Archive for the ‘Small Business’ Category
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.
Tuesday morning, GOP legislators, led by House Minority Leader Kurt Daudt and Senate Minority Leader David Hann, visited the St. Cloud Regional Airport to discuss the just-ended session. After brief presentations by Daudt and Hann, they opened things up for questions.
Rep. Daudt first noted that the DFL legislature raised taxes by “$2.1 billion” and fees by another $300,000,000. Sen. Hann and Rep. Daudt both talked about not needing that tax increase to solve a $627,000,000 deficit. Both legislators spoke about the need to spend money more wisely, with Sen. Hann noting that the DFL didn’t include any reforms in their budget or policy bills.
When asked about the $400,000,000 in property tax relief, Rep. Jennifer Loon verified that most of the relief came in the form of increased payments to cities and counties. When asked if LGA payment increases helped cities like Duluth, St. Paul and Minneapolis just spend more rather than provide property tax relief, Sen. Hann and Rep. Daudt said that there’s a history of that. Adding to that, Sen. John Pederson said that, while the DFL was screaming about people’s property taxes going up, St. Cloud’s property taxes were actually going down.
Another piece of legislation that was brought up was the energy bill. The bill passed in the House but, ultimately, it didn’t pass in the Senate. Still, it’s almost a guarantee that the DFL will bring it up early in 2014. Sen. Pederson said that one of the Senate DFL’s selling points for the legislation was that it would lower electric rates. Republicans questioned that talking point by asking why northern Minnesota needed the carve-out if their rates were dropping.
The most chilling part of the press conference was hearing Teresa Bohnen, the president of the St. Cloud Chamber of Commerce talk about how businesses are hurting and that the tax bill won’t help with that. Afterwards, Rep. Daudt said that businesses are planning ahead for the tax increases. He then said that that’s why job growth is slowing down. Rep. Daudt said that we won’t see a spike in unemployment but that we’re likely to see job creation stagnate.
The other point they made was that, while the middle class won’t get directly hit with tax increases, the middle class will get hit with higher priced products as a result of the tax increases on “the rich.” Rep. Jeff Howe said that the warehousing tax will trigger higher prices, adding that that tax increase “wasn’t well thought out.”
It’s no longer debatable whether the DFL hates business. They certainly hate entrepreneurs. Rep. Ryan Winkler’s minimum wage legislation is the ultimate combination of nanny-statism and heavyhanded government:
The Minnesota House likely will approve a minimum wage increase later this week, after a committee Monday expanded the bill’s reach by doubling state-required parental leave for a new child.
Under the amended measure by Rep Ryan Winkler, DFL-Golden Valley, employers would be required to grant 12-week leaves after a birth or adoption.
The House Ways and Means Committee tacked the provision onto Winkler’s bill that aims to raise the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour in 2015 from today’s $6.15. Then the wage would automatically increase.
Why would employers do business in a state that requires 12 weeks of maternity leave? For an employer, that means an extra 6 weeks of doing without an employee. That’s almost a fourth of the year without an employee. This is nanny-statism that’d make Michael Bloomberg proud.
That’s before talking about raising the minimum wage by almost 50% in 3 years. To cover the cost of higher wages, they’ll hire fewer people. Rep. Winkler should rename his legislation the ‘Growing the Nanny State and Killing Jobs bill’ because that’s what this bill will do.
A few weeks ago, Rep. Winkler tried spinning his legislation by saying that raising the minimum wage doesn’t hurt employment. At the time, I argued that that isn’t accurate. It’s true that raising the minimum wage doesn’t always hurt employment. It’s equally true that there are times, like during a weak economy, when raising the minimum wage kills jobs.
Businesses that are having trouble making money simply won’t hire people if the cost of wages increases. When the increased minimum wage is increased dramatically, like what’s being done in Rep. Winkler’s legislation the hiring freeze is that much more dramatic.
Further, employers seeking to expand will cross Minnesota off their list of destinations when they see this level of regulation and overbearing government. Business starts will shrink. Mitch’s post shows that people are already leaving Minnesota:
Though data can deliver mixed messages, data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) point to one clear and worrisome fact: Minnesotans and their wealth are moving to Southern and Western states. Between 1995 and 2010, an average of $340 million in income—based on 2010 dollars—moved each year from Minnesota to other states—a movement totaling more than $5 billion over 15 years. The states that on net receive the most Minnesota income tend to be low tax states such as Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, and Washington.
