After not caring about the Polymet permitting process for years, Jim Oberstar finally cares. Sort of:

It’s been in the works for more than four years, but when the environmental review came out last fall, the federal government blasted the report as inadequate.

Oberstar says he wants a thorough review, but it shouldn’t take so long.

“The red tape, the slowdown, the lack of full attention by federal and state permitting agencies has dragged this process out much too long,” said Oberstar.

Oberstar said the No. 1 issue people talk about in northeastern Minnesota is jobs. And the Polymet mine promises 400 jobs.

“I’ve heard some concerns, ‘Be careful about our environment. We love this land, we don’t want our waters to be adversely affected.’ And I’ve assured people that corners will not be cut, there will be no exceptions made, but we have to do this in an expeditious manner,” he said.

It’s been 4 years since the permitting and inspection process started. Finally, it’s got the attention of Rep. Oberstar? Why didn’t he take interest before this? There’s a simple answer for why it’s finally got his attention: Tom Emmer has made this a focal point of the campaign and Sen. Dayton is looking like he doesn’t care about job creation.

Enter Rep. Oberstar to cut the red tape. Enter Rep. Oberstar so jobs can be created. What a great guy Rep. Oberstar is. For that matter, what a great guy Sen. Dayton is.

There’s just one problem with this picture. If Rep. Emmer hadn’t brought it up, and if the issue hadn’t gained traction, it’s likely that this project still wouldn’t be getting attention. Let’s remember that Sen. Dayton wasn’t worried about streamlining the permitting process during the final DFL debate before the primary.

As for Rep. Oberstar, why didn’t he take an interest in the process long before this? Polymet’s been run through the ringer for 5 years. Suddenly, he cares? Why didn’t he care before the MNGOP candidate brought it up at a debate? Why didn’t he care prior to Tom Emmer making this a major political issue?

Mining is the bread and butter of the Iron Range economy. Creating hundreds of jobs should’ve been Rep. Oberstar’s first priority. Iron Rangers now know that it wasn’t Oberstar’s top priority.

Chip Cravaack is the MNGOP-endorsed candidate for MN-08. Unlike ‘Lord Oberstar’, Cravaack will represent the district. That’s because he’s actually listening to the people of the Eighth District. Had Rep. Oberstar listened to his constituents, he would’ve taken an interest in Polymet sooner.

Instead, he jumped into action when his political ally, Sen. Dayton, got into political hot water. That’s just what I’d expect from the guy whose highest priority many years is getting bike paths built with highway Trust Fund money.

Sen. Dayton and Rep. Oberstar won’t represent Minnesota because they’re too busy catering to their political allies in the environmental movement.

Technorati: Polymet, Mining, Jobs, Tom Emmer, Debates, Permitting, Reform, Chip Cravaack, MNGOP, James Oberstar, Mark Dayton, Special Interests, Environment, DFL, Election 2010

During this morning’s press conference, Sen. Dayton was asked why his lawyers removed public documents. He acted as if they’d been magically lifted from the public’s view. He hinted that he didn’t have anything to do with those records not being part of the public record.

When MDE’s Luke Hellier asked Sen. Dayton if he’d instruct his attorneys to return the documents to the public record, Sen. Dayton replied that he didn’t think that that’s what people are interested in this election cycle.

With all due respect, that isn’t the issue. The issue is whether Sen. Dayton is fine with hiding things from his past. If he is, then that’s something that Minnesotans should know prior to Election Day.

Sen. Dayton, what are you hiding? Are you covering up things from your admitted history of depression and alcoholism? It’s impossible for Minnesotans to know since Sen. Dayton is being secretive. It isn’t that the documents are sealed. They were taken by Dayton’s lawyers.

When Luke asked another question, Sen. Dayton replied this way:

“Minnesotans are disgusted with negative campaign tactics. I trust they want to take the high road.”

If we had a real media, they’d ask Sen. Dayton why his family is running one dishonest ad after another about Tom Emmer. If we had a real media, they’d be asking why his allegedly detailed budget numbers add up to a big deficit. A real media would be asking whether Sen. Dayton would raise taxes on the middle class to cover the shortfall.

