Archive for the ‘Small Business’ Category
The Democrats must think that they have to push their fake War on Women meme. This week, it’s TakeAction Minnesota’ Dan McGrath’s turn to push that dishonest meme:
The Hobby Lobby and Harris v. Quinn rulings handed down by the Supreme Court’s conservative and male majority lay bare exactly what they value. And it’s not caring for each other. Nor is it a woman’s right to make her own decisions. Instead, these justices value ever-expanding corporate power at the expense of working people and believe that women, and the professions they lead, are worth less than others. In ruling as they did on two very disparate topics, these five men have launched an assault on women in the workplace. But it’s workers and their families who should be concerned.
In the Hobby Lobby ruling, the conservative majority took the absurd notion that corporations are people one step further. In its earlier Citizens’ United ruling, these justices granted corporations the right of free speech, and thus the ability to spend limitless amounts of money in elections. Now, these same justices have established corporate religious freedom, and the right to refuse women contraception. As the power of corporations expands, a woman’s ability to decide what is in her own best interest is diminished. That this ruling applies to “closely held” corporations means that as much as 52 percent of the American workforce may be affected.
First, I’d love hearing where the First Amendment only pertains to individuals. I still haven’t heard a Democrat point to the part of this text that says the First Amendment’s protections only pertain to individuals:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The First Amendment talks about “the right of people peaceably to assemble.” Otherwise, there’s no hint on whether they thought the First Amendment should apply only to individuals.
What compelling case can Democrats make that the political speech of corporations is less legitimate than the political speech of individuals? Should LLCs with 3 owners be allowed to express their political beliefs but corporations with 50 stockholders be prohibited from expressing their political beliefs? If Democrats think that, why do they think that?
Hobby Lobby simply said that they’d offer insurance that covered 16 forms of contraceptives, not 20. Am I to think that women are incapable of making the right decision in that situation? Further, should I think that women working at Hobby Lobby can’t afford to pay for the other types of contraceptives? After all, they make twice the rate of minimum wage.
What right do women have to have their contraceptives paid for? If I received $10 for each time I’ve heard the left talk about reproductive rights are a woman’s private decision, I’d be wealthy and then some. If it’s that private, then women should bear some of that responsibility.
Finally, why should government tell people that they can’t practice their faith? The First Amendment certainly promises people that government can’t tell them how to practice their faith. That’s one of the biggest reasons why people left Europe.
In Harris v. Quinn the same five justices ruled that workers who provide care to children, the elderly and disabled are only partial government workers and, therefore, can opt out of paying union dues, even if they benefit from workplace protections obtained by a union. While public employee unions are already finding ways to adapt, this is a serious blow to their strength. But it’s an even bigger blow to care providers, 90 percent of whom in Minnesota are women, many of whom are women of color.
In Harris v. Quinn, the Supreme Court said that small business owners have the right to determine who represents them in petitioning the legislature. In fact, the National Labor Relations Act prohibits business owners from belonging to a union. The high court decided that small business owners aren’t public employees, at least in the sense that a PR person for a public agency is a public employee.
This is pure BS:
Homecare is one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy. But the wages these workers earn are paltry. The average wage of non-union caregivers is $9-11 per hour. In Illinois, whose homecare union was the subject of the court case, wages are $13 per hour. By limiting the power of these workers to bargain for better wages and set higher professional standards workers and those they serve lose out. While anyone who depends on a caregiver knows their work is priceless, these five justices are saying that work in the home is less valuable than other male dominated professions.
That’s a non sequitur argument. Child care provider establish their rates independent of government. If they want to negotiate a raise for themeselves, they negotiate with the parents who get the check. They don’t negotiate with the commissioner of Human Services.
If they think that government should spend more money on this assistance, then they petition for higher assistance rates. When they do that, they’re the ones who determine whether they should hire a lobbyist, a trade organization, join a union or just lobby the legislature themselves. That’s their decision alone.
