|
|
|
Radical Environmentalism Moving Us Farther from Energy Independence |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/30/2008
|
|
|
The popular notion of energy independence for the United States continues to gain ground in hearts and minds, yet nearly every legislative action being taken on energy policy moves us further from that objective.
Reacting to high gas prices, President Bush finally came out swinging at legislative actions that got us where we are today, calling for Congress to remove roadblocks to expanding domestic energy production and to drop plans to increase taxes on energy.
Nuclear power is inexpensive, clean and efficient, yet due to actions by the federal and state governments, a new nuclear power plant has not been constructed in the US in over 30 years. The US has been called the Saudi Arabia of coal, because of the tremendous abundance of the fuel present within our borders, yet states are enacting moratoriums on the construction of new clean coal-fired plants. A 2,000 acre plot of land in the 19 million acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) holds the potential to increase domestic oil production by 20%. That’s the equivalent of 27 million gallons of gasoline and diesel per day, and would rival Saudi Arabia’s exports, but Congress has forbidden drilling for oil in ANWR. Increased domestic oil-drilling and construction of new oil refineries would undoubtedly drive gas prices down, but thanks to irrational policies, we’re paying $3.50 a gallon or more at the pump and the price is expected to continue rising.
Bio-fuels not only spectacularly fail to move us closer to energy independence; they simultaneously threaten our food supply and exponentially increase prices. Even if every acre of farmland in the US was converted to bio-fuel production, we would not achieve energy independence through bio-fuels and we would produce no food. Because of intense lobbying by big agricultural interests looking for short-term payoffs, a significant portion of national and state energy policies rely on these fuel sources even though it is becoming increasingly apparent that bio-fuels don’t live up to their promise.
More than four years ago, a new coal-fired 500-megawatt power plant was proposed for Big Stone City near the Minnesota-South Dakota border. Protests by radical environmentalists and politics have delayed the project to such an extent that construction hasn’t even begun yet, and permits have been languishing in bureaucratic process for two and a half years.
As part of the construction plan for the next generation cleaner-burning plant, an existing coal-fired plant next to the site would be retrofitted with new emissions scrubbing technology that the designers say will mean the two plants combined will produce fewer emissions than the current Big Stone plant now produces alone. Regardless of the energy needs of the region, and the environmental benefits of the project, coal power has been demonized to such an extent that future power needs for the region are threatened.
The move away from coal-fired power generation in favor of wind and solar power is a major contributor to escalating energy costs. Xcel Energy estimates that Minnesota’s renewable energy mandates will lead to an average household electric bill increase of $300 to $400 per year.
Further exacerbating the cost problem is an increasing reliance on natural gas to generate electricity because of its perceived environmental benefits. Use of natural gas to fire Minnesota power plants has increased nearly 7-fold since 1997. Xcel Energy’s two new gas-fired power plants will increase natural gas consumption even more dramatically in the next year. The two new plants, which will generate about 1,000 megawatts between them, will consume more natural gas than is now used to heat every home in Minneapolis and St. Paul combined.
The trend pits electricity production against heating in competition for the same resource, driving up the cost of both. Natural gas price increases have already had a significant impact on Minnesota families and businesses. Center Point Energy reported 208,000 gas bill delinquencies in 2007 and Minnesota’s Home Energy Assistance expenditures rose 33% between 2005 and 2007.
Although the US has increased domestic output of natural gas in recent years, we import 16% of our natural gas supply. Increasing reliance on natural gas will mean more imports, and therefore less energy independence.
|
MN House debate on the Hackbarth amendment to lift the nuclear power plant moratorium.
|
Legislators, who by and large profess a desire to foster energy independence, are moving us farther and farther away from that vision by falling in with socialism veiled in pseudo-environmentalism, giant agricultural financial interests and irrational fears of nuclear power.
We are witnessing examples of this even within state-level policy proposals. Debating an energy bill ( SF3337) in the Minnesota House on April 23rd, Representative Tom Hackbarth (R – Cedar) introduced an amendment that would remove Minnesota’s long-standing moratorium on new nuclear power plants. Predictably, the amendment was defeated, continuing the cycle of calling for energy independence while simultaneously working against it. |
 |
|
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
A Tax Increase for 69% of Minnesota Homeowners |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/29/2008
|
|
|
|
 DFLs property tax proposal seems to confuse even its own authors
Taxpayer's League Press Release April 29th, 2008
ST. PAUL – House DFLers yesterday introduced this year’s version of the Omnibus Tax bill and with it their attempt at property tax reform. Among the highlights of their Tax bill is an overhaul of the state’s property tax relief programs that they claim would make 95% of Minnesotans eligible for some form of property tax relief.
The intent of the legislation, introduced by Representatives Ann Lenczewski [DFL-Bloomington] and Paul Marquardt [DFL-Dillworth], is to tie Minnesotans’ property tax payments directly to their income. Trumpeted as a simplification of the current system and a way to force wealthy Minnesotans to pay their fair share, under the new system any family earning more than $200,000 a year – the DFLs definition of “rich” – would see a tax increase.
