« AP: “GOVERNOR LASHES BACK; SAYS OVERRIDE WILL SPARK ‘TAX REVOLT’” | Home | LEGISLATOR THREATENED: END CAMPAIGN FOR CONGRESS OR DAMAGING INFORMATION WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU; LEGISLATOR DOES’T END CAMPAIGN, MN PUBLIUS POSTS INFORMTION »
MDE FROM THE ARCHIVES: SPEAKER REMOVED DFL LEGISLATORS FROM TAX COMMITTEE FOR VOTING AGAINST DFL’S TAX BILL
By Michael B. Brodkorb | February 27, 2008
As I predicted yesterday, Democrats in Minnesota have started to cry foul because the six Republicans (the Override Six) in the House of Representatives who voted to override Governor Pawlenty's veto of the DFL transit bill are being reprimanded.
But as I wrote yesterday, it is Minnesota Democrat who have the long history of punishing other Democrats for straying from the party ideology.
I was reminded today that in 1987, the DFL Speaker of the House, Fred Norton, removed DFL legislators from the House Tax Committee because they voted against the DFL's tax bill. Please read excerpt of a news articles after the break.
"House Speaker Fred Norton removed two veteran DFL legislators from the powerful House Tax Committee Thursday after they voted against the majority's tax bill a day earlier.
Norton said the votes cast by Rep. Tom Osthoff, St. Paul, and Rep. Linda Scheid, Brooklyn Park, 'capped off a whole lot of lack of cooperation' by the two legislators who have reputations for independence.
Norton, a St. Paul DFLer, said that Osthoff and Scheid, as members of the committee, were warned that all DFL tax committee members and chairs of other committees were expected to uphold the caucus position and vote for the tax bill.
'They didn't see that they had an obligation to the caucus,' Norton said yesterday in an interview.
Osthoff, in his 13th year in the House, and Scheid, in her seventh, said they voted against the tax increase because it would work against a majority of the residents in their districts. " Source: Star Tribune, May 1, 1987
###
"Independent-Republicans accused Norton of stifling dissent and some DFlers disagreed with his action. But several DFlers said Norton's action was justified and necessary to assert his leadership to move the DFL program through the House.
'Fred didn't have any other choice,' said Rep. Willard Munger, DFL-Duluth and the most senior member in the House.
'In running a place like this you have to have a certain amount of discipline. He had to get some work done. He's taking a risk, but it's one he had to take. This is going to make him a stronger leader. His criticism has been that he's not strong enough.'
Rep. Gordon Voss, DFL-Blaine and chairman of the Tax Committee,said he agreed with Norton's action. Voss is a maverick in his own right. He has clashed with the caucus over several issues in the past and even lost the chairmanship of a committee in 1982 for bucking the caucus.
'As leadership, you have some obligations to the caucus. It doesn't mean dissent is stifled,' Voss said." Source: Star Tribune, May 1, 1987
Topics: Override Six |
February 27th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
I wonder if the Star Tribune ran a front page article calling it “retaliation” the next day.
February 27th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
I think that perhaps an alternative label to the Override Six could be the Override SICK.
Instead of a Tax Revolt it might be a TACK’S Revolt because London Bridge HAS FALLEN DOWN and the Governor should NAIL DOWN the problems that he has helped to create.
February 27th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
WOW, you have to go back over 20 years. That must have kept even YOU busy!!
Good for you!
February 27th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
HA!
20 years ago!
Only one Republican who was in the legislature n 1987 is still there (Dennis Ozment).
If you can’t stick to this millennium, you are really stretching.
February 27th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Let us not forget who also enabled this pork filled legislation, The MN Chamber.
I posted a list of the board members up on http://www.savagerepublican.com
If you are looking for ways to save money, Since government doesn’t seem to be able to cut its budget - I suggest this is a good list to use for items to cut from your home and business budget.
February 27th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Zack:
Keep in mind the DFL hasn’t had a history where a vote of this type affected their party since they have had control of the state senate to the best of my knowledge since the 1970’s.
Furthermore and this is important having the veto proof majority in the senate the house republicans had to hold the line to maintain our principals. We needed 45 votes. The six are paying this price because if just one of them had voted on our side the veto would’ve been upheld and there will be no gas tax today.
And Zack this is equal to like a Brithish person telling the Germans what the D-Day plan was before the attack. republicans stand for lower taxes. Six people who claim to be Republicans decided in one scoop to increase the gas tax, the sales tax, the car tab tax, and to do spending for mass transit instead of the roads. To the average Republican that is a Democrat vote not a Republican vote
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
February 27th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
By default, that must mean that the Democrats have fully supported all of their fellow members for 20 years?
What a pathetic original post.
February 27th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Nope. It means the Democrats have had a truly “split” congress during the 90s and early 2000s.
I was here when the Republicans had control of the House in the 90s, while the Dems had the Senate. There was never a need for heavy handed tactics.
Both instances were of heavy necessity. And the fact that people are trying to obfuscate by stating that it was 20 years ago, shows to the rest of us (The Minnesota public) that it has relevance and shows that the Democrats are just the same in a situation like that.
Of course, you won’t hear that from the Democrats on blogs, because they cannot think with truth or reason.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
wouldn’t you have to go back ABOUT 20 years to find a time when a Democrat govenor vetoed anything or for that matter signed anything. Minnesotans want to veto pen in the fiscal rights hands even if they are willing to go the other way locally.
February 28th, 2008 at 7:46 am
You’d have to go back 20 years to find a DFL governor…