Democrats oppose Pawlenty plan, whatever it might be

Posted at 10:31 AM on November 5, 2009 by Tim Pugmire (3 Comments)
Filed under: MN Legislature, Tim Pawlenty

Gov. Tim Pawlenty had not yet held his news conference this morning to announce a proposed constitutional amendment, but Democrats got an early jump on criticizing the proposal, whatever it is.

House Majority Leader Tony Sertich, DFL-Chisholm, issued the following all-purpose, negative news release:

Statement from House Majority Leader Tony Sertich on the Governor's upcoming press conference:

"While we do not yet have all the details about the Governor's upcoming announcement, we fully expect it will have nothing to do with strengthening schools, improving health care or creating jobs for struggling Minnesotans.

This is much more about grabbing headlines than it is about addressing the immediate needs of Minnesota families. Ideas like the one he's proposing have been tried in other states and have failed.

The real killer for Minnesota families is the $2 billion more in property taxes they've paid since Governor Pawlenty took office.

Clearly, this proposal is not for Minnesota."

House Majority Leader Tony Sertich

---

Comments (3)

I assume this is some kind of joke, right? Or has the political discourse in our state really descended so far that we have reached a point where one party doesn't even wait to hear what the other says before deciding they're against it?

Posted by Jim Belich | November 5, 2009 10:46 AM

---

Its a bit ridiculous to hold a news conference in advance of a proposal that hasn't been made. But having read the other MPR story on the proposal, I am inclined to agree: its a gimmick that would hurt the state, not help it.

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/11/05/spending-amendment/

It seems pretty short sighted, and another passing of the buck by Gov Pawlenty, to propose a constitutional amendment to solve a problem created by the Governor's veto pen. If future legislatures and governors have the discipline to craft legislation that is balanced in revenue and spending, the amendment is unnecessary. When the system is working as designed, the executive & legislature balance each other, and we only get spending that approximates revenue. Instead, this year we had an undisciplined governor who signed the spending bills while vetoing the revenue bills. Perhaps a more appropriate fix would be to reign in the unallotment loophole & instead mandate the legislature stays in session until the budget is balanced.

Posted by bsimon | November 5, 2009 11:48 AM

---

What's most startling about this preemptive press release is how accurate it is. It's pathetic how predictably bad our governor has become at leading our state.

Posted by Sean | November 11, 2009 12:12 PM

---

Post a comment

The following HTML tags are allowed in your comments:
+ Bold: <b>Text</b>
+ Italic: <i>Text</i>
+ Link: <a href="http://url" target="_blank">Link</a>
Fields marked with * are required.

Name*:

E-mail Address*:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments*:

Comment Preview appears above this form upon pressing the "preview" button. Edit your comment and press "preview" again, until you are satisfied with your comment.

Your comment may not appear on the blog until several minutes after it was submitted.

• E-mail this page
• Print this page
• Save to Delicious
• Submit to Digg
• Share this

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories

Become a Sponsor