Posted by ndillon on 08/11/11

I wish we would have lit up their phones and email BEFORE this vote as we did two years ago over TARP.  Please let them hear it now.  The debt ceiling may be the TARP of 2012. Remember, if you don't like the candidates on the ballot in November, the time to do something about that starts in February 2012 (at caucus).

I sent the following short letter to Senators Franken and Klobuchar and Congressman Paulsen.  It's really easy if you use DownsizeDC.org - it auto fills the contact forms on their websites for you.

Here's another example of why I don't trust my government, and why I want it to do less.

The public was told that we had no choice but to raise the debt ceiling or else we would face dire financial consequences.

Congress raised the debt ceiling and we STILL have dire financial consequences.

Our nation's problem is that Congress (you) spend too much money. Your solution was to allow it to spend more.

I am sincerely disappointed with your vote to raise the debt ceiling.

Posted by ndillon on 06/22/11
Last updated 06/25/11

[originally posted at www.noranndillon.com]

Need proof that state government has a spending problem? MPR provided yet another example in a recent story on Lutsen Mountain violating a permit on water sourcing:

[Rep.] Dill and [Sen.] Bakk say if Lutsen is forced to take water from the lake [Superior] instead of the Poplar River, they will ask taxpayers to underwrite the cost.

It is a fact (and an economic principle) that resources are limited. State government collects tax money and then chooses how to spend it according to the requirements and powers granted by the Constitution. The problem is that lawmakers discovered that they could spend your money on other things. Throw in the power of taxation and there's no need for prioritizing or making a hard decision.

Minnesota will have an additional $4 billion in revenue during the biennium to spend through the general fund. That's a 12% increase from the last budget! There is plenty of money to spend.

Lawmakers don't want to tell constituents (or donors or patrons) that they can't have something. It usually isn't good for them personally (think: re-election) even though it's good for every one else.

Why are we cutting allowances for traumatic brain injury patients but paving a bicycle trail from Saint Bonifacius to Mayer?

Why are the budgets shrinking for the courts, the third and equal branch of government, but we bailed out the Buffalo Regional Railroad for almost $3 million?

Why do we sit in a bottleneck traffic jam on I-494 in Plymouth but spend almost $6 million on prairie restoration?

What is the next Constitutionally mandated state service that will suffer because Rep. Dill and Sen. Bakk want to subsidize a private business in their area?

I wrote about this last October. Our state's budget problem will not be solved with class warfare, but with fiscal responsibility and the courage to prioritize. The state Legislature did its job and passed a balanced budget that spends within the means of the state. It's time for Governor Dayton to sign those finance bills or he will bear the responsibility for shutting down state government.

Posted by ndillon on 06/16/11

[originally posted at noranndillon.com]

According to the Census Bureau, the median income in Minnesota is $56,956. If that was your income, how long do you think you could get away with spending $62,652 each year?

Most people understand that this is not a sustainable path, yet it is directly analogous to Governor Dayton's proposed budget. The state anticipates $34 billion in revenue over the next biennium, but he's insisting on spending $37 billion. If Minnesota families and businesses can't spend more than they earn, then neither should the state.

As a reward for being honest with the people of Minnesota, Governor Dayton last week referred to fiscally conservative legislators as extreme "right-wing Republicans." Even less productive was when he said the freshmen "seemingly understand little about government and care even less."

Considering the amount of time, energy and effort that goes into a political campaign, I think it's wholly unfair to accuse any member of the Legislature of not caring. I met a lot of ‘couch sitters' last year. You don't occupy one of those 201 seats in Saint Paul by not caring.

I also think the accusation that the freshman don't understand government is completely untrue. I believe that the freshmen completely understand government - fill bills with goodies for your constituents and patrons, vote yes even if there are things you don't like, and everybody returns to their districts as the heroes. Most people complain about political logrolling, the trading of votes and favors to secure passage of projects in one's districts and spread the costs across the state (or nation). So why vilify a group of people that refuses to participate in something everybody claims to hate?