Sen. Dayton is counting on the media’s malpractice and double standards to keep letting him get away with saying that he abhors “negative campaign tactics” while his family uses dishonest “negative campaign tactics.”

It’s time that somebody told the truth about Sen. Dayton. Sen. Dayton doesn’t hate “negative campaign tactics” if they’re used against his opponent. Sen. Dayton’s detailed budget numbers add up to a whopping multi-billion dollar deficit. Sen. Dayton would raise taxes on middle class families and on the rich to pay for reckless spending habits. Sen. Dayton is counting on the media’s malpractice to hide this information from Minnesotans.

When Sen. Dayton comes clean about his attorney removing unsealed documents from the public record, when Sen. Dayton tells the SEIU, EdMinn and his family to stop lying about Tom Emmer, when Sen. Dayton stops omitting the part that he’ll need to raise taxes on the middle class, then he’ll have earned the public’s trust.

At this point, he isn’t even close to earning our trust. At this point, Sen. Dayton shouldn’t be trusted on anything he says other than his plan to increase spending.

It’s worth noting that the Agenda Media shouldn’t be trusted in their ‘reporting’ of the Dayton campaign. (It’s difficult to trust in something that only marginally exists, isn’t it?)

Technorati: Media Bias, Agenda Media, Mark Dayton, Divorces, Public Record, Transparency, Depression, Deficits, Tax Increases, Tax The Rich, Middle Class Tax Increases, ABM, Politics of Personal Destruction, DFL, Election 2010

Two of Esme Murphy’s guests this morning were U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar and State Sen. Tarryl Clark. If their mission was to insult Minnesotans’ intelligence, then their mission was accomplished. Let’s start with Sen. Klobuchar.

When asked about what needed to be done to get the economy moving, Sen. Klobuchar said that improving broadband access would be a major boost. While I think expanding broadband would be a positive thing if done the right way, I don’t think it’s the key to creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs.

Another of Sen. Klobuchar’s insulting statements was saying that we need to speed up approval rates for medical devices. This coming from the woman who voted to kill medical device manufacturing jobs when she voted for Obamacare? It’s time that Ms. Klobuchar admitted that she says one thing while doing another.

You can’t pretend to be the champion for medical device manufacturers after you’ve voted for a bill that will cripple medical device manufacturing.

State Sen. Tarryl Clark essentially repeated the lies she’s telling in her “Jim, the real voter” ad. She talked about how she’s fiscally responsible, how she’s voted to keep taxes down for 95 percent of Minnesotans and how she’s cut her office expenses.

I debunked each of those myths in this post. Tarryl can’t make those statements without omitting major votes that she’s cast. She can’t say that she’s consistently voted against raising taxes on 95 percent of Minnesotans when she voted for increasing the gas tax, the wheelage fee, the state sales tax (think Legacy Act) and the metro sales tax in the 7 county metro area.

As for Tarryl’s claim that she’s the fiscally responsible candidate in the race, that’s insulting and laughable. This statement was made by the woman who voted in 2007 for omnibus spending bills that would’ve increased state spending by 17 percent in the 2008-09 biennium. Fortunately, Gov. Pawlenty vetoed those bills.

SIDENOTE: The bills that Gov. Pawlenty vetoed had huge tails in them. Most of the bills had provisions in them that raised spending by even more enormous amounts in the out years.

During today’s interview, Tarryl bragged about voting to cut state spending by 10 percent. Tarryl’s attempting to take credit for cutting spending when the reality is that she told KSTP’s Tom Hauser that it would be almost impossible to cut spending by more than $500,000,000. Tarryl had to practically be dragged kicking and screaming to vote to cut spending by 10 percent.

Tarryl’s statements and Sen. Klobuchar’s statements aren’t surprising or unexpected. They’ve had a history of saying things that insult people’s intelligence. They also have a history of sounding reasonable at first listen. That disappears once you think things through and evaluate what they’ve said through the prism of facts.

Finally, it’s worth noting that today’s interviews were disappointing from a journalism standpoint. Esme Murphy accepted as fact everything that Tarryl Clark said. She didn’t ask how Tarryl could say she was fiscally responsible when she voted in 2007 to increase spending by almost 20 percent. That should’ve been automatic.