But according to calculations made by the Department of Revenue and released today during a committee hearing, when the new property tax system is fully phased-in, nearly 69% of Minnesota homeowners will see a tax increase.
“I’m not sure how the bill’s authors miscalculated the fiscal impact of this legislation. How could they claim that 95% of Minnesotans will be eligible for property tax relief when the numbers actually show that 69% of homeowners will see a tax increase,” said Phil Krinkie, president of the Taxpayers League of Minnesota and a former chairman of the House Taxes Committee. “Perhaps they were just too eager to put forth another scheme to take from the rich and give to the poor. Whatever their thoughts, capping property taxes as a percentage of income is a bad idea that will lead to a local government spending spree.”
The Tax bill, which will continue to be debated in various House committees this week, has no direct equivalent in the Senate and will most likely meet opposition from Governor Pawlenty and a majority of Minnesota homeowners who would see a tax increase if this bill were to become law.
Take Action: Sign the Tax Cut Petition.
|
|
|
|
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
Real Health Care Reform |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/25/2008
|
|
|
|
Physcians are concerned about adding another party (the government) between between the doctor-patient relationship. Government mandates could influence the level of care offered to patients. They recognize that rationing could likely result from these policies. Other countries with similar health care systems use rationing to control medical costs.
Dr. Jim Young explains his concerns.
|
Ask just about any Minnesotan if our health care system needs work. Doctors, insurance agents, nurses, lawyers, politicians, and patients will probably not only say ‘yes,’ but have some sort of medical horror story to tell you too.
Where it gets difficult is in trying to articulate exactly what should be done. Most people will have suggestions for improvements in areas with which they have had personal experience, but system-wide changes that will work for everyone are elusive.
There tend to be two generalizations when it comes to health care reform discussions. On one side, there are those who expect the government to take control and provide “universal health care.” On the other, we hear about “free market solutions.” To be frank, most people spouting these media-driven catch phrases don’t know what either notion actually means, but they have the right sound bites to mesh with one personal political philosophy or the other.
Most discussion of health care reform ideas is limited to making claims of presumed benefits or advocating a bumper-sticker health care solution. The news media is often ruthless in its simplification of the issues, so this article attempts to explain some of the details of useful health care reform ideas.
Under current statutes, it is actually illegal to purchase medical insurance from outside the state. Minnesota has a closed market, with the largest number of government-imposed insurance policy mandates in the nation. Introducing more competition and reducing government mandates will expand quality and choices while reducing costs.
Providing tax credits for the purchase of individual health plans would help offset the disparity between employer-sponsored group plans paid for with tax-free dollars and privately purchased plans without the same tax break. People struggling to continue coverage between jobs through COBRA and employees who do not receive health insurance through their work would benefit from such tax credits.
Expanding Health Savings Accounts (HSA) coupled with high-deductible insurance plans would put more consumers in-charge of their health care dollars. Partially removing the third party pay model will result in more fiscal discipline on the part of the consumer, reducing over-use of our health care system. This will in turn drive down the price of insurance policies while allowing the consumer to keep unused health care dollars for education, retirement savings or other uses of their direction.
Tort reform would reign-in the costs of frivolous lawsuits and could have an immediate impact on the cost of medical treatment by reducing the doctor’s overhead cost of malpractice insurance that is ultimately passed on to the consumer.
Reforming Medical Assistance and MinnesotaCare to resemble an HSA model has the potential to significantly reduce overuse of subsidized plans. Recipients would be rewarded for exercising fiscal responsibility by being able to rollover the unused cash balances within their HSA account.
While contemplating various methods of health care reform, it’s important to keep the rights of patients in mind. Protections for patient privacy are essential. Private medical records should never be transferred without the explicit consent of the patient.
The health care reform bill that’s now being debated in conference committee will be on the way to the governor’s desk soon, but the governor has expressed misgivings about the details, which are very different from the ideas expressed here. The goals set out by the governor’s commission, various committees, legislators and special interests that crafted the bill are laudable: Controlling health care costs and increasing access to treatment. The end product doesn’t live up to its promise, though.
The 114 page health care bill as it now stands actually increases costs and could very well have the effect of reducing access by closing rural hospitals and clinics.
Governor Pawlenty wanted a bill he could sign to improve Minnesota’s health care. Unfortunately, he didn’t get one and it’s reported that he’s been meeting with conference committee members to see if changes can be made that bring the bill closer to the original vision for it. Failing that, the governor may very well veto legislation he had hoped to be able to support. In that case, health care reform will not happen this session and legislators will go back to the drawing board when they reconvene next winter.
Related Reading: Pawlenty to Host Health Care Meeting (MPR)
Take Action: Click here to tell the governor what kind of health reform you want.
|
|
|
|
Comments (2)
|
|
|
|
Happy to Pay More for a Worse Minnesota Economy |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/25/2008
|
|
|
 It’s no real wonder that rural economies are sluggish and good paying outstate jobs can be difficult to find in Minnesota. Businesses in lower-population areas of the state are overburdened with taxes.
