I really have put off any sort of decisions about my political future until we get through this legislative session and this budget crisis, and I want to stay focused on that. I haven’t ruled out running for re-election as governor, either. I’ve told our local press that I’ll something to say about that later this year, but generally, I’m going to focus on the task at hand.
I’ve made no secret of the fact that I think Pawlenty will not seek another term and if you parse Pawlenty’s language in this answer, there are a couple of clues that he’s probably not going to run again. First, Pawlenty says he “hasn’t ruled out” a re-elect. Which is the kind of phrasing used to discuss a less likely possibility. Second, and more significant, is the fact that Pawlenty is putting off an announcement until after the session. This is a critical session for the Governor (and the state) and Pawlenty doesn’t want to become a lame-duck. Remember, the DFL is only two votes away from a veto proof majority in the State House. If Pawlenty becomes a lame duck, it might be harder to keep wavering GOPers in the House on the wagon.
Lobbyist Pawlenty? RNC chairman Pawlenty? Join a monastary Pawlenty? CEO…?
Sarah Palin’s running mate?
I think Pawlenty should get a job through Jobz. That would really tell him if the program works.
No way T-Paw runs in 2012 if Obama is popular. That is when you run an old, nearly done politician as his or her final flash. Think Bob Dole and Walter Mondale. I’m thinking it will be a nice last hurrah for someone like Huckabee.
I think if T-Paw escapes from this legislative session with a positive tone and decent popularity, he runs for Gov again and positions himself as a more senior GOP voice in 2016.
DtM — You are positing a big “if.” The state is pretty much broke, and there are no more accounting tricks to use to balance the budget. It doesn’t look like he has many options — he can continue to play to the Taxpayers’ League and alienate the rest of the electorate, or he can act pragmatically (raise taxes) and lose his strongest, most reliable supporters. Sure, he’s slick, but this may be beyond him.
We can rely on him to do what is NOT in the best interest of Minnesota…same old story. Isn’t it interesting that he states he needs to stay in Minnesota and work on this budget deficit NOW, but he was more than happy to be away playing with John McCain when some foreward thinking leadership might have helped us get ready for this. He’s so slick that not even those that know him well could tell you what “tricks” he’s got up his sleeve. Note to legislature…PLAY HARDBALL and stick it to him!
DantheMan-
I would disagree, because one of the highly effective characteristics of the GOP is that they almost never say die. 1996 was a missed opportunity to run a real candidate against a soon to be impeached President, not a sign of a trend. Pawlenty has superb communications skills, and has an ability that is pure gold: he can tell people they can get something for nothing while making them believe that there refusal to even think of sacrifice or giving back makes them virtuous. Potent gift to have against someone who will have spent three years saying ‘nothings free, its going to be a hard climb to get out of this mess.’
Problem Pawlenty has with a second in re-elect in 2010 is this - there is no more seed corn for him to eat. Everything’s been cut, there’s no way any accounting gimmicks can create the illusion of a surplus, and so much infrastructure repair (not just transportation) has been put off in the name of tax cuts that a lot of municipalities and counties are going to really feel the hurt this year. Two more biennium budgets after this to get through scot-free? Hard to do, when a lot of what made this state a good place to live is falling apart around you. I think Pawlenty has to go for the Presidency in ‘12, when he’ll be a green-tinged Republican former governor whose still somewhat popular, as opposed to ‘16 when he’ll be an upper mid-west Bush.
I don’t think it is hypocritcal that Pawlenty would be spending some time out of the state campaigning for his friend McCain in the summer and fall, but choosing to stay in the state during a legislative session. Legislative sessions are when you do the state’s work.
The good news for T-Paw is that if he can’t rise above this deficit, neither will many of his challengers. Margaret Kelliher, Steve Kelley, other legislators. It is actually a golden opportunity for people temporarily out of politics like Entenza or Dayton, although I think both would be lousy Governors.