The unions are dishonest in saying the Supreme Court is anti-women. That’s insulting. They aren’t anti-women. They’re just pro-Constitution. The dirty little secret is that unions don’t care about women. They see unionizing them as their best opportunity to gain more political clout.
This morning’s ruling in the Harris v. Quinn case is a major setback for public employee unions. First, Harris v. Quinn
is the lawsuit brought by Pamela Harris, a home care giver in Illinois. The ramifications will be felt immediately in Minnesota. GOP gubernatorial candidate Jeff Johnson issued this statement immediately following the ruling:
“Today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling is a tremendous victory for Minnesota childcare providers and all those who value employment freedom. It was beyond the pale for Governor Dayton to use the livelihoods of hundreds of small businesswomen throughout the state as collateral to pay back his union campaign contributors. I congratulate the brave and determined women who fought back, and I look forward to ensuring this November that Mark Dayton never has the opportunity to do this to them again.”
The Supreme Court ruled that public sector unions can’t collect fees from home health care workers who object to being affiliated with a union. The Court’s decision nearly guarantees that Dayton will lose his lawsuit with Minnesota childcare providers.
This statement was issued by Deputy House Republican Leader Jennifer Loon and Rep. Mary Franson after the ruling:
“Today’s ruling is a welcome relief for Minnesota’s small business owners and hardworking families whose livelihoods were put in jeopardy by Governor Dayton and the Democrat-controlled legislature,” said Loon. “With the annual costs of childcare exceeding the average cost of in-state college tuition and fees, combined with the fact that Democrat legislators refused to give moms and dads with kids in daycare bigger tax refunds this year, Minnesota families simply cannot afford the additional strain that unionization would have imposed on their budgets.”
“The ruling from the Supreme Court today sends a clear signal to Governor Dayton and Democrats in the legislature that they must cease their reckless attempts to force independent childcare providers into a government union. Our children deserve better than to be pawns in a scheme to get more union dues out of hardworking parents” said Franson, a former childcare provider. “Minnesota parents and childcare providers can now breathe a sigh of relief knowing it’s likely that their childcare will not be imperiled by the higher costs and reduced choices of forced unionization.”
This is a major setback for AFSCME and the SEIU. Likewise, it’s a stinging defeat for Gov. Dayton and the DFL legislature, who passed the law that allowed for unionization elections. Meanwhile, this is certain to cause joy with in-home child care providers.
This has been a terrible week for the Obama administration. It hasn’t been a stellar week for the Dayton administration, either. They both lost on the Harris v. Quinn ruling. Meanwhile, President Obama got spanked when the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that his recess appointments were unconstitutional. For Gov. Dayton, his other major loss was the news that MNsure won’t be functional before the next open enrollment.
It’s understatement to say that this hasn’t been a good week for liberals. Combine last week’s SCOTUS rulings with the headwinds slamming Democrats electorally and you’ve got reason to believe that this won’t be a happy election campaign season for Democrats.
Technorati: AFSCME, SEIU, SCOTUS, Harris v. Quinn, NLRB v. Noel Cannning, President Obama, Mark Dayton, Special Interests, Democrats, Mary Franson, Jeff Johnson, Small Businesses, MNGOP, Election 2014
Now that Advanced Auto Parts is shutting its Bloomington, MN office, the big question is simple. What will Gov. Dayton say about this company taking more high-paying jobs out of Minnesota? Here’s what’s being reported:
Advance Auto Parts Inc. announced Thursday that it will shut its corporate office in Bloomington in September 2015 as part of a company reorganization following two key acquisitions. The decision means that Minnesota will lose about 100 jobs, including the CEO and CFO positions.
This commenter got it exactly right:
duck2013 So the second corporate headquarters leaves Minnesota in only one week? You Democrats better raise taxes quick! There’s people working and earning money and it’s not fair! lol
When Medtronic left Minnesota, Gov. Dayton said “As I look at the project as governor of Minnesota, this is a good deal for the people of our state.” What will Gov. Dayton say this time about AAP shutting its Bloomington office? We don’t have to wonder what Jeff Johnson thinks on the issue:
“Mark Dayton is presiding over an exodus of businesses, and declares it ‘good’ for Minnesota when they leave,” said Jeff Johnson, Republican endorsed candidate for governor.