The Minnesota Taxpayer’s Association conducted a 50-state study comparing state to state property taxes and found that Minnesota’s rural commercial property is taxed at the third highest levels in the nation. A typical $25 million commercial property pays nearly $1 million in property taxes, compared with a national average of just over $500,000.
Smaller properties, in the $100,000 and $1 million ranges fare slightly better, ranking 9th and 4th highest taxed nationally. Any way you slice it, Minnesota’s rural commercial property owners are in the top ten most taxed, a dubious distinction.
Excessive business taxes, especially in rural areas result in layoffs, hiring freezes, and businesses closing. Next time you see a sign that reads “Happy to pay for a better Minnesota,” keep in mind that it’s also possible to overpay for a worse Minnesota.
Read more: Rural Minnesota Businesses See Rise in Property Taxes - Finance and Commerce
|
|
|
|
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
Dangerous Health Care Bill Approaching Governor's Desk |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/18/2008
|
|
|
A health care 'reform' bill will be landing on Governor Pawlenty's desk within the next several days that would dramatically expand the government's role in Minnesota's health care system. The bill creates new layers of government bureaucracy, adds thousands of people to taxpayer-subsidized health plans, grants government access to our private medical records, co-opts schools into monitoring the weight of our children and allows Katrina-style bureaucrats to decide which treatment options will be available to you and your family.
The bill that ultimately emerges from conference committee will be an amalgam of House File 3391 and Senate File 3099 each of which were passed within their respective bodies.
The costs of complying with the new regulations imposed by this bill will especially threaten rural hospitals and clinics. Medical facilities in greater Minnesota may be forced to cut back services or close down entirely.
Governor Pawlenty has been eager to improve access and affordability of health care in Minnesota. He has tried to work with the legislature to craft a bill that respects market demands and protects patient rights. But the bill that has emerged from the legislative process fails to deliver on these objectives.
During the course of a marathon 10-hour floor session in the DFL-controlled House, Republican legislators introduced numerous amendments to incorporate increased competition and fiscal responsibility into the legislation. But none of these ideas were adopted into the bill that emerged (see video at right).
A legislature determined to give government more control over health care has created a monstrous bill that greatly expands the state’s role in health care and creates new, powerful government agencies to dictate the kinds of insurance and even the types of treatments that will be available to patients. This bill will set the stage for the implementation of socialized medicine in Minnesota.
Physcians are concerned about adding another party (the government) between between the doctor-patient relationship. Government mandates could influence the level of care offered to patients. They recognize that rationing could likely result from these policies. Other countries with similar health care systems use rationing to control medical costs.
Real health care reform will only happen by getting government out of the health care business and putting the patient back in charge of making their own health care decisions. True health care reform measures must incorporate free market principles that will allow competition to drive down costs and improve quality. Today, Minnesota is on the cusp of taking our health care policy in exactly the opposite direction.
Only Governor Pawlenty now stands between this bill and your family's health care.
|
|
|
|
Comments (21)
|
|
|
|
Abdicating Minnesota’s Authority to California in the Name of Global Warming |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/17/2008
|
|
|
 Minnesota legislators concerned with reducing automotive emissions of greenhouse gasses have devised a drastic plan. Evidently, state lawmakers don’t trust themselves to establish pollution standards for Minnesota, because the bill they’ve crafted abdicates that authority to the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
CARB is a division of the California Environmental Protection Agency and consists of 11 members appointed by California’s governor (Arnold Schwarzenegger). They set emission standards for vehicles sold in California that are twice as ambitious as federal guidelines, requiring 30% lower emissions in less than eight years.
Representative Hortman (DFL – Brooklyn Park) wants to permanently entrust the 11-member California panel with regulatory authority over Minnesota. The bill she introduced ( HF863) directs the Minnesota’s Pollution Control Agency to adopt rules that “must be identical to and must incorporate by reference the California low emission vehicle regulations adopted by the California Air Resources Board under the California Code of Regulations, title 13.”
Not only does Representative Hortman intend to adopt current known California regulations, but she intends to do so in perpetuity, giving appointed California bureaucrats the power to enact unknown future regulations for the state of Minnesota.
The bill states that MPCA’s rules “must be amended as necessary in a timely fashion to minimize the time during which Minnesota's rules are not identical with California's regulations, as required under United States Code, title 42, section 7507. Amendments under this clause must be made under section 14.388, subdivision 1, clause (3). Any portion of California's regulations requiring a federal waiver under the Clean Air Act in order to become effective may not be enforced in Minnesota unless and until California receives the requisite federal waiver.”
In their rush to “save the planet,” they forgot to save Minnesota’s sovereignty. A UCLA student would have more influence over Minnesota’s vehicle regulations than any voter or politician in Minnesota would!
"We're talking about an 11-member panel in California, that's going to be regulating the state of Minnesota,” said Representative Tom Hackbarth (R – Cedar), “That's not the way to operate in our state. I don't think our legislature wants to give away that kind of authority."
