Thanks to Tony Sertich’s op-ed in this morning’s St. Cloud Times and Mark Dayton repeatedly saying he’ll tax minnesota’s job creators into submission, we now have the outlines of the DFL’s job creation strategy. Here’s what Rep. Sertich said about the DFL’s most recent job creation bill:

On Aug. 3, Minnesota held its bond sale, putting up for bid state bonds that will fund ag loans, transportation projects, and various infrastructure improvements across the state. The sale was a resounding success, with competition among private bidders resulting in a historically low interest rate that will save Minnesota taxpayers millions of dollars.

The results of this sale made clear this year’s quick and decisive passage of a bonding bill by House Democrats was exactly the right thing to do. Bids will now be let for projects such as road and bridge improvements, clean water and improvements to our state colleges and universities.

As many as 20,000 construction jobs will be created, as well as hundreds of spinoff jobs in areas such as manufacturing, materials supply, food service, health care and retail. Communities across the state benefit when workers come to eat at their restaurants, buy gas at their gas stations and shop in their stores.

As fascinating as that was, this paragraph was most revealing:

For more than 150 years, bonding bills have been exactly what Minnesota needed to stimulate the economy and create jobs. Minnesota’s businesses, workers and families can feel confident we will continue to make job creation our top priority, with a responsible bonding bill as the cornerstone.

There it is!!! Rep. Sertich admits that the DFL’s annual bonding bills are the Minnesota equivalent of a federal stimulus package. He’s just admitted that we’re spending money we don’t have on projects we don’t need. What Rep. Sertich didn’t admit, though, is that the people getting the jobs are the DFL’s union allies. Certainly, the IBEW and other construction unions benefit greatly from the DFL’s spending our money. In return, the DFL benefits greatly from the unions’ campaign contributions.

That’s a pretty sweet racket if you can keep it a secret.

This setup also begs another question. Why does the DFL focus on the government spending money on creating jobs instead of government getting out of the way and letting the private sector create jobs?

The DFL’s and Rep. Sertich’s insistence on spending our taxes on annual stimulus bills is frightening enough. As bad as that failed economic model is, it’s nothing compared with Mark Dayton’s tax plan. Here’s what Pat Kessler wrote about Dayton’s tax-the-rich plan:

Dayton’s proposing as many as three new income tax brackets.

Singles and couples with incomes between $130,000 and $150,000 would pay “slightly more” according to Dayton. For those earning more than $500,000 a year — a sharper spike. And at $1,000,000 and above: “significantly more” in income taxes.

Dayton says million dollar “homes” deserve special attention too.

Remember that $53 million home for sale on Lake Minnetonka?

It’s taxed at the same percentage as a $500,000 home in Fridley.

It’s TRUE.

Currently, Minnesota has two property tax rates: 1.0 percent for homes valued under $500,000 and 1.25 percent for homes valued above $500,000.

Dayton would change that with a special tax on homes worth $1 million or more.


Avoiding winter is one thing but if you’re snow-birding to avoid taxes, your wings could get clipped. Minnesotans who live 6 months and 1 day outside the state currently don’t pay Minnesota income taxes.

Dayton said that’s over if he’s elected: You live in Minnesota and pay taxes or you don’t.

that last sentence should tell you everything you need to know about Dayton’s tax policy. If you spend a single day in Minnesota, you’ll get hit with his tax increases. The only way to avoid Mr. Dayton’s punishing tax rates is to leave the state permanently, which is exactly what the vast majority of snowbirds will do.

When Minnesota’s snowbirds leave, two things will happen. First, Mark Dayton and the DFL will whine that those greedy snowbirds won’t pay their fair share. (Nevermind the fact that it’s their privately saved retirement money.) Next, Mr. Dayton’s budget projections will be off by a significant amount. They’re off already but they’ll be off by a bigger amount when Sen. Dayton chases the snowbirds out of Minnesota.

Finally, during tonight’s debate, Tom Emmer highlighted Mark Dayton’s job creation weakness. Rep. Emmer talked about a mining company on the range that’s gone through 5 yrs. of environmental studies and permitting processes. At the last DFL debate, Sen. Dayton said that it’d be ok with him if it took another 2 years to complete.

Tom Emmer said that it’s immoral to stretch the permitting process out that long, especially with people on the range unemployed or in danger of losing their home.

I agree with that. What will those extra years of studies and waiting produce other than bigger debts and more foreclosures for the people of the Iron Range?

Simply put, we can’t afford to put the DFL in charge of job creation. Rather than maintaining a construction-oriented economy that Rep. Sertich and Sen. Dayton favor, Minnesota needs leadership, both in the governor’s mansion and in the legislature that seeks to unleash Minnesota’s entrepreneurial spirit.

That will only happen if we elect leaders that trust the people rather than people who think government has a big role to play in the private sector.

