Still nothing doing
Well, today's floor session came and went, and nothing of note happened. No histrionics, no stunts. Just more debate over Rep. Mark Olson's daily attempt to set budget targets. I guess the big news today was that a bipartisan group is voting for it. Not terribly impressive. I was expecting something a little more interesting, like legislators chaining themselves to their desks until a deal is reached.
Nothing appears to be happening at all in terms of negotiations, and time is running out. Here's how I see it. The House and the governor (for all practical purposes the same thing) are going to have to admit that taxes need to go up. The Senate wants two things: ensuring that nobody is kicked off state medical care, and an income tax increase. They need to give up one of these things and concentrate on the other, and I think they should concentrate on keeping health care. If both sides can find a way to balance the budget while kicking nobody off of health care, then that should be the deal. It shouldn't be too hard. That leaves a lot of other issues left unfinished, especially transportation, but it's the foundation at least.
posted by MN Politics Guru @ 20:49
7 Comments:
It seems to me that in order to maintain bipartisan pressure from the "young 'uns" on the floor, they are going to have to craft a deal that moderates both tax increases and minimizes the number of people who may get dropped from health care. A "Solomonesque" approach, if you will. That would provide enough for guys like Rep. Erhardt to take up the cause and stand up and be counted. Yes, it would expose the right and left flanks, but there are enough folks within that 134 member house who could swallow a "half-and-half" deal and go home. As long as it gets 90+ votes to make it veto-proof from King Timothy.
I don't think a "one or the other" deal is going to fly.
Longer term, both sides are going to have to think through the health care issues in a more thoughtful manner. If that's possible.
Given the cast of characters involved (doctors, lawyers, hospitals, insurance companies, drug companies, etc.) this issue has something for everyone to skewer.
You can't talk about the DFL wanting to raise taxes by itself. It's not like they just want to raise taxes to raise taxes. It is about balancing the budget and fully funding health care and education. It can't be an either or unless you want to cut the hell out of everything else like LGA. Oh then you're going to raise property taxes so I guess either way taxes go up. What the DFL is going to end up having to do is choose between education and health care and accept some kind of cuts to one and the Republicans will have to agree to raise some kind of taxes.
Dems should hang tough.
NO expelling of poor people from MN care, period.
How this is paid for can be negotiated.
Having said that, I think that if the government shuts down, Pawlenty and the Republicans get most of the blame, particularly if the Dems make it clear what they are standing for.
A government shutdown would puncture Pawlenty's "golden boy" untouchable image, open him up to attacks about putting his political aspirations above the interests of Minnesotans (IIRC polls show a majority of Minnesotans willing to increase taxes as part of a solution). I think it makes him much more vulnerable in '06.
Are you the same DP that ran the "Pawlenty v. the DFL" blog?
Nope, that was some other DP
Gee, I wasn't aware "blogger" had the ability to differentiate between DP and DP. You don't exactly sound like a person who would run a Pawlenty v the DFL from the stance of a Pawlenty supporter. But hey- I'm just some schmo that doesn't understand technical things like these new-fangled blogs.
Gee, I wasn't aware that blogger could differentiate between a "DP" and a "DP".
Post a Comment
<< Home