It pains me to say this but it’s got to be said: Minnesota isn’t special anymore. The lakes are still beautiful. The woods are still picturesque. The regulatory burden is excessive. Do-gooder organizations like Conservation Minnesota are attempting to kill industry in northern Minnesota. Tax rates are confiscatory. The special interests, aka AFSCME, MAPE and ABM, run the DFL. They say jump. The DFL asks ‘off what’?
Sacred cows abound within the budget. Bills pass through this legislature because we have to ‘invest in higher education’ or all-day Pre-K or whatever else the special interests demand of the DFL.
It’s time for the DFL to wake up to the fact that they’ve reached a breaking point on excessive taxation, irresponsible spending and overregulation. These statistics prove that people are voting with their mortgages (and their feet) on what’s excessive.
These paragraphs are a stinging indictment of Rep. Winkler’s bill:
Republicans and business leaders generally said the higher wage would hurt Minnesota firms. “There is no capacity on Main Street to absorb any more expense,” Rep. Jim Abeler, R-Anoka, said.
Rep. Bud Nornes, R-Fergus Falls, said he talked to a restaurateur who makes $60,000 profit a year. The new minimum wage requirement would cost him $60,000, Nornes said. “Why should he stay in business?” Nornes asked. “We’re going to lose some.”
As damning as that information is, and it’s plenty damning, it’s nothing compared with this admission:
However, Rep. Tim Mahoney, DFL-St. Paul, added: “It is a small number of businesses that will be hurt.”
Isn’t that reassuring. It’s only a few businesses that will get hurt. I’m sure that’ll ease those businesses’ minds.
The DFL can argue all it wants but capital flight from Minnesota exists. It’s just that the delusional idiots running the DFL think it doesn’t exist. In the end, reality trumps theory.
At the start of this session, I said that the DFL would sail through because Alida Messinger would give them their marching orders. When Gov. Dayton introduced his bill, businesses far and wide criticized it for imposing a sales tax on transactions between businesses and lawyers, accountants and other service providers. When the House DFL introduced their tax bill, it was criticized for imposing a gigantic, disastrous income tax increase, raising the top income tax rate from 7.85% to 12.49%. It’s difficult to imagine how the Senate DFL’s tax bill could be worse.
Difficult but no longer impossible:
Democrats in the state Senate released a plan today that increases income taxes on wealthiest 6 percent of Minnesotans, raises the sales tax on clothing and services, and increases the cigarette tax.
Republicans don’t like it and even some Democrats in competitive districts are uneasy about the taxes and spending. But DFL leaders say the $1.8 billion dollar tax increase is needed to erase the state’s budget deficit and increase spending for schools and property tax relief.
It’s incredible that the Senate DFL took the worst part of Gov. Dayton’s tax proposal, the sales tax increase on services, watered down the worst part of the House DFL’s tax increase, then added their own terrible wrinkle by raising income taxes on the middle class.
While Senate DFL leaders praise the bill as good tax policy, some of their rank-and-file members remain apprehensive about it.
“This is going to be a hard one for me to support,” said first-term DFL Sen. Melisa Franzen. Franzen, who represents the swing district of Edina, Minnetonka and Bloomington, worries the bill could harm the state’s business climate.
“If the cost of doing business in Minnesota is going to rise and small business is going to be impacted, that is something that I have to take into account,” Franzen said.
Sen. Greg Clausen, DFL-Apple Valley, worries about the income tax portion of the bill, but said he thinks many of his constituents could live with it since the bulk of the extra spending is dedicated to education.
“There certainly are people out there that say ‘no new taxes.’ Whenever they see a tax they don’t support that,” Clausen said. “But I think there is also a group of people who recognize that there are needs in our state.”
First, Sen. Rest is wrong that the Senate bill is “good tax policy.” It isn’t good tax policy raising the cigarette tax because it’ll significantly hurt convenience stores while cutting cigarette tax revenues without reducing smoking.
Hurting retailers and Minnesota’s general fund while doing nothing to tamp down smoking is a nasty negative trifecta of tax policy.
Second, there’s no way the cost of doing business in Minnesota doesn’t increase. Businesses will get hit with higher income taxes & higher business costs thanks to the sales taxes on services. That’s before talking about how the cigarette tax increase will hurt convenience store sales.
If the DFL doesn’t pull its act together quickly, they’ll find lots of complaints on the campaign trail next year.