When Tarryl trotted out her “Washington isn’t working for the people and neither is Michele Bachmann” line, why didn’t Esme Murphy highlight the fact that Washington is being run by Democrats? Further, why didn’t Esme Murphy ask what things she disagrees with Speaker Pelosi on?

Last week, when she interviewed Tom Emmer, there were lots of tough questions. This week, none. I’m fine with Esme Murphy asking Tom Emmer tough questions. I just expect the same when she’s interviewing Tarryl Clark.

Technorati: Interview, Esme Murphy, Tarryl Clark, Tax Increases, Spendaholic, Spending Cuts, Amy Klobuchar, Medical Devices, Medical Device Tax, Broadband, Job Creation, Obamacare, DFL, Election 2010

Lori Sturdevant’s column purports to show the error in Rep. Emmer’s budget thinking. Instead, what it does is it exposes the flaw in the DFL’s thinking. This section is important in understanding the differences between Rep. Emmer’s thinking and Sen. Dayton’s thinking:

Add the federal money and the school IOU totals to 2010-11 general fund spending, and the sum is $34.6 billion. That’s $1.7 billion, or 5 percent, more than the expected state tax receipts in 2012-13.

So $1.7 billion is the real deficit? I asked Marx.

Not quite, he said. State budget forecasts project the cost of current state programs tomorrow. Since 2002, cost-of-living inflation has been excluded from the projections. (That bit of lawmaking legerdemain could be another chapter in my book.)

Herein lies the DFL’s flawed thinking. In their mind, anything that’s been appropriated once should be forever considered necessary to fund. There isn’t a business in the world that could survive that type of thinking.

When businesses experience a downturn in revenue, they adjust their budgeting or they’re soon bankrupt. Since businesses prefer making profits, they’re often faced with a decision: do they adjust priorities, reduce or eliminate spending on non-essential items or do they just higher prices from their customers and hope that customers are willing to pay more for their products.

The difference is that, with government, they aren’t often presented with this decision since their charging higher prices isn’t a matter of convincing ‘customers’ to pay higher prices. Theoretically, governments can pass tax increases which are passed onto We The People. These tax increases aren’t voluntary. They’re mandatory because they have the force of law behind them.

Rep. Emmer thinks that there’s too much replication in government. He often talks about the permitting process, where a farmer who wants to expand his operations could theoretically go before 5 different agencies, each in a different department of the government, each with the ability to squash the farmer’s expansion plans.

Sen. Dayton’s budget is built on the premise that the permitting process shouldn’t be changed and that no other budget line items should be changed. That’s foolish thinking because there’s too much replication within government. That’s before asking whether all the budget items are necessities. I’m willing to be that they aren’t. In fact, I’m willing to bet there’s alot of money sent to political allies that could be eliminated without Minnesota’s taxpayers never noticing the difference in quality of life or in the delivery of important services.

In Rep. Emmer’s Minnesota, each agency and each department would start their budget from scratch each 4 years. Instead of guaranteeing each department and each agency the same amount of money plus a little for inflation, departments and agencies would have to explain why their funding levels need to stay the same or be increased.

They’d have to prove that each item is a necessity and that spending that money would improve the lives of Minnesotans. Departments would have to prove that there isn’t a better, less expensive way of delivering their services. Knowing that they’d have to justify every penny of their spending alone would likely change departments’ budgeting habits.

I find it impossible to think that eliminating the replications found in the permitting processes wouldn’t dramatically change what’s needed to be spent. I refuse to think that there aren’t health care reforms that wouldn’t save hundreds of millions of dollars in the state budget.

Politically speaking, Sen. Dayton and Mr. Horner are sitting on a powderkeg. They keep criticizing Rep. Emmer for not having shown his plan to redesign government. He’s entrusted much of that assignment to Annette Meeks.

When Annette Meeks finishes the project and the plan is unveiled, there will be alot of complaining from special interests who won’t like the fact that their racket is getting eliminated. Sen. Dayton will certainly complain, partly because he’s still thinking in terms of funding a 1980s form of government.

This is the 21st century. It’s time we took better advantage of technology to make the cost of government less expensive. It’s time we did a better job of setting sensible spending priorities rather than looking at taxpayers as the politicians’ ATM’s.

