Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Mark Dayton category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Mark Dayton’ Category

According to this article, Minnesota’s AFL-CIO is putting partisanship ahead of the Constitution. The proof comes when they wrote “Working Minnesotans applaud Governor Dayton’s move to appeal today’s court decision. The Republican budget is a bonanza of tax giveaways to corporate CEOs coupled with toxic policies that weaken teacher standards and demonize immigrants.”

Apparently, the Minnesota AFL-CIO hasn’t figured it out that Gov. Dayton signed those bills into law without a gun pointed at his head. Gov. Dayton wasn’t coerced into signing the budget bills. He didn’t like signing the bill that changed teacher licensure. Gov. Dayton certainly tried forcing Republicans into passing a Real ID law that could be given to illegal aliens. Unlike a handful of DC Republicans, Minnesota Republicans stood up to Gov. Dayton. They told him what they weren’t willing to include in bills, then kept their promise.

The Minnesota AFL-CIO is acting like an obedient subsidiary of the DFL. They’re acting like the DFL’s obedient prison bitch. By saying “Republicans can avoid further wasting taxpayer dollars by returning to the table with Governor Dayton to negotiate a budget that is fair to working people and reflects Minnesota values”, they’re simply repeating Gov. Dayton’s words.

Speaking of Gov. Dayton, he’s still pretending that he’s got some leverage:

It is unfortunate that Republican legislative leaders are using this ruling to avoid completing their work.

The legislature’s work is finished, thanks in large part to Gov. Dayton negotiating this year’s budget, then signing those budget bills. If Gov. Dayton wants some bills changed, he’ll have to sweeten the pot. At this point, that isn’t likely to happen.

Briana Bierschbach’s article is instructive in what it gets wrong:

Another key question of the case was whether eliminating funding for the Legislature is the same thing as effectively abolishing it. That’s what the Legislature argued, and in the ruling, Guthmann unequivocally agreed.

The argument isn’t that Gov. Dayton’s line-item veto effectively abolished the legislature. It’s whether Gov. Dayton’s line-item veto forces legislators to perform essential responsibilities without getting paid. Does Gov. Dayton have the constitutional right to tell legislators that they must continue performing constituent services without compensation? The DFL should think twice before answering that question. Should Republicans have the right to appropriate no money for Gov. Dayton’s commissioners’ salaries?

Legislators have an affirmative responsibility to perform constituent services. Gov. Dayton shouldn’t have the authority to tell legislators they have to work for nothing.

Dayton wasn’t actually opposed to the level of funding passed for the Legislature’s operations, but Sam Hanson, Dayton’s attorney, said that didn’t matter. The state constitution gives the governor the power to line-item veto budget provisions for whatever reason he chooses, he argued, and the wisdom of those decisions cannot be questioned by the other branches of government.

That’s what arrogance sounds like.

After reading a frightening quote from this article, it’s fair to question whether Gov. Dayton is partially dishonest or mostly dishonest.

The article quotes Gov. Dayton as saying “It is unfortunate that Republican legislative leaders are using this ruling to avoid completing their work.” Apparently, Gov. Dayton’s staff hasn’t made sure that he’s taking his medication. Apparently, Gov. Dayton hasn’t noticed that he signed all of the budget bills. Apparently, Gov. Dayton is pretending that his veto eliminating the Legislative Branch is constitutional even though a judge has said it isn’t.

In his ruling, Judge Guthmann said “The court concludes that the Governor’s vetoes violated the Separation of Powers clause of the Minnesota Constitution because they both nullified a branch of government and refashioned the line-item veto as a tool to secure the repeal or modification of policy legislation unrelated to the vetoed appropriation.”

Judge Guthmann continued, saying “Absent emergency court funding, the effective abolition will exist as long as the Governor decides to veto legislative funding bills submitted to him, which the Governor’s counsel conceded could occur through the remainder of the Governor’s term. The Governor argues that the vetoes abolished or defunded the legislature. However emergency funding is at most a temporary measure to preserve the constitutional rights of the people while the Executive and Legislative Branches resolve their differences. Emergency funding is not a remedy for arguably unconstitutional actions by one branch of government against another.”

Gov. Dayton, is your appeal based on the belief that you stacked the Minnesota Supreme Court with DFL ideologues who will rule with you no matter what? (Actually, I’m fairly confident the Minnesota Supreme Court will get this right because I can’t imagine how they’d argue that the Legislative Branch isn’t an essential part of the government.) If Gov. Dayton’s justices rule that the legislature isn’t essential, they’ll be instant laughingstocks.

Gov. Dayton and Rebecca Otto are both appealing their lawsuits to the Supreme Court. Gov. Dayton is virtually assured of losing while Otto is likely to lose. Side note: Whatever the rulings in the Dayton and Otto lawsuits are, they’re frivolous and extreme wastes of taxpayers’ money. It’s more proof that the DFL doesn’t care about other people’s money.