Auto makers say the California emissions standards (which aren’t even in force in California, since they contradict federal regulations) would sharply increase the cost of automobiles, and limit the number of SUVs and trucks that could be sold in a state where they were implemented.
According to the Minnesota Automobile Dealers Association, Minnesotans buy more trucks than cars, which poses a problem with California Standards. Higher demand SUVs and trucks would have to be rationed. Ford Dealers would have to sell a certain number of Focuses before they could sell an F-150, for example. If Hortman’s bill is adopted, more expensive vehicles, rationing, and an abdication of Minnesota’s regulatory power to another state’s government bureaucracy will result.
Also see: Don't Take My Truck.
Take Action: Tell your elected officials to reject the California Emissions Bill.
|
|
|
|
Comments (5)
|
|
|
|
Levi Strand Signs Tax Cut Petition - Wins iPod |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/15/2008
|
|
|
 Congratulations to Levi Strand of Anoka, Minnesota who took the time to sign the Tax Cut Petition and was entered in a drawing sponsored by Minnesota Majority to win a brand new 4GB iPod Nano.
"That's awesome. I never win anything," said Strand.
The drawing was conducted on April 15th by generating a random number to correspond with a record number on the petition. Over 1,200 people had signed the petition, calling on lawmakers to refrain from introducing any new tax, and instead work toward reducing and capping taxes.
Signing the petition automatically identifies and faxes one’s state senator, house representative and sends a copy to the governor.
The petition remains online to sign at TaxCutPetition.com.
|
|
|
|
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
The Tax Cut Rally, Global Warming Spring Weather and Twin Cities Media Bias |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/14/2008
|
|
|
The taxman cometh. Income taxes are due on Tuesday, April 15 th. Tax Freedom Day (the day that marks when an average worker has earned enough money to pay his taxes for the year) is April 23 rd this year on a national average, but Minnesotans have to shoulder their tax burden for a few extra days. Tax Freedom Day is April 27th this year in Minnesota according to the Tax Foundation. They say that's the 8th latest nationally.
On a blustery April 12 th, thousands of Minnesotan taxpayers braved icy winds and snow to converge outside the State Capitol and demand relief from the burden of working nearly 1/3 of every year to fill the government's coffers. Talk host Jason Lewis, backed by his home radio station 100.3 KTLK, organized the Tax Cut Rally with Minnesota Majority as a premier partner. Taxpayer’s League, the Minnesota Free Markets Institute, and the Center for Parental Responsibility also had booths there.
The Tax Cut Petition went high-tech this year. Minnesota Majority set up a large tent with 40 laptop computers allowing attendees to sign the petition online and instantly send a fax to their state representative, senator and the governor. 904 people used the setup to send their tax-cut message to their elected officials. Hundreds more took printed copies of the petition to sign at home, opting not to wait in the unrelenting long lines for a turn at a computer (thus far, 3,300 messages have been sent via TaxCutPetition.com).
This year’s speakers included KTLK personalities Chris Baker, Dan Conry and of course, Jason Lewis. Harold Shudlick gave the invocation and Jeff Davis, Twila Brase, Michelle Bachman, Barb Davis White, Marty Seifert, Phil Krinkie and John Kline roused the crowd on high-tax topics ranging from universal health care to global warming.
Despite the cold, wind, sleet and snow, turnout at the annual rally rivaled last year’s tax-cutting crowd, which garnered an estimated 7,000 attendees on a warm, sunny day. Regardless of the actual numbers, the Associated Press and the Star Tribune grossly underreported turnout.
 “The Minnesota Tax Cut Coalition held its annual rally at the State Capitol on Saturday, drawing a crowd of about 1,000 people demanding that legislators stop ‘wasteful’ spending and allow Minnesotans to keep more of their paychecks.” Jean Hopfensperger of the Star Tribune wrote in an April 13th article.
The Associated Press, followed by KARE-11, WCCO and other TV news outlets relying on the AP wire service reported a crowd that was under 1,000, saying “ nearly 1,000 people rallied at the State Capitol against higher taxes.”
DFLer, Matt Entenza was quoted in the AP story claiming that Minnesota is actually ranked the 32 nd highest tax state, which isn’t even within the bounds of realistic debate. The United States Census Bureau Ranked Minnesota the 5th highest in per-capita taxes in 2005 (the most recent year that per-capita data is available online from the Census bureau). Current data suggests that Minnesota may have momentarily dipped to number 6, but following a $6.6 billion tax-hike, Jason Lewis asserted that we’re probably back up around 4 or 5. Entenza is making up statistics from whole cloth and the media just ran with it.
The liberal media bias is alive and probably becoming more brazen, but thanks to alternative media like radio and the Internet, the truth still has an outlet.