Counting all of those things is what brought Minnesota Management and Budget to a $5.8 billion deficit in 2012-13, Marx said. A candidate who says otherwise is “being subjective,” he said. (Marx is a master of diplomacy as well as state finances.)

Actually, I’d describe Marx as a disciple of the status quo. I’d agree that the $5.8 billion number is accurate if you didn’t think that any of this biennium’s spending was wasteful spending. I agree that the $5.8 billion number is accurate if I was convinced that there weren’t less expensive ways of delivering services.

That’s before asking how much money would be generated by Polymet hiring 2,000 people to start their mining operation instead of tying them up for a total of 7 years in the permitting process. How much tax revenue isn’t realized when farmers in Clay County expand their hog farming operation in North Dakota instead of Minnesota because of the permitting process? How much tax revenue would be realized if 3M, Marvin Window and other companies expanded in Minnesota instead of other states?

These companies will keep moving elsewhere as long as Minnesota’s government is this cumbersome and businesses are overregulated.

I didn’t see proof that Ms. Sturdevant considered those possibilities in reaching her conclusions. It’s important that, should she venture into the world of public policy again, she should consider those variables more fully.

Streamlining government, eliminating replication and encouraging dynamic economic growth will dramatically change Minnesota’s budget landscape. We can’t afford government harassing businesses. Government should make sure that businesses aren’t polluting but then get out of their way.

Building a dynamic, fundamentally sound economy will cure most of Minnesota’s budget ails. That’s what Sen. Dayton and the DFL hasn’t figured out. They’re so focused on funding government that they aren’t focused on creating a dynamic economy. Yes, they’ll talk about jobs but that isn’t the same as creating a dynamic economy.

In Sen. Dayton’s mind and in the minds of the DFL, a bonding bill is a jobs bill. It isn’t. It’s a debt bill. It’s a stimulus bill designed to give the economy a brief shot in the arm. A dynamic economy creates jobs that are still there a decade later.

It’s time that Ms. Sturdevant, Sen. Dayton and the DFL figured out that there’s a difference between funding the DFL’s special interest allies’ wish lists and building a dynamic economy. It’s time that Ms. Sturdevant, Sen. Dayton and the DFL admitted that funding the DFL’s special interest allies’ wish lists is what’s driving the projected budget deficits. Eliminating the pork and the replications is the best way to eliminate the deficit.

Technorati: Tom Emmer, Permitting, Annette Meeks, Economy, Zero-Based Budgeting, Reforms, MNGOP, Special Interests, Mark Dayton, Deficits, Polymet, Lori Sturdevant, Strib, Bonding Bill, Stimulus, Debt, DFL, Election 2010

I just spent part of my afternoon campaigning with Michele Bachmann here in St. Cloud. Included in that campaigning was Michele addressing a room full of her biggest supporters at her new campaign office.

Earlier this afternoon, Michele stopped at C & L Distributing. Just like at other campaign stops, Tarryl’s unenthusiastic trolls were there to greet the Bachmann bus with signs and protests. (I guess Tarryl’s trolls didn’t get the memo from Dayton High Command that tracking was supposed to stop immediately.)

SIDENOTE: When Sen. Dayton criticized the MNGOP trackers for being too close for him to campaign, those trackers stayed at least 15 feet away and it was on public property. Tarryl’s trolls protested on private property. When Michele entered the building, she could’ve easily shaken the protesters’ hands. Unlike Sen. Dayton, Michele took it in stride, politely smiling as she walked past the protesters.

One sign in particular caught my attention. It was a ‘Thank You’ card from the insurance companies, supposedly because Michele does whatever they tell her to do.

Andy caught this picture of the rather unenthusiastic hodgepoge collection of protesters:

We’ve seen the articles about how low Democratic enthusiasm is. Tarryl’s trackers were the embodiment of that enthusiasm gap. They showed up, they held their signs, they went home. Rah. I was a little disappointed, though, when they didn’t attend the grand opening of Michele’s new campaign office in Waite Park.