Wednesday afternoon, Judge John Guthmann ruled that Gov. Dayton’s veto of funding for the legislature was unconstitutional. In his ruling, Judge Guthmann said “The court concludes that the Governor’s vetoes violated the Separation of Powers clause of the Minnesota Constitution because they both nullified a branch of government and refashioned the line-item veto as a tool to secure the repeal or modification of policy legislation unrelated to the vetoed appropriation.”

Judge Guthmann continued, saying “Absent emergency court funding, the effective abolition will exist as long as the Governor decides to veto legislative funding bills submitted to him, which the Governor’s counsel conceded could occur through the remainder of the Governor’s term. The Governor argues that the vetoes abolished or defunded the legislature. However emergency funding is at most a temporary measure to preserve the constitutional rights of the people while the Executive and Legislative Branches resolve their differences. Emergency funding is not a remedy for arguably unconstitutional actions by one branch of government against another.”

Unfortunately, Gov. Dayton immediately announced that he was appealing the ruling within minutes of hearing the ruling:

“Today’s District Court ruling is only a preliminary step in this case’s judicial process. The Stipulation, which the House, Senate, and I filed with the District Court Judge in June, states, ‘The parties agree to jointly seek accelerated review by the Minnesota Supreme Court of the District Court’s order or judgment.’ Accordingly, I have asked Sam Hanson, my legal counsel, to appeal this decision to the Minnesota Supreme Court.”

It isn’t required that Gov. Dayton appeal Judge Guthmann’s ruling. Gov. Dayton could simply announce that he isn’t appealing the ruling. Instead, Gov. Dayton has chosen to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a lawsuit he doesn’t have a chance of winning.

Speaker Daudt weighed in:

What’s particularly hurtful to Gov. Dayton was his attorney admitting that this “could occur through the remainder of the Governor’s term.” To be fair, Hanson was put in a difficult, near-impossible situation. That’s what happens when your client is a jackass. Hanson’s argument was weak, though, too:

But Dayton’s attorney says the governor has broad authority to veto appropriations.

I can’t deny that governors have “broad authority to veto appropriations.” That isn’t what Gov. Dayton did in this instance. When he line-item vetoed the legislature’s operating budget, he didn’t just veto an ordinary appropriation. Gov. Dayton also vetoed funding for an entire branch of government. That type of chutzpah can’t be tolerated.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

Last week, Gov. Dayton recommended that a fund be started to instruct police officers. At Gov. Dayton’s announcement, unfortunately, the most well-received speaker was Valerie Castile, Philando Castile’s mother.

That’s mostly because Gov. Dayton proposed that the training fund be named after Philando Castile. That didn’t sit well with the police. Their response was that “Still, the topic of naming the fund came up. Dennis Flaherty, a former executive director of the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association who was at the meeting, said it was ‘fair to say there was disagreement’ in the law enforcement community over naming the fund.”

Castile’s mother was well-received because she said “At the end of the day, everyone wants to go home. The police wants to go home and the civilian wants to go home. And if we can combine and work together as human beings that will happen. We got to learn how to communicate better with each other. We’re supposed to be the most intelligent species on the planet, but look (at) what we do to one another. We’re worse off than some animals, that just go around and prey on people.”

A loyal reader of LFR told me that Philando Castile’s uncle has participated in some meetings designed to work on police training issues. I was told that Castile’s uncle, for whatever it’s worth, is fairly level-headed. That’s believable in light of this paragraph:

Of police, she said, “We need them because the world would be chaotic if we didn’t have the police. Don’t get me wrong: I love having the police to protect and serve us. But when it comes to the point where there’s miscommunication and it turns out the way it turned out for my son, it’s unacceptable.”

This is a tragedy. This is the dashcam video of the shooting:

Gov. Dayton, unfortunately, spoke before he had the facts in the shooting. When he spoke, Gov. Dayton said that Castile probably wouldn’t have gotten shot if he was white. Gov. Dayton said that not knowing that Officer Yanez is Hispanic. Gov. Dayton said that without seeing the video of the shooting.
Technorati: , , , ,

Hopefully, this will be the final article on the lawsuit between the Legislature and Gov. Dayton that Judge Guthmann will rule on. I’d hate to have to write another post about the SC Times’ dishonest Our View editorial. In that editorial, the Times editors wrote “As you probably recall, Dayton’s unprecedented decision to cut most funds to the Legislature as of Friday ended (or did it?) the 2017 session. He explained his decision as a way to get the Republican-led Legislature to negotiate a handful of measures to which he objected. And most certainly worth noting is that legislation forced Dayton to either accept the Republican tax bill or defund the state Department of Revenue.”

