Thing is, I’m not sure why they needed the “halfheartedly”… If Pawlenty’s the one doing it, doesn’t one already assume that it will be done “halfheartedly”? Well, whatever, a little redundancy never hurt anyone.
Note: The reason Pawlenty’s rebate plan is “halfheartedly” done is because he has a legal obligation to sketch out a plan for rebates but he actually advocates spending the surplus. So while he has to sketch out a plan, he doesn’t advocate actually following through on it. I’m making this note because someone rightfully pointed out that this post is misleading. I had meant it to be a quick post poking fun at the title of the article and Governor Pawlenty but I unintentionally implied wrong-doing on the part of the Governor.
I believe that the governor is legally obligated to offer a rebate plan but he knows that the legislature will be spending the “surplus” that required the rebate plan, hence the “half-hearted”.
State law requires the Governor, which, in this case, is Pawlenty, to propose a tax rebate plan to the Legislature when a surplus exists. Pawlenty has fulfilled his statutory obligation by offering a tax rebate plan, yet, as the article, indicates prefers to spend the surplus on government programs and services, a position which your party supports.
Aren’t you happy that Pawlenty is being “half-hearted” about his statutory obligation in that he prefers to spend the money rather than send it back from whence it came, the taxpayers’ wallets?
Aren’t you the one who’s being disingenuous?
I absolutely agree on both your points, I was just having fun with the title. But, you’re right, I suppose it is a bit disingenuous so I will make a note of the fact that I was just trying to joke around with the title of the article.