My governor, Tim Pawlenty, has been a regular media gadfly during his first press availability of the 2012 campaign media statements at the Republican Governors’ Association meetings. He’s had the combover line and the less ideology, more doing line, and he let loose with a nice cheap shot against his 2012 rival rebuke to Sarah Palin, saying that “Drill, baby, drill” was just a slogan. If you didn’t know anything about Minnesota’s governor, you might think he was a decent, pragmatic guy who was willing to stand up to his party’s orthodoxy.
Those of us who live in Minnesota, of course, know better. Gov. Timmy has not been willing to buck his party, not at all. He’s still refused to sign a tax increase during his six years in office, going so far as to veto a transportation funding bill that passed in the wake of the I-35W bridge collapse because it had a gas tax attached to it. Jeff Rosenberg has a nice roundup for those who’ve forgotten some of Timmy’s greatest hits, like the time he line-itemed funding for the central corridor transit proposal that he’d supported, just to stick it to the DFL.
Pawlenty is no less beholden to the social conservative wing of the party; while Pawlenty is not his wife, former Judge Mary Pawlenty, she’s well-regarded in the conservative evangelical community, and Timmy’s done nothing that would make the Palin wing actually reject him. He’s been appropriately anti-gay, vetoing the 2007-08 omnibus state departments appropriation bills because it allowed benefits for domestic partners. He also signed a pledge supporting an anti-gay marriage amendment — doing so along with its primary supporter, then-State Sen. Michele Bachmann, R-Stillwater.
His former law partner, now Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court Eric Magnuson, was praised by LifeNews as a pro-life advocate. And he was a big supporter of the “right to know” act, which requires women in Minnesota to read a packet of material before having abortions because, you know, women don’t think of such things; the first materials issued by the Department of Health included previously debunked claims of an abortion-breast cancer link.
His first commissioner of education — one ultimately defenestrated by the DFL-controlled Senate — was Cheri Pierson Yecke, who pushed unsuccessfully for including soi-disant Intelligent Design theory in Minnesota’s standard curriculum.
And let’s not forget this gem from the 2006 State GOP Convention:
I can tell you what your worst nightmare is. It’s one of the big-spendin’, tax-raisin’, abortion-promotin’, gay marriage-embracin’, more welfare-without-accountability lovin’, school reform-resistin’, illegal immigration-supportin’ Democrats for governor who think Hillary Clinton should be president of the United States.
So yes, it’s nice to hear Tim Pawlenty sounding like Arne Carlson. But talk is cheap. And Gov. Timmy has spent the last six years governing much more like Sarah Palin than George H.W. Bush. And if he ends up as president, I suspect he’ll model himself on a different Bush, one who talked a good, bipartisan game during the campaign — and governed from the hard right.
He’s still refused to sign a tax increase during his six years in office,
Why is this specifically a problem?
I’m also curious as to how this is a partisan position. Has the opposition party taken an opposing position and pledged to increase taxes?
I’m also curious as to how this is a partisan position. Has the opposition party taken an opposing position and pledged to increase taxes?
Please see above, where Jeff notes that Pawlenty went “so far as to veto a transportation funding bill that passed in the wake of the I-35W bridge collapse because it had a gas tax attached to it.” Presumably if the bill passed the state legislature, a majority of legislators were OK with the gas tax. That is an increase in taxes, and a fairly reasonable way to fund transportation. (The people buying more gas presumably are driving more and thus putting more stress on the roads and bridges.)
And according to this link, the gas-tax-including bill was indeed supported by the opposition party.
The statement was that he hasn’t signed a tax increase during his entire tenure in office, said statement being given as evidence that he doesn’t buck his party. A majority of legislators might have approved that particular increase, but the statement makes it sound (to me at any rate) as if not ever approving a tax is a partisan position. Is the opposition generally in favor of increasing taxes?
Gas taxes are indeed a logical way to fund roads. But raising taxes isn’t the only way to fund a project. Killing off other projects or programs is another way, and doesn’t require a tax increase. Now, I’m not familiar with the current state of Minnesota’s finances or tax burden. I’m just pointing out that just because he wouldn’t raise taxes doesn’t mean he didn’t find the project worthy. Did he run on a “I won’t raise taxes” pledge? Just because a legislature passes a measure doesn’t mean it should become law. There’s a reason why every State legislature and the Federal legislature gives the executive authority veto power over legislative actions. There’s always a provision to pass laws over the executive veto. Apparently the opposition may have supported it, but not enough to do that.
I wish this guy was our governor. Illinois legislators just love raising taxes. When they’re not leasing out state assets (the lottery, tollways) to convert capital assets into operating funds that’ll run out long before the leases do.
Did he run on a “I won’t raise taxes” pledge?
In his first term, yes. However, at one point he did finagle it — with the budget in dire straits and new revenue having to come from somewhere, Pawlenty agreed to a cigarette tax — but insisted it be called a “health fee” so that he could say he hadn’t raised taxes.
Pawlenty’s refusal to raise taxes hasn’t kept taxes from going up, either. He’s balanced the budget in large part by cutting Local Government Aid — money from the state to local governments. To maintain services, counties have been raising property taxes at double-digit levels during Pawlenty’s tenure, as the state moves what had been the state’s burden onto the counties.
In short, Pawlenty has made a hash of the economics in the state out of a desire to be seen as an anti-tax crusader, while making taxes less progressive and having the occasional bridge collapse. I’m not in favor of always raising taxes no matter what, but I am in favor of paying for what you get, and the State of Minnesota hasn’t been doing so.
(Incidentally, the legislature ultimately overrode Pawlenty’s veto. Also, there’s some evidence that Minnesotans want higher taxes; an increase in the state sales tax was added to the state’s constitution in November.)
Pawlenty’s refusal to raise taxes hasn’t kept taxes from going up, either. He’s balanced the budget in large part by cutting Local Government Aid — money from the state to local governments. To maintain services, counties have been raising property taxes at double-digit levels during Pawlenty’s tenure, as the state moves what had been the state’s burden onto the counties.
One of the reasons we have a federal structure is the idea that the more local a governmental unit is, the more accountable they are to their constituents. Moving what had been the state’s burden down to the counties isn’t necessarily a bad idea. Why shouldn’t that burden have belonged to the county in the first place? If the people of a county want services, let the county legislature be responsible to the electorate for providing them and raising the money to pay for them.
Does the Minnesota state constitution deny counties the ability to impose an income tax? Because I agree that increasing property taxes is undesirable. It’s a very regressive tax. What about sales taxes? Can the counties impose those? Here in Crook County, Illinois, we have a 10% sales tax (the Highest In The Nation). It’s kind of regressive because it’s on everything, including groceries and clothing, but that can be changed.
As far as the bridge collapse goes, I’ll first posit that yes, maintenance of an Interstate bridge is properly a state and Federal responsibility. I didn’t follow up on that story. But was the cause neglected maintenance due to Pawlenty’s tax policies? How old was that bridge and how long had it been festering compared to Pawlenty’s tenure? Was the cause neglected or incompetent maintenance due to corruption/featherbedding in the state’s transportation department? Was it bad design?