It's not surprising Gov. Tim Pawlenty is facing some criticism for his proposal to open a state-sponsored casino in the Twin Cities to generate revenue for Minnesota and three northern tribes. What is surprising is where some of the criticism is coming from. Number one, from Republicans. Pat Doyle had this lead in the Star Tribune:

In a rift between Republicans over the future of gambling in Minnesota, Senate Minority Leader Dick Day on Wednesday declared Gov. Tim Pawlenty's proposal for a tribal-state casino "dead on arrival" unless it can be located at Canterbury Park or perhaps at a future Anoka County harness track.

"There are very few of our caucus members who would endorse it unless it was teamed with racino," Day said, referring to putting slot machines at a track, which he supports. "If it was by itself ... the Democrats and the governor would have to get it passed in the Senate. Good luck there."

The second unexpected source of criticism is the leader of one of the bands Pawlenty wants the state to partner with. Patrick Condon of the Associated Press had this story:

The chairman of an Indian tribe looking to build a new casino with the state said that Gov. Tim Pawlenty dropped a big obstacle in the plan's path by calling on the partner tribes to come up with $200 million to get it started. "If we had access to that kind of money we certainly wouldn't be pitching a casino in the metro area," George Goggleye, chairman of the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, said Wednesday.

The White Earth Band of Ojibwe and the Red Lake Band of Chippewa - the other likely partners in a state-tribal casino - also couldn't afford it, Goggleye said.

The chairmen of the White Earth and Red Lake tribes did not immediately return phone calls seeking comment.

Pawlenty's chief of staff, Dan McElroy, said the $200 million figure is "an estimate and certainly subject to being discussed."

Does this criticism suggest the governor announced his plan before it was fully baked? Well, sure. But that doesn't mean Pawlenty won't get what he wants.
MPR's Michael Khoo summed things up with this tidy bit of analysis:

All of this leads to a legislative irony. A majority of lawmakers may favor new gambling opportunities -- but if they can't agree on which opportunities, then Day says gridlock could preserve the status quo. Pawlenty, in his budget address, had a warning for lawmakers who object to his use of casino revenue.

"This is our budget. We've got $200 million. It's no different than if we've got $200 million from something else. If the Legislature wants to mess with it, they've got to fill the hole. It's their problem," Pawlenty said.

That reality may, in the end, be the most persuasive argument for lining up legislative support. Republican House Speaker Steve Sviggum supports both the racino plan and the governor's tribal partnership -- and he notes that the governor has actually left the door open for both.

However, with a much reduced majority following last fall's elections, Sviggum says he's not sure he can pass a gambling bill at the moment. But time, the speaker says, is on his side.

"As you get to February, March, and April and people see what their choices are, and their choices are fair gaming versus monies for education, monies for nursing home increases, higher education -- I think the Legislature overwhelmingly will be supporting the gaming proposal," says Sviggum.

Why have two of Minnesota's former finance commissioners become such harsh critics of Tim Pawlenty? I'll leave it for you to ponder, but they were at it again Wednesday. Here's some of what they had to say from MPR's Laura McCallum:

Less than a day after the governor released his budget proposal, the debate over its merits was in full swing. Former finance commissioners Jay Kiedrowski and John Gunyou were among the critics. They say the governor has turned to the wrong solutions for balancing the budget -- namely accounting gimmicks, gambling money and property tax increases.

Pawlenty wants to erase a projected $700 million deficit with a combination of spending cuts, money from a new casino and other revenues. Kiedrowski, a Democrat, singled out Pawlenty's plan to accelerate the collection of certain taxes.

For instance, sales taxes on auto leases would be paid up front rather than over the life of the lease. That, Kiedrowski says, constitutes a gimmick. He says Pawlenty's budget also presumes that school districts will raise property taxes.

"I think it's ironic that this conservative governor is for more financial gimmicks, more debt, more gambling and more property taxes. I was hoping we were going to see a better budget than this," says Kiedrowski.

While Kiedrowski had hope, it sounds like Gunyou sort of knew what was coming:

"The governor is so irrationally committed to his 'no tax' pledge that he won't even reform our state's volatile tax system on a revenue-neutral basis," says Gunyou. "Minnesota has the most volatile tax system in the country. We need to fix it, and get off this fiscal roller coaster."

What do you think of the budget? Send me some comments, and I'll round them up in a future letter.