Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>>> "YOUR LEGISLATORS" IS MADE POSSIBLE IN PART BY THE GENEROUS
FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF MEET MEMBERS, MAKING MINNESOTA CLEAN
WATERS, SAFE COMMUNITIES, QUALITY EDUCATION AND VET VANCE
CARE HAPPEN. WE WORK HARD FOR MINNESOTANS.
>>> LIVE FROM ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA WE WELCOME YOU TO
ANOTHER SEASON OF "YOUR LEGISLATORS".
A ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION FEATURING STATE LAWMAKERS WHO
ARE PREPARED TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS AND DISCUSS IMPORTANT
ISSUES AFFECTING CITIZENS OF MINNESOTA.
>>> NOW, HERE IS YOUR MODERATOR FOR TONIGHT'S PROGRAM BARRY
ANDERSON. >> GOOD EVENING, AND WELCOME TO
THIS WEEK'S VERSION OF "YOUR LEGISLATORS".
WE ARE DELIGHTED YOU COULD JOIN US ON THIS COLD THURSDAY
EVENING. IT'S WARM HERE IN THE STUDIO,
AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE PUBLIC
POLICY ISSUES THAT FACE MINNESOTA.
WE WANT YOU TO BE A PART OF THAT CONVERSATION, HENCE THE CATCHY
NAME OF THE PROGRAM, "YOUR LEGISLATORS".
WE WANT YOU TO CALL IN AND GIVE OUR LEGISLATORS, OR YOUR
LEGISLATORS QUESTIONS TO ANSWER. THE E-MAIL AND NUMBER WILL
APPEAR ON THE SCREEN. WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM
YOU. WE COME TO YOU EACH WEEK FROM
NOW UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE GOES HOME UNTIL THE END OF MAY.
WE HOPE TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT WITH NEARLY EVERYONE
THAT REPRESENTS A PIECE OF MINNESOTA.
WE BEGIN THIS EVENING BY INTRODUCING OUR GUESTS WHO'LL
HELP US UNRAVEL THE MYSTERY OF ST. PAUL.
WE BEGIN TO THE IMMEDIATE LEFT JOINING FROM 66B FROM ST. PAUL
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN LESCH. TELL THE VIEWERS A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT YOURSELF. >> I'M FROM ST. PAUL, AND I'M A
PROSECUTOR FROM THE CITY OF ST. PAUL.
THIS IS MY SIXTH TERM IN THE LEGISLATURE, AND I CHAIR THE
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE AND SERVE ON THE JUDICIARY PUBLIC SAFETY AND
TAXES. >> YOU ARE DOING WHAT KIND OF
PROSECUTION FOR OUR VIEWERS? >> MISDEMEANOR PROSECUTIONS AND
ANYTHING FROM YOUR STANDARD RUN-OF-THE-MILL BAR FIGHT TO
PROSTITUTION, DWI'S AND RESISTING ARREST.
>> AT THE RISK OF CREATING PROBLEMS THAT IN FACT IS MY
BACKGROUND AS WELL. I SPENT A NUMBER OF YEARS
PRACTICING IN THE HUTCHISON AREA AND ALSO DOING MISDEMEANOR
PROSECUTIONS. WE WILL GO ONTO THE REST OF THE
PROGRAM. MAYBE LATER.
JOINING US A REGULAR WITH THE PROGRAM, BEEN WITH US MANY TIMES
OVER THE YEARS, AND DELIGHTED SHE COMES BACK TO US ONCE AGAIN
FROM DISTRICT 45, NEW HOPE SENATOR ANN REST.
GOOD TO HAVE YOU WITH US AGAIN. TELL OUR VIEWERS A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT YOURSELF. >> THANK YOU, BARRY, AND IT IS
MY PLEASURE TO RETURN AND HAVE A CHANCE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION
WITH YOU AND WITH MY COLLEAGUES. THIS TERM, I HAVE BEEN IN THE
SENATE FOR A WHILE, AND THIS THERM I'M CHAIRING THE TAX
REFORM COMMITTEE. I SERVE ON THE TRANSPORTATION
AND PUBLIC SAFETY POLICY, AND FINANCE DIVISION, AND ALSO THE
STATE GOVERNMENT AND VETERANS FINANCE DIVISION AS WELL AS THE
ELECTION SUBCOMMITTEE IN THE HOUSE, AND ONE OF MY PASSIONS IS
CAPITAL PRESERVATION, AND I'M REALLY PLEASED TO SERVE ON THE
CAPITAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION, AND WE ARE HOPING TO MOVE
FORWARD ONCE AGAIN THIS YEAR WITH THIS MULTIYEAR PROJECT.
>> SENATOR REST, WE HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT TAXES OVER
THE YEARS MANY TIMES. TELL OUR VIEWERS ABOUT YOUR
BACKGROUND IN THAT AREA. IT'S A LITTLE MORE EXTENSIVE
THAN SERVING ON THE COMIEE, I BELIEVE.
>> I'M A RETIRED CPA AND HAD A SMALL TAX PRACTICE, AND PREVIOUS
TO THAT WORKED FOR A CPA FIRM, AND HAVE A GRADUATE DEGREE IN
TAX POLICY AND TAX LAW FROM THE UNIVERSITY.
>> AS THEY SAID, IT'S BRORDER THAN SIMPLY SERVING ON THE
COMMITTEE. WE ARE DELIGHTED YOU WILL BE
WITH US THIS EVENING, BECAUSE I THINK WE WILL BE TALKING A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT TAXES BEFORE WE ARE DONE.
IT'S LAWYER NIGHT AT THE STAGE HERE ON "YOUR LEGISLATORS", AND
SENATOR DAVE THOMPSON, DELIGHTED YOU COULD JOIN US.
TELL OUR VIEWERS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELF.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME. I LIVE IN LAKEVILLE.
IT'S LAKEVILLE, FARMINGTON AND A LARGE PART OF SOREN DAKOTA
COUNTY. I WAS ELECTED IN 2010 AND SERVE
AS THE RANKING MEMBER OF SENATOR REST'S COMMITTEE ON THE TAX
DIVISION, AND ALSO ON THE FULL TAX COMMITTEE AS WELL AS STATE
AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND EDUCATION POLICY, AND VERY GLAD
TO BE HERE AND HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THE
ISSUES, THANKS FOR HAVING ME. >> SENATOR THOMPSON, ACTUALLY, I
HAVE LIMITED EXPERIENCE IN THE RADIO AND TELEVISION BUSINESS,
AND SENATOR THOMPSON IS OUR VETERAN, AND IF WE HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT WE WILL LOOK TO YOUR DIRECTION AS WELL.
>> BEEN WITH US MANY TIMES OVER THE YEARS REPRESENTATIVE TOM
HACKBARTH. GOOD TO HAVE YOU WITH US AGAIN.
>> I'M STATE REPRESENTATIVE TOM HACKBARTH AND REPRESENT FIVE
CITIES AND ONE TOWNSHIP. I'M STARTING MY NINTH TERM, AND
I SERVE ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE,
POLICY COMMITTEE, ENERGY COMMITTEE WHICH I WAS CHAIR OF
LAST YEAR, AND I'M IN THE LEAD ON THE ENVIRONMENT POLICY
COMMITTEE THIS YEAR AND ALSO ON WAYS AND MEANS.
MY AREAS OF INTEREST ARE HUNTING, FISHING AND OUTDOOR
RECREATION, AND OUTDOOR FUN, I LIKE TO CALL IT, ALL OF THOSE
KINDS OF THINGS. MOTORCYCLING AND ATV AND SNOW
MOABLG, ALL THOSE THINGS ARE GREAT.
I LOOK FORWARD TO LOOKING AT SOME OF THOSE ISSUES THIS YEAR,
AND MAYBE TWEAKING WOLF HUNTING AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS, AND
OTHER AREAS OF INTEREST HAVE TO DO WITH RACINO AND GAMING.
>> AND YOUR BACKGROUND. >> SOLD AUTO PARTS 34 YEARS, AND
I'M A VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER AND I DID CONSTRUCTION AT TECHNICAL
CENTERS FOR A WHILE. >> ALL RIGHT, WELL, I WANT TO
REMIND OUR VIEWERS TO CALL IN WITH QUESTIONS.
AS WE ARE WAITING THE QUESTIONS TO BEGIN, I THINK WE SHOULD
BEGIN OUR PROGRAM TALKING ABOUT THE MAJOR NEWS OF THE WEEK WHICH
IS OF COURSE OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL.
