« MN PUBLIUS “JUMPS THE SHARK” WITH LATEST ATTACK ON MN GOP | Home | OBAMA’S MINNESOTA CO-CHAIR & DULUTH MAYOR ADMITS CAMPAIGN FINANCE MISTAKE »
DFL PARTY CHAIRMAN REFUSES TO DEBATE MN GOP CHAIRMAN ABOUT DFL TRANSIT PLAN
By Michael B. Brodkorb | March 3, 2008
"No debates
Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party leaders rejected Minnesota Republican Chairman Ron Carey’s suggestion that the parties debate the now-law transportation funding bill.
Carey wanted eight debates, one per congressional district, to discuss the $6.6 billion, 10-year transportation funding bill. Carey likes to call it the largest tax increase in state history.
'To strengthen our economy, Republicans believe we must take measures that reward hard work and investment,' Carey wrote to DFL Chairman Brian Melendez. 'Now is not the time to be punishing Minnesotans with gas tax increases, sales tax increases, license tab fee increases and other fee increases.'
Democrats were not exactly thrilled to debate an issue lawmakers already resolved by overriding Gov. Tim Pawlenty's veto" Source: Duluth Budgeteer, March 1, 2008
Click here for the complete story.
###
Click here to read my post about MN GOP Chairman Ron Carey's debate request.
Topics: Uncategorized | 26 Comments »
26 Responses to “DFL PARTY CHAIRMAN REFUSES TO DEBATE MN GOP CHAIRMAN ABOUT DFL TRANSIT PLAN”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:43 am
Haven’t you heard? DFL cockroaches scatter from the light.
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:45 am
Quite honestly, it’s a good strategy. Call out the Democrats regularly, throughout the state to debate the full breadth of issues… from theft by taxation to gay marriage. Lets let Minnesotans see for themselves what this crop of socialists stands for.
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:50 am
I would like to see at least one DFL’er explain why bonding for bridges was removed from the 2008 bonding bill and a gorilla exhibit was inserted.
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:01 am
From Michael’s link:
***
“The verdict is in, the Legislature has spoken: On Monday more than two-thirds of legislators overrode Gov. Pawlenty’s veto to pass a bipartisan comprehensive transportation bill that will finally help rebuild our roads and bridges, reduce congestion and improve public transit,†said Kelly Schwinghammer, the DFL communications director. “With Minnesotans facing with skyrocketing health care costs, mortgage foreclosures, high property taxes and a lackluster economy, this is no time for sour grapes from the Republican Party.â€
***
Well put, Kelly. But, ya forgot to add:
“It’s the sour grapes GOPers love so much, that gives them their distinctive whine.”
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:04 am
“With Minnesotans facing with skyrocketing health care costs, mortgage foreclosures, high property taxes, and a lackluster economy, now is a perfect time to pick even deeper in to tax-payers pockets, and rob them of everything they earn.”
Said some jackass DFLer.
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:06 am
Master of None:
Liberal’s logic basically says that bonding bills put to our children the costs of things we need to day. They neglect the fact that our children will use the roads that we are building today, but never mind.
That logic is removed when considering crap that none of us wants or needs today… a gorilla exhibit, for example. It’s just fine to dump those expenses off on the children.
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:14 am
You know something Tom, I think most Republicans, whether moderate or further to the right would be happy to debate Democrats on a wide variety of issues like taxes, transportation and budget priorities.
But the DFL will have none of it.
Drop the “bi-partisan” line too, okay?
8 GOP votes in a legislature of over 200 Senators and Representatives is hardly bi-partisan.
Tom, how can you defend the earmarks and special project promises made to the Override 6.
Rep Rod Hamilton: “The DFL needs my vote and I need Highway 14.”
Everyone knows how much of a problem earmarks are on the national level; it severely interferes with a serious effort to solve a problem, usually resulting in the entire bill being vetoed.
We know this. You know this.
But, in the name of partisanship, embarrassing the Governor and simple greed, you folks on the left simply cannot bring yourselves to admit that the gamesmanship that surrounded the transportation bill, or as I call it, “Highway Robbery” left many Minnesotans with a bad taste in their mouth about the political process.
Nevertheless, you got your way and continue to refuse to debate the merits of one of the largest tax increases in MN history.
You know, Tommy–you represent your party’s rhetoric very well. The DFL whines and cries to high hell about the failing public school system…I believe that “Two Putt Tommy” is the face of the failed public school system.
Prove us wrong Tom.
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:19 am
So they pass a comprehensive transportation bill that will finally help rebuild our roads and bridges, reduce congestion and improve public transit, and jack up our taxes, BTW
and then borrow money to buy the gorilla’s a play pen.
Are there any grown-ups in the DFL?
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:21 am
***
“You know something Tom, I think most Republicans, whether moderate or further to the right would be happy to debate Democrats on a wide variety of issues like taxes, transportation and budget priorities.”