Minnesota is among the most overtaxed states in the nation, legislators just raised our taxes again, and taxpayers came out in impressive numbers to stand in the cold for hours and demand not just holding the line on taxes, but real tax relief. “’No new taxes’ isn’t going to cut it anymore,” Jason Lewis said in his speech. “When you’re bleeding to death, somebody yelling ‘no new wounds’ isn’t going to cut it.”
|
|
|
|
Comments (3)
|
|
|
|
Pork Buster – Pawlenty Line Item Vetoes, then Signs Reduced Bonding Bill |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/7/2008
|
|
|
 Passed by large margins in both houses of the state legislature, a whopping 114 page, $1 billion bonding bill landed on the governor’s desk last week. Today, after some extensive veto-pen editing, Governor Pawlenty signed the bill into law. The new price tag is $105 million lower than the governor’s original stated limit, and about $300 million less than the legislature sought.
“I find it inconceivable that legislators would fund a brass band music lending library and yet provide no funding for a much needed new nursing facility at the Minneapolis Veterans Home,” the governor wrote in a letter to House Speaker Kelliher.
Vetoed spending items included:
- $72.7 million for the U of M and MNSCU (Minnesota State Colleges and Universities)
- Millions for wetlands and landscaping projects
- $1.4 million for soccer fields in Blaine
- $3 million for volleyball courts in Rochester
- $3.3 million for various other amateur sports facilities
- $82.75 million for 13 rail transit projects
- $2 million for a Cedar Ave bicycle bridge in Minneapolis
- $11 million for gorilla and polar bear exhibits at Como Zoo
- $2 million for lights that “preserve the natural night environment” in Minneapolis
- Millions for assorted trails and paths
- A half-million for the city of Floodwood to buy a business park
- $5 million for the arts
- Millions more in miscellaneous district-specific pork projects
The bonding bill as signed by the governor totals $717 million, keeping it well under the traditional 3% debt service budget limit. A good-sized chunk of the pork is gone, making the 2008 bonding bill leaner, and the smallest capital investment bill passed in years.
|
|
|
|
Comments (7)
|
|
|
|
The Costs of Illegal Immigration in Minnesota |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/4/2008
|
|
|
 Illegal immigrants residing in Minnesota cost taxpayers $345 million in state revenues each year. That figure is projected to climb to over $1 billion by 2020 according to research conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).
In addition to the state-borne cost of local subsidies and expenses, Minnesotan taxpayers contribute $309 million dollars each year toward federal expenses incurred by illegal immigration.
With a total annual cost to Minnesota of around $654 million tax dollars, the average Minnesota household pays $284 per year to subsidize illegal aliens.
The price paid by the citizens of Minnesota to subsidize illegal aliens is primarily distributed across expenditures for education, emergency medical care and incarceration. There are myriad other costs associated with illegal immigration, as well. In the city of St. Paul, for example, 85% of subsidized housing is occupied by immigrants (according to author Sanford Ungar in his book, Fresh Blood).
In what amounts to an acknowledgement of its culpability in exacerbating state expenses related to illegal immigration due to inaction, the federal government has established funds to assist states in defraying associated costs.
The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program was established to compensate states and local jurisdictions for incarceration of criminal aliens. In 2004, Minnesota received $1.78 million from the federal government under this program. This is only partial compensation, however, as Minnesota’s actual cost of incarcerating criminal aliens was about $13 million in 2004.
Emergency treatment of illegal immigrants was estimated to cost Minnesota taxpayers $17 million in 2004. The federal government compensated the state less than 10% of the cost with a payment of $1.4 million.
Illegal immigration cost Minnesota’s public school systems an estimated $146 - $276 million in 2004. This expense is borne by local property taxes as well as by the state treasury.
While it is true to some extent that some working illegal immigrants pay taxes, the average illegal immigrant household costs the federal government alone $2,700 per year, and the taxes contributed by the average illegal alien household equal only half that amount.
While both Minnesota and the United States have been established by and continue to thrive by the infusion of immigrants from all over the world, it is important to make the distinction between legal immigrants and illegal aliens. Immigrants who integrate into society lawfully and become citizens enrich our culture and add to the productivity of the nation. By contrast, illegal aliens who sneak into the US unlawfully and who by definition have no allegiance to our society create a demonstrable and significant drain on our economic resources.
Sources:
Take Action: Sign the Immigration Enforcement Petition.
|
|
|
|
Comments (2)
|
|
|
|
Carver and Scott Only Counties to Reject Metro Area Transit Tax Increase |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
4/2/2008
|
|
|
|
All seven metro counties have now weighed in on the new transit tax and it appears that sales and excise taxes will be increasing in five of the metro counties. Here's the run-down on the voting by county:
- Anoka County commissioners voted 5-2 in favor of the tax and to join the new bureaucracy created with it. Commissioners Berg, Lang, Kordiak, LeDoux and Erhart voted in favor of the tax hike. West and Sivarajah opposed.
- Carver County commissioners voted unanimously to reject the tax increases.
- Dakota County commissioners approved the new taxes by a vote of 5-2. Harris and Gaylord voted against the increase.
- In Hennepin county, Peter McLaughlin championed the transit-tax cause, joined by Opat, Stenglein, Dorfman and Koblick. Randy Johnson and Penny Steele opposed, but the tax increase was passed 5-2.
- Scott County unanimously rejected the sales and vechicle tax increases.