I know the proffered solution is to raise taxes, but that's not the same as our Minnesota family finding spare change in the couch cushions. Taxes take money out of the private sector who would have spent it on things needed by them, not some distant politician wanting to ensure his/her re-election. Governor Dayton says he's only going to tax "the rich" but the Tax Incidence Analysis by the MN Department of Revenue demonstrates that EVERYONE in the state will pay more under his plan. The largest tax burden increase as a percentage of income falls on the top decile, which is no surprise since that's the group Governor Dayton is targeting. But the second largest increase as a percentage of income falls on the lowest decile - those making less than $11,298 per year. Governor Dayton's plan will hurt the people he claims to be defending.

It's not fun to say no to someone who wants something. But everybody knows that you'll quickly find yourself in a financial mess if you make $56,956 and spend $62,652 each year. We need courageous and principled legislators who are going to be as responsible with the state's finances as we are with our own. I'm proud of the Legislators who are putting the political logrolling into the buzz saw. I hope you will encourage them too.

Posted by ndillon on 05/17/11

As much as Sunday's Star Tribune poll tried to bolster support for raising taxes as a piece of the budget deficit puzzle, its own results exposed the fallacy that Minnesotans want to pay higher taxes.

The opening premise that "a strong majority of Minnesotans say they want a solution that mixes tax hikes and spending reductions" is undercut by looking at the poll numbers. Raising taxes on high earners was the first choice for 39% of poll respondents. However, only 7% preferred raising sales taxes.

Meaning tax him, not me. Higher taxes are fine as long as someone else is paying them.

The money for a tax increase in any category (higher earners, cigarettes and alcohol, sales, et al) must come from somewhere. It may be "new" revenue to the state, but it was someone else's IRA deposit, tree-trimming payment or weekend in the Boundary Waters. It was an ironic quotation in this article from a tax increase supporter who said, "The more you give those idiots [Legislators], the more they spend." Spot on. Where is the public benefit in taking away money from folks who will spend it on the things they need (want) in the private economy and turn it over to politicians who will spend it in ways to ensure their re-election, regardless of demand?

I became a student of the state's budget last year. Since 1960, it has grown at 10% per year. During that time, personal incomes have risen at 7% per year. That is clearly an unsustainable trend. Minnesota's political leaders must deal with the spending. If we raise taxes now, it will be like turning up the radio when the engine makes a racket. It will not solve our problem and we will find ourselves in the same fiscal mess two years from now.

Governor Dayton, please take note: if only 7% of Minnesotans are willing to personally pay higher taxes via the sales tax, then it doesn't sound like "very, very strong support" for your position after all.

(cross posted at www.noranndillon.com)

Posted 05/18/11 lexslexus Moorhead, MN

Well put, Norann! Great to see you publicly continue the defense of liberty.

Posted 05/18/11 MichaelBarry Sebring, FL

"Don't tax you, don't tax me- Tax the man behind the tree."

Posted by ndillon on 04/01/11
Last updated 04/01/11

This bond advertisement was in the March 20, 2011 Star Tribune's Business section. It caught my eye.

Here's the 102 page bond announcement from the City of Monticello.

So the City of Monticello is trying to provided modern and desirable services to its citizens. Well done, since its citizens have no other options.

Oh, wait... According to the City of Monticello's "For Residents: Utilities website," both TDS Telecom AND Charter Communications already provide TV, internet and phone services to the Monticello area.

So if there are competing, private providers of these services, why exactly is the City of Monticello using taxpayer subsidized bonds to enter into an otherwise free market?

At least they are honest that it's YOUR company. You'll be paying for it - whether or not you use it.

[orginally posted at noranndillon.com]

Posted 06/09/11 AaronOlson91 Bloomington MN, MN

This is pretty interesting. It would be nice if bond announcement link wasn't forbidden and the "for residents: utilities website" link worked. What would the incentive be for the City to compete with those two companies?