FOR NO APPARENT REASON EXCEPT SENATOR REST DID TALK ABOUT
TAXES, LET'S START WITH YOU AND GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK
ABOUT THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL, AND YOUR REACTION TO IT, AND
YOUR THOUGHTS AND GO AROUND THE TABLE AND SEE WHAT PEOPLE HAVE
TO SAY ABOUT IT. GO AHEAD.
FLOOR IS YOURS. >> THE GOVERNOR HAS, I THINK,
OFFERED PROBABLY THE BOLDEST BUDGET THAT WE HAVE SEEN IN ANY
NUMBER OF YEARS, AND THERE CERTAINLY IS A LOT OF TAX REFORM
IN IT, AND THERE IS A -- I THINK THERE IS A REAL MOVEMENT TOWARDS
HAVING AN HONEST DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO FUND
THOSE THINGS THAT MINNESOTANS WANT, NEED, AND OR DEMAND.
HE'S DOING IT WITHOUT ANY OF THE GIMMICKS, WITHOUT ANY OF THE, AS
FAR AS I CAN SEE, I MEAN, IT'S GOING TO BE A HUGE EFFORT TO GET
THROUGH THE BILL ANDxD THE BILL, BUT THE ONE-TIME BORROWING,
WITHOUT THE ONE-TIME GIMMICKS, AND IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE WE
HAVE HAD A BUDGET APPROACH THAT DID THAT, AND CERTAINLY THE
LEGISLATURE FOR THE 10 YEARS, BUT THE LEGISLATURE OF THE TWO
BODIES HAVE EMBRACED ONE-TIME SOLUTIONON GIMMICKS, TIMING
SITUATIONS, YOU KNOW, THROWING THINGS BACK AND FORTH IN ORDER
TO HAVE WHAT I BELIEVE IS AN ARTIFICIAL BALANCE.
THE GOVERNOR, IS I THINK, TAKING ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PUTTING
THAT ASIDE AND WORKING SO THAT BY 2017, WE CAN HOPEFULLY REPAY
THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS, BUT ALSO WE WILL HAVE DEALT WITH THE
STRUCTURAL DEFICIT. >> SENATOR THOMPSON, YOUR
THOUGHTS. >> FIRST OFF, I'M IN AGREEMENT
WITH SENATOR REST ON TRYING TO FIND ONE-TIME MONEY TO SOLVE
BUDGET PROBLEMS, AND IN FACT EVEN THOUGH THE REPUBLICANS
RUNNING THE LEGISLATURE AND THE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR ENDED UP
THERE IN THE LAST BUDGET CYCLE, I DON'T THINK IT'S THE RIGHT WAY
TO DO BUSINESS. FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE I AGREE
WITH THE GOVERNOR'S APPROACH. SOMETHING THAT WAS REALLY A
SURPRISE TO US REPUBLICANS GENUINELY, THIS GOVERNOR TALKED
A LOT AND DEMOCRATS DID NATIONALLY HERE IN MINNESOTA
ABOUT TRYING TO QUOTE, TAX THE RICH AND FIND THE 2% AND GET
THEIR MONEY. I THINK THE THING THAT'S
SHOCKING TO ME IS LOOKING AT THE $2.1 BILLION NET INCREASE IN
SALES TAX. SENATOR REST AND I HAD A GOOD
DISCUSSION IN HER OFFICE ABOUT THE FACT THAT I'M FOR TAX REFORM
AND CHANGING THINGS. I THINK THERE'S AN ARGUMENT TO
BE MADE FOR BROADENING THE BASE AND DOING DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT
NOT IF IT'S GOING TO TAKE $2.1 BILLION NET OUT OF THE
POCKETS OF THE PEOPLE OF MINNESOTA AND MAKE NO MISTAKE
ABOUT IT, THAT'S NOT A TAX ON THE RICH.
BUT A TAX ON MINNESOTA DIRECTLY AND INDIRECTLY, AND TAXES ON
SERVICES, SUCH AS OIL CHANGES WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR CAR
MAINTAINED, HAIRCUTS, AND OBVIOUSLY CLOTHING, THOSE KINDS
OF THINGS, AND INDIRECTLY IN THAT A LOT OF THESE BUSINESS TO
BUSINESS TAXES JUST GET PASSED ON.
I THINK THE SHOCKING THING TO ME WAS THAT THIS GOVERNOR TALKED
ABOUT HITTING THE RICH. I TELL YOU EVERY MINNESOTAN IS
GOING TO GET WHACKED IF IT ENDS UP BEING LIKE ANYTHING THE
GOVERNOR PROPOSED. IT'S NOT GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE AND
CERTAINLY ISN'T GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY.
>> I WANT TO GET BACK TO THE SPENDING ISSUE.
IT'S REALLY ABOUT SPENDING. IT'S NOT SO MUCH ABOUT THE TAX
INCREASES BUT ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL SPENDING THAT THE
GOVERNOR WANTS TO DO IN THIS BUDGET.
WE WOULDN'T BE NEEDING TO RAISE THE TAXES IF IT WASN'T FOR
INCREASING THE SPENDING. LET'S LOOK AT THE BUDGET AND
WHAT THE REPUBLICANS DID WITH THE GOVERNOR LAST BIENNIUM.
WE ARE SITTING GOOD ENDING IN 2013, AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A
SURPLUS, AND IF YOU LOOK OUT IN THE OUT YEARS FOR THE UP COMING
BIENNIUM, WE CONTINUE, AND ALWAYS CONTINUE TO BRING IN
ADDITIONAL REVENUE. WE ARE GOING TO BE BRINGING IN
ADDITIONAL REVENUE IN THE NEXT BIENNIUM.
WAYS AND MEANS LAST WEEK, I THINK HE SAID IT WAS SOMEWHERE
BETWEEN 2 AND 5% PROJECTED INCREASE IN REVENUE FOR THE NEXT
BIENNIUM. YET WE ARE LOOKING AT A DID HE T
IN THE OUT YEARS. THE DEFICIT THAT WE ARE LOOKING
AT IS ABOUT THE PROJECTED SPENDING.
IF WE CAN REDUCE THAT SPENDING TO THE INCREASE THAT WE ARE
EXPECTED TO BRING IN, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET.
WE DON'T NEED TO BE RAISING TAXES, SO I'M STARTING MY NINTH
TERM, AND I HAVE NOT BEEN IN THE LEGISLATURE YET WHEN WE HAVE
ACTUALLY REDUCED THE BASE. WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT.
WE ALWAYS TALK ABOUT CUTTING. IN THIS BUDGET THE GOVERNOR IS
TALKING ABOUT MAKING SPENDING CUTS.
HE HASN'T MADE ANY SPEPEING CUTS.
HE HASN'T TOUCHED THE BASE. LIKE THE REPUBLICANS DID THE
LAST TWO YEARS, WE CUT THE INCREASES.
WE DIDN'T CUT INTO THE BASE. WE HAVE TO GET CUTTING OUT SOME
OF THIS RIDICULOUS SPENDING WE HAVE TO DO IN THE STATE.
IT'S ALL ABOUT THE SPENDING. LET'S GET BACK TO THAT, WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT AN INCREASE IN SPENDING HERE, JUST THE SALES
TAX ALONE IS GOING TO BE $2.1 BILLION ADDITIONAL REVENUE
TO THE STATE. WHERE IS ALL THIS MONEY GOING TO
GO? WHAT'S THE ADDITIONAL SPENDING
THAT WE HAVE TO DO THAT SENATOR REST NEEDS TO BE DONE.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE THAT HAS TO BE DONE.
THE STATE IS RUNNING VERY, VERY WELL RIGHT NOW.
THE BUDGET WE PASSED TWO YEARS AGO, ENDING UP WITH A SURPLUS.
SENATOR REST, YOU TALK ABOUT THERE'S NO GIMMICKS IN THIS
BILL. THERE ABSOLUTELY IS GIMMICKS IN
THIS BILL, IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET.
MAYBE IN THE END WHEN THE HOUSE AND SENATE WORK IT OVER, THERE
WON'T BE ANY GIMMICKS. HE PUSHES OFF THE SHIFT UNTIL
2017 BEFORE WE PAY IT BACK, BEFORE WE START TO PAY IT BACK.
THAT'S PART OF THE GIMMICKS THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT.