- Ramsey County commissioners voted 6-1 in favor of the tax and Joint Powers board, which will determine how the revenue is divided. Commissioners Carter, McDonough, Reinhardt, Rettman, Parker and Ortega voted to raise taxes. Only Bennet voted no.
- Washington County commissioners adopted the new taxes by a vote of 3-2. Pulkrabek and Kriesel opposed the tax hike, while Myra Peterson, Hegberg and Stafford voted in favor.
The new sales and vehicle taxes tax will go into effect on July 1st in affected counties.
A summary of the voting record together with each commissioners' contact information can be found here.
Read Craig Westover's column about transit budgets: Fighting Over the Spoils.
|
|
|
|
Comments (10)
|
|
|
|
Minnesota Health Care at Risk |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
3/28/2008
|
|
|
 The state senate approved the health care bill ( SF3099) on Thursday by a vote of 41-22, but legislators on both sides of the aisle have deep concerns about the nature of the bill. Governor Tim Pawlenty has withdrawn his support of the bill in its current form.
DFL Senator Sharon Erickson Ropes said the bill “puts Minnesota health care at risk,” and suggests that many legislators don’t even understand huge sections of the bill. “This is all very confusing,” she said.
Republican Senator David Haan is worried about privacy intrusions in the bill, like body mass index monitoring. "This kind of active intrusion in people's lives goes way beyond what's necessary," he said.
Senator Ray Vanderveer (R – Forest Lake) summed up the bill saying, “We want to encourage people to get health insurance by putting a tax on it and making it cost more.”
The governor said the current bill is unacceptable to him, but added that he thinks the bill is still “fixable.”
The House has yet to take up it’s version of the health care bill ( HF3391) in a floor vote, but it is expected soon.
There are significant differences between the House’s bill and the Senate’s. If the bill is approved in the House, it will go to a conference committee between the two chambers to hammer out differences. Significant changes sometimes occur in conference committees, and completely new elements are not out of the question.
|
|
|
|
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
How Much is that Gorilla Cage Going to Set Me Back? |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
3/27/2008
|
|
|
 Bonding. A government method of borrowing for large public works projects. Bonds generally mature in 30 years and require repayment with interest.
Bonding is an effective mechanism for funding big projects that benefit future generations, like building new highways. If a road lasts 30 years, stretching payment for its construction to span its useful life makes sense.
This year, nearly a billion dollars in new bonding has been proposed and is now being debated in the state legislature. In light of our current budget shortfall, and to preserve the state's bond rating, the governor wants to limit borrowing this session. Ever eager to bring home the pork, the legislature wants to see how high they can push the numbers. Several of the projects they want to fund beg evaluation of their necessity, especially considering that the current budget already spends more than available revenues.
Frank Moe (DFL – 4A) wants over $13.5 million for new state trails and Melissa Hortman (DFL – 47B) tacked on another $2.1 million for trails in Anoka County. Throw in another $2.4 million for other non-metro trails and we’re looking at almost $20 million for trails.
Shelly Madore (DFL – 37A) wanted to borrow $5 million for a Minnesota Zoo “Master Plan.” She only got $1 million in the omnibus bonding bill for pre-design and design of the “Master Plan,” but not to worry. The Zoo will still get a nice piece of the bonding package with another $8.5 million for “asset preservation.”
Thanks to Alice Hausman (DFL - 66B), Como Zoo is set to receive $11 million for new gorilla cages and Mike Jaros (DFL – 7B) didn’t miss bringing back a piece of the zoo pie, snagging $1.2 million for polar bears at the Duluth/Superior Zoo.
Kim Norton (DFL – 29B) is looking to bring home $4 million to expand a volleyball court in Rochester (don’t you just need sand and a net?) and Scott Kranz (DFL – 51A) wants a million to fix up a soccer field in Blaine for a total of $5 million interest-bearing state dollars going to local, amateur sports facilities.
Tony Sertich (DFL – 5B) is trying to snag half-a-million for the town of Floodwood to acquire land on which to build a business park. A few questions might come to mind with this one. First, why does the state care whether Floodwood has a business park? Second, where the heck is Floodwood? And third, why is government purchasing land for what is inherently a private, commercial venture?
Minneapolis legislators are keen to bring home the bacon as well. Margaret Kelliher (DFL – 60A) seeks $3 million for predesign of renovations to Orchestra Hall. Thanks to Frank Hornstein (DFL – 60B) and Phyllis Kahn (DFL – 59B), Minneapolis gets $2 million to purchase new lighting that “preserves the natural night environment” (seems like that should be free). Another $70 million is appropriated for the Central Corridor light rail line.
The above examples only begin to scratch the surface, revealing the stockpiles of pork lurking inside the bonding bill. See the bill for yourself to find out what other questionable spending priorities legislators want to borrow money for in a deficit year.