John S - I have to correct one thing you said. You say that President Obama is saying nothing’s free, we have to work hard. That part is right. But candidate Obama got elected by promising a little bit of everything to everybody. If there was a group he didn’t have, he’d give them something and then he’d have them.
Come, say, 2011, will we have the parental, realist Obama, or the promise-the-world Obama?
I can’t believe that Pawlenty would run again — he has nothing to gain politically by being a three-term (as opposed to two-term) governor, and he has everything to lose and very likely could lose given the budget debacle. If Pawlenty is anything, he’s a shrewd politician. Why take the risk?
Historically, it is difficult for any governor to run for a third four-year term. Minnesota has had three-termers before, but that was when a term was two years in length. If Gov. Pawlenty does decide to run again, he would not have history on his side. This is not to say it would be impossible, just that the past examples would not bode well.
T-Paw doesn’t run, goes for the 2012 endorsement but doesn’t get it. But he’ll have some National campaign legs and some ‘experience’ that preps him for 2016.
He plays the lecture circuit, gets his name out there, and in 2014 plays a major roll in the resurgence of the GOP in the middle of President Obama’s 2nd term, the same time line the GOP started taking a bath under Bush. Politics is a game of runs, and by 2014 T-Paw will be the front runner, and on the verge of locking in the endorsement and making a run at it.
Steve Kelley’s actually a Senior Fellow and Director of the Center on Science, Technology, & Public Policy at the Humphrey Institute right now, and not in the Legislature.
But it’s an fair point that the session and the deficit may put down the hopes of those in the legislature. A lot will depend on how it goes.
As for T-Paw, I tend to agree with those who think he’ll bow out some time next year and start his run for POTUS. It’s awfully tough to get a 3rd term here in MN. There’s a lot of downside for T-Paw and not a lot of upside for him personally.
I don’t see Pawlenty running for president in 2012. Unless Obama is a disaster, that is going to be a tough race for the Republicans and I really don’t think Pawlenty has it in him. Not that Pawlenty is lazy, but I just don’t see the guy working that hard.
Whether he gets re-elected as governor will depend on whether the Democrats put up a shitty candidate. Given the track record, its likely they will, but I can always hope.
Flash,
I don’t think Pawlenty has the chops to be a strong GOP leader, honestly. He’s used gimmicks and half-truths to bring the budget in balance, but obviously it wasn’t sustainable. If he were to face a serious challenge from someone like Romney, I think he’d get toasted. He’s a Romney immitation after all, faux-fiscal conservative, photogenic and seemingly genial, but Romney’s tougher and plays rough.
Barring a personal scandal, Obama will be a 2-term President. He is smart, savvy, and will adapt to whatever figure he needs to be in order to get re-elected. I don’t say that negatively, I say it with respect to his political savvy. He is one of the more calculated and savvy politicians I have ever seen.
So assuming Obama gets a 2-term Presidency, I stand by my comment that the GOP puts up a has-been as a sacrificial lamb in 2012.
Most politicians get the assured and then let it sit vacant while they run for the next level, don’t they? Pawlenty isn’t going to stay out of the gub race if he plans a POTUS race… but those POTUS races are expensive, I guess.
I’m thinking: T-Paw won’t run for President unless there is a certain atmosphere, and it’s hard to predict atmosphere four years ahead of a POTUS run. I can’t see him running at all unless it’s for VP.
DtM-
People who run for governor/President tend to see themselves as world beaters. And we all just saw a man go from junior Senator to President of the United States in two years. Pawlenty could think he’s special, and he has the skills.
Or we’re both right. He doesn’t run again in ‘10. But he doesn’t do ‘12. Instead he takes four years to teach/lecture, trys to climb on/lead a hypothetical Republican resurgence in ‘14 by trying to unseat Franken. He then gets to use two painful budget sessions he missed by not running for re-election to his own advantage (“Remember the good times under me, compared to what you got after”), and if it works well, ride the wave. The more I run this down, the more convincing it sounds…. Hmmn….. Are we looking at Pawlenty putting off his decision until June the wrong way? By June, he’ll know whether he has a choice of stepping stone. Does he try for the Senate in ‘14, or try to get through two more bienniums with his hide? ‘10 to ‘16 is a long time to wait outside of public office before running for the big job.