During the tour of the C & L facilities, Obamacare was brought up as being a major drag on hiring. We were told, by the HR director, I think, that the extra paperwork alone makes it a huge burden and a huge cost driver.

When the C & L event was over, I was invited to join the Team Bachmann bus, an invitation I quickly accepted. The conversation on the bus was electric. As we approached Michele’s office, one of Michele’s staff announced that an estimated crowd of 50 people were awaiting us. That estimate was off by alot. There were easily more than 100 people eagerly awaiting at Michele’s campaign office.

For a more complete description of the day’s event, Andy’s post is today’s must reading.

Once at her campaign office, Michele emphasized the need to outwork the DFL and to work for each other. Michele said that it was important to get local candidates like King Banaian and Tom Ellenbecker elected so they could restore fiscal sanity to St. Paul’s landscape. She said that it’s imperative to elect Tom Emmer because he’s got a plan for making government more responsive to Minnesotans. Finally, she said, it’s imperative to elect Dan Severson as our next Secretary of State.

When Michele introduced King, King said that, not only are we Taxed Enough Already (TEA) but that St. Paul has Spent Enough Already (SEA), an observation that was greeted with enthusiastic applause. After the grand opening was over, I spoke with King. I said that, perhaps, last year’s TEA Parties would lead to this year’s SEA Change. Based on the things I’m hearing from around the state, that’s a definite possibility.

According to Mark Sommerhauser’s article, Tarryl spokester Carrie Lucking responded, saying “Sooner or later, voters are going to want to hear from Bachmann about what she’s done in four years in Congress.” Put Michele in the majority and give Michele a gavel and you’ll see some serious reforms happening.

I’d also suggest that getting people to fight against the twin albatrosses of Obamacare and the failed stimulus is precisely what Sixth District voters want her to do. I said today that we don’t need wimpy spending freezes like President Obama proposed this winter; we need spending cuts. We don’t need a scalpel like then-Sen. Obama said in the debates; we need a meat cleaver.

One thing that Michele said that re-inforced King’s claim that Democrats have Spent Enough Already is that the federal budget baseline has increased exponentially. The Pelosi Congress has raised spending by over $4,000,000,000,000 in 4 short years. (That includes the budgets and stimulus spending.) The national debt will increase an additional $10,000,000,000 over the next decade if Pelosi’s spending spree isn’t reversed.

I wrote a long time ago that Tarryl was facing a stiff uphill fight against Michele. After watching the professionalism and the work ethic of her campaign team, I’m more confident of my prediction than the day I made that prediction.

Andy will be back on the Bachmann campaign bus again this morning for Day 2 of the Bachmann bus tour. Here’s Andy’s advice on staying connected to Day 2’s events:

You can follow my tweets as well as others who we crossed paths with by searching the hashtag #bbt10

I wish I would’ve been able to join Team Bachmann on the tour (I was invited) but it didn’t work out this time. Rest assured that I’ll be following Andy’s tweets and Andy’s posts throughout the day.

The only question I have is whether the same unenthusiastic Tarryl trolls follow Team Bachmann around.

Technorati: Bus Tour, Campaigning, Michele Bachmann, Distributorship, TEA Parties, Campaign Staff, King Banaian, Tom Ellenbecker, Dan Severson, MNGOP, Tarryl Clark, Tarryl’s Trackers, Enthusiasm Gap, DFL, Election 2010

Dick Morris’ latest column has some great advice for Republican candidates. Here’s his advice:

Republican negative ad writers always delight in describing the Stimulus package as bloated, wasteful, government-growing, and useless. The adjectives get in the way. The polling we’ve done indicates that the simple words “stimulus package” convey all that and more.

There is no need to call Obama’s health care legislation “a government attempt to take over our health care” or a bill to “slash medical care for the elderly” or an “attempt to force rationing of care.” The simple word Obamacare conveys the same meanings.

Why describe cap and trade as “job killing” or “driving jobs overseas” when the words cap and trade say these same things to voters?

Less is more. Why use words that clutter? It isn’t like the people don’t know what Obamacare is. It isn’t like they don’t already have a negative view of it. Ditto with Cap and Trade. Ditto with the stimulus.