OUR BUDGET WE ACTUALLY PAID BACK WITH THE LAST BUDGET THAT WE
DID, AND WE PAID BACK WHAT WE WERE CHASTISED FOR IN THE LAST
ELECTION. WE ACTUALLY PAID BACK EVERYTHING
WE BORROWED FROM THE SCHOOL SHIFT PLUS SOME OF WHAT THE
PREVIOUS BIENNIUM THAT THE DEMOCRATS BORROWED FROM THE
SCHOOL SHIFT. THAT'S BEEN PAID BACK TO THE
SCHOOLS ALREADY. I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE HAVE THE
PROBLEM WHERE WE SAY WE NEED MORE REVENUE, WE NEED MORE
TAXES. THAT'S W WT IT'S ALL ABOUT, MORE
TAXES FOR ADDITIONAL SPENDING. IT'S ABOUT THE SPENDING, AND
THAT'S WHAT WE SHOHOD BE TALKING ABOUT.
>> SENATOR REST, YOU WANT TO RESPOND SINCE HE INVITED YOU TO
DO SO? >> CHECKING OFF EVERYTHING THAT
HE SAYS THERE. >> I OBVIOUSLY DISPUTE A NUMBER
OF THINGS HE SAID, BUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT SPENDING, WE ARE
LOOKING AT $1.4 BILLION IN PROPERTY TAX RELIEF.
I THINK MINNESOTANS DO NEED THAT.
I THINK PROPERTY TAXES HAVE GONE UP WHAT?
TRIPLE -- LET ME, SIR. >> WHAT DOES THE STATE HAVE TO
DO WITH PROPERTY TAXES? >> WELL, WE HAVE PASSED POLICIES
AND MANDATES ON DEMANDS ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAT HAVE INCREASED
THEM BY HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN THE LAST DECADE.
WE KNOW THAT INNESOTANS REALLY MAY RE-SENT, IF YOU WILL, THE
PROPERTY TAX ALMOST MORE THAN ANY OTHER TAX.
I THINK WE ARE COMMITTED, ALONG WITH THE GOVERNOR, TO PROVIDING
PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. YOU MAY CALL IT SPENDING.
I CALL IT REDUCING THE BURDEN OF ONE OF THE MOST REGRESSIVE TAXES
THAT WE HAVE FOR HOMEOWNERS. MINNESOTA IS KNOWN OVER THE
DECADES FOR PLACING A HIGH PRIORITY ON HOME OWNERSHIP, AND
I THINK THAT THE GOVERNOR IS RECOGNIZING THAT VALUE AND
MAKING GOOD ON IT. CAN HE DO EVERYTHING IN THIS
BUDGET IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS? NO.
NOBODY CAN. BUT I THINK THAT HE'S MADE A
GOOD BOLD START, AND I'M WILLING TO WORK WITH HIM TO GET A GOOD
RESULT. >> WHY DON'T YOU WEIGH IN.
>> I'M IMPRESSED WITH WHAT THE GOVERNOR HAS DONE.
THERE'S NO QUESTION ECONOMISTS MADE CLEAR OVER THE AMOUNT OF
TIME WE CUT LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROPERTY TAXES HAVE GONE UP AND
THEY STATE THEY ARE LINKED. WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH RAISING
THOSE PROPERTY TAXES. >> YOU CAN SHIFT THE BLAME,
REPRESENTATIVE HACKBARTH BUT WE CAN SAY THE BUCK STOPS HERE.
YOU CAN'T SAY IT'S THE FAULT OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND IT'S
THE FAULT OF THE CITY COUNCIL. WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT WHEN
YOU ARE SHORT SHEETING THEIR BED CONSISTENTLY AND HAVE TO PAY FOR
POLICE AND FIRE, LOCAL JAILS AND LOCAL SERVICES, THAT HAS TO COME
FROM SOMEWHERE. YOU CAN'T WASH YOUR HANDS.
>> DAYTON NOW -- 500 PER FAMILY PROPERTY TAX CREDIT IN ORDER TO
RELIEVE THIS BURDEN OF PROPOSALS AND ADDITIONAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT
AID, AND YOU TALKED ABOUT SPENDING, IT'S TO ENSURE
FAMILIES CAN AFFORD THE HOMES THEY LIVE IN AND GET THE POLICE
SERVICES, FIRE SERVICES AND YOU UNDERSTAND PEOPLE RELY ON THE
FACT THEY ARE GOING TO LIVE IN A SAFE COMMUNITY.
IT'S A CORE FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT.
WHAT CAN YOU COUNT ON IF YOU CAN'T COUNT ON THE FACT A
FIREMAN IS GOING TO SHOW UP TO YOUR HOME WHEN IT'S BURNING OR A
REASONABLE RESPONSE TIME? THERE'S NO QUESTION IT'S BOLD.
IT'S THE OBLIGATION -- GOP HAS THE OBLIGATION TO POLK HOLES IN
IT. I GET IT AND I UNDERSTAND IT.
ONE THING YOU CANNOT SAY IS THAT THIS BUDGET KICKS THE CAN DOWN
THE ROAD LIKE HAS BEEN GOING ON THE LAST 10 YEARS.
MINNESOTANS ARE SICK OF THAT AND WON'T TOLERATE IT.
IT MAKES A LOT OF CHANGES IN PROPERTY TAXES AND TAXES AS A
WHOLE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING.
IF IT'S NOT THIS, YOU NEED TO COME UP WITH A COMPREHENSIVE
SOLUTION. IT'S A PLAN ON THE TABLE AND
GREAT STEP FORWARD. >> I AGREE WITH REPRESENTATIVE
HACKBARTH THAT THE SPENDING IS THE PROBLEM, AND OBVIOUSLY TAXES
ARE DRIVEN BY A NEED TO GENERATE SUFFICIENT REVENUE TO COVER
SPENDING. WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY TAX
RELIEVE THAT SENATOR REST AND REPRESENTATIVE HACKBARTH WERE
TALKING ABOUT, THE PROBLEM AS I SEE IT, SENATOR REST, IS WE
DON'T CONTROL WHAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS DO IN TERMS OF
RAISING TAXES, AND WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THIS $1.4 BILLION OF
PROPERTY TAX RELIEF, BUT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CAN REINSTITUTE
THAT. WE DON'T HAVE CONTROL OVER THE
ABILITY TO DO THAT, AND IF YOUR PERSPECTIVE IS MANDATES AND
THINGS WE HAVE SHOVED DOWN TO LOWER GOVERNMENTS AND REQUIRED
THEM TO DO IS THE PROBLEM, MY VIEW WOULD BE WE SHOULD RELIEVE
THOSE THINGS RATHER THAN PROVIDING WHAT ENDS UP BEING
STATE SPENDING AND COULD RESULT OR COME RIGHT BACK INTO THE
BUDGET IN THE STATE GOVERNMENT. AS FAR AS LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID
GOES, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO GO BACK TO THE INITIAL PURPOSE
OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID, AND THAT WAS TO HELP COMMUNITIES
THAT HAVE INSUFFICIENT POPULATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE TO
PROVIDE THE BASIC THINGS THAT THEY NEED, SUCH AS MAINTENANCE
OF THEIR CITY STREETS, SHOVELING THE WALKS IN THE WINTER AND
THOSE KINDS OO THINGS. UNFORTUNATELY IT HAS BEEN
CO-OPTED BY MINNESOTA'S LARGEST CITIES SO MINNEAPOLIS, ST. PAUL,
ROCHESTER AND DULUTH ARE THE LARGEST RECIPIENTS OF LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AID, AND IT HAS BECOME A SITUATION WHERE THE
AREAS OF THE STATE WITH THE BIGGEST POLITICAL CLOUT ARE
GETTING THE MONEY, NOT THE CITIES THAT NEED IT.
THAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID.
>> IT'S ACTUALLY BECOME A WELFARE SYSTEM FOR OUR CITIES,
AND THEY ARE DEPENDING ON IT. REPRESENTATIVE LESCH, LIKE I
TRIED TO SAY, THESE CITIES HAVE DEPENDED ON IT, AND IN MY AREA,
THEY HAVE ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY. IF THEY ARE NOT GETTING THE
MONEY THEY NEED, THEY ARE CUTTING BUDGET.
THEY ARE NOT CUTTING FIRE AND POLICE LIKE A LOT OF COMMUNITIES
THAT I KNOW DO. BUT THEY ARE FOCUSING ON THE
CORE ISSUES THAT THE PEOPLE IN THE CITY NEED.
THEY ARE CUTTING OTHER AREAS OF GOVERNMENT.