The other thing to remember, for all of us, is that for the first time in a long while, we have someone who wasn’t mature/growing to maturity in the world of 1965 to 1975. A rising number of Congresspeople and Senators too. There are a lot of strange, strange bedfellows in American politics who are only on the same sides of a lot issues because they both hated what the other side stood for when Nixon was President. It’s entirely possible that the party coalitions by the dates we are talking about will be radically different than what we see now. Pawlenty may not have even begun to dig the gold from his new ‘greenery.’
I could see Governor Pawlenty as a Vice-Presidential candiudate (where bland is the order of the day). President doesn’t seem as likely. He has been able to excite the David Brooks types (although Mr. B might have second thoughts if he knew about T-Paw’s anti-intellectual streak), but I don’t see him as firing up the national base. Yes, he’s a conservative on social issues, but I think that part of his success in Minnesota has been running without pushing that conservatism in our faces (in ‘02, he looked far more moderate than the highly-scripted Brian Sullivan). At the same time, if he tries to become the face of a Republican moderate resurgence, he has his conservative baggage to deal with.
John S’s Senate scenario seems more plausible, IMHO.
All I know at the moment is that Pawlenty seems to be keeping his options open about running for President. His proposed budget, with its cuts in corporate tax rates and increases in education spending, seem designed for the explicit purpose of a future presidential campaign. Back in the late ’90s, there was all this glowing press coverage about the “new breed” of GOP governors who were cutting income taxes and increasing education funding in their states, as if this was some brilliant new political formula that had been discovered. Actually, these governors had just been lucky enough to hold office during an economic boom that gave them huge surpluses to give away. Pawlenty seems to be trying their old formula, except, you know, with a $6-7 billion deficit.
Meanwhile, on the DFL side, Margaret Anderson Kelliher and R.T. Rybak seem to be keeping their options open in terms of running for governor. Rybak’s probably wary about saying anything before 2009. Declaring for governor before he’s re-elected Mayor would look arrogant. Plus, he has to run a city that’ll be getting hit with more LGA cuts yet again. Get ready for another 8 percent property tax increase and more deferred maintenance on city services. And Kelliher has the difficulty of balancing the needs of a campaign with the practical realities of leading a diverse legislative caucus and producing a budget that doesn’t gore too many people’s pet programs or issues.
In any case, I don’t know what any of these people will end up doing, and I don’t know if they know yet either. They’re just doing what all politicians like to do: Keeping as many options open as possible.
Good point, Another Chris. I don’t see Rybak being able to effectively get sworn in one day and then announce his 2010 campaign the next day. Coleman has the exact same problems. Hard to raise money; hard to keep a fairly picky party in line. The DFL (if not the state) has never accepted career candidates in a governor’s race (see Hatch, Kelley, Moe, Humphrey). As for Kelliher, she will come out of the budget disaster looking impotent at best and terrible at worst. It’s an impossible position for her. She’s better off waiting to run in 2018 (assuming a Dem does not win in 2010). Someone like Paul Thissen or Tom Bakk will win the endorsement, win the primary, and then give Ramstad a hell of a run.
“His proposed budget, with its cuts in corporate tax rates and increases in education spending, seem designed for the explicit purpose of a future presidential campaign.”
Or perhaps he believes it is the right thing to do. I know, how naive of me.
“His proposed budget, with its cuts in corporate tax rates and increases in education spending, seem designed for the explicit purpose of a future presidential campaign.”