Vice President Biden got his nickers in a knot Tuesday when John Boehner gave a major economic address in which he said that the stimulus failed. Miserably. Biden can whine all he wants but defending President Obama’s stimulus plan is a losing fight. Here’s Morris’ suggestion for an ad that works:

A simple ad along these lines will be far more effective for a Republican challenger to a Democratic incumbent than any elaborately conceived negative commercial:

“Do you support the $850 billion stimulus package Obama passed last year? Joe Democrat voted yes. Harry Republican says no.

The TARP bailout? Democrat voted in favor. Republican is opposed.

Obamacare? Joe Democrat supported it. Harry Republican would have voted no.

Cap and Trade? Democrat yes, again. Republican, no.

Vote for the one that agrees with you.”

People aren’t in a live-and-let-live mood these days. They’re unemployed or underemployed, possibly in danger of losing their home to foreclosure and worrying about their kids’ future. If that isn’t enough, and it is, people feel like the government isn’t listening to them.

Never in my lifetime have I seen a group of people so motivated to throw the liberal bums out, not even in 1994. They’re well-informed, too. Most have done their due diligence and just need to be pointed in the right direction. If that’s the case, just point them in the right direction, then get out of their way. Don’t overcomplicate things.

Most troubling to Democrat strategists is that these voters can’t wait to get to the polls. Either that or it’s that the worst is yet to come. What we’re seeing now is voters expressing their digust with the Obama administration and the Reid/Pelosi regime. We haven’t seen the partisan trend yet and we haven’t seen the new Contract-like document yet.

Republicans are witholding those documents until everyone is fully tuned in. It’s like a distance runner holding a little back until the final half-lap. Think of the races where the favorite is setting a strong pace, then the last half-lap arrives and suddenly he pulls away.

That’s what I predict will happen this year. Call it a crystallizing moment or the moment of realization or whatever. It’s coming and it will break the conservatives’ way.

If Republicans keep working hard and enunciating clear messages, in the manner that Dick Morris said, this election will be a powerful repudiation of President Obama’s and Speaker Pelosi’s agenda.

Technorati: Dick Morris, Stimulus, Obamacare, Cap And Tax, Negative Ads, Job-Killing, Tax Increases, Messaging, TARP, Bailouts, Economy, TEA Party, Republicans, Democrats, Election 2010

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Yesterday, Michele Bachmann announced that she would do a series of bus tours in August, September and possibly October. Tarryl Clark’s campaign’s first reaction was to start whining:

Bachmann’s challenger Tarryl Clark’s campaign responds by asserting that Bachmann has kept her distance from constituents over the recess. “A carefully staged bus tour can’t cover the fact that Bachmann’s focus is not on the people of the 6th District,” writes campaign manager Zach Rodvold.

Tarryl’s campaign’s meme has been to accuse Michele of not getting anything done for the district. (Like any Republicans got anything done with Queen Pelosi running the House like a dictator.) Tarryl should watch her step. It isn’t like she’s got a long list of accomplishments as assistant majority leader.

Tarryl’s ‘accomplishments mostly include raising taxes, raising spending and raising taxes some more. Like most of her image, it’s mostly a mirage that Tarryl’s gotten many positive things done.

Her campaign is known more for her undying devotion to the labor union special interest groups’ wishlists than for her principled stand on issues. Tarryl’s criticism of Michele Bachmann seems to be that Rep. Bachmann is too principled to be bought off.

Tarryl would never be so principled as to not be willing to go to the highest bidder. Tarryl is nothing if not buyable. Except if the issue is increasing taxes. Then she can’t be bought off.

Now that Michele is starting her advertising campaign, Tarryl’s in trouble. She’s got too many ugly votes to defend not to be hurt, starting with her vote to break a 33-33 tie to increase taxes on Minnesota’s job creators.

Tarryl’s anti-capitalist agenda won’t be popular in the district. That’s why she’s alleging that Michele doesn’t spend enough time in the district. The last thing Tarryl wants to talk about is how Tarryl’s policies affect Minnesota’s economy. During the time that she’s been assistant majority leader, she’s voted for gigantic spending increases (17 percent in 2007) and the biggest tax increases in Minnesota history.