This Strib/DFL hit piece is what I’ve been expecting considering the infighting between Ann Lenczewski and Tom Bakk over their tax increase bills. Here’s the lede in Neal St. Anthony’s Strib article:
Regardless, businesspeople aren’t united on these issues. Case in point: Even “United for Jobs” members are lobbying for increased funding for their favorite causes or to retain their tax breaks.
And not every businessperson opposes a tax hike if Dayton can make the case.
“An increase in the marginal income tax rate would have no affect on our business or whether to expand,” said Harvey Zuckman, 62, executive vice president and an owner of Minneapolis-based FirstTech, who also is president of the Twin Cities Metro Independent Business Alliance.
“Our hiring decisions are based on consumer demand and revenue. I put the question to our MetroIBA members and a number had a similar response.”
By St. Anthony’s standards, anything short of unanimity of opinion equals division within the anti-tax increase ranks. It didn’t occur to St. Anthony that there are lots of disagreements within the business community. Apparently, St. Anthony isn’t too sharp on DFL tax increase history. Apparently, St. Anthony doesn’t know about this DFL tax increase disaster. Similarly, St. Anthony isn’t aware of Gene Pelowski’s opposition to Rep. Lenczewski’s 2009 ‘tax reform’ legislation:
Pelowski said lawmakers won’t have enough votes to override a Pawlenty veto of a DFL tax plan, and said the proposals are a “fiction” that will force lawmakers to scramble to craft another budget proposal after Pawlenty’s veto. “We have to do what is real and not go through an exercise of what-ifs,” Pelowski said. “There are no what-ifs. There is only the stark reality of this budget deficit.”
This year’s fight within the DFL on the differing tax increase proposals isn’t something unanticipated. Here’s a post I wrote about the infighting within the DFL over Rep. Lenczewski’s ‘tax reform’ proposal from 2009:
“This bill proposes the most significant tax overhaul in 20 years,” said the bill’s chief author Rep. Ann Lenczeswki, DFL-Bloomington.
In addition to the tax hikes, Lenczewski’s bill removes a variety of tax breaks for homeowners and businesses. Charitable contributions, the mortgage interest tax deduction and the property tax deduction for homeowners are eliminated and replaced with a tax credit based on income. The bill also eliminates several business tax breaks, like the Research and Development credit and parts of the governor’s JOBZ program.
Lenczewski said she wants to clean up the state’s tax code. “Which is to sweep the tax code clean of all of the preferential treatment and subsidies and things we can’t afford anymore and instead bring a fairer, more progressive income tax to Minnesotans based on the ability to pay,” she said.
Here’s Sen. Bakk’s response to Rep. Lenczewski’s proposed tax increase:
Senate Taxes Committee Chairman Tom Bakk, DFL-Cook, said eliminating the current mortgage interest deduction could hurt Minnesota’s high rate of home ownership and higher alcohol taxes would drive some liquor shoppers across the Wisconsin border.
Simply put, the DFL has been split on which taxes should get increased for years. The notion that the business community is hopelessly split in its opposition to Gov. Dayton’s tax increases is DFL spin.
Convenience store operators think that raising the cigarette tax will hurt their retail outlets. What’s more, they can verify the fact that the DFL’s cigarette tax increase will hurt their businesses.
With regards to the Dayton/DFL income tax increase on “the rich”, Teresa Bohnen really has talked with 4 different companies who will likely expand their companies in other states:
St. Cloud Area Chamber of Commerce President Teresa Bohen says she’s recently talked with four local companies who say they may have to transfer their investments to other states, if the Governor’s plan goes through.
Most important in this is whether the Dayton-DFL tax increases will hurt Minnesota’s economy, strengthen Minnesota’s economy or cause Minnesota’s economy to tread water, gaining a little hear, hurting a little there.
What’s most likely to happen as a result of the Dayton-DFL tax increase is that convenience stores will get hurt, some businesses that were started in Minnesota will expand in other states while other businesses won’t be affected by the tax increases. In other words, the best Minnesota should hope for from the Dayton-DFL tax increase is for Minnesota’s economy to continue treading water.
That’s unacceptable. Then again, that’s what doesn’t get reported when the Strib writes articles that could pass for DFL press releases.