Contact your elected officials and tell them to "Cut The Pork!"
|
|
|
|
Comments (2)
|
|
|
|
Compare the Treatment of Our Veterans |
|
Jeff's Blog
|
By Jeff Davis on
3/26/2008
|
|
|
|
This 3 minute video from ABC's "Person of the Week" provides a stark contrast to the treatment that VETS FOR FREEDOM received when trying to visit Forest Lake High School. High school administrators and those who organized the protest threat resulting in the cancellation of the presentation at the school would do well to watch this video and learn the meaning of true patriotism.
|
|
|
|
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
Veterans Not Welcome at Forest Lake High School |
|
Jeff's Blog
|
By Jeff Davis on
3/25/2008
|
|
|
|
A national tour featuring decorated veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was scheduled to stop this week at Forest Lake Area High School. But just hours before the event, school administrators abruptly canceled the visit.
Forest Lake High School principal Steve Massey says he canceled the appearance by the Vets for Freedom because he didn't want politics in the classroom. But the truth of the matter is that Mr. Massey succumbed to pressure from radical left wing activists that threatened to stage a protest at the school.
Pete Hegseth, a Forest Lake High grad and the director of Vets for Freedom, said that he had talked with school officials during the planning process, and made clear that presenters would not make political statements. "It's Iraq and Afghan veterans talking about what they saw and what they did there, and about what it means to put on the uniform of your country," he said.
Star Tribune columnist Katherine Kersten said it best in her column this week: “Shame on Forest Lake High administrators for caving to political pressure under the guise of preventing political pressure. Apparently, they only understand the sort of political pressure exerted by left-wing anti-war groups.” It is appalling that high school students are not allowed to hear from the men and women who have risked their lives protect our country because of threats from Left wing protesters.
You can weigh-in on this incident with some of the people involved in the cancellation. Contact Steve Massey, the principal of Forest Lake Area High School, and let him know what you think about his decision to cancel the event. You can also contact Contact Karl Bremer, one of the organizers of the protest threat resulting in the school's cancellation decision.
|
|
|
|
Comments (7)
|
|
|
|
New Health Care Proposals Unnecessary, Expensive and Intrusive |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
3/20/2008
|
|
|
|
We recently interviewed Rep. Tom Emmer (R, Delano) and Twila Brase (Citizens' Council on Health Care) regarding the health care reform measures that have been intoduced by DFL legislators (SF3099 / HF3391). All Minnesotans should watch these interviews to understand how these so-called 'reforms' will ultimately impact the way health care is sold and delivered in Minnesota.
The bills (SF3099 / HF3391) are currently being hurried through the state legislature. Supporters say it will make health insurance more affordable and accessible. The reality is that these proposals will do neither. Instead, the bills will target smokers, drinkers and people with some extra pounds for state-sponsored lifestyle modification initiatives, create new layers of expensive government bureaucracy and encumber small business owners with costly new administration mandates.
The creation of a proposed Health Insurance Exchange, the centerpiece of the bill (number SF3099), is ostensibly designed to provide to employees of small companies who purchase their own individual health insurance the same tax break as employers receive. In reality, the Exchange will increase the cost of privately-purchased health care by at least 2%, burdening taxpayers with new taxes and fees, and forcing small businesses to become bill collectors for insurance companies with whom they are otherwise unassociated.
The cost of medical services would actually increase under this proposal. Hospitals, other care providers and insurance companies will be billed for the Health Improvement Fund. The fund will seek to collect $40 million from health care providers, the expense of which will naturally be passed on to consumers.
A portion of SF3099 deals with sharing private medical records across multiple agencies and organizations, keeping track of your lifestyle choices, how much you weigh, funding third-party organizations to implement programs to cajole and coerce you into behavior choices preferred by the state, and recruiting as many people as possible into the state’s medical welfare programs (Medical Assistance and MinnesotaCare).
The ultimate goal of the bill appears to be to expand the number of people dependent on the state for their medical care. The bill provides bounties paid to organizations and individuals that recruit new enrollees in the state’s medical welfare programs. Schools will be asked to single-out students who receive free or reduced-rate school lunch as targets for recruitment activities. If a school is successful in enrolling a student’s family, they will earn a $25 bounty. To entice potential new enrollees, the bill suggests that organizations should "provide an applicant a gift certificate or other incentive upon enrollment."
Once registered into the state system, enrollees will be required to submit to mandatory health and weight screening, and a complete loss of medical privacy.
There is no uninsured crisis in Minnesota. The current rate of uninsured people is estimated at 7.2 percent. Demonstrably, the majority of those uninsured are without coverage by choice. Fifty-four percent of Minnesota’s uninsured are eligible for state assistance, but they choose not to enroll. The rest are eligible for employer group or individual plans, but have decided not to purchase the insurance.
The Insurance Exchange is an expensive solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. The rest of the plan attempts to put more people on the public dole, while raising taxes and fees, invading patient privacy and restricting individual freedoms.
Government is the problem, not the solution. Minnesota has the highest number of government-imposed insurance mandates in the country. Instead of allowing insurance companies to offer different products for different people, the goverment has mandated what must be included in every plan, thereby driving up the cost of insurance for everyone. Goverment has also errected barriers that prevent insurance companies from outside the state to compete for your business. Everyone knows that when there's competition within a marketplace, costs go down and quality goes up.