Rapidly growing government and raising taxes on Minnesota’s job creators isn’t the blueprint for economic success. That’s before discussing Tarryl’s opposition to common sense health care reforms that save taxpayers money and improve coverage.

Tarryl likes playing the ‘Michele’s never around card’ even though Michele is out in the district. It’s just that she often spends part of a day speaking across the country, too. For instance, after Michele gave a stirring speech at this year’s CPAC convention, she was back in the district before nightfall.

What you need to know about Tarryl Clark’s campaign is that it’s all whining all the time.

Technorati: Bus Tour, Michele Bachmann, CPAC, Small Businesses, Fiscal Restraint, Campaign Ads, MNGOP, Taxin’ Tarryl, Tax Increases, Spending, Special Interests, Tarryl Clark, Zach Rodvold, DFL, Election 2010

This morning, Esme Murphy interviewed Tom Emmer for her WCCO-TV show. As one of Tom’s supporters, I’m glad he appeared on the show. That said, there were too many predictable questions, almost like they were DFL talking points questions. This wasn’t Esme’s finest interview.

One of the questions she posed was why Tom hasn’t “put out a detailed budget proposal like Sen. Dayton has”. Tom quickly pointed out that Sen. Dayton’s allegedly detailed budget plan is about two and a half pages long. Tom highlighted the fact that we’re projected to take in $32,000,000,000 during the next biennium. Combine that with the fact that we’re supposedly staring in the face of a $6,000,000,000 deficit. That means that the DFL passed bills that had tails to spend $38,000,000,000 the next biennium.

It’s worth noting that part of Sen. Dayton’s tax increase plan is unconstitutional. His tax on snowbirds who stay in another state 6 months and 1 day as though they were residents of Minnesota won’t fly. Residence in a state means staying in that state 6 months and 1 day.

Let’s remember that the budget that passed during the 2007 session called for spending less than $35,000,000,000. That means that the DFL wants to spend substantially more during the 2012-13 biennium than during the 2008-09 biennium even though we’re in a long-lasting, deep recession now and we were living in relatively prosperous times then.

Tom pushed back when Esme Murphy said that “You’re talking about eliminating MinnCare in terms of the credits.” He’d just finished talking about reforming MinnesotaCare “that would save $350,000,000″. That sounds suspiciously similar to the fiscal note that the Department of Human Services put together for Steve Gottwalt’s Healthy Minnesota Plan.

Esme stuck to her language of where Tom would cut in order to balance the budget. Tom said that it isn’t a cut if you’re spending more money. He said that “It’s not a deficit in reality. It’s what government wants to spend. Government wants to spend $38,000,000,000.” Tom later said that “it’s a matter of spending what you have, now what you want to spend.” Tom then noted that the DFL wants to increase spending by 17 percent from this biennium to next.

There isn’t a sane person who thinks that spending should increase by 17 percent from this year to the next. To pay for that spending increase in Minnesota, that would require raising taxes by enormous amounts. It also means that tax increases wouldn’t be limited to just “the rich” either. Those tax increases would dip well into the middle class.

When Esme asked “Where would the cuts be?”, Tom answered Esme’s question with his own question. “Esme, how do you have a cut when you have more revenue? That’s why you’ve heard me. We’ve had this discussion before. I try never to use that word cut because you could leave everything the way it is today. We’re gonna have more money to spend a year from now so where’s the cut?”

Another thing that Tom mentioned that’s important is the need for regulatory reform. Tom’s also talked during debates and MPR interviews about streamlining the permitting process. Cutting taxes, streamlining the permitting process and implementing regulatory reform would spark a job creation explosion in this state like we haven’t seen in a couple of decades.

Like I said, it was important that Tom appeared on the show. Tom showed himself skilled at swatting aside the stock DFL talking points questions. More importantly, he proved himself adept at talking about his positive agenda.

That will be important in the weeks ahead, starting with the State Fair. If Tom just stays within himself when talking with State Fair visitors, he’ll win over alot of people because he’s the only candidate in this race with a positive, job-creating agenda that will give Minnesotans the opportunity for prosperity.

Mark Dayton certainly can’t credibly claim that his agenda will create more opportunities for prosperity. Under his tax plan, the only people who’d be getting rich would be moving van companies because there’d be tons of people leaving Minnesota.