“Minnesota is replacing its welcome signs at the border with ones saying ‘closed for business.’ It is never a good thing to see jobs fleeing the state, no matter what Governor Dayton says. We need to stop the bleeding, and get this economy healthy again,” Johnson concluded. “When I am governor, I will reform taxes and regulations to ensure that Minnesota has one of the best business climates in the world,” Johnson concluded.
Apparently, Gov. Dayton won’t hesitate in telling Minnesotans that losing high-paying Medtronics to Ireland is being a good deal. That doesn’t change the fact that high-paying jobs are leaving Minnesota. Gov. Dayton’s happy talk doesn’t change the fact that Minnesota is losing great companies to other states and other nations.
The capital flight that’s happened since last fall is both astonishing and frightening. It’s frightening because AAP is just the latest company to leave Minnesota. I wrote this post to highlight the fact that Nash Finch and Cargill were leaving Minnesota for other states. If Gov. Dayton and the DFL legislature want to run on the verified fact that major corporations are leaving Minnesota, that’s their choice.
That isn’t what they’ll do but it’s something Republicans should highlight every time they’re campaigning. Minnesotans might or might not care about tax increases, depending on whether they’re affected or not. Minnesotans, though, will snap to attention when they hear that high-paying jobs are leaving Minnesota for Ireland, Michigan and North Carolina.
Minnesota needs a new financial direction. We can’t keep raising taxes or threatening to raise taxes and expect companies to stay in Minnesota. Advanced Auto Parts, Cargill, Medtronic and Nash Finch are proof that companies will leave if the taxes are too high.
Last spring, Zach Dorholt willingly voted for the DFL’s tax increase bill. This year, Rep. Dorholt is trying to wiggle out of that vote with a little spin:
For local Republicans, the DFLer in the crosshairs on this issue is St. Cloud Rep. Zachary Dorholt. He’s among the DFLers who voted for last year’s broad-ranging tax measure that included the business-to-business taxes.
Dorholt since has lobbied to repeal those taxes.
“I’m encouraged to see that Rep. Dorholt has changed his mind,” Sen. John Pederson, R-St. Cloud, said last week. “He originally supported those business-to-business taxes coming out of the House.”
Well, yes and no.
There’s no question Dorholt voted for the measure that put the taxes into law. He says the measure, which also raised taxes on wealthy people and tobacco, made other priorities possible, such as boosting funding for schools and freezing tuition at state colleges and universities.
“I’m not somebody who’s going to vote against a bill when it has much more good in it than bad,” Dorholt said.
But Dorholt says he never supported the business-to-business taxes.
Actually, it’s yes, no and yes again. Rep. Dorholt allegedly promised Teresa Bohnen, the president of the St. Cloud Chamber of Commerce, that he wouldn’t vote for the B2B taxes. Then he voted for the B2B sales taxes. That’s bad enough but it’s more than that, though. Rep. Dorholt said that he wouldn’t “vote against a bill” that “has much more good in it than bad.”
That sounds relatively reasonable. Unfortunately, further investigation of the bill shows that the bill didn’t have more good than bad in it. The final tax bill that Rep. Dorholt voted for didn’t just include the B2B sales taxes in it. That tax bill also had the Senate Office Building appropriations in it.
Did Rep. Dorholt think it was right to impose sales taxes on farmers and small businesses that rent warehouses? I’d love hearing Rep. Dorholt’s explanation on that. The B2B taxes were awful enough. Rep. Dorholt didn’t just vote for those taxes. He voted to fund a Taj Mahal building that the legislature didn’t need, too. He also voted to raise income taxes on small businesses.