***
Yeah, “right”.
John Kline won’t even have Town Hall Meetings; what makes you believe he’d have debates?
Last cycle, after getting the PiPress Endorsement, he promptly blew off the next three public appearances with Coleen Rowley, INCLUDING the Goodue County Veterans Forum, held at the Zumbrota VFW.
But, NOW you want to debate a law that just got passed??!?
ROFLMAO!!!!
And you guys wonder why the voters gave the DFL a veto-proof majority…..
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:25 am
And you guys wonder why the voters gave the DFL a veto-proof majority in the senate…..
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:37 am
Chestnut has commented 1st, 2nd, 5th & 6th, calling for debate on the “full breath of issues”:
“theft by taxation”
“gay marriage”
One of the persons running for USA Senate won in a fight against Big Tobacco, and up $200 million ($200,000,000) a year goes into the coffers of the State of MN annually, as long as those companies are selling cigarettes.
I think the $200 million is part of the full breath of issues.
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:40 am
Tom, I do not work for Rep. Kline’s campaign and nor will I speculate about what his intentions are with his candidacy for re-election.
Our National Congress, Democrat-controlled has decided, for better or for worse, that rebating taxpayers some money will work to provide some sort of jumpstart to the economy.
Here in MN, the DFL rammed a massive transit bill down our throats that will raise taxes in a couple of ways.
Moreover, this transit bill is a regressive tax. A tax that will increase a gallon of gas, and sales taxes on working Minnesotans that can afford it the least: lower and middle income workers, as well as Seniors or anyone living on a fixed income.
Since the DFL runs around the state talking about ending poverty and then pisses our money away on “Human Services”—the fastest growing state agency around…………how do they intend on squaring that with the voters that gave them the bully pulpit in the first place?
Also, around this time last year, the DFL trotted out their repetitive lie that raising taxes didn’t need to be an option in the context of a $2.2 billion surplus.
That comment didn’t come out of thin air, that is what we heard from essentially everyone with a DFL near their name.
They pissed that surplus away, and we are now faced with a $935 million deficit.
Tom, you wouldn’t manage your family’s budget that way.
Why do you feel okay with doing that with the taxpayer’s dollars?
No partisanship.
No B/S.
No R=Lapdog childish junk.
Just tell us here on MDE:
Why do you feel that it is okay to be financially irresponsible with tax dollars in a fashion that you would never do with your own money?
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:06 pm
By Gorilla exhibit I assume you mean funding for zoos in the bonding bill. Ask yourself who has been the biggest advocate for zoos in our state? Surprise, surprise it’s Governor Pawlenty! So before you bash the DFL ask yourself why the Governor has asked for so much zoo funding over the years?
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Clint you dipshit you mised the point.
Point being the DFL so fine with bonding some projects but for transportation it was a different story.
As is anything with the local DFL, they cannot help but lie.
March 3rd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
So before you bash the DFL ask yourself why the Governor has asked for so much zoo funding over the years?
There was no request for zoo funding in the governor’s bonding bill, NONE, ZERO. His bill had money for higher priority things like bridge replacement.
The DFL’s bonding bill has ZERO dollars for actual automotive bridge replacement.
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:19 pm
If this was such a great thing for Minnesota, the DFL should be overjoyed with the chance to debate it and explain to us exactly how much more money we will pay in taxes and what exactly it will go toward. Right?
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:40 pm
GOP Optimist said: ***”They pissed that surplus away, and we are now faced with a $935 million deficit.“***
Say, GOPer? Remind me which bill, that Pawlenty whipped out the ol’ “VETO” pen on, that “pissed that surplus away”, will ya?
Oh, wait – YOU CAN’T.
See, that’s why there’s a majority of DFLers elected at statewide races; DFL majority in the Senate, and DFL majority in the House – GOPers simply have a problem telling the truth AND THE VOTERS RECOGNIZE THAT.
March 3rd, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Actually Tommy, he vetoed every one of the DFL’s economy killing budget bills last year.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:45 pm
“See, that’s why there’s a majority of DFLers elected at statewide races…”
And that’s why we haven’t had a DFL governor since 1990.
March 4th, 2008 at 7:18 am
So, Chestnut – which one of those veto’d budget bills, last year, were overridden? Remember that GOP OPtimist claimed this: “They pissed that surplus away, and we are now faced with a $935 million deficit.“
March 4th, 2008 at 8:23 am
I’ll pose the question again for you Tom:
Why do you feel the legislature should manage the state’s budget (public taxpayer dollars) in this irresponsible fashion when nobody would do that with their family’s budget?
We expect families to be fiscally responsible and manage their money with the ebb and flow of the economy, and for most families, this isn’t that difficult of an adjustment.
So, again: Why do you feel that this is an acceptable practice at the state government level when you would never make those decisions with your own money?
