Posted: 07/08/10 18:05, Edited: 07/08/10 20:27
by Dave Mindeman
I have to say that I am with Mark Dayton on this one. The 2010 election for governor is too important to not start laying the cards on the table. We should be demanding some detailed options for balancing the next budget.
Dayton's tax plan is certainly open to criticism. That's fair. But to me, the criticism is never going to ring true unless alternatives are put out to the public.
I realize that economic conditions and budget forecasts can turn around quickly -- but adjustments can be made. I'm sure Dayton would do the same. But there is no reason that all the candidates can't give their general outline of how it will be done.
Margaret Anderson Kelliher is getting closer to some specifics. She laid out an outline in a presser today:
“As Governor I will make those earning more than $250,000 to pay their fair share. I will demand an end to sweetheart deals that shelter tax dollars overseas, and close foreign corporate tax loopholes. “As Governor I will fight waste, fraud and abuse against state government. I will make necessary budget reductions while protecting students from cuts in the classroom, senior citizens in nursing homes, and basic essential services for Minnesota’s most vulnerable. “And as Governor I will use temporary budget tools to transition our state to long-term economic stability.
Alright, getting there. Just need a little more. How much will those over $250,000 be paying? How much will closing loopholes generate? What kind of budget cuts can be made that will protect classrooms, seniors, and basic services? I understand about temporary budget tools, but are we going to rely on it as much as Pawlenty did?
We're getting there with Dayton and MAK. How about Entenza?
Entenza's website doesn't have a specific issues site for the budget. Rather, he envisions that the thousands of green jobs he plans to produce will grow us out of our economic doldrums and solve the budget problem with it.
A noble effort...but I doubt it is going to be practical for the next immediate budget cycle. If you are ready to lead on day one, then let's hear what you propose on day one.
Then we get to Emmer. He may have stumbled onto something with that tip credit. Maybe he plans to uncover all those independently wealthy waiters and waitresses who have been withholding all of that money from their tax returns. But I digress.
Too often Republicans get away with a generalized small government, cut taxes, cut spending mantra without giving any specifics. This year, that has to stop. Bring out the spreadsheets and let the people decide.
You may not be running for accountant, Mr. Emmer, but you are still running to be in charge of the Minnesota budget in its entirety. Tell us what it will look like. And how education and health care will be dealt with. You can talk about all the penny-ante programs you want to discuss, as long as they add up to $5-6 billion to balance the budget.
The same goes for Tom Horner. Middle of the road? Well dead skunks can be in the middle of the road, too. Tell us what a "balanced approach" really means.
His response to Dayton???
"I'm the only candidate who is providing details of a balanced approach to fixing the budget," Horner said. "A balanced approach that includes tax reform, spending reductions and government redesign."
What tax reform? What cuts? And what the hell is redesign? No more platitudes. No more public relations dodges. Give us the facts and make them specific.
Dayton isn't entirely off the hook either. I don't think you can balance the next budget entirely on tax hikes to the wealthy. I think Kelliher and Entenza should make the case as to whether this is politically viable and realistic. They should point out the problems and Dayton should defend it.
We need to talk seriously and specifically about this issue. The citizens of Minnesota have to know that there is a plan and that the person to implement is ready to stake his or her candidacy on it.
