seifert.  And I think Emmer will be more determined to pursue those dreams, like taking on Minnesota's bloated array of over-reaching and often duplicated services.  Seifert could expertly manage to drop our national tax burden ranking a few positions, but it will likely be a complicated solution that will unwind without annual attention.  Emmer seems ready to make simpler, more structural changes, the kind that last.

Again, what a joy it is to have two such qualified, energetic, electable candidates this cycle.  What a shame we have to settle for one.  But for me, for now, the one I prefer is Tom Emmer.

Comments

[Brent Metzler]

For all I know, Emmer could be anywhere from a conservative to a RINO, and I consider the latter more troubling than some Democrats. Better be safe and just vote for whoever the DFL puts on the ballot than to be disappointed later.

[anonymous]

I'm not particularly familiar with Emmer (won't be on my primary ballot, and I do know I'm no big fan of Seifert) but I'm working through my own research on the dems. Tell me more about Emmer--what kinds of duplicated service cuts does he propose? That seems like a sensible area to focus spending cuts.

Curious what you think about Baak's clothing tax, specifically targed to pay off the school problem (how on earth did we find ourselves in THAT mess?) and then diminish. I know he's taking a lot of heat for it, and I doubt I'll find many Republicans on board with ANY revenue increase, but seems seems like a fairly moderate way to increase revenues with relatively little pain individually. Clothing is a necessity, but among adults it's largely discretionary and with kids there are many ways around it for those who simply can't afford it (secondhand stores, hand me down--all tools I've used even without the tax). Really, can we cut our way out of this imbalance, or is that just wishful thinking? I was surprised/pleased that the Chambers of Commerce remained neutral, which seems like a quiet endorsement from a traditionally conservative group.

--Annie

[J. Ewing]

Minnesota does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem. If the State budget had kept pace with inflation for the last 50 years, it would now be one TENTH the size it is today-- we have had 1000% growth in government! Until we address that atrocity, taxes are a mere distraction. Cut both!

Now, as to which candidate can do that more effectively, I'm not sure. I don't think "dreams" are the proper qualification, considering the current occupant of the White House, nor is "vision." A common drunk has "visions," but they're not useful, nor are the political kind unless there is something in the leadership ability of the candidate that can actually bring those visions to fruition.

[Speed Gibson]

If I truly thought more money would improve our public schools, I would give it some thought. But even here, I would much prefer a local property tax increase to make sure that Pogey & Co wouldn't later come along and redirect that clothing tax to GAMC etc.

But of course, money is a poor indicator of results. Plus, we need to take full advantage of this recession to refocus current expenditures.

[Brent Metzler]

Bakk claims that he won't run in the Primary if he doesn't get the endorsement, which I think is unfortunate, because I believe that he is probably the best candidate running for governor this year.

I think that expanding sales tax to clothing is a good move, because I generally favor consumption taxes. I would not count on the the school "problem" to be solved or the tax diminishing though, unless schools somehow figured out how to operate without funding. Hmm, no, don't expect that to happen.

[anonymous]

I guess here's my left-leaning moderate's view on the raise taxes/cut spending issue.

If you need to lose weight you can diet or you can exercise. Either will work. But if you do both, you'll be healthier and it will work fast and last longer.

We can cut and cut and cut, but we'll be left wtih anemic public services, toss a lot of public employees (some of them very good at their jobs) onto the unemployment rolls, and put ourselves into a rotten fiscal pit that the next administration will need to try to climb out of.

Or, we can simply raise taxes on everyone and people will complain (legitimately) and discretionary income will drop and that will negatively impact the economy long term.

Or we can all set aside the ideologies we try so darn hard to make work in every situation, concentrate on a balanced, sensible approach that doesn't overcorrect in either direction and try to keep our collective head down until this particular storm has passed and we can give ourselves some relief.

Brent--I'm actually not a big fan of consumption taxes, because they tend to be regressive. But I'm willing to concede that desperate times call for desperate measures, and I'm OK with it.

--Annie

[Speed Gibson]

Annie, the challenge, the need is to quit playing the education game between the 40 yard lines. I speak not so much in terms of cutting costs overall as putting that money where truly needed. Decades of sloppiness when revenue was available have caught up with us.

For example, we continually wrestle with class sizes. We can agree 40 is probably too high, but I challenge you to come up with the test that could discern which of 1,000 5th grades were 26 to a room, the others 28. Common sense easily trumps what little credible research is available. (Look at Kansas City, e.g.)

But the $ difference between 26 and 28 is easily discernable, money that could likely been more productively spent elsewhere.

[anonymous]

Speed--I'll absolutely agree with you in principle (though I assure you I am incapable of managing 26 OR 28 fifth graders for hours/days/months on end).