I think it’s telling that all the talk is of Pawlenty’s political future and his national ambitions. He’s not as interested in what’s best for Minnesota or fixing the budget as much as staging himself for some role in the 2012 election. Get ready for 2 more years of zero leadership from the Governor’s office, but plenty of posing and photo ops and empty rhetoric.
The irony about you all complaining of T-Paw is that we just elected a man to President who accomplished nothing as a US Senator other than raising his profile. Zilch. Nada.
Barack Obama gave a speech in 2004. Then he became a Senator. Then he nearly immediately began to position himself for President, and 18 months later he began his formal campaign.
He kept the Senate seat as his day job, but we all know where his time was spent.
Yet it is wrong of T-Paw to take advantage of a photo-op or an invitation to a news show. How hypocritical.
Yet it is wrong of T-Paw to take advantage of a photo-op or an invitation to a news show. How hypocritical.
No, it’s not wrong to take advantage of a photo-op. But Pawlenty’s record on job creation in Minnesota is terrible. Pawlenty’s bootlicking of the Tax Avoiders League has beggered Minnesota. It’s time to throw the Supply Siders to curb. It’s a failed philosophy that has never worked.
As far as Obama’s accomplishment in the Senate go:
THESE ARE BARACK’S ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN THE U.S. SENATE TO DATE:
** First legislation, the HOPE Act, which increased Pell Grants to $5100, and later joined Senator Kennedy on the Higher Education legislation that passed July 20, by a vote of 78-18. That legislation also included funding for Predominantly Black Colleges to assist with counseling, tutoring and other needs of low income students. It also creates the Teaching Residency Act which will create a school-based teacher preparation program in high needs schools to provide each teacher with a mentor, content instruction, classroom management skills, a master’s degree and state certification, and a 2 year follow-up program.
**The Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006
is an act that requires the full disclosure of all entities or organizations receiving federal funds beginning in fiscal year (FY) 2007 on a website maintained by the Office of Management and Budget.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Funding_Accountabi...
**The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act
Authored by U.S. Sens. Dick Lugar (R-IN) and Barack Obama (D-IL), the Lugar-Obama initiative expands U.S. cooperation to destroy conventional weapons. It also expands the State Department’s ability to detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction.
Signed into Law on January 11, 2007.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/chrisblas...
**The 2007 Government Ethics Bill
http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_17/news/19664-1.html?...
http://www.commonblog.com/story/2007/9/14/164837/331
** The “Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-2125
** S116 - Summer Learning demonstration project to provide summer learning grants and encourage new teaching methods.
http://www.pasesetter.org/demonstrationPrograms/nasd.ht...
and this one, moved out of committee just a few days ago:
Obama’s Global Poverty Act of 2007, passed out of committee just a few days ago
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Congressman Adam Smith (D-WA) today hailed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s passage of the Global Poverty Act (S.2433), which requires the President to develop and implement a comprehensive policy to cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief, and coordination with the international community, businesses and NGOs. This legislation was introduced in December. Smith and Congressman Spencer Bachus (R-AL) sponsored the House version of the bill (H.R. 1302), which passed the House last September.
http://obama.senate.gov /
Amendments, that have all passed:
S.Amdt.159 to S.Con.Res.18 - To prevent and, if necessary, respond to an international outbreak of the avian flu.
S.Amdt.390 to H.R.1268 - To provide meal and telephone benefits for members of the Armed Forces who are recuperating from injuries incurred on active duty in Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom.
S.Amdt.670 to H.R.3 - To provide for Flexible Fuel Vehicle (FFV) refueling capability at new and existing refueling station facilities to promote energy security and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
S.Amdt.808 to H.R.6 - To establish a program to develop Fischer-Tropsch transportation fuels from Illinois basin coal.
S.Amdt.851 to H.R.6 - To require the Secretary to establish a Joint Flexible Fuel/Hybrid Vehicle Commercialization Initiative, and for other purposes.
S.Amdt.1362 to S.1042 - To require a report on the Department of Defense Composite Health Care System II.
