Aaron Brown of Minnesota Brown, a fantastic blog based way up on the Iron Range, has a great post on the practical political consequences of the moderate purge going on inside of the House Republican Caucus. Here at MN Publius, we’ve focused in on what this says about the broader trend of suburban moderates fleeing the Republican party. But Aaron points out that Seifert’s crusade against moderation actually weakens his position in the Legislature.
I am not surprised that die-hard GOPers would be upset with this group breaking ranks, but I am surprised that they’re basically excommunicating the whole lot of them despite the Republicans’ status as an almost feckless minority in the House. If these six somewhat moderate Republicans were to switch parties or lose to more conservative opponents (who would be prime targets in the Fall), we would see a DFL legislature that can and would override Pawlenty all the time until he leaves office. I just don’t get it.
At this rate, the House Republican caucus of 2009 will include Rep. Marty Seifert, the Monopoly guy and Skeletor. That’s a pretty bad ass group, but they won’t be able to stop universal health care, a stronger education system or tax reform. And that’s good news for DFLers, independents and moderate Republicans. You know, most Minnesotans.
So true.
Loading ...
Democrat plan for universal health care = More money out of the public’s pocket in return for a three month wait to see a doctor.
Democrat plan for a stronger education system = More Money out of the public’s pocket in return for less academic achievement and an increased drop out rate.
Democrat plan for tax reform = More money out of the public’s pocket in return for absolutely nothing.
Those are some pretty bad assed plans.
If you think healthcare is expensive now, just wait ‘til it’s free.
Aaron may have a fantastic blog, but I don’t know that I agree with his analysis.
If the House needs several Republican votes in order to over ride a guv’s veto, then ‘6 somewhat moderate Republicans’ losing their elections to ‘more conservative opponents,’ as Brown suggested, does not seem to guarantee “a DFL legislature that can and would override Pawlenty all the time until he leaves office.”
Aaron must be assuming that the ‘more conservative opponents’ would be defeated by DFLers, and that may be an unqualified assumption. There may not be DFL challengers in all the districts.
I just wonder how long you’ll continue to paint the DFL legislature as moderate. This morning, Speaker Kelliher just issued a statement saying that we need to consider taxing clothing in Minnesota. I thought the DFL was supposed to be for working families and the middle class. First they pass a regressive gas tax bill with tab increases, wheelage taxes and a metro sales tax increase. Now they are pushing for more regressive sales taxes. I guess they don’t care about the middle class after all.
On one of last night’s late news broadcasts (KSTP I think), they discussed the expansion of sales tax to clothing. The details, as best I recall them, were that the overall sales tax in the state would drop from 6.5% to 5.9%, and that it would be expanded to cover clothing. The lone legislator interviewed in the story was Rep. Ron Erhardt (R-Edina). But the governor signaled his opposition to the proposal, and I doubt this one would be over-ridden.
Thanks for the link, Zack. To follow up, I don’t know that the DFL has a shot at all six of these seats, though one or two for sure. But if the GOP is trying to defend their left flank and keep above the crucial 1/3 line, this seems like a setback for them. They’ll have to spend money defending these seats now and that leaves them vulnerable elsewhere. Also, this sort of tactic won’t play well in swing districts, where voters are more accustomed to splitting their ballots.
I think voters are smart enough to know that someone has to pay for needed road improvements.