But I'm wondering if you'll also agree that it's a slippery slope. If you and I say "OK, let's go with 28," there will immediately be a rush from others to raise it to 30. And we're off and running. And soon we're wondering why "classroom managment" has gone to hell with 40 'tweens and one frazzled teacher.

As far as the hypothetical class size test. Well, I don't think that would be terribly hard to administer, if we care to find out. Over the course of several years, measure the single-year gains of kids in classes of 26 and 28. Ensure individual teachers are in both pools in alternate years. Measure at different grade levels (may matter in early years but be negligible in later years, or vice versa). Extrapolate the results over the course of a child's educational career and you have measurable, replicatable results.

So, again, I guess I'm back to, there are no easy fixes. Best practices--and not just from one think tank or another--that are implemented with appropriate forethought and follow through and accountability seem like the smart way to proceed. There may be bold, innovative programs that are miserable failures (varying demographics, levels of special needs, capabilities of the staff). And maybe the administrators need to be fired. Or maybe the programs just need to be discontinued and we move on.

I agree that incremental change brings incremental results, but sometimes that's enough as long as we're moving your metaphoric ball in the right direction. Drastic change can bring devestating results to the kids who are in the balance. But if we gradually, consistently improve both our programs and our budgets--using both common sense and research--I think we're doing good work.

--Annie

[The Big Stink]

Annie: The statistical balance you seek is the same thing the education cartel has been saying they want for decades, i.e., increased efficiency and fiscal accountability. The problem, of course, is they can't achieve either because there are no consequences for failing.

[anonymous]

Well, Stink, I have surprising news for you: I am not in fact the education cartel. Did you see the part where I suggested firing failing administrations as one possible outcome. I'm guessing that runs counter to that particular group.

Are you opposed to the combination of common sense and best practices? I find that, honestly, rather baffling. How do you determine your position, if not from gathering, synthesizing, and evaluating the available info and research?

I occasionally (frequently) suspect that you're in this just to stir the pot and promote an ideology, not to fix the problems. I'm genuinely curious--what field do you work in, that you've found success in such a black and white approach to life?

--Annie

[The Big Stink]

What do you want from me? I pay my property taxes. You want me to do it with a smile on my face? I have real problems with a monopoly which will not reform and, in particular, a system whose only response to criticism is to further insulate themselves from competition. This parochial attitude so many have that the schools will reform themselves if we all just get "constructive" is false. Monopolies don't reform. They have no reason to. That is a law of nature.

I don't hate public education, I despise inefficiency - particularlly in the public sector. Consider the old joke: What does an 800-pound gorilla eat? - Whatever it wants to.

[anonymous]

I apologize in advance derailing of Speed's post, but since you asked I'll go ahead and respond.

What do I want from you? The same thing I want from everyone I converse with--irl or online:
an open mind, intellectual curiosity, strong opinions with a willingness to consider others, and a civilized tongue.

There are two sides to every story, and I'd happily hear yours if you'd do the same and maybe for the sake of conversation we can figure out something that might provoke some change even if it's not exactly, completely your ideas.

Do you really think it's fair, realistic, or even democratic to think yours are the only ideas that hold value? You're as frustrating as some smug 20 year old militant PETA activist (with whom I get equally exasperated). Look around. Recognize that you are actually not the sole expert on all things. Other people bring valuable ideas, research, energy, and solutions to the discussion. I'm a big proponent of having courage of your convictions, but, as the old saying goes, we have two ears and one mouth for a reason. You seem to have three of one and none of the other.

In vast, national forums I don't expect much from other posters, but for all I know you live three blocks over from me. I'd like to think if we struck up a conversation in the checkout line at Almstead's or Thistles or Fat Nat's that you'd be a more friendly, open neighbor than you've been so far.

You asked. . . . .

So anyway, point of order. Speed gave his tentative endorsement for Emmer. I'm curious what those of you on the other side of the spectrum see in his platform that make him a good pick.

--Annie

[The Big Stink]

I am being civil. You wanted my honest opinion and I gave it to you and you think it's too coarse. I can't account for your personal sensitivities. It appears you're not as much interested in debating this critical mistrust of public funds as you are in seeking people who agree with you. I don't disagree with you - I just don't think your Rx addresses the root causes.

[anonymous]

Fine. I give.

From my impassioned plea for open-minded discussion and give & take and intellectual curiosity, your take away is that I'm thin skinned and seeking people who agree with me. Hi, have we MET?

I'm trying to remember a time--one time--when you gave consideration and discussion to an idea that wasn't your own. I challenge you to try it. It goes something like this "That's an interesting idea. I'm not sure I agree, it seems like XXX, but I'm curious how it would work, tell me more."

I'm trying to be the change I want to see in the world. I'm really trying.

For now, pax, Speed.

--Annie

[Speed Gibson]

We'll have to meet up sometime, Annie.