THEY ARE NOT EXPANDING THEIR SPENDING LIKE SO MANY CITIES
WANT TO DO. WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID,
THEY START TO GET IT AGAIN, AND YOU START FUNDING IT AND FEEDING
THE BEAST AGAIN, AND THEY ARE GOING TO EXPAND THEIR SPENDING
ON OTHER ISSUES, JUST LIKE THIS GOVERNOR AND THIS LEGISLATURE
WANTS TO DO IN THIS BUDGET. THEY WANT TO EXPAND THE
SPENDING, DO MORE SPENDING. >> THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS.
WHEN YOU SAY THERE'S A SPENDING PROBLEM, YOU CAN'T GET AROUND
THE FACT THAT THE COST OF GOVERNMENT HAS STEADILY DECLINED
DURING THE TIME I HAVE BEEN IN THE LEGISLATURE.
THE AVERAGE PERSON SPENDS LESS OF EVERY DOLLAR THEY EARN ON THE
COST OF GOVERNMENT IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA NOW THAN THEY DID
10 YEARS AGO. WHEN YOU SAY IT'S A SPENDING
PROBLEM, PEOPLE ARE GETTING A MORE EFFICIENT DEAL.
IF YOU WANT MORE, YOU CAN MAKE THAT PITCH.
BUT RECOGNIZE THE FACT PEOPLE ARE GETTING A BETTER DEAL THAN
THEY USED TO. WITH RESPECT TO GOVERNMENT AID,
NO QUESTION. PEOPLE LIKE MINNEAPOLIS ST. PAUL
WITH AGING INFRASTRUCTURE AND GROWING BURNS WITH PENSION
LIABILITIES, ABSOLUTELY WE HAVE NEEDS.
ST. PAUL, ONE-THIRD OF THE TAX BASE IS GONE, BECAUSE WE HAVE
THE UNIVERSITIES WE LOVE TO SCHOOL YOUR KIDS AT
UNIVERSITIES. WE LOVE TO, ABSOLUTETE.
BUT THEY DON'T PAY IN THE PROPERTY TAX BASE.
NEITHER DO RELIGIO DO RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS.
WE TAKE CARE OF PEOPLE SO THEY HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICES
AND SOME PEOPLE AREN'T LEFT OUT IN THE COLD.
>> I WOULD ADD I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY, VERY CAREFUL TO MAKE
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS OUT TO BE THE VILLAN AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
OFFICIALS, WHETHER THEY ARE SCHOOL BOARDS OR COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OR MAYORS.
YOU KNOW, WHEN YOUR CONSTITUENTS GO TO VOTE, AND I HAVE SAID THIS
MANY TIMES, AND THEY VOTE FOR YOU AND THEY ELECT YOU AND YOU
THINK THEY MADE A WISE DECISION, BUT THOSE SAME CONSTITUENTS,
WHEN THEY GO TO VOTE FOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, THEY DON'T ALL
A SUDDEN GET STUPID IN TERMS OF WHO THEY ARE CHOOSING TO RUN
THEIR COMMUNITY. YOU KNOW, LET'S BE REALLY
CAREFUL ABOUT TALKING ABOUT PROFIT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT IT'S
NOT TRUE. MOST OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN
OUR STATE ARE RUN VERY, VERY WELL.
>> I AGREE WITH YOU. >> WELL, YOU WERE REALLY GOING
AFTER THEM. >> I'M NOT GOING AFTER THE
PEOPLE IN MY COMMUNITY. >> BUT YOU WERE SAYING PEOPLE IN
MY COMMUNITIES. >> CITY GOVERNMENTS HAVE TO
BUDGET ACCORDINGLY INSTEAD OF CONTINUALLY SPENDING ALL THE
TIME. >> LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT OF A
DIFFERENT WRINKLE ON THIS TAX ISSUE.
A VIEWER FROM BAGLEY SAYS I LIKE THE IDEA OF A SALES TAX TO
HANDLE THE DEFICIT AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT MAY BE OUT THERE.
A VIEWER SAID WE SHOULD REPLACE THE PROPERTY TAX WITH AN
EXPANDED SALES TAX. A VIEWER SAYS PUTTING A TAX ON
FOOD AND CLOTHING SOUNDS LIKE A REALLY BAD IDEA TO THAT VIEWER.
WE HAVE ANOTHER VIEWER FROM UNIDENTIFIED TOWN WHO SAYS THEY
DON'T WANT TAXES TO GO UP, PERIOD.
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE SALES TAX PIECE, BECAUSE THAT'S A PROPOSAL
THAT'S KICKED AROUND A LITTLE BIT ABOUT EXPANDING IT TO
CLOTHES AND SERVICES AND SO FORTH, AND THE GOVERNOR HAS
FORMALLY PROPOSED IT, AND MAYBE WE WILL TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
>> I THINK WHAT HAS REALLY BEEN INTERESTING ABOUT THE GOVERNOR'S
PROPOSAL IS THAT ALTHOUGH WE EXPECT IT BECAUSE IT'S WHAT HE
RAN ON WHEN HE WAS RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR TO PROPOSE A TAX
INCREASE ON THE 2% ON THE INCOME TAX ON THE FOURTH TIER, AND YET
WHAT IS GETTING THE MOST CHATTER NOW IS THE DIFFERENCES AND THE
REFORMS THAT HE IS PROPOSING IN THE SALES TAX, AND I THINK
THAT'S COME AS A SURPRISE TO ALMOST ALL OF US.
BUT I THINK WHAT HE'S MOVING TOWARDS IS THE RECOGNITION WE
ARE INDEED IN A DIFFERENT ECONOMY THAN OUR PARENTS WERE OR
YOUR GRANDPARENTS MAYBE WHERE THE BASKET OF GOODS IS NO LONGER
HARD GOODS, AND THE BASKET OF GOODS IN OUR -- FOR EACH OF OUR
FAMILIES IS FAR MORE INVOLVED IN SERVICES.
YOU SPOKE EARLIER ABOUT TAXING OIL CHANGE.
WELL, MOST OF OUR FAMILIES PROBABLY DID THAT FOR
THEMSELVES. THEY BOUGHT THE OIL.
THEY PAID TAX ON THE OIL, AND THEY CHANGED THEIR OWN OIL.
>> NOW, WE PAY SOMEBODY TO DO THAT.
THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE IN WHAT'S IN THE BASKET OF GOODS, AND SO
OUR ECONOMY AND THE TAX POLICY IN IT HAS TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE
HAVE GONE FROM A HARD GOODS ECONOMY TO A SERVICE ECONOMY,
AND THE PARTICIPATION OF CONSUMERS IN THAT ECONOMY HAS TO
BE RECOGNIZED JUST AS IT WAS 50 YEARS AGO, AND THEY ARE BEHIND
IN THAT. SO THIS MOTION OF LOOKING AT
BROADENING THE BASE WIDER THAN I PROPOSED IN MY PROPOSAL, WRITING
THE BASE AND LOWERING THE RATE, ECONOMISTS TELL US OVER AND OVER
AGAIN THAT THAT LEADS TO A STABLE TAX SYSTEM AND A STABLE
ECONOMY. WE KNOW THAT THIS THREE LEGGED
STOOL THAT WE HAD BEFORE WHERE IT WAS WITHIN-THIRD PROPERTY
TAXES AND ONE-THIRD SALES, ONE-THIRD INCOME TO RUN OUR
STATE ON THAT THAT HAS GOTTEN REALLY, REALLY LOPSIDED WITH
OVER 40, 45% OF THE REVENUES COMING IN COMING IN FROM THE
PROPERTY TAX SYSTEM, WHICH IS THE MOST REGRESSIVE.
WE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT ALL OF THE PROPOSALS IN THAT
CONTEXT, BUT THE NOTION OF A BROAD BASE AND A LOW RATE, I
DON'T THINK ANYONE WOULD DENY IS A PATHWAY TO A STABLE TAX
REFORM. >> SENATOR REST, I HAVE TAKEN
GRIEF FROM MY BASE IN THAT I DON'T DISAGREE THAT WE HAVE A
CHANGING ECONOMY, AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THINGS DIFFERENTLY.
THE PROBLEM I HAVE IS WHAT THE GOVERNOR IS PROPOSING IS NOT
REFORM. IT'S A MASSIVELY HUGE MIDDLE
CLASS TAX INCREASE. IT'S PROBLEMATIC FOR
INDIVIDUALS. >> YOU NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT
THE WHOLE THING. YOU TALK ABOUT IT'S A MASSIVE
TAX INCREASE BUT SOME OF THE THINGS THEY ARE PAYING THE SALES
TAX ON NOW, IT'S GOING TO GO DOWN OVER 2%, AND THE PROPERTY
TAX RELIEF, WHO IS THAT GOING TO?