Rep. Dorholt isn’t voting to repeal those B2B taxes. He’s voting to hide his mistake. He doesn’t want taxpayers noticing the fact that he voted to raise taxes on small businesses, farmers and the middle class while voting to fund a palace for Senate fat cats.
That isn’t the definition of voting for something that “has much more good in it than bad” in it. That’s voting to raise taxes regardless of the details.
States are attempting to thwart President Obama’s and Sen. Reid’s plan to decimate small businesses, aka the government shutdown. They’re having mixed results:
The Arizona town of Tusayan, on the southern rim of the Grand Canyon, has 558 residents and 1,000 hotel rooms. And by Friday, it had $325,000 to reopen temporarily shuttered Grand Canyon National Park.
“The reason we exist is the Grand Canyon National Park. This closure is devastating,” said Greg Bryan, Tusayan’s mayor and the owner of a Best Western hotel. The town is offering to fund a partial reopening of the park that would allow visitors to drive through on a main road and stop at overlooks.
This week, Sen. Reid shot down the House bill that would’ve opened all national parks. In fact, he suggested that it was a gimmick. It isn’t. It’s the GOP’s attempt to not hurt small businesses. Something that’s undeniable is that Sen. Reid’s obstructionist tactics are hurting small businesses across the nation.
In Wisconsin, officials are keeping seven federally subsidized state-owned forest, wildlife and recreation areas open, even after receiving instructions from the federal Department of the Interior to close them. The state lands depend on federal funds for 18% of their budgets, or $701,000 total.
“I really don’t think it is a defiance, but fulfilling our obligations,” said Cathy Stepp, an official with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, which administers the state properties. “We are doing everything we can with social media, radio outlets and news to get the word out that we’re open. The calls are coming in like crazy—people are planning to come here with camping trips every year, weddings, reunions.”
Wisconsin, thanks for keeping parks open rather than joining with President Obama and the Democratic Party in inflicting pain on American families.
This definitely caught my attention:
Lawmakers in Maryland have worked out a small exception to the federal shutdown to allow several hundred family members to honor firefighters who died in the line of duty at the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial in Emmitsburg, Md., this weekend.
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D., Md.) worked with the memorial, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the U.S. Fire Administration to open the site briefly for the annual memorial service.
A spokeswoman for Gov. Martin O’Malley, a Democrat, said the brief opening didn’t present an additional cost. “They’re just unlocking the gate and allowing families of fallen firefighters to pay their respects at the memorial,” the spokeswoman said.
This is the history of the Obama administration and Democrats. They threatened to arrest World War II veterans trying to visit their memorial but they give special exemptions to Democratic allies like Steny Hoyer and Martin O’Malley.
In Arizona, the Grand Canyon State, the awe-inspiring attraction brings in millions of visitors every year and is an anchor of the state’s tourism industry, which last year accounted for $19 billion in spending and 7% of tax revenue, according to a state tourism report. The attraction creates 12,000 jobs, and tourists spend $1.2 million a day on businesses there, according to Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, a Democrat who represents the district that includes the canyon, as well as seven national forests and other national parks.
Ms. Kirkpatrick said Friday she is continuing to negotiate on behalf of her district to try to reopen the Grand Canyon and other parks.
The Grand Canyon would be open if not for Sen. Reid’s insistence on hurting small businesses. He’ll attempt to explain away his refusal to fund the National Park Service by saying it’s part of his political strategy. That’s his option. Still, that doesn’t exempt him from criticism that he’s putting a higher priority on his political party’s political posturing than he’s putting on helping small businesses.
Most of the shops in and around the Grand Canyon are little mom and pop shops. Most can be run by a family. That’s who Sen. Reid and President Obama are hurting. Shame on them for needlessly tormenting these shopkeepers.
