Today’s the big day: whether the work is done or not the state constitution mandates that the legislative session ends tonight at midnight. The signs coming out of the capitol lead me to be cautiously optimistic that the work actually will all be done by deadline (a notable accomplishment in of itself) but the question remains as to what the compromise will look like.
It’s pretty clear that there will be no major new revenue sources out of this session. The proposed tax increases have been scuttled due to the Governor’s unyielding devotion to the tax-payer’s league (which apparently only represents the 1% wealthiest Minnesotans because I think the average tax-payer would have loved some property tax relief). And without a new revenue source I can be pretty confident that we won’t have significant property tax relief (the DFL will get some into the budget, but not near what they wanted), no per-pupil student funding increases, no tuition caps at the state colleges, no new transportation funding, and our nursing homes won’t get the help they need. These political corpses (a long with scores of others) can be laid firmly at the Governor’s feet.
But that’s just my two cents, what does everyone think of this legislative session so far? Did we get what we bargained for when we sent overwhelming majorities to the state capitol? Did the DFLers overextend themselves when they reached for those upper-level tax increases? Or is this all just part of the regular bargain/compromise cycle that happens at the capitol?
Discuss.
Loading ...
Beating the deadline isn’t an accomplishment if it results in a deal that a Sviggum-led House would’ve made.
The deadline is meaningless. Next year people will care about whether things got done.
Politicians should focus more on results and less on inside baseball that 99 percent of the people don’t care about.
The DFL plan would have provided no property tax relief and no matter how much you say it would it doesn’t make it so. Paying down bonds for certain local governments does not mean those governments will lower taxes. If the DFL would have asked for straight property tax relief they would have gotten it.
In the end DFL leadership screwed up by thinking a majority of Minnesotans would hold the governor responsible for a special session which would force him to compromise. For a combination or reasons from lack of a coherent message, an inability to present what message they did have and huge disagreements between the house and senate they could not pull it off. The newly elected DFL representatives are from conservative areas and they know the proposed tax increases would have killed them in the next election, which they have to face two years before the governor. DFL leadership should have see this and come up with a workable strategy if they wanted to get any of what they proposed passed.
I agree. There WAS NO MESSAGING from the Dems. Again they let the republican’s define them and what they were trying to accomplish. From the anti-tax rally, the billboards, and all of the talk radio shows they have access to they projected their rallying cry. Their inablility to present a coherent message, any message at all, is and will be there problem until they ‘grow some’ and stand up for what they believe in.
“Paying down bonds for certain local governments does not mean those governments will lower taxes.”
Spot on.
No one at the state capital forced cities to go on a tax binge, and there is no mechanism contained in the pie-in-the-sky tax bills that were presented by the Democrat legislature that would have forced a reduction.
Maybe, just maybe I will see more than ten people at the truth in taxation hearings in my city this year.
There are so many places to find economies in budgets that go unexplored because the city councils do not see any organized demand that they do so.
Arguing city and county taxation at the state level makes no sense and the Democrats that have been touting their “property tax reductions” know it.
This session demonstrated nothing more than yet another attempt by Democrats to “stick it” to successful people.
The Governor did the people’s work by smacking them back down to reality.
Seems like the tone is changing and not changing for better. I would put the odds of a special session to be very likely.
I don’t understand why your list of grievances are Pawlenty’s fault. Let’s begin with the so-called property tax relief. The cities that receive no LGA would get virtually no property tax relief at all. Also, Minneapolis received a lump sum payment of $90 million last year and property taxes did not go down.
As for per pupil education spending, the DFL focused solely on special education at the expense of regular education. If you wanted to increase per pupil spending, you could easily adjust the formula that unfairly gives a class of third graders in Minneapolis $13,000 per pupil but the same class of third graders in Mankato only gets $6600.
I’m not sure why there should be tuition caps at our colleges and universities. Education is valuable and students should probably have to pay something for their education. Not to mention all of the loans that are available.
As for transportation funding, you’re completely wrong. The voters passed a brand new revenue source to fund transportation last year. It’s called dedicating all of the Motor Vehicle Excise Taxes to transportation under the Constitution. The DFL had the choice of bonding for $1.7 billion in transportation funding and paying for those bonds with the new money going into roads under the MVET amendment. They chose to not fund transportation.
So, you see, the DFL has plenty of responsibility for their own inaction. Instead of looking to fund government with thinking outside the box, they went back to the same special interest groups that have funded their elections time after time again and said no. It’s time to hold them accountable for their absolute failure at governing.