Actually, Gov. Dayton didn’t “cut most funds to the legislature.” As former Attorney Gen. Mike Hatch explained, the funding for the legislature is a single line. It’s a binary choice. It’s all or nothing. Gov. Dayton cut all funds for the legislature. Second, the Times didn’t mention that Gov. Dayton agreed to the tax relief he now wants to renegotiate.

Here’s a message to Gov. Dayton: You agreed to the tax relief. Twice. Now you want to renegotiate the bill you just signed. Instead of using such slippery tactics, try keeping your word instead. Dishonest politicians like you created the Trump administration.

Judge Guthmann ruled that the legislature is part of government’s core function. That means it’ll get funded.

Finally, it’s time to call the SC Times out for making both sides appear culpable for this fiasco. The DFL agreed to these budget deals. If they didn’t like them, they shouldn’t have agreed to them. The GOP tax relief plan provides tax relief to farmers and small businesses. The DFL plan allows government to get bigger and more intrusive.

It isn’t difficult to see which side is on the people’s side and which is on the special interests’ side.

Technorati: , , , ,

Friday night on Almanac’s roundtable, Mike Hatch said something that Gov. Dayton probably didn’t want him to say. First, Gov. Dayton wants to get Republicans to renegotiate parts of the bills Gov. Dayton signed. Speaker Daudt and Senate Majority Leader Gazelka have steadfastly refused to do that.

Specifically, Gov. Dayton wants Republicans to repeal parts of the Tax Bill and renegotiate the teacher licensure reform bill that Gov. Dayton signed. At this point, there’s no incentive for Republicans to renegotiate any of those things because, in Hatch’s opinion, Judge Guthmann essentially said that the legislature is a core function of government that has to be funded.

One of the precedents established by Minnesota’s courts is that things that are deemed core functions of government get funded.

Needless to say, the St. Cloud Times published an Our View editorial that’s virtually incomprehensible. The Times is famous for blaming both sides in a political fight. This time, it’s mostly Gov. Dayton’s fault, though you wouldn’t know that from the Times’ editorial:

In the wake of a judge’s ruling last week granting temporary funding for the Minnesota Legislature, let’s hope the lawsuit in need of the ruling drags on, and on and on and on, ideally until Election Day 2018.

Why? Perhaps if this lawsuit, paid for 100 percent with tax dollars, stays in the news that long, voters will have a top-of-mind reminder to finally cast ballots for state office holders whose top priority is public service through compromise, not political gamesmanship through stubbornness.

What the Times omits from their editorial is that none of this would’ve happened if Gov. Dayton hadn’t reneged on his promise to cut taxes in 2016. Originally, Gov. Dayton agreed to a massive tax relief package. After the legislature passed the bill with overwhelming bipartisan support, Gov. Dayton vetoed the bill.

Minnesota doesn’t need tons more “state office holders whose top priority is public service.” Minnesota needs one less dishonest governor who reneges on legislation that he’s agreed to sign. Let’s be clear. Gov. Dayton isn’t trustworthy. He’s proved that the last 2 years.

Finally, I hate to disappoint the Times editorialists but this lawsuit is virtually over. Gov. Dayton has lost the suit. The only thing that’ll save him is if the Minnesota Supreme Court rules that the entire legislative branch isn’t essential. That won’t happen because the Court would become a laughingstock.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

This article announcing Gov. Dayton’s appointing of a new chairperson of the Met Council highlights the possibility of that appointee facing pushback when her committee hearing is held.

According to the article, “The Met Council has new leadership. On Tuesday, Gov. Mark Dayton announced that current Chair Adam Duininck will step down from his role as head of the Met Council. In his place, Dayton announced the appointment of Minnesota State Rail Director Alene Tchourumoff to head the Met Council.”

Further into the article, Alpha reporter Preya Samsundar reports “Sen. Dave Osmek of Mound, who is expected to announce his candidacy for governor this summer, had been pushing pieces of legislation to reign in, and more recently, abolish the Met Council. On the last day of session, Osmek turned in a 214-page piece of legislation which states, “A bill for an act relating to local and state government; abolishing the Met Council.” Osmek has been pushing for reformation of the Met Council since 2015.”
Sen. Osmek’s credentials as a reformer are high. Jason Lewis’ reformer credentials are pretty high, too. Rep. Lewis is working hard in DC against organizations like the Met Council:

In Washington, Rep. Jason Lewis is also doing his part to ensure the council goes no further. In March, a bill authored by Lewis passed through the Transportation & Infrastructure Committee in the United States House of Representatives.

“Under the rule, the Met Council, a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), could have expanded their boundaries and taxed the suburbs to help fund downtown projects,” Lewis told Alpha News at the time. “We’re protecting the ability of local decision makers to do what works for their own communities.”