It’s time to reject the DFL’s economic plans because they don’t work. It’s time to enthusiastically support the GOP because they’re the only leaders who trust in Minnesota’s innovators and entrepreneurs.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

7 Responses to “Here’s the DFL’s Job Creation Strategy”

  • Rex Newman says:

    Maybe you’ve heard Rush talk about New York & NYC, which have relentlessly dogged him ever since he left for Florida. Audits every year even though he doesn’t live there and avoids even travel there. Is this what we want in Minnesota?

    Remember, in tax court, you’re guilty until proven innocent.

  • Gary Gross says:

    I’ve yet to see anything worthwhile in Dayton’s tax plan. nuff said?

  • eric q says:

    You misstate. Dayton said he’d tax the rich. Not the job creators.

    Why anyone, despite years of evidence, would still cling to trickle down, but for the rich who prosper disproportionately under it, eludes my sense of common sense.

    Yet it happens.

    Emmer saying Dayton wanted to burden hard-working Minnesotans was particularly offensive.

    There is no justification to equate the rich, who work the remainder of us hard, with the hard work they extract.

    I have neither the time, inclination, or wealth to join any elite country club. Yet that is where Dayton says he would impose fairer taxation. You don’t create jobs with a tennis racquet and gin and tonic.

    Emmer saying pay and benefits are greater in public sector jobs exposes a truth – the people in control of the private sector are exploitative. Wow. Big surprise.

    Yet Emmer does not see that the logic flowing from his one-trick-pony rhetoric indicts his position.

    Gary, waitresses and waiters do work hard, I have seen busy restaurants and boorish patrons, and while they undeniably are hard working and NOT, despite Emmer misstatement, making a hundred grand waiting tables.

  • eric q says:

    Cullen Sheehan. The reporting is more and more that he is being turned to.

    Will we get Emmer dressed up as Norm-lite?

    Norm was already lite enough that he made Franken laugh.

    Will this change boost Emmer polling numbers, or only alienate some of the loyalists that got him the nod over Siefert?

    Any reading of the tea leaves?

    Or do we all, even GOP insiders and pundits, wait and see?

    I agree that there’s much time between now and early November; and early polling is suspect.

    Will it tighten and go to the wire, and can Horner get more than the regular – except for Ventura – ten percent — if that?

    My guess, Emmer will not alienate loyalists. They will believe that they see what he’ll be doing, and know where he’s from if elected.

    My guess, Horner came across better on paper and in reporting – where the aim is that a closer three horse race will sell more papers and air time ads – but when I saw the three on stage together, he was the prodigal son.

    Interesting how they had Dayton and Emmer together, centered between the two moderators, and Horner seated on an end, with a moderator between him and the other two.

    MPR – staging stuff? No. Say it ain’t so, Joe.

  • Gary Gross says:

    Eric, Cullen Sheehan couldn’t change Tom’s desire to be substantive if his life depended on it. Being substantive is who Tom is. Norm’s a good guy but he was more personality-driven than Tom.

    This is a strong Republican year. Tom still beats Dayton by 3-5 points. Last night’s debate showed that Dayton didn’t have the poise or temperament to be governor. When asked how he felt about President Obama’s education reforms, like alternative licensure & Race to the Top, Dayton said that the first reform he’d recommend is to “restore the education funding that was cut over the last 8 years.” That’s his idea of reform??? Throw money to the unions, then bend over & genuflect, is Dayton’s type of reform???

    I wish I could be surprised but that’s the most predictable answer I’ve ever heard.

  • Gary Gross says:

    You misstate. Dayton said he’d tax the rich. Not the job creators.

    Not true. According to Dayton’s website, anyone making more than $130K is considered rich & will be hit by the higher income tax brackets. That’s reality. There are lots of small businesses that file as individuals that will be hit by Dayton’s tax increases.

    Last session, the DFL used a similar benchmark for rich in their end-of-session tax increase bill. The fiscal not from the Dept. of Revenue said that 57% of the people who’d get hit by the tax increase would be “small businesses & farmers.”

    You might not admit it but that’s the statistical reality from the professionals at the Dept. of Revenue.

  • eric z. says:

    Gary, thanks for the reply comment on Sheehan-Norm.

    I agree on Norm being more style than substance – more hat than cowboy.

    I have not seen enough of Emmer. I do not know whether your feeling that the GOP will have a strong election is ripe yet – I see it as premature. By mid- to late-September we will be better able to feel the pulse of the electorate.

    With a higher marginal tax bracket kicking in at $130,000 and not that big a jump at that level, it is not burdensome.

    I wish my income were $130,000 so that I could fret a bit over the tax level on the marginal thousands I make beyond that cutoff figure. It would be happy fretting, vs. having less.

    I suppose a waiter and waitress, married, would be in at $200,000 and Emmer’s taxing stance would appeal to them – all of them in that situation Emmer deemed common.

Leave a Reply