Technorati: Grand Canyon National Park, Small Businesses, Arizona, Tourism, John Boehner, World War II Memorial, World War II Veterans, GOP, Harry Reid, President Obama, Steny Hoyer, Martin O’Malley, Government Shutdown, National Park Service, Democrats
Appearing weaker by the day, Gov. Dayton is publically opposing the repeal of the warehousing services tax increase:
Dayton has said a repeal of the warehousing tax can wait until the 2014 session, because it doesn’t take effect until next April.
That’s a feeble argument. ‘It can wait because it won’t hurt businesses until April’ isn’t compelling, especially considering this information:
Dayton wants to call lawmakers back to St. Paul on Sept. 9 to approve disaster relief for 18 counties hit hard by storms in June. He said yesterday he also wants the special session to exempt farm equipment from a new tax on business equipment repair.
I’m fine with them not repealing the warehouse tax until next winter. The tax increase will be repealed. While it’s still on the books, though, it’s a constant reminder that Gov. Dayton’s and the Democrats’ highest priority is to raise taxes regardless of whether it hurts Minnesota’s economy.
Dayton and the Democrats that control the legislature worry more about raising taxes than they care about strengthening Minnesota’s economy. Cargill shipped 200 high-paying union jobs to Colorado. Red Wing Shoes is seriously considering building a $20,000,000 warehouse in Wisconsin as a direct result of Gov. Dayton’s warehouse tax.
It’s shocking that a governor would oppose repealing a tax that’s threatening to move dozens of jobs to Wisconsin on the basis that the tax won’t hurt a major employer until next April.
Chamber President David Olson’s letter asks for a repeal of the entire tax on business equipment repair, along with new taxes on warehousing services and equipment purchases by telecommunication providers. He said the taxes are hurting business and job growth.
“Business must plan ahead and these new taxes are already impacting their decisions,” Olson wrote. “We are aware of situations where expansion plans are now on hold or where companies are considering relocating some or all of their operations to other states.”
“Companies are considering relocating…operations to other states” is code for Red Wing Shoes, though it might include other companies, too.
Since gaining total control of the legislature, Democrats have weakened Minnesota’s economy with their foolish, counterproductive tax increases. They’ve put businesses in their crosshairs. They’ve paid off their special interest allies with illegal legislation that hurts Minnesota’s poorest families.
The Democratic Party in Minnesota is nothing if not finely attuned to their special interest allies. That’s why repealing foolish, counterproductive taxes isn’t their priority. That’s why we can’t afford another 2 years of their policies.
A federal judge dismissed 2 lawsuits in-home child care small businesses filed after Gov. Dayton signed the bill into law. Here’s part of what the judge wrote of the dismissal:
Chief Judge Michael Davis wrote the “plaintiffs express a fear that, one day, there may be a certified union for family child care providers who accept State subsidies and that, one day, such a union may decide to impose a fair share fee on nonmembers of the union… Plaintiffs request that the Court peer into a crystal ball, predict the future, and then opine on the constitutionality of a speculative scenario…Courts may not give such advisory opinions. Plaintiffs’ claims are not ripe.”
Gov. Dayton issued this statement on Judge Davis’ dismissal:
I am very pleased that both lawsuits seeking to prevent child care providers from deciding for themselves whether or not to form a union have been dismissed by the Chief Judge of the United States District Court. I believe that working men and women should have the right to vote on forming a union, and that the Court’s decisions will permit such an election to be held.
Gov. Dayton’s victory might be temporary. The judge didn’t say the small business leaders’ lawsuit was without merit. He simply said it wasn’t ripe. That’s something echoed by the plaintiffs’ attorney Doug Seaton:
He’s dismissed the case but he’s dismissed it on the basis that nothing is ripe, nothing has happened yet in his view. We think enough has happened so the judge can decide and he shouldn’t dismiss the case but because of that part of the decision it’s possible that our evaluation will be- we’re better off to wait until there’s a filing by AFSCME or some part of the process in the election takes place and then it’s very clear- it is ripe. So that would be one avenue to re-file after a matter of time and developments or directly go to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to file an appeal of this decision.