Adding more layers of bureaucracy and regulation won’t solve our health care problems. It will only exacerbate them. The solution lies in the free market. Offering consumers more choice in personalizing their health coverage plans by eliminating government mandates would immediately reduce the cost of coverage for most Minnesotans. A simple change in our tax code could eliminate the need for complicated plans like the Insurance Exchange by giving everyone the same tax deduction for health care expenditures. This would also help decouple insurance from a person’s employment situation, and make health insurance more portable.
TAKE ACTION: Click here to contact your state legislators now.
Be sure to read Craig Westover's recent columns in the Pioneer Press: The Devil's Not in the Detail, But Sitting in Plain Sight and A Sow's Ear of Corporate Socialism. Also take a look at It's Universal at Ladies Logic.
|
|
|
|
Comments (27)
|
|
|
|
Design Flaw Responsible for 35W Bridge Collapse |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
3/19/2008
|
|
|
 The NTSB released a fifth update of its findings on the 35W bridge collapse on March 17 th. The NTSB had previously cited too-thin gusset plates as a factor in the collapse and has now pinpointed the exact plates that failed and their location in the bridge structure.
The NTSB is now examining archival information provided by the original design consultants to determine how and why the bridge plans called for the thin gusset plates installed in 1967.
Following the bridge’s collapse, a number of lawmakers immediately took the stage to decry a lack of tax revenues as the cause, and some (like Senator Steve Murphy for example) went so far as to blame the current MNDOT administration and Governor Pawlenty’s office.
Transportation Funding, it seems had little or nothing to do with the bridge’s ultimate collapse. The bridge’s faulty design doomed it to fail from the day it was built. Despite the facts, politicians will likely continue to hearken back to the collapse of the 35W bridge as a catalyst to raise taxes for “transportation.”
|
|
|
|
Comments (5)
|
|
|
|
Reagan on Socialized Medicine |
|
Jeff's Blog
|
By Jeff Davis on
3/18/2008
|
|
|
|
In 1961, then private citizen Ronald Reagan partnered with the American Medical Association to record this 10 minute speech that was to become part of what was known as Operation Coffee Cup (OCC). OCC was a campaign conducted by the American Medical Association (AMA) in opposition to the Democrats' plans to extend Social Security to include health insurance for the elderly, later known as Medicare. As part of the program, doctors' wives would organize coffee meetings and play the Reagan recording to convince acquaintances to write letters to Congress opposing the program. Reagan's arguments against socialized medicine ring as true today as they did over 40 years ago. Minnesota state legislators pushing for increased government involvement in health care should take a moment to reflect on Reagan's comments.
|
|
|
|
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
If We Adopt Socialized Medicine, Where Will Canadians Go For Their Health Care? |
|
Jeff's Blog
|
By Jeff Davis on
3/14/2008
|
|
|
|
Want to get a first hand look at government controlled health care? Watch this brief video and see how a Canadian was forced to seek care in the United States in order to save his life.
Some Minnesota politicians believe that Minnesota should adopt a health care plan similar to that of Canada. But these politicians would do well to consider some of the outcomes associated with the Canadian system, such as:
- Waits up to 5 days in Emergency rooms
- Three-year waiting list for a pain clinic
- Waits of four months for radiation therapy for cancer patients
- Declining enrollment in medical school resulting in too few doctors and nurses
- Closing hospitals to save costs
- 12 % of Canadians can’t find a family physician.
There are countless examples of why adopting a Canadian-style health care program is bad public policy for Minnesota.
|
|
|
|
Comments (5)
|
|
|
|
Majority of DFL Reps Favor Sanctuary Cities Continuing to Harbor Illegals |
|
Jeff's Blog
|
By Jeff Davis on
3/13/2008
|
|
|
 Today a majority of DFL state representatives voted in favor of a motion to squash a potential vote on HF3010, a bill to prohibit sanctuary cities from harboring illegal aliens in Minnesota. Cities like as Minneapolis and St. Paul have sanctuary policies that prevent police officers from inquiring about immigration status or enforcing immigration laws. These policies are allowing illegal aliens to openly enjoy the benefits of citizenship without the fear of deportation.
The DFL-controlled House has been trying to stall HF 3010, hoping to have the bill simply die in committee. Today the bill's chief author, Rep. Paul Kols (R, Victoria), made a motion to pull the bill directly to the House floor for an up-or-down vote. But Rep. Tony Sertich (DFL, Chisholm) then made a motion to table the Kols’ motion. The Sertich motion prevailed (click here to see the voting record - a vote in favor of the Sertch motion was a vote in favor of sanctuary cities).
Sanctuary city policies cause a host of financial, legal and criminal problems that negatively affect the quality of life for legitimate Minnesota citizens. The recent bus crash in Cottonwood is a tragic reminder of this fact and should have been a wake-up call to our state legislators to get tough on illegal immigration. But most DFL representatives don't seem to be getting the message.
Here's a link to an Action Alert we just issued urging citizens to contact their representatives on this measure.
|
|
|
|
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|