S.Amdt.1453 to S.1402 - To ensure the protection of military and civilian personnel in the Department of Defense from an influenza pandemic, including an avian influenza pandemic.
S.Amdt.2301 to H.R.3010 - To increase funds to the Thurgood Marshall Legal Educational Opportunity Program and to the Office of Special Education Programs of the Department of Education for the purposes of expanding positive behavioral interventions and supports.
S.Amdt.2605 to S.2020 - Expressing the sense of the Senate that the Federal Emergency Management Agency should immediately address issues relating to no-bid contracting.
S.Amdt.2930 to S.2349 - To clarify that availability of legislation does not include nonbusiness days.
S.Amdt.3144 to S.Con.Res.83 - To provide a $40 million increase in FY 2007 for the Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program and to improve job services for hard-to-place veterans
S. Amdt 41 to S. 1 To require lobbyists to disclose the candidates, leadership PACs, or political parties for whom they collect or arrange contributions, and the aggregate amount of the contributions collected or arranged.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Barack has Written a total of 890 Bills and Co-sponsored Another 1096 since he started serving in the U.S. Senate.
Yet it is wrong of T-Paw to take advantage of a photo-op or an invitation to a news show. How hypocritical.
No, it’s not wrong to take advantage of a photo-op. But Pawlenty’s record on job creation in Minnesota is terrible. Pawlenty’s bootlicking of the Tax Avoiders League has beggered Minnesota. It’s time to throw the Supply Siders to curb. It’s a failed philosophy that has never worked.
DTM -
Just in case facts mean anything to you:
Here are just a few highlights from Barack Obama’s career as a US Senator: specific pieces of legislation, what they meant and how they were passed.
The Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act
Introduced by Sen. John McCain in May 2005, and cosponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy. Barack Obama added three amendments to this bill.
While the bill was never voted on in the Senate, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Acts of 2006 and 2007, respectively, drew heavily upon the wording of this bill.
The Lugar-Obama Cooperative Threat Reduction
Introduced by Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. Dick Lugar and Sen. Tom Coburn.
First introduced in November 2005 and enacted in 2007, this bill expanded upon the successful Nunn-Lugar threat reduction, which helped secure weapons of mass destruction and related infrastructure in former Soviet Union states.
Lugar-Obama expanded this nonproliferation program to conventional weapons — including shoulder-fired rockets and land mines. When the bill received $48 million in funding, Obama said, “This funding will further strengthen our ability to detect and intercept illegal shipments of weapons and materials of mass destruction, enhancing efforts to prevent nuclear terrorism.”
Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
This act of Congress, introduced by Senators Obama and Coburn, required the full disclosure of all entities or organizations receiving federal funds in FY2007.
Despite a “secret hold” on this bill by Senators Ted Stevens and Robert Byrd, the act passed into law and was signed by President Bush. The act had 43 cosponsors, including John McCain.
Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act
This law helped specify US policy toward the Congo, and states that the US should work with other donor nations to increase international contributions to the African nation.
The bill marked the first federal legislation to be enacted with Obama as its primary sponsor. Following this legislation’s passage, Obama toured Africa, traveling to South Africa, Kenya, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Chad. He spoke forcefully against ethnic rivalries and political corruption in Kenya.
Honest Leadership and Open Government Act
In the first month of the 110th Congress, Obama worked with Sen. Russ Feingold to pass this law, which amends and strengthens the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995.
Specificially, the changes made by Obama and Feingold requires public disclosure of lobbying activity and funding, places more restrictions on gifts for members of Congress and their staff, and provides for mandatory disclosure of earmarks in expenditure bills.
The House passed the bill, 411-8, on July 31. The Senate approved it, 83-14, on Aug. 2. At the time, Obama called it “the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate.”
Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act
Following the Republican-sponsored voter intimidation tactics seen in mostly black counties in Maryland during the 2006 midterm elections, Obama worked with Sen. Chuck Schumer to introduce this bill.