Hollee Saville, one of the leaders of the anti-unionization fight, issued this statement on Judge Davis’ dismissal:
This is NOT over! We believe the Judge has erred and are considering our options to appeal or refile as the election process proceeds, but this challenge is not over. We remain convinced that home child care providers are not subject to unionization by the state under this statute.
Providers, PLEASE register to accept CCAP NOW so that you would get a vote.
We still need help adopting licensed family child care providers for mailings (any amount makes a difference) and will need help calling eligible voters soon, since we’re sure that AFSCME will present their 500 cards soon.
PLEASE visit www.MinnesotaFamilyChildcare.com to see how you can help.
At the heart of this fight is whether a legislature can write legislation that changes a private sector employer into a public sector employee without the employer’s consent. If the court rules that legislatures have that authority, then there’s nothing that legislatures couldn’t do.
As for Gov. Dayton’s statement, he’s intentionally omitting a pair of important points. First, legislatures shouldn’t have the right to call for a vote when existing federal legislation prohibits that vote. Also, legislatures shouldn’t have the right to write legislation that says private sector employers aren’t private sector employers. That’s what the DFL’s bill essentially does.
Finally, the DFL is playing with political fire with this issue. Anti-unionization activists are upset with the DFL for essentially throwing them under the bus to pay off the DFL’s political allies. The DFL stepped on a political landmine with this. Passing this legislation is motivating voters to vote against the DFL.
UPDATE: Here’s how Sen. Dave Thompson responded to last night’s child care ruling:
“On Sunday, July 28, 2013, The Honorable Michael Davis issued an order dismissing claims against Governor Mark Dayton pertaining to the childcare unionization legislation that was passed and signed into law during the 2013 legislative session. Of course, I am saddened by the decision, but am glad Judge Davis left the door open for the childcare providers to re-assert their claims at a later date.
“It is sad that these independent business people must work through the courts to try and stop the impact of this damaging law. This is what happens when elected officials put political interests ahead of the people. Governor Dayton and Democrats in the legislature have chosen to reward campaign contributors and union bosses while at the same time bullying childcare providers, most of whom are self-employed women.
“Rest assured if I am honored to be your next governor, I would make it a priority to repeal this ill advised and harmful law. This is an example of special interest politics at its worst, and Minnesotans should not stand for it.”
Here’s a quick quiz for voters: when was the last time the DFL didn’t side with their special interest allies?
Tags: Child Care Unionization, Mark Dayton, AFSCME, Mike Nelson, Corruption, Public Employees, PEUs, DFL, Hollee Saville, Doug Seaton, Small Businesses, Child Care Providers, CCAP, Federal Lawsuit, Michael Davis, Federal District Court, Dismissal
For months, we’ve heard the DFL, from Gov. Dayton and Speaker Thissen to DFL legislators, talk about taxing the rich because they hadn’t paid “their fair share” to support the DFL’s warped vision of government. Thanks to information included in Rep. Zach Dorholt’s e-letter update, we’ve got verification that the DFL just passed a massive tax increase on the middle class. Unfortunately, it’s mostly focused on small businesses. Here’s part of who’s getting victimized with the DFL’s middle class sales tax increases:
Commercial Equipment Repair:
Repairing and maintain electronic and precision equipment only if the service can be deducted as a business expense. Effective for sales made after June 30, 2013
TAXED if deducted as a business expense (purchased by a business), repair of the following items:
- cell phones, iPads, and similar devices
- computers, and everything that attaches to them like printers, monitors, and storage devices
- office equipment like photo copiers, scanners, and fax machines, CAD machines
- televisions, video and digital recorders and players
- communications equipment like two way radios, land line phones, and satellite dishes
- radar and sonar equipment
- medical and scientific equipment like microscopes, x-ray machines, etc.
Here’s another victim of the sales tax increase:
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment
Labor to repair or maintain commercial and industrial machinery and equipment is taxable, even when the equipment is installed into real property. This includes:
- refrigerators and freezers
- Farm machinery used in agricultural production (Note: The repair or maintenance is not taxable if farm machinery is owned for personal use.)