Tags: Ann Lenczewski, Tax Reform, Tom Bakk, Mortgage Interest Tax Deduction, Mark Dayton, Tax Increases, Cigarette Tax, Liquor Tax, Unemployment, Economic Stagnation, Outmigration, Convenience Stores, Gene Pelowski, DFL, Teresa Bohnen, St. Cloud Chamber of Commerce Small Businesses, Capitalism
Whether you’re rich or poor, young or old, the House DFL’s tax plan will raise everyone’s taxes, with the exception of Baxter Healthcare Corp. Here’s the House DFL tax plan:
Minnesota House Democrats are looking to fetch $2.5 billion by raising taxes on people with high incomes, those who smoke and those who drink alcohol. A tax package released Monday boosts those taxes to balance the budget, cut property taxes and increase school aid.
Including a temporary surcharge on top earners, Minnesota would carry the nation’s third highest tax rate.
In other words, the House DFL’s plan would raise everyone’s taxes. Gov. Dayton and the DFL frequently fight, at least verbally, for a more progressive tax system. In reality, the DFL fights for raising taxes, whether they’re progressive or regressive.
Gov. Dayton and the DFL frequently complain that “the rich aren’t paying their fair share.” If they truly believe that, why did the House DFL make cigarette and liquor tax increases a central part of their tax bill? House Speaker Paul Thissen says alcohol and cigarette tax allows the state to recoup the health effects, etc. caused by alcohol and tobacco.
What Thissen isn’t talking about is the verifiable fact that raising those taxes a) loses money for the state’s general fund, b) hurts small businesses like convenience stores and c) creates an underground economy.
QUESTION TO SPEAKER THISSEN: Why pass a tax increase that hurts small businesses and will create a revenue shortfall?
Then there’s the DFL’s plan to raise income taxes on “the rich who aren’t paying their fair share.” The top rate, including the DFL’s surcharge, will be 12.49%. Those companies just got hit with a barrage of federal tax increases, including the employer mandate tax increase and the tax increase on health insurance policies.
QUESTIONS FOR SPEAKER THISSEN: Do you think these companies will just continue to let you tax away their profits? Why does the DFL insist on tax increases, knowing that the DFL’s tax increase will lead to companies leaving Minnesota?
St. Cloud Area Chamber of Commerce President Teresa Bohnen says she’s recently talked with four local companies who say they may have to transfer their investments to other states if the Governor’s plan goes through.
Speaker Thissen can’t resist raising taxes even though he knows the DFL’s tax increases will hurt Minnesota’s economy. That’s because ideology is more important to the DFL than creating a flourishing economy.
The DFL’s policy of raising taxes on everyone will undermine Minnesota’s recovering economy. The DFL’s plan to raise tax rates to unprecedented and unjustifiable levels is, at minimum, counterproductive. At most, it’s foolish. Unfortunately, most of the DFL’s tax policies will become law. The good news is that these tax increases will inspire people to vote the DFL out of office in 2014.
MN2020, the progressive think tank run by former DFL gubernatorial candidate Matt Entenza, is defending Gov. Dayton’s budget:
Minnesota 2020, a progressive think tank that defends Minnesota’s tradition of higher taxes and higher spending, has released a new report suggesting those raw figures are seriously misleading.
Adjust for inflation and the ups and downs in state general fund spending caused by accounting shifts and federal stimulus funding in previous budget cycles and the numbers show a different picture: $40.6 billion in spending in 2002-03, $35.4 billion in the current budget, $35.7 billion in the upcoming budget if Dayton gets his way, and $37 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars for 2016-17.
Even if the governor, who wants to raise income taxes on the wealthiest 2 percent of Minnesotans to support higher spending, is able to enact his entire budget, less than a third of the real-dollar cuts of the past decade would be restored, said Jeff Van Wychen, director of tax policy for Minnesota 2020.
“These cuts are eroding Minnesota’s fiscal foundation and they need to be reversed,” said Van Wychen during a press conference in St. Peter, one of three held by the organization in southern Minnesota Tuesday.
Van Wychen’s alarmist rhetoric should be ignored. When Andy Aplikowski wrote this post, he highlighted the DFL’s habit of saying one thing, then doing another. Here’s the Pi-Press article Andy highlighted:
Following a hush-hush courtship, top Minnesota lawmakers acknowledged Tuesday, April 16, that they are compiling a multimillion-dollar package of public subsidies and tax breaks to encourage an Illinois-based pharmaceutical firm to add 200 high-paying jobs and undertake a substantial construction project in their state.