Thank goodness for Jason Lewis for protecting suburbs like Prior Lake, Shakopee and Chanhassen. Let’s hope we elect a Republican governor and keep our GOP majorities in the Minnesota House and Senate so we can, at minimum, stop the Met Council’s authority to tax people without representing people.

Right now, the Met Council ‘represents’ Gov. Dayton. They don’t represent the people. Still, they’ve been given the authority to levy taxes. There’s no way that’s right.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

This article highlights additional parts of Judge Guthmann’s ruling in the Legislature’s lawsuit against Gov. Dayton that don’t sound good for Gov. Dayton.

First, in my post, I highlighted Judge Guthmann’s statement saying that “the public would be irreparably harmed” by being deprived “of a basic constitutional right – a fully functioning Legislative Branch.”

In Judge Guthmann’s injunctive ruling, he wrote “In addition to the parties’ Stipulation that Count I of the Complaint is ripe for decision, the court also finds that the issues presented to the court in Count I of the Complaint are ripe and require a ruling from the court.”

Some Twin Cities pundits have suggested that it’s best that Judge Guthmann order the two sides to sit down and work out their differences. I’ve never agreed with that approach. The constitutional issues are too important. Gov. Dayton’s claims are too reckless. It isn’t possible to reconcile Gov. Dayton’s filings with principles befitting a democracy. If the courts finally rule that Gov. Dayton “has the absolute authority to line-item veto anything for any reason,” it’ll demolish the checks and balances in Minnesota’s constitution.

Judge John Guthmann might’ve given Minnesotans a hint as to how he would eventually rule on the legislature’s lawsuit against Gov. Dayton. Judge Guthmann ordered the “state budget chief to take all steps necessary” to fund the legislature.

In issuing that order, Judge Guthmann said “Absent (temporary) relief, the public would be irreparably harmed through the deprivation of a basic constitutional right —a fully functioning Legislative Branch.” That sounds to me like Judge Guthmann is leaning in the legislature’s direction. Gov. Dayton’s attorneys had argued that the “Governor has explicit and unqualified authority under the Minnesota Constitution to veto any line item of appropriation. The Minnesota Constitution authorizes the Governor’s line-item vetoes, without any qualification as to the Governor’s subjective intent or purpose.”

In his ruling, Judge Guthmann said that “the public would be irreparably harmed” by being deprived “of a basic constitutional right – a fully functioning Legislative Branch.” I said earlier this week that the line-item veto was a tool that might be used to shape budgets. Further, I wrote that doesn’t compare in importance to depriving the people of a basic constitutional right to representation.

This lawsuit shouldn’t have been needed. Gov. Dayton should’ve signed last year’s tax relief package. Vetoing that bill demolished Gov. Dayton’s credibility. That veto led to the GOP legislature to play hardball with Gov. Dayton this year. Thankfully, this was the last budget session Republicans will have to deal with Gov. Dayton.

Frankly, Gov. Dayton’s last day can’t come soon enough.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

John Jasinski’s op-ed in the Owatonna newspaper is hard-hitting and to the point. The point that caught my eye the most was when Sen. Jasinski said “But the biggest problem is the precedent it sets: if the governor’s decision is allowed to stand, then every future governor will effectively be able to hold the Legislature or Supreme Court hostage until they get everything they want. Imagine a governor withholding funding to the courts over a ruling they didn’t like. Gov. Dayton’s veto has opened that door.”

Think of the power that precedent would give a (God forbid) Gov. Thissen or Gov. Erin Murphy. Minnesota would turn into an autocratic state almost immediately. Let’s remember that Rep. Thissen already verbally abused paid staffers. Imagine what he’d do if the courts ruled in Gov. Dayton’s favor and Thissen became governor. It’s a frightening thought.

Another of Sen. Jasinski’s points came when he said “We also won’t be able to have session, so every urgent project will face another year without funding. Want Highway 14 to get done? Thanks to the governor’s action, we won’t be able to provide any more money for it until 2019. That goes for any other road, bridge, or infrastructure project, or any law that needs to be fixed.”

Gov. Dayton’s latest temper tantrum essentially stops the state for 2 years, though you wouldn’t know it if you got your information from the Twin Cities media’s reporting:

Gov. Dayton agreed to this budget, including the tax relief. He intended to veto this tax package just like he vetoed the tax relief package he agreed to last year. Gov. Dayton even accused Republicans of “political blackmail.” If anyone’s playing political blackmail, it’s Gov. Dayton. He agreed to the budget. Now, he’s trying to get Republicans to renegotiate major parts of the tax relief package.

Thank God Gov. Dayton won’t preside over another budget session. Every group of taxpayers is paying more taxes. Minnesotans aren’t getting more services for those additional taxes, either. It’s time he retired and spent more time with his family.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,