1. Endorsed an independent conservative candidate over a Repubican candidate in the NY-23 special election.
2. Questioned whether Sen. Olympia Snowe belongs in the Republican party (because the best thing for a tiny minority caucus to do is start expelling its members - maybe the Minnesota Senate GOP should try that).
3. Proposed a constitutional amendment that would cap state spending.

What does all of this portend for the 2010 session of the Minnesota Legislature?  Disfunction with a capital D.  I expect Pawlenty to take extreme positions in order to pacify the right flank of the national GOP.  As a result nothing will get done.  I wouldn’t even be shocked if a bonding bill fails to pass (for the second time in the history of the Pawlenty Administration).

Let’s forget about the fact that the legislature is overwhelmingly Democratic, and not particularly receptive to Pawlenty’s ideas. Even leaving that aside, Pawlenty is a lame duck, and the only remaining session of the legislature will be a bonding session, not a budget session. In even-numbered years, the legislature’s sole task is to pass the bonding bill. Pawlenty’s proposals don’t really have any place in the upcoming session.

I don’t begrudge Pawlenty his run for president — in fact, I’m hopeful it will bring a bit of attention to Minnesota politics. But I just wish he’d admit that’s what he’s doing, so we can stop pretending his proposals are directed at Minnesotans, rather than the nation at large.