The extent of the public offerings is becoming known months into a high-level recruitment. The name of the company, Baxter Healthcare Corp., had been constrained by a confidentiality agreement entered into by Gov. Mark Dayton’s administration. Even lawmakers who have begun voting on the package didn’t know which firm would benefit.
In other words, the Dayton administration is fine with cutting taxes if they’re picking the winners and losers. This proves that the Dayton administration isn’t that worried with “the rich” paying “their fair share” as long as cutting taxes on corporations creates jobs. The DFL won’t admit that they’d be better off cutting taxes across the board and letting companies flourish.
Whether it’s the DFL or their political allies like MN2020, they simply won’t admit that they’re hurting Minnesota’s economy with their high tax, high regulation economic agenda.
This is yet another admission that the DFL’s legislative agenda doesn’t lead to creating jobs. The only time the DFL’s economic agenda creates jobs is when they throw their legislation out the window.
Van Wychen’s talk about inflation-adjusted budget figures quietly avoids talking about the money that’s appropriated that’s totally wasted on foolishness. It’s a clever tactic to ignore a real problem by talking about something that isn’t a problem. Inflation-adjusted budgets assume, incorrectly, that a) government operations can’t and haven’t been improved and b) every penny appropriated in 2002 was spent efficiently.
It’s foolish to think that every penny of any biennial budget was spent on something we need and was spent efficiently. That’s like believing that businesses can’t grow without the government’s assistance.
The bottom line on these discussions is that a) the Dayton administration just admitted that his economic policies don’t work and b) budgets should be based on spending money efficiently on the things we need, not what special interests want. On that count, the DFL is 0-for-2.
Don Davis’ post about the DFL’s budget is enlightening. There isn’t any doubt that the DFL wants to raise taxes. The question is which taxes they want to raise and how much they’d raise taxes by. Then there’s the question about getting the House to agree with the Senate and the legislature to agree with Gov. Dayton.
There’s still no doubt in my mind that it’ll get ironed out. Similarly, there’s no doubt that the DFL’s tax increases will stunt job growth. There’s no doubt that some businesses will expand outside of Minnesota rather than in Minnesota.
Bill Glahn thinks that the DFL will pass a budget on time. That said, he thinks it’ll need fixing:
The budget will be passed before the “end” of session. Even if they have to cover up the clock to pretend midnight has not passed, even if they have to come back and fix it in special session.
The budget and much else will be passed at the last second, with bare partisan majorities, in massive bills that no single human being will have read all the way through before they are signed into law.
It will all be hailed as a once-in-a-generation political triumph. Until…months later…when someone gets around to reading the bills passed…and we all wonder: now what?
The thing isn’t only about the confusion within the DFL, though that’s certainly part of the problem. The biggest problem is that the DFL doesn’t have a pro-growth economic agenda. The DFL’s hostility towards businesses is getting noticed by businesses. The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce gets that. Here’s part of what Jason Bernick, a member of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce said recently:
I’ve often heard Governor Dayton say that “you’re entitled to your own opinion but you’re not entitled to your own facts.” I have a great deal of respect for Governor Dayton as he has always been a good listener who has maintained a respectful discussion. However, since the beginning of this session, I have noticed this quality has been degrading and becoming disrespectful in Governor Dayton.
Teresa Bohnen, the president of the St. Cloud Chamber of Commerce, has talked with 4 companies who are thinking of expanding. During Gov. Dayton’s townhall meeting, she spoke out against the jobs that would be lost if the legislature creates a fourth tier of income taxes. She said that these businesses might expand elsewhere if the legislature passes that higher income tax tier. Gov. Dayton, like the DFL legislature, doesn’t take these warning signs seriously.
In the end, the omnibus spending bills will be significantly bigger than those passed by the GOP legislature. The Tax Bill will include some major increases, some of which will hurt convenience stores. That isn’t the right path to prosperity.
Friday night on Almanac, Rep. Pat Garofalo exposed Rep. Ryan Winkler’s opposition to small business during their debate on Rep. Winkler’s minimum wage legislation. Here’s the transcript of the opening exchange between Rep. Garofalo and Rep. Winkler:
REP. GAROFALO: Today, I was talking with a small business owner in Apple Valley named Erin. She runs Revive Salon in Apple Valley. She was talking to me today that, as a small business owner, she pays more in taxes to the government than she takes home for her family and the Winkler proposal will increase her costs by $5,000. Now Erin knows a lot about her business. She knows how to price her products and she knows she can price it at a maximum price before people are going to stop purchasing those services. Unfortunately, this is an unfunded mandate so the question I’d have for Rep. Winkler and anyone that supports the minimum wage would be how are businesses supposed to pay for these increases?