The bill has been referred to the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Obama said of the bill, “This legislation would ensure that for the first time, these incidents are fully investigated and that those found guilty are punished.”
The Obama-McCain Climate Change Reduction Bill
The Obama-McCain bill, which is co-sponsored by Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., would cut emissions by two-thirds by 2050.
Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007
Introduced by Obama, this binding act would stop the planned troop increase of 21,500 in Iraq, and would also begin a phased redeployment of troops from Iraq with the goal of removing all combat forces by March 31, 2008.
Explaining the bill, Obama said it reflects his view that the problems in Iraq do not have a military solution. “Our troops have performed brilliantly in Iraq, but no amount of American soldiers can solve the political differences at the heart of somebody else’s civil war,” Obama said.
Amendments to the 2008 Defense Authorization Bill
Obama worked with Sen. Kit Bond to limit, through this bill, the Pentagon’s use of personality disorder discharges in the FY 2008 Defense Authorization bill.
This provision would add additional safeguards to discharge procedures and require a thorough review by the Government Accountability Office. This followed news reports that the Pentagon inappropriately used these procedures to discharge service members with service-connected psychological injuries.
“With thousands of American service members suffering day in and day out from the less visible wounds of war, reports that the Pentagon has improperly diagnosed and discharged service members with personality disorders are deeply disturbing,” said Senator Obama. “This provision will add additional safeguards to the Department of Defense’s use of this discharge and mandate a comprehensive review of these policies.”
The Comprehensive Nuclear Threat Reduction provision
Working with Sen. Hagel and Rep. Adam Schiff, Obama authored this provision, which would require the president to develop a comprehensive plan for ensuring that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material at vulnerable sites around the world are secure by 2012 from the threats that terrorists have shown they can pose.
A provision from the Obama-Hagel bill was passed by Congress in December 2007 as an amendment to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.
“It is imperative that we build and sustain a truly global effort under an aggressive timeline to secure, consolidate, and reduce stockpiles of nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material to keep them out of the wrong hands. The comprehensive nuclear threat reduction plan required by this provision is an important step in that effort,” Obama said of the provision.
These are just a selection of the bills that Obama has introduced and co-sponsored.
Facts? Republicans? C’mon, you’re setting the bar way too high.
Thank you for pasting the information from Obama’s Senate Press Office here. I’m glad it now resides in yet another place on the web.
So it is great to see that Obama was adding his name to bills in the Senate, something that happens with relative easy. The typical Senator adds his name to 100-200 bills per congress. More if they have their eye on the Presidency.
So back to my original point, if T-Paw is operating with one eye on higher office, it should hardly be offensive to you all. After all, T-Paw will at least put in a decade of high-level public service prior to announcing a candidacy. Obama? 24 months.
If Obama is allowed to position himself for Presidency before his Congressional orientation video was even done playing, what is wrong with T-Paw positioning himself after a successful term-and-a-half as Guv?
Maybe you disagree with me assessing him as successful. If you, you are in the minority. Last approval poll: 55% approval, 39% disapproval. And that is in a recession.
if T-Paw is operating with one eye on higher office,
If it were just one eye, I could live with that but Pawlenty is avoiding and has avoided since he took office, responsible and effective tax policy, in order to position himself for 2008 and now, 2012. This, all to the detriment of Minnesota’s economy. His ridiculous allegiance to the Tax Avoidance League has placed the burden of the state’s schools and infrastructure on communities while at the same time, reducing LGA. This forced property taxes up at double digit rates, yearly. This regressive tax policy affects middle and lower income peoples much more adversely then the wealthy elite. To get the state out it’s current funk is going to take a full time administrator. Little Timmy can play at being a national contender on his own time. Meanwhile, these serious times call for serious leaders with serious proposals. It’s grownup time.