IT'S GOING TO MIDDLE CLASS HOMEOWNERS.
>> BRINGING IN MORE MONEY. $2.1 BILLION MORE MONEY.
>> BUT YOU ARE OFFSETTING THAT WITH PAYMENTS OFF PROPERTY TAX
RELIEF. >> IT'S MORE MONEY THAT YOU ARE
BRINGING IN. >> AFTER WE DUG A WHOLE FOR THE
PAST 10 YEARS. >> THERE'S NO HOLE.
>> TAKE A LOOK AT IT. TAKE A LOOK AT THE PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ARE AND THE PUBLIC SAFETY AREA, PEOPLE ARE
SUFFERING. STAFF IS DOWN.
COSTS OF GOVERNMENT IS DOWN, ABSOLUTELY.
BUSINESSES WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, IF A BUSINESS COMES IN AND SAYS
HANG ON. >> SUDDENLY I HAVE TO PAY FOR
ALL OF THESE TAXES AND I WASN'T PAYING BEFORE.
YOU HAD NO TAX LIABILITY BEFORE? I CAN'T WAIT FOR THOSE FOLKS TO
SAY THIS IS UNFAIR. I'M USED TO NOT PAYING TAXES AND
NOW I HAVE TO PAY MY FAIR SHARE. IT'S UNFAIR.
WHEN THE GOVERNOR SAYS OKAY, WE ARE REDUCING THE OVERALL
CORPORATE TAX RATE AND AT THE SAME TIME WE ARE CUTTING OUT THE
LOOPHOLES THEY MAY PAY SALES TAXES THEY WEREN'T PAYING
BEFORE. BETWEEN THE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF,
THEY ARE GOING TO BE BETTER OFF. >> THE PROBLEM IS,
REPRESENTATIVE LESCH, YOU ARE MAKING IT SOUND AS THOUGH
THERE'S NOT A NET INCREASE IN TAXES.
THERE'S A NET INCREASE IN TAXES TO FEED THE GOVERNOR'S SPENDING.
YOU TALK ABOUT THE RELIEF OF MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES WITH
PROPERTY TAX $500 A YEAR. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S TO
EVERYBODY, AND IT'S NOT JUST TO THE MIDDLE CLASS.
IF YOU TAKE THE SALES TAX INCREASE AND DIVIDE IT BY THE
NUMBER OF MINNESOTA ANSWER IT REPRESENTS $389 FOR EVERY MAN,
WOMAN AND CHILD IN THE STATE. A FAMILY OF FOUR MAY GET THEIR
$500 TAX RELIEF WHICH THEY MAY OR MAY NOT GET BECAUSE LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS MAY TURN AROUND AND INCREASE THAT.
NOT SAYING THEY WILL. THEY MAY.
BUT THAT REPRESENTS ALMOST $1,600 PER FAMILY IN SALES
TAXES. THE PROBLEM IS THE GROWING
GOVERNMENT, AND I THINK SENATOR REST, YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT.
THE GOVERNOR RAN ON RAISING TAXES ON THE WEALTHY.
THAT DIDN'T SURPRISE ANYONE. I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE WHAT HE
HAS DONE TO THE MIDDLE CLASS, AND IT'S DISTURBING TO ME.
AS FAR AS THE BUSINESS TO BUSINESS CLASSES, SENATOR REST,
YOU ARE AMPLY TRAINED TO KNOW THOSE GET PASSED ON TO
INDIVIDUALS. WHEN THE LOCAL ACE HARDWARE HAS
TO PAY MORE FOR THEIR ATTORNEY TO SET UP THEIR CORPORATION OR
DO SOMETHING TO THEIR BUSINESS OR PAY THEIR ACCOUNTANT MORE FOR
THEIR TAX RETURNS TO BE DONE, THAT ENDS UP EITHER GETTING
PASSED ON TO CONSUMERS OR EMPLOYEES.
THE COST OF GOVERNMENT IS GOING UP, AND IT'S TAKING MONEY OUT OF
THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND THEY ARE TAXING THE MIDDLE CLASS TO DO
IT. IT'S NOT A GOOD RECIPE FOR
ECONOMIC GROWTH OR HELPING FAMILIES.
>> THE PRICE OF GOVERNMENT IS NOT GOING UP.
IT'S GOING DOWN EVER SINCE WE STARTED CALCULATING THAT
PARTICULAR STATISTIC. BE CAREFUL.
IT IS A TERM OF ART BECAUSE IT'S IN THE STATUTE.
SOME PEOPLE'S QUOTE SPENDING IS OTHER PEOPLE'S INVESTING.
OF COURSE YOU ARE GOING TO HEAR A LOT OF DEMOCRATS TALKING ABOUT
INVESTING IN MINNESOTA. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT SPENDING, I
TALK ABOUT INVESTING IN OUR CHILDREN, INVESTING IN MAKING
SURE THAT WE ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO ALL THE RESEARCH
THAT WE HAVE HEARD OVER THE YEARS, AND WE ONLY PAID LIP
SERVICE TO, AND THAT IS ABOUT EDUCATING AND PROVIDING
RESOURCES FOR THE REALLY LITTLE ONES, THE FOUR-YEAR-OLDS TO BE
READY TO GO TO KINDERGARTEN, TO INVEST IN ALL DAY KINDERGARTEN
FOR PARENTS THAT CHOOSE IT. SO THAT WE CAN REALLY HAVE A
LITERATE MINNESOTA EDUCATED WORK FORCE WHICH IS WHAT WE NEED FOR
THE JOBS. TO TALK ABOUT THE BUSINESS
ECONOMY, WHAT HAPPENED TODAY? YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING IS SO
TERRIBLE AND BAD AND WHATEVER. PINNACLE.
PINNACLE IS COMING TO MINNESOTA AND IS GOING TO HEADQUARTER
HERE. THAT'S HOW BAD THE BUSINESS
CLIMATE IS IS. THEY CERTAINLY HAVE TO KNOW WHAT
KIND OF BUDGET PRINCIPLES THIS GOVERNOR IS PROPOSING.
YOU CAN TALK ABOUT SPENDING. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT INVESTING.
>> I WAS REMINDED TODAY, AND I READ AN ARTICLE BY DEAN SMITH
AND HE QUOTED ABOUT PEOPLE WHO SEEM TO KNOW THE COST OF
EVERYTHING, BUT THE VALUE OF NOTHING.
WHAT DO WE WANT HERE IN MINNESOTA?
WHAT'S THE VALUE THAT WE PROVIDE TO YOU TO BE A CITIZEN OF
MINNESOTA? HISTORICALLY WE WERE VERY PROUD.
I GREW UP UNDERSTANDING WE HAD THE BEST ROADS.
YOU KNEW WHEN YOU DRIVE ACROSS THE BORDER IN IOWA AND NOW YOU
KNOW WHEN YOU DRIVE TO IOWA BECAUSE THEY HAVE BETTER ROADS
THERE. WHAT DO WE PROVIDE YOU NOW?
WHAT DO WE GET EXCEPT FOR THE WEATHER OUTSIDE NOW?
>> WE HAVE BEEN INCREASING EDUCATION FUNDING IN THE LAST
FEW YEARS, AND LAST YEAR WE GAVE AN ADDITIONAL $50 ON THE
FORMULA. SENATOR REST WE CAN TAKE THE
ADDITIONAL $50 IN THE EDUCATION BUDGET AND DO ALL DAY
KINDERGARTEN. WE COULD DO THAT.
WE DON'T HAVE TO RAISE TAXES TO DO THAT.
>> WE CAN'T MAKE THE INVESTMENT, HOWEVER, IN GETTING RID OF WHAT
WE CALL SUBSIDY IN SPECIAL EDUCATION, WHICH IS THE GOVERNOR
IS PROPOSING. >> SENATOR REST WE CAN'T DO
EVERYTHING ALL IN ONE YEAR. I KNOW YOU AND THE HOUSE
REPRESENTATIVES AND THE GOVERNOR WANT TO DO THAT AND YOU ARE
GOING TO DO IT IN THE NEXT BIENNIUM.
YOU ARE GOING TO FIX ALL THE PROBLEMS.
>> YOU SAID THE GOVERNOR HAD A GIMMICK ABOUT THE PAY BACK.
>> RIGHT. >> WE ARE NOT TRYING TO DO IT
ALL IN ONE YEAR. BUT HE PAYS FOR IT IN 2007.
>> LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE YOU RAISED WHICH IS THE EARLY
CHILDHOOD EDUCATION. SENATOR THOMPSON YOU TOLD US YOU
SERVED IN EDUCATION POLICY. MAYBE LET'S MOVE IN THE
DIRECTION OF EARLY CHILDHOOD PIECE, AND IT'S BEEN AROUND IN
PAST LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS AND HAD SUPPORT, AND WHAT'S YOUR
VIEW ON THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL ON THAT ISSUE?
>> ONCE AGAIN IT BOILS DOWN TO WHAT WE WANT TO PAY FOR AND WHAT
WE VALUE PAYING FOR, AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY QUESTION WE
ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SEE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PAID
FOR IN THE STATE. I FRANKLY HAVE SOME CONCERN.
I BELIEVE THE BEST FOLKS TO RAISE CHILDREN AND GET THEM TO
THE AGE TO START SCHOOL ARE PARENTS, AND I KNOW THAT SOME
PEOPLE SEE THIS AS IMPOLITIC TO SAY, THAT WHICH YOU TAX YOU GET
LESS OF AND THAT WHICH YOU SUBSIDIZE, YOU GET MORE OF.
WE ARE SUBSIDIZING A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE CHOOSING, NOT
THAT THEY ARE INCAPABLE BUT CHOOSING TO AB DID ABDICATE THR
PARENTING DUTIES AND GET THE STATE TO PAY FOR IT.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE NEED TO GO
ENTIRELY. WE NEED TO PUT RESPONSIBILITY ON
PARENTS TO RAISE CHILDREN. THEY GIVE US THE BEST OUTCOMES,
AND I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO PUT OURSELVES IN A SITUATION WHERE
WE ARE SERVING AS PARENTS THROUGH GOVERNMENT FROM ALMOST
FROM THE TIME THE KID COMES HOME FROM THE HOSPITAL.
>> WE ARE IN A GLOBAL ECONOMY, WE ARE COMPETING WITH KIDS IN
ASIA, KIDS IN EUROPE. WE ARE COMPETING WITH KIDS IN
SOUTH AMERICA AND AFRICA. THERE'S NO QUESTION WE NEED TO
LOOK AT THE FUTURE OF OUR KIDS, HOW THEY ARE EDUCATED.
I UNDERSTAND YOUR PERSPECTIVE. THERE'S A TENDENCY TO WANT TO BE
TRADITIONAL ABOUT THIS. WHEN KIDS IN OTHER COUNTRIES ARE
GETTING A LEG UP ON US, WE HAVE GOT TO WATCH OUT FOR THAT.
WHEN IT'S ESTABLISHED THAT EARLY CHILDHOOD IS RETURNING $7 TO ONE
SPENT ON HOW WE DO OVER ALL WITH FUTURE PERFORMANCE, YOU CAN'T
IGNORE THOSE NUMBERS. IT'S A DIRECTION WE HAVE TO MOVE
IN. >> MAYBE WE HAVE TO GO IN A
DIRECTION OF PERFORMANCE BASED FUNDING.
MAYBE WE SHOULD GIVE INCREASED FUNDING FOR OUR SCHOOLS AND
SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT DO A BETTER JOB OF GETTING THEIR KIDS
EDUCATED. >> I GUESS IT DEPENDS WHAT YOU
MEAN BY PERFORMANCE. IF THIS IS WHERE THE DROP OFF
IS -- IN GENERAL, REPRESENTATIVE HACKBARTH, YOU DON'T WANT TO
THROW MONEY AT A PROBLEM AND SAY WELL WITH A BIGGER PROGRAM IT'S
GOING TO WORK. WE HAD 10 YEARS OF CUT BACKS TO
CUT BACK THE PROGRAMS THAT AREN'T WORKING, BUT IN GENERAL
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. THERE SHOULD BE EXPECTATIONS AND
WE AS LEGISLATORS ARE IN A GOOD POSITION TO EVALUATE THAT AS
WELL. WHETHER WE ARE DELIVERING JOBS
TO THE INDUSTRY THAT HISTORICALLY RELIED ON GOOD
EDUCATION. >> THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE BEEN
DOING IS THROWING MONEY AT THE PROBLEM.
>> LET'S TALK ABOUT SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT VIEWERS HAVE.
ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS ABOUT THE PROGRAM IS OUR VIEWERS PAY
ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU FOLKS ARE DOING, AND THEY HAVE SOME
THOUGHTS THAT THEY WANT TO SHARE WITH US.
WE HAVE A VIEWER FROM HITCH I SON WHO WANTS TO KNOW ABOUT A
BILL THAT SENATOR BAKK SPONSORED.
IT SAVED $31 MILLION. HE THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA.
I DON'T VOUCH FOR OUR VIEWERS NUMBERS, BUT WHAT ABOUT THOSE
KINDS OF EMPLOYEE ISSUES? ANYBODY KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT
THAT? >> I DON'T RECALL THE BILL.
>> I DON'T EITHER. I CAN'T HELP.
>> ALL RIGHT. ANY THOUGHTS?
WE HAVE ANOTHER VERY SPECIFIC QUESTION DEALING WITH THE
BOUNDARY WATERS DRAINAGE WORK GROUP, AND THIS IS A BILL
DEALING WITH THE. >> WE HAVE A LONG LEGISLATURE.
>> DOES ANYBODY HERE KNOW ABOUT THE BOUNDARY WATERS DRAINAGE
WORK GROUP? IF NOT WE WILL PICK ON NEXT
WEEK'S GROUP AND ASK THEM ABOUT THAT.
WE WILL COME BACK TO THAT ONE. WHAT ABOUT K-12 EDUCATION.
WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT FROM THE BUDGET SESSION.
THE GOVERNOR MADE A PROPOSAL. LET'S START WITH YOU,
REPRESENTATIVE LESCH AND FLUSH THAT OUT A BIT.
>> 600 MILL, AND 340 MILLION GOING TOWARDS E12 AND THE
BALANCE GOING TO HIGHER EDUCATION.
THE SHIFT HAS NOT BEEN PAID BACK IN THIS.
WHEN I TALK TO EDUCATORS WHAT WE ARE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT TO DO
THIS, I'M IMPRESSED. I THINK THE GOVERNOR HAS MADE A
GOOD DECISION. WITH ALL THAT'S BEEN CUT,
WHATEVER WE ARE TALKING ABOUT,S SOME LEGISLATION WE HAVE
ATTEMPTED TO KEEP E12 HARMLESS, AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT
HOW WE RAMP UP. THE DEVIL IS ALWAYS IN THE
DETAILS OF THIS, OF THE 340 MILLION, HOW WE ARE GOING TO
GET THERE, AND WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC THINGS THAT ARE GOING
TO BE ADDED BACK IN. GENERALLY I LIKE THE LOOK OF IT.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS WE ARE HAVING RIGHT NOW, TOO, IN OUR
DISCUSSIONS, WE CAN TALK ABOUT NUMBERS AND TOTAL NUMBERS, BUT
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT ABOUT THE DEVIL IN THE DETAILS.
AS THE GOVERNOR FOLKS ARE PREPARING TO PRESENT THE
PROPOSALS TO THE VARIOUS COMMITTEES AND TAX COMMITTEE
NEXT TUESDAY, WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO SEE, AND I'M AS EAGER AS
ANYONE TO SEE IT IS THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE IN THE BILLS THAT HE'S
PROPOSING, AND OUR PENCILS ARE SHARP, AND HIS PENCIL IS SHARP
AND WE UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS OF HIS PROPOSALS
THROUGH STATUTORY LANGUAGE, AND THAT'S NO MORE TRUE IN AN IGA
FORMULA, AND NOT ENOUGH TO SAY WE ARE GOING TO GET PROPERTY TAX
RELIEF THROUGH A LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID AND COUNTY AID AT
THE LEVEL THAT THE GOVERNOR IS PROPOSING, BUT WE NEED TO KNOW
THE FORMULA THAT'S GOING OUT SO THAT COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE A
GOOD TAX BASE ARE NOT ONES THAT ARE GOING TO BE GETTING DOLLARS
THAT ARE NOT NEEDED FOR THEM TO DELIVER THE SERVICES.