REP. WINKLER: That’s just the same old line that businesses that oppose the minimum wage have used every single time it’s been increased. In fact, all the evidence, all the history since the minimum wage was enacted in 1938 shows that there’s been no negative impact on employment.
Apparently, Rep. Winkler thinks he knows what’s best for businesses, though there’s no history of him having run a successful small business.
What’s worse is that Rep. Winkler apparently isn’t interested in what small businesses are saying or the effect his legislation will have. The fact that he’s willing to dismiss legitimate issues without a discussion indicates that he isn’t interested in employers.
I wish I could say that I’m surprised but I’d have to ignore this post about how rudely Gov. Dayton was towards St. Cloud business leaders recently. Whether it’s Gov. Dayton or Rep. Winkler, the DFL’s hostility towards businesses isn’t difficult to find.
Thoughtful people know that it isn’t credible to first be hostile to employers, then say that you’re pro jobs.
The ‘proof’ that Rep. Winkler supposedly has that increasing the minimum wage doesn’t affect employment is ignoring reality. Anyone thinking that increasing businesses’ costs during difficult economic times simply doesn’t think staying competitive is important. Apparently, that’s the DFL’s belief, because that’s the playbook they’re following.
Columnist John Cass has written a column about a disturbing incident in Chicago. Here’s the video that’s going viral:
Kass’s column got my blood boiling. This is what got me started:
The video, posted by the Tribune’s Breaking News Center, shows in vivid and frightening detail how armed thugs robbed a gift and sports store Tuesday in the Logan Square neighborhood.
You can see the gunman demand the money. You see the store owner’s brother-in-law with a gun to his head. You see the shots being fired, and the bat wielded by a wounded and desperate Luis Quizhpe, the 62-year-old proprietor who fought for his life.
That’s what got me started but this is what’s got me seeing red:
On Wednesday we called Roderick Drew, spokesman for Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s Law Department, who told us that store owners are prohibited from carrying handguns.
“A business owner can register a long gun (rifle or shotgun) for their fixed place of business, but it has to stay on the premises,” Drew said. “The business owner cannot register or bring a handgun to his place of business. The only place a person can lawfully have a handgun is the home.”
Chicago’s and Illinois’ royalty are protected but shop owners are without protection. Rahm Emanuel is part of that royalty. He’s protected. Mr. Quizhpe isn’t part of that royalty. He was shot. Repeatedly. If Mr. Quizhpe had used a handgun to defend himself, there’s little doubt that Emanuel would’ve had him arrested and prosecuted.
During the Clinton administration, President Clinton talked about “people that work hard and played by the rules.” He suggested that he’d fight for them. In Emanuel’s Chicago, “people that work hard and play by the rules” get shot while the city turns a blind eye towards the victims:
Quizhpe said he’s considering selling the store his family has run for decades.
“I’ve been thinking about selling everything off and changing my business,” he said. “The reality is, with everything going on, it’s difficult to put myself and my family in danger.”
Democrats frequently talk about hunting when the conversation turns to the Second Amendment. That isn’t what the Second Amendment is about. It’s about the right of the citizenry to protect themselves from criminals and tyrant politicians like Emanuel. Chicago is doing everything possible to prevent people from protecting their families and businesses.
That’s clearly a violation of Mr. Quizhpe’s Second Amendment rights. Thankfully, Kass has written about this horrific event:
Anti-gun policy wonks talk in abstract terms. But it’s not abstract for victims. It’s not abstract for Quizhpe. And it wasn’t abstract for Michael Kozel, 57, who for 20 years owned a muffler shop in the Gage Park neighborhood. On Jan. 3 he was shot dead in the back by robbers, one of the 42 homicides that month. Chicago has already forgotten his name.
Politicians that won’t let citizens protect themselves from gun-toting thugs should be run out of office. There’s no chance that Emanuel will be run out of office. He’ll be praised by gun control activists across the nation. That’s the definition of being un-American. There’s nothing more un-American than acting like royalty while telling the citizenry that they can’t protect themselves.
When will Chicago take its city back? When will they admit that shopkeepers have the right to protect themselves against violent thugs?