- Logging equipment
- Manufacturing and production equipment
- Mechanical cleaning equipment (floor sweepers, washers/scrubbers, etc.)
- Mining equipment
- Other heavy machinery (front end loaders, cranes, bulldozers, back hoes, skid steers, forklifts, etc.)
- Restaurant equipment
- Truck scales (portable and real property)
The DFL’s sales tax increases will hit tons of mom-and-pop shops. Repairing logging equipment will now get hit with the DFL’s sales tax increase. That hits the middle class hard. Tons of these loggers are small businesspeople making $35,000-$50,000. They aren’t rich by anyone’s definition. Repairs of cell phones, iPads, computers, and printers will now be taxed. How many people will get hit with that DFL tax increase? Perhaps hundreds of thousands? Certainly tens of thousands will get hit, with only a tiny percentage of them being “the rich.”
Unfortunately, the DFL’s victimization of Minnesotans doesn’t stop there. Here’s another group of people getting hit
with the DFL’s middle class tax increase:
Examples of taxable electronic and precision equipment repair and maintenance:
- Power tools and shop equipment
- Computer equipment
- Office security system
- Sprinkler system in a production building
The DFL’s tax increases hit every income group in the state. Everyone will get hit with the DFL’s tax increases. What’s worst is that the DFL’s tax increase is paying off the DFL’s special interest allies while giving the average Minnesotan less effective government, especially less effective schools.
Think about this: the DFL raised taxes on everyone while repealing the Basic Skills Test for teachers. That isn’t just a bad deal for Minnesotans financially. It’s a terrible shafting of students who need high quality teachers so they can compete with people in other states and around the world.
What’s pathetic is that Gov. Dayton signed the DFL middle class tax increase into law at the same time he signed the repeal of the Basic Skills Test. What’s most pathetic is that Gov. Dayton signed the DFL middle class tax increase into law at the same time he signed the repeal of the Basic Skills Test requirement that he’d signed into law in 2011.
Does Gov. Dayton do whatever the DFL’s special interest supporters tell him to do? That’s what it looks like. There certainly isn’t proof that he’s ever stood up to the DFL’s special interest supporters. We certainly don’t need a governor who resembles a potted plant. We need a governor who thinks things through and acts in the best interest of all Minnesotans, not just the DFL’s special interest supporters.
Finally, St. Cloud needs a legislator who’s willing to tell his party’s leadership he won’t vote for legislation that hurts middle class families. St. Cloud needs a legislator who doesn’t vote according to the DFL’s special interest supporters’ wishes.
Karen Cyson’s monthly op-ed is stunningly propagandist in nature. Here’s a sampling of Cyson’s propaganda:
The right to vote for representation was a catalyst for the American Revolution. It wasn’t until 124 years later, in 1920 with the passage of the 19th Amendment, that women were given that right.
How patronizing then that the current conflagration about a child care providers union isn’t about whether to form a union, but whether the providers be allowed to vote on whether to form a union.
That’s right. Another 93 years later, many in a mostly male Minnesota government are telling a mostly female profession, “Now, now, little lady. We know what’s best for you. Don’t you go worrying your pretty little head over this dang union thing.”
If Ms. Cyson didn’t have a history of spewing liberal propaganda, I’d be upset. The truth is that Ms. Cyson didn’t accidentally get her facts badly wrong on this issue. It’s that she’s lying through her teeth.
I watched about 4 hrs. of the debate on the House floor. Rep. Mike Nelson carried the bill for the DFL. Rep. Nelson is “a trades business agent for the Lakes and Plains Regional Council of Carpenters and Joiners.” In short, he’s belonged to a carpenters union for over 20 years. While I can’t find his voting record on union issues, I’m betting the ranch it’s 100%.