THE SAME THING, I THINK, CAN BE APPLIED TO THE SPEPEFICS OF THE
EDUCATION PROPOSALS AS WELL. IT'S NOT JUST THE OVERALL
NUMBER. BUT IT'S WHERE IT'S BEING
DELEGATED AND ALLOCATED. >> I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE
BUDGET AS REPRESENTATIVE HACKBARTH ACCURATELY POINTED
OUT, WE INCREASED THE BUDGET LAST YEAR, AND WHEN WE SHIFTED
WE ADDED TO COMPENSATE DISTRICTS ON THE DEBT THAT THEY WOULD
INCUR. BUT THE THING IS OUR EDUCATIONAL
SYSTEM'S DEFICIENCIES ARE MOTT THE RESULT OF LACK OF FUNDING
AND THAT'S DEMONSTRATING BY THE FACT THAT THE SCHOOLS IN OUR
STATES THAT HAVE THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF FUNDING ARE NOT
NECESSARILY THE HIGHEST PERFORMING SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL
DISTRICTS LIKE MY OWN WHERE WE TAKE IT ON THE CHIN IN THE WAY
SCHOOLS ARE FUNDED ARE DOING WELL.
THERE ARE OTHER FACTORS INVOLVED.
SO, YOU KNOW, THIS WORD REFORM IS THROWN AROUND A LOT TO THE
POINT IT BECOMES MEANINGLESS. WE DO NEED CHANGE, AND I'M NOT
FRANKLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE STUDENTS IN MY DISTRICT.
IN LAKEVILLE, FARMINGTON AND THE SMALLER TOWNS AROUND, I SPOKE AT
A NATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN RANDOLPH, ONE OF THE BEST
SCHOOLS IN THE COUNTRY. THEY DO A PHENOMENAL JOB.
I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE SCHOOLS IN MINNEAPOLIS, ST. PAUL AND
OTHER AREAS THAT ARE IN SCHOOLS THAT ARE NOT DOING WELL, AND
BECAUSE OF THE STRUCTURE WE HAVE, DON'T HAVE REALISTIC
ALTERNATIVES FOR PARENTS TO GET THEIR STUDENTS OUT OF THERE.
SO THE REFORM NEEDS TO BE INCREASING COMPETITION, AND
INCREASING ACCESS TO SCHOOLS THAT ARE PERFORMING WELL FOR
PARENTS THAT HAVE THEIR CHILDREN IN STRUGGLING SCHOOLS.
IT'S BECOME VERY POPULAR TO TALK ABOUT THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP, WHICH
OF COURSE IS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE PERFORMANCE OF WHITE
STUDENTS AND MINORITY STUDENTS, AND IRONICALLY, THE VERY FOLKS
WHO SEEM THE MOST CONCERNED ABOUT THAT ARE THE ONES WHO WANT
TO PREVENT DISPROPORTIONATELY MINORITY STUDENTS FROM HAVING
GOOD EDUCATIONAL ALTERNATIVES AND THAT'S VERY UNFORTUNATE.
>> I APPRECIATE, SENATOR, YOUR CONCERN FOR STUDENTS IN
MINNEAPOLIS ST. PAUL. I HOPE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT
WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT GETTING STUDENTS OUT OF THERE OR WHAT
YOU CONSIDER UNDERPERFORMING SCHOOLS YOU UNDERSTAND THE
FACTORS, AND I WONDER IF YOU HAD THE CONCENTRATIONS OF POVERTY IN
LAKEVILLE, IF YOU HAD THESE SPECIAL EDUCATION CONCENTRATION
OF STUDENTS IN LAKEVILLE, IF YOU HAD THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
LEARNERS IN LAKEVILLE, I WONDER HOW THOSE SCHOOLS WOULD BE
PERFORMING. THE INNER-CITY HAS A UNIQUE SET
OF PROBLEMS, AND YOU CAN'T MAKE IT GO AWAY BY CLOSING DOWN THE
SCHOOLS AND FANNING THEM OUT TO OTHER DISTRICTS OR OTHER AREAS.
WE HAVE CHARTER SCHOOLS IN MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL THAT DO
THIS AS WELL. BUT THE SPECIAL TYPES OF NEEDS
THAT WE HAVE IMPACT THOSE RATES OF SUCCESS IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
>> IF I MAY RESPOND TO THAT. WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT.
OBVIOUSLY DIFFERENT SCHOOL DISTRICTS DUE TO DEMOGRAPHIC
ISSUES AND CHALLENGES AND THE LIKE.
BUT THE FACT IS THAT DOES NOT JUSTIFY CREATING A SYSTEM IN
WHICH THOSE WHO WOULD SEEK ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE
COMPETITIVE DON'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT, AND WE ALL
BELIEVE IN ALMOST EVERY AREA EXCEPT EDUCATION THAT IRON
SHARPENS IRON. AS YOU COMPETE AND AS YOU HAVE
SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS, PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND THE
LIKE COMPETING, WE BELIEVE IN OTHER AREAS OF THE ECONOMY THAT
THAT WOULD HELP EVERYBODY CREATE BETTER SCHOOLS AND NEW AND
BETTER IDEAS. INSTEAD WE CREATE WHAT IS IN
EFFECT A MONOPOLY, AND I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE CHARTERS
SCHOOLS AND OPEN ENROLLMENT OMTIONS BUT THE CHOICE IS VERY,
VEROPTIONS BUT IN MY VIEW THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE.
>> I THINK MINNESOTA IS KNOWN FOR AN ENORMOUS ARRAY OF CHOICES
THAT PARENTS HAVE FOR THE PROGRAMS THAT THEIR CHILDREN ARE
ENROLLED IN, THE SCHOOLS THEY CAN GO TO, WHETHER IT'S MAGNET
SCHOOLS OR CHARTER SCHOOLS OR OPEN ENROLLMENT OR A POST
SECONDARY. WE HAVE -- WE ARE NOT ACROSS THE
COUNTRY AS A STATE THAT PLACES A VALUE ON WHAT'S CALLED THE
SCHOOL CHOICE OR A HIGH VALUE ON THE SCHOOLw3 CHOICE MOVEMENT.
CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY CAN'T CHOSE IN THE WHOLE STATE
TO GO TO SCHOOL IN RANDOLPH. THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE.
SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME LIMITS BASED ON HOW MANY STUDENTS YOU
CAN, YOU KNOW, -- THAT YOU CAN ACCOMMODATE.
THAT'S TRUE IN OTHER SCHOOL DISTRICTS AS WELL.
THE CHOICE IS NOT ABSOLUTE. BUT THE PROGRAM IS CERTAINLY --
THEY ARE CERTAINLY AVAILABLE STATEWIDE.
>> MY POINT IS THERE MAY BE PROGRAMS AND THIS AND THAT, AND
WHAT WE KNOW, AND I DIDN'T HEAR FROM ANYBODY THAT TESTIFIED FROM
THE SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE THAT DISAGREES WITH THE NOTION
THAT THE BEST TRADITION OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS IS WHETHER A
CHILD CAN READ AT GRADE LEVEL THIRD GRADE.
AT THIRD GRADE YOU START TO READ TO LEARN.
MY POINT IS IF WE HAVE SCHOOLS THAT FOR WHATEVER REASON ARE
TAKING STUDENTS OF NORMAL INTELLIGENCE AND ABILITY AND NOT
TRAINING THEM TO READ BY THIRD GRADE, IF THOSE PARENTS DON'T
HAVE AN ECONOMICALLY VIABLE WAY OUT OF THAT SITUATION, WE ARE
DOING A HORRIBLE DISSERVICE TO OUR PARENTS AND IT'S
DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTING POOR PEOPLE AND MINORITIES AND
LIMITING ACCESS TO THE AMERICAN DREAM, AND WE NEED TO FIX THAT.
>> AND ONE THING THAT WILL FIX THAT, AND THE ONLY THING I
REALLY LIKE ABOUT THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET IS ALL DAY EVERYDAY
KINDERGARTEN. I LIKE THAT VERY MUCH AND IT
WILL HELP IN THAT REGARD. OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T THINK
TOO MUCH ABOUT THE WHOLE THING. >> YOU HAVE COME A LONG WAY.
>> SENATOR REST, I HAVE ALWAYS REPORTED ALL DAY EVERY DAY
KINDERGARTEN. ALWAYS.
MY SON WAS ONE OF THE VERY FIRST STUDENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN
ALL-DAY EVERYDAY KINDERGARTEN. IT'S TREMENDOUS AND IT'S THE
RIGHT THING TO DO. WITH THAT, I ALSO WANT TO CLEAR
IDENTIFY SOMETHING KIND OF IN PASSING BUT SOMETHING I SAID
EARLIER. WE TALKED ABOUT THE SHIFT, AND
THE SHIFT HAS BEEN PAID BACK THAT THE REPUBLICANS BORROWED IN
THEIR BUDGET. IT'S ALL BEEN PAID BACK, PLUS
SOME OF THE DEMOCRAT PAID PREVIOUS BIENNIUM.