No B/S.
No “Smokescreen” and “R=Lapdog” stunts (you are an adult living in Eden Prairie, right?)
No making excuses.
Just tell us right here on MDE why you think this type of legislation is fiscally responsible without playing your blame game and “republiCon” stunts.
March 4th, 2008 at 9:45 am
Say, GO? You must of missed this one:
***
TwoPuttTommy Says:
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:40 pm
GOP Optimist said: ***â€They pissed that surplus away, and we are now faced with a $935 million deficit.“***
Say, GOPer? Remind me which bill, that Pawlenty whipped out the ol’ “VETO†pen on, that “pissed that surplus awayâ€, will ya?
Oh, wait – YOU CAN’T.
See, that’s why there’s a majority of DFLers elected at statewide races; DFL majority in the Senate, and DFL majority in the House – GOPers simply have a problem telling the truth AND THE VOTERS RECOGNIZE THAT.
***
March 4th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Tom:
How much of the truth was told by the DFL when they claimed that this transit bill would put “30,000 people back to work?”
I was at the committee hearing where it was made clear as crystal that approximately 1,100 jobs would be “created” by passing this bill.
But that is not the rhetoric that was used.
No sir.
Not in the papers, not on radio and not on the Senate Floor.
30,000 jobs….1,100 jobs.
No 2 ways around it Tom.
Moreover: How much of the truth was spoken by the DFL about 1 year ago when they were deciding what to do with the $2.2 billion surplus?
Nearly every Democrat elected maintained that they saw no need to raise taxes when we were looking at such an enormous surplus.
But that isn’t what happened, was it?
No, sir. Instead, they went ahead and attempted to create a 4th tax bracket for wealthy Minnesotans to pay more for your precious cultural heritage centers and your glorious non-profit money pits. This would’ve lead to making MN THE highest taxed state in the nation which of course WAS vetoed by the Governor.
Tom, I am not suggesting that the Republicans have always been as forthcoming as they should’ve been. You have a point there and I understand that.
But if you can’t acknowledge that the DFL DID campaign, win and profess the intention NOT to raise taxes in the face of the $2.2 billion surplus, your ideology is simply blinding you.
And it would not be truthful.
March 4th, 2008 at 10:17 am
According to Governor Pawlenty’s past rhetoric, the recently overridden bill contained “user fees”, NOT “tax increases”.
If you don’t want to pay the gas “fee”, don’t. Take less trips; you only pay the fee if you CHOOSE to.
If you don’t want to pay the increased tab “fee”, don’t. Get a few more miles outa the old one; you only pay the fee if you CHOOSE to.
See how this works? Your party uses the ol’ “It’s not a ‘tax’; it’s a ‘fee’ when it suits YOUR purposes, but denies that strategery when it doesn’t.
And in your original post, #12, you start out with rhetoric, blame, and BS, but then demand I reply without using the rhetoric, blame, and BS you reserve the “right” to only use yourself.
Doncha hate it, when the stuff you do, is done back to you??!?
Voters are recognizing the above, and more. Which is why the DFL is on a roll; GOPers are angrily purging anyone not ideologically “right”; but savvy politicians like Erik Paulsen are claiming to be “bi-partisan and moderate” while they toe the party line.
It’s gonna be a brutal year for anyone runnin’ with an “R” behind their name, because reasonable people distrust the GOP Party.
March 4th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
To quote GOP Optimist: “Why do you feel the legislature should manage the state’s budget (public taxpayer dollars) in this irresponsible fashion when nobody would do that with their family’s budget?
“We expect families to be fiscally responsible and manage their money with the ebb and flow of the economy, and for most families, this isn’t that difficult of an adjustment.
“So, again: Why do you feel that this is an acceptable practice at the state government level when you would never make those decisions with your own money?”
I’ll answer that question. A family budget is the product of (usually) one or two people in a household deciding their priorities. They don’t have to ask their neighbors, their relatives, they don’t have to ask people living in the next county, they can make the decision all by themselves. They can decide together what to forego, what to postpone, or what to spend frivolously on. They can decide to increase the revenue side by changing employment, selling some things they decide they don’t want or need, or dipping into the families savings or retirement or any other sources they might have.
Government is not a family. Their are 67 senators, 134 representatives, a governor and state agencies, and hundreds of “interested parties” (or “special interests”, depending on your point of view) with an opinion and some influence on who gets what and how much in the budget!
And believe me, anyone who has been around state government knows that each program, each fund, each revenue source, each agency, each part of the state, has a constituency that will defend the importance of their piece of the pie. On organizations “irresponsible fashion” is anothers “vital expenditure”. And that includes both Republicans and Democrats!
There is simply no reasonable way to compare a family budget process or choices with that of state government. They two are not at all comparable and trying to make it so does not enhance the debate.
December 31st, 2008 at 10:30 am
classes business planning planning business lydia