Richard -
It sounds like your issue isn’t with T-Paw’s performance relative to balancing Guv priorities with national exposure. You just flat out don’t like his political positions, whether is in the national mix or not. And that is completely fair — you are as entitled to your opinion as I or anyone else is.
If TPaw was focusing 125% of his time on Minnesota rather than 99%, you would still have a problem with him because of the decisions he was making. Again, very fair.
I thought TPaw’s column in the Strib today stated it well — a Governor cannot be all things to all people. He is prioritizing two things above others: 1) jobs, and 2) education. I respect an Executive who prioritizes a few importannt issues, rather than one who tries to be a jack of all trades, and ends of being a master of none.
I respect the fact that you would prefer a Governor who would have different proirities, but I for one think Pawlenty is the right Governor for the state right now.
1) jobs — Pawlenty has been an epic failure on this front.
2) education — Again, epic failure.
I share his priorities, if indeed, those are his real priorities. The real indication that he wants to make Minnesota successful is if he abandons that philosophy that in his 6 years in office has been a monumental failure, or continues to cowtow to the Tax Avoiders League to stage himself for the national spotlight in 2012.
@ DtM
“He kept the Senate seat as his day job, but we all know where his time was spent.”
Obama made many, many, many more votes in the senate than his competitor (the guy you voted for) over the last two years. In fact, McCain was the MOST absent of ALL the senators.
Hmmm, no new stories in 5 days, where are you guys:)
Maybe they have a real life, unlike some of us.
DTM-
I have more a problem with cutting the corporate tax rate for the same reason I would have a problem (from a purely economic standpoint) with my own taxes being cut right now. Just as I myself am saving a whole lot more than I spend, I think it is safe to assume that a number of businesses would regard extra money as an insurance policy and not a reason to expand in massively uncertain time. It would be good for me to have more money to save right now. It’d be good for a business that wanted to survive. Not so good for the economy if everyone does it.
It’s called the ‘Paradox of thrift’, and while Keynes named it, is been known for longer. Whatever their flaws, tax revenue gets spent on salaries and programs, and a stimulus based on spending gets money into the economy faster. This is one of the situations where Keynes is right. It has its drawbacks yes, but those are the flu. What we have now is cancer.
So one can wonder why Pawlenty would want to do something that goes against economic orthodoxy for the sake of political orthodoxy. I worry though - you want to cut revenues and fix education? Getting something for nothing can be very hard to do, even if St. Reagan says it should work.
Of late, you guys have been posting hardly at all. If you’re going to pack it in - please join forces with someone else and keep going - but don’t kill this blog through neglect.
John S -
I disagree. Sure, there are a few companies out there, I’d say fewer than 10%, who use this as an “excuse” to cut back on waste even though their business is OK, just as there are individuals not going out to eat because they keep hearing about the bad economy (even though they are making more than they did last year).
But most companies are not on salary, they are on comission. Many of us are on salary — we know what we’re going to make in 2009. Businesses, well, they are playing it month-by-month.
I think T-Paw’s point is that if a company is given the option of expanding an office full of knowledge workers in Minneapolis, Sioux Falls, Dallas, Denver, or Nashville, they will choose based mainly on: 1) where can they find the workforce, and 2) where can they operate that office for a reasonable cost.
If we aren’t competitive on both those fronts, those jobs don’t come to Minnesota. Expanding new knowledge-based jobs to our economy is true wealth creation. We need continual wealth creation in order to expand our tax revenue base.
There are a number of factors that make Minnesota more attractive then other states in the Mid-west and the nation. Our education system produces very highly educated, highly motivated employees and provides for the needs of company’s families. Our environment is clean. Our arts scene is vibrant. All these reasons and more have resulted in more Fortune 500 companies in Minnesota then any other Midwestern state. Minnesota, has in the past been in a leadership role in our region and in the nation. Pawlenty’s policies have reversed that and threaten our quality of life. Minnesota needs serious investment not political posturing for an individual’s (little timmy) political ambitions.