THAT DID GET TAKEN CARE OF. >> WE COULD SAY THEY PAID BACK
WHAT THE DEMOCRATS BORROWED AND STILL OWE WHAT THE REPUBLICANS
BORROWED. >> I HAD A COUPLE OF SPECIFIC
QUESTIONS FROM VIEWERS THAT HAVE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION TO OUR
DISCUSSION TONIGHT. WE HAD A COMMENT FROM A VIEWER
WHO IS A COUNTY COMMISSIONER IN SOUTHERN MINNESOTA WHO SAYS BY
GOSH OUR COMMISSION HAS BEEN LOOKING FOR WAYS TO CUT, COMBINE
AND REORGANIZE, AND THEN THE STATE CUTS AID AND MANDATES YET
MORE SERVICES. I WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT
VIEWER'S QUESTION, BECAUSE LAST YEAR THERE WAS SOME TALK -- I
THINK MAYBE IN THE LAST COUPLE OF SESSIONS ABOUT MA MANDATES AD
LEAVING COUNTIES AND CITIES WITH SOME OF THE MANDATES.
I CAN TELL YOU EVERYTHING FROM DATA PRACTICE TO WHO KNOWS WHAT,
YOU HAVE MANDATES THAT COME TO YOU FROM ST. PAUL.
THERE WAS MINNESOTA CITIES OR MINNESOTA ASSOCIATION COUNTIES
THAT HAD A PROPOSAL TO REDUCING SOME OF THE MANDATES.
I WAS WONDERING WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT?
IS THAT A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION AT ALL?
ANYBODY KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT?
>> I HAVEN'T SEEN IT. EVEN FROM THOSE OF US WHO
APPRECIATE STATEWIDE STANDARDS AS A GOOD EFFICIENT WAY TO MODEL
GOVERNMENT, EVEN WE RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS A BUREAUCRATIC
CREEP THAT IS INVOLVED IN STACKING THESE THINGS ON THE
BOOKS YEAR AFTER YEAR, AND ESPECIALLY WHEN SOME OF THEM
BECOME MEANINGLESS OR BURDENSOME, WE WANT TO RECOGNIZE
AND SEE WHICH ONES WE CAN DISPENSE WITH.
BUT IT IS AT THE SACRIFICE OF HAVING STATEWIDE STANDARDS THAT
WE CAN RELY ON AND BE EFFICIENT. THAT'S THE TRADE OFF.
>> I WANT TO PIGGYBACK SOMETHING SENATOR REST SAID EARLIER.
WHY WOULD I ASSUME BOY, THOSE VOTERS ARE SMART AND SENT ME TO
ST. PAUL BUT MAN THEY ARE IDIOS WHEN THEY VOTE FOR CITY COUNCIL.
THAT'S WHY I OPPOSE CITY MANDATES.
MY ASSUMPTION, JUST LIKE WITH THE PROPERTY TAXES THAT PEOPLE
PAY LOCALLY, MY ASSUMPTION IS THESE TAXES HAVE BEEN LEVIED BY
FOLKS VOTED IN. INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH THE MORE
LOCAL YOU MAKE GOVERNMENT THE CLOSER PEOPLE ARE TO THE
DECISION MAKERS, AND SO I THINK THE WAY TO ANSWER THE PROPERTY
TAX PROBLEM AND CITY TAX PROBLEMS, GET AWAY, WE STATE
LEGISLATORS THINK WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE BELL TRAMY COUNTY DO
THINGS LIKE DAKOTA COUNTY. MAYBE THEY DON'T WANT TO.
THE PROBLEM WITH BEING A POLITICIAN, THOSE WHO HAVE A
HAMMER EVERYTHING TO THEM LOOKS LIKE A NAIL.
WE SHOULD NOT DO THAT. RUN THE COUNTIES AND CITIES AND
SCHOOL BOARDS BACK OFF OF THE MANDATES AND THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE
SUCH HIGH TAXES. >> WE SHOULD BE MINDFUL OF THE
LOCAL REGULATIONS THAT BROUGHT US THINGS AS CRAZY AND BURDENS,
AND HIGH SPEED INTERNET, WE DON'T NEED YOUR REGULATIONS,
INTERNET, AND I MEAN, TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.
>> AND THE TUBES. >> ON SOME LEVEL THERE CAN BE A
BENEFIT TO THESE IN THE LONG RUN THAT WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE, EVEN
IF IT'S A SHORT-TERM BURDEN. >> SENATOR REST, YOUR THOUGHTS
ON MANDATES. >> WE HAD A WHOLE STRING OF
MANDATES THAT WE CONSIDERED GIVING RELIEF TO A NUMBER OF
YEARS BACK, BUT FOR AS MANY PEOPLE THAT CONSIDERED SOMETHING
A MANDATE, WE HAD OTHER PEOPLE COMING AND SAYING OH, IT'S A
NECESSITY, AND SO THE MANDATE RELIEF BILL THAT WE HAD REALLY
WAS FAIRLY WEAK, AND IT'S REALLY A HARD DISCUSSION TO HAVE
BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH WE WANT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO HAVE SOME
MEASURE OF AUTONOMY, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS WE ALSO WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT A CHILD WHO LIVES IN HENNEPIN COUNTY HAS ACCESS
TO, YOU KNOW, GOOD FIRE AND POLICE SERVICES AND PROTECTION
AND SO ON AS MUCH AS SOMEONE THAT LIVES IN SHERBURN COUNTY.
ALTHOUGH THERE'S NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT FOR
MAKING SURE THAT AN INDIVIDUAL, NO MATTER WHERE THEY LIVE, GETS
A UNIFORM EDUCATION IN OUR STATE.
WE DON'T PUT THAT IN THE CONSTITUTION FOR THE KINDS OF
SERVICES THAT WE EXPECT FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
I STILL THINK THAT THERE'S A LEVEL OF EXPECTATION THAT IF
YOUR HOUSE IS ON FIRE IN ONE COUNTY, AND YOU DIAL 911 YOU ARE
GOING TO GET SOME SERVICE FOR THAT, AND YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR
IT. BUT WE DO HAVE THAT EXPECTATION.
THE MANDATE DISCUSSION IS A VERY DIFFICULT ONE, BECAUSE WE REALLY
DO HAVE TO LOOK AT THE THINGS THAT ARE A BURDEN, THAT WE
SHOULD NOT ASK THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO PAY, AND THE SAME
WAY THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PASSES ON MANDATES TO THE STATE
LIKE FUNDING SPECIAL EDUCATION, AND THEY DON'T SEND THE MONEY.
>> 20% OF THE MONEY. >> THEY DON'T ACCEPTED THE
MONEY, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, WE ARE STILL GOING TO BE PROVIDING
SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES TO THE CHILDREN OF MINNESOTA.
>> I FIND IT FUNNY. STATE LEGISLATORS THINK IT'S A
DISGRACE WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GIVES A LITTLE MONEY
IN A NDATE AND DOESN'T FULLY FUND IT, BUT WHEN WE DO IT TO
THE COUNTIES THEY ARE MAKING SURE IT'S STANDARDS.
>> AND A VIEWER FROM FARMINGTON. THIS VIEWER WANTS TO KNOW
WHETHER THE PRIMARY ELECTION WILL BE MOVED TO JUNE.
>> THERE ARE A NUMBER OF -- I THINK THERE ARE GOING TO BE A
NUMBER OF PROPOSALS COMING THROUGH THE ELECTION
SUBCOMMITTEE, AND ONE OF THEM WILL CERTAINLY BE PROPOSED AND
IT'S AN EARLIER PRIMARY THAN THE AUGUST ONE.
WE MOVED THE SEPTEMBER PRIMARY TO AUGUST BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL
OVERSEAS VOTING ACT. THEY REQUIRED US TO HAVE A
CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME BETWEEN ELECTIONS SO WE COULD SEND
ABSENTEE BALLOTS TO THE MEMBERER OF THE MILITARY SERVING
OVERSEAS, AND WE HAVE ONLY DONE THAT ONCE OR TWICE NOW, BUT IT
IS STILL BEING LOOKED AT WHETHER IT'S BETTER TO HAVE A LONGER
PERIOD BEFORE THE GENERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN THAN IT IS TO
HAVE THE CANDIDATES WITHIN OUR PARTIES FIGHTING ONE ANOTHER
FOR -- TO WIN THE PRIMARY OVER A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME.
I I THINK YOU CAN SEE THAT, AND THE POINT I WOULD MAKE ABOUT IT
IS EITHER THAT AND SOME OTHER