As part of the ongoing budget talks, my gut feeling is that the Governor has given his nod for certain Republican Reps to override the gas tax veto late tonight. Greater Minnesota and suburban legislators are being lobbied hard for more transportation dollars, especially from their county boards and county highway departments. If the over-ride were to occur the Governor can still stake claim to his original “pledge” of no new taxes and at the same time allow needed transportation dollars to flow into the system, a few vulnerable Republican legislators are given some cover and at the end of the day the “liberal” Democratic legislature can be blamed for the gas tax increase. We will see in a few short hours.
mike,
You may be right. But at $3.35 a gallon, any legislator who raises the gas tax does so at his or her own peril. I can see the revolt coming now.
Chris,
I just returned from a weekend in Wisconsin where the Gas Tax is 10 cents higher than Minnesota’s and gas ranged in price from $3.26 to $3.28 a gallon. Gas is $3.25 in Rochester at the moment.
Because of that, Wisconsin is ahead of Minnesota in its quality of roads, expansion of exisiting higways, and vast improvement on the Interstates. Getting through Wisonsin is a lot easier now.
Despite your objections to the Gas Tax going up a nickel here, Minnesota roads will continue to break down. There is a horrible stretch of I-90 West ouside Dresbach for 15 miles that needs serious redoing. State monies go to improving the Interstatesas well as Federal monies. Pawlenty should have signed the Transportation Bill rather than vetoing it.
kathy,
You pretend that the transportation bill was only a nickel. It wasn’t. It included another 2.5 cents for some paltry amount of bonding as well as wheelage taxes of $20 per vehicle and a metro wide sales tax increase of .5%. That’s pretty crazy and deserves to be vetoed. By the way, I’ve driven in Wisconsin and I wouldn’t necessarily brag about their roads. And in South Central MN, gas is $3.35 a gallon.
P.S. kathy,
The DFL should have gone along with the governor and bonded for $1.7 billion in road projects to be paid for by new money coming into transportation via the MVET consitutional amendment. If you raised the gas tax a nickel, you will only see $150 million in new money each year. At that rate, it would take 10 years (not including cost increases) to build the same roads Pawlenty proposed in just one year.
I don’t have a problem with increased user fees as long as the money goes to what is being used and the gas tax does that. The problem the DFL has with the gas tax, other than the additional taxes Chris mentioned, is that it is completely contrary to their line on making the tax system more progressive. Their message was mixed and that is in part what kept it from gaining traction.
Self pimpage: I have been live blogging at I Don’t Hate America.
The other addons should not have been needed. Rewrite the bill for the 5 cents only increase.
I was grocery shopping this afternoon long after we arrived home. Gas at the Kwik Trip by the HyVee store was $3.26 a gallon. Smaller towns charge more. I have seen that on the way to Makato from Hwy 14.
Kathy,
Mankato was $3.35 as of Saturday. Mankato may be smaller than Rochester, but I wouldn’t call Mankato a small market. Faribault was also $3.35 on Saturday.
Then how is it with Wisconsin with the higher gas tax sells gas for $3.26 a gallon as of this afternoon when we left?
The Governor skillfully came up with a mantra about “9.8% increase” that went largely unchallenged by the majority and the media, and in my opinion this exacted a toll on efforts to actually invest in Minnesota’s infrastructure and human capital this year. The Strib’s news item this morning repeated it without a second thought (again).
The Department of Finance’s February forecast clearly indicated that some one-time funding was available, but no ongoing dollars without raising revenue. Here’s the math: $2.16 billion - $1.003 billion of cash on hand and reserves - $1.2 billion of inflationary costs the Department of Finance projected = $43 million in the hole. Seem like a mismatch from the 9.8% figure the Governor and Republican legislators have been repeating? Indeed.
One of the lessons here is that a tight message - even if it’s a number that’s not accurate - can drive the whole debate. Having said that, it seems to me that without knowing what the Governor will or will not veto, the session’s a draw.
kathy,
There are other factors in gas prices besides taxes (although taxes play a very immediate role when there is an increase). The summer driving formulas Minnesota requires through our environmental laws play into our higher gas prices. The point I was making about the gas tax was never to compare Minnesota’s to Wisconsin’s but to say that if they passed a gas tax increase, our prices would jump another nickel at the time when consumers (I thought the DFL protected consumers) are being squeezed hardest.