With Tom’s new ad starting this week, people will start seeing the real Tom Emmer instead of the charicature that ABM and the other progressive spinmeisters have created. The polls showing Tom trailing are mostly the result of ABM’s relentless dishonest campaign and keeping Sen. Dayton in front of friendly audiences.

Now that the battle is joined, expect Sen. Dayton’s lead to shrink quickly and disappear eventually.

Had Esme Murphy wanted to do a great interview, she might’ve asked Tom why he thinks Sen. Dayton’s plan won’t balance the budget or create jobs. Sparks would’ve flown, which is a TV show’s ratings dream. Had she done that, it would’ve started a great debate on the candidates’ policies instead of the drone of their soundbites.

Technorati: Tom Emmer, Interview, Balanced Budget, Reforms, Regulations, Permitting, Tax Cuts, Job Growth, MNGOP, Esme Murphy, TV Interview, ABM, Spin, Mark Dayton, Tax The Rich, Snowbirds, Capital Flight, Deficits, Unemployment, DFL, Election 2010

Sen. Dayton supposedly gave an impassioned speech to the DFL faithful at the DFL State Central meeting Saturday. Among the red meat items that he threw out there was this statement:

“It’s fundamentally unfair, it’s fundamentally wrong. Tom Emmer and Tom Horner think it’s terrific, and Yvonne and I think it’s terrible,” he said to a roaring crowd of supporters, adding: “I think most Minnesotans who can afford to pay more taxes, the top 10 percent, are willing to do so…for the sake of the future of Minnesota. And on November second we’ll find out.”

If it could be proven that the money we’re currently spending is being spent efficiently and only on necessities, Minnesotans might agree to a tax hike. If it could be proven that there aren’t ways to deliver needed services (think public safety, education) more efficiently, Minnesotans might agree to a modest tax increase.

They might but I wouldn’t bet on it.

Suffice it to say that Minnesotans don’t think state government spends money efficiently. They certainly don’t think the money spent is always spent on necessities.

In Mark Dayton’s Minnesota, every cent is spent on necessities and only for the most altruistic reasons. In Mark Dayton’s Minnesota, money is never spent on excesses requested by special interest groups or by their lobbyists.

During the Almanac debate, Tom Emmer talked about streamlining the permitting process because Minnesota’s process is time-consuming and expensive. When Tom cited the case of 2 farmers in Clay County who expanded their hog operation in North Dakota rather than deal with Minnesota’s bureaucracy, Sen. Dayton said that he’s “all for streamlining the bureaucracy.”

Rep. Emmer replied that he’d followed Sen. Dayton’s career and that he’d never seen Sen. Dayton wite or co-sponsor any legislation that streamlined any part of government.

When he was asked at the final DFL debate what type of education reform he supported, Sen. Dayton said that the first reform he’d implement would be to restore the funding that was allegedly lost during the Pawlenty administration.

Based on his conflicting answers, we’re to believe that Sen. Dayton thinks that streamlining government is reform and that spending more money is reform, too.

In Mark Dayton’s Minnesota, $3,000,000,000 in tax increases and $900,000,000 in spending cuts balances Minnesota’s budget. In Mark Dayton’s Minnesota, massive tax increases on Minnesota’s job creators won’t send those companies scurrying for greener pastures, that it’ll actually spur job growth.

Minnesota can’t afford Mark Dayton’s fuzzy math. He hasn’t proven himself as a policy expert. He hasn’t proven that he’d handle our money well. He didn’t make great decisions in Washington.

The only things we can prove are that a) he’s addicted to public service, b) he’s a trust fund baby and c) he’s run away from challenges in the past.

There isn’t anything in Sen. Dayton’s career that suggests he’s a leader. That’s the history of a less-than-distinguished career politician. If you don’t believe me, ask Sen. Dayton why he gave himself an F for his Senate career and why the NRA exposed his cop-killer bullet allegations as false.

Technorati: Taxes, Tax Increases, Mark Dayton, Education, Spending, Special Interests, Fuzzy Math, Tax The Rich, DFL, Tom Emmer, Reforms, Permitting, Streamlining, MNGOP, Election 2010