By comparison, the chief Republicans fighting against the DFL’s child care unionization legislation were Rep. Mary Franson, Rep. Sarah Anderson and Rep. Joyce Peppin. Rep. Franson, in fact, read from a legal study from the law firm of Seaton, Peters and Revnew that talks about the NLRA, aka the National Labor Relations Act. Here’s a quote from the NLRA:
Federal law mandates that it is an unfair labor practice for an employer to “…dominate or interfere with the formation or administration of any labor organization or contribute financial or other support to it…” 29 U.S.C. 158 (a)(2)
One of the highlights of the child care debate came after Rep. Nelson said for the umpteenth time that the BMS, aka the Bureau of Mediation Services, “has been doing these elections for 40 years and they’ve been doing a fine job.” That’s when Rep. Anderson asked Rep. Nelson if the BMS had ever been audited. He admitted he didn’t know, at which point Rep. Anderson asked “Then how do you know that they’ve been doing a fine job?”
At another key point, Rep. Nelson argued against an amendment on the font size of the print on the mailer sent to child care providers. He held up a mailer that met the requirements of the amendment. Minutes later, Rep. Peppin introduced a mailer she’d gotten from the child care providers still outside the House floor at 4:05 am. Rep. Peppin showed that this mailer had lots of fine print that was difficult to read.
That’s before talking about Hollee Saville, the leader of the opposition to the DFL’s child care unionization efforts. Saying that Hollee is well-informed on this issue is understatement. She’s the heart and soul of the leadership that’s trying to defeat this illegal effort.
That’s before talking about the dozens of women outside the House floor who oppose the legislation. They outnumbered the pro-union child care advocates by a wide margin.
Ms. Cyson’s statement that an all-male gang of legislators told the women that they “know what’s best for you. Don’t you go worrying your pretty little head over this dang union thing” is pure bullshit. In fact, the DFL told the women child care providers that they knew best of how to run their child care small businessses. They did it by having Rep. Nelson, a pro-union man, repeatedly say that the “BMS has been doing these elections for 40 years and have been doing a fine job.”
That’s proof positive that the DFL, not a bunch of know-it-all men, told the women who run child chare small businesses they the DFL knows what’s best for these women. The DFL essentially said that these female entrepreneurs shouldn’t “worry their pretty little heads” about unionization.
Finally, Rep. Nelson admitted in an interview on WCCO radio that this was a payoff to AFSCME:
Thankfully, this legislation will be defeated in the federal court system. The NLRA is quite clear that it doesn’t allow business owners to “dominate or interfere with the formation or administration of any labor organization or contribute financial or other support to it.” Further, governments can’t say that private sector business owners are public sector union employees just because it says so.
Ms. Cyson should pay attention to the laws on the books. She shouldn’t be ignoring the ones she doesn’t like.
The day after the session ended, the GOP and DFL took flight to give people their take on the session. As is tradition, the DFL bragged about all the great things they did while the GOP talked about the destruction that the DFL did. This chart shows how much people will get hurt from the DFL tax increase:
While it’s true “the rich” will get hardest initially, the reality is that the tax increased levied at them will be paid by their customers. “The rich”, aka small businesses, will pay an additional $1.13 billion. Meanwhile, other employers will pay an additional $424,000,000. The middle class tax increases totals an additional $600,000,000.
At a time when middle class wages are stagnant, the DFL chose to burden the middle class with a significant tax increase. Of course, they’ll dispute that but that’s reality.
This year’s session will be known for its tax increases. Passing gay marriage will be characterized as historic but that isn’t what the average Minnesotan was thinking about. They’ve been hoping that the economy would start growing again. The DFL’s tax increase won’t help create jobs.
The business owners I’ve spoken with have said that they’re expecting job growth to level off. They aren’t expecting a big increase in unemployment, just a sharp decline in job growth.
The other thing they’re expecting is to see businesses leaving the state or expanding in other states rather than expanding in Minnesota.
The harsh reality is that the DFL’s budget grows government, not the economy. When government grows, economies either shrink or their growth slows significantly. Apparently, the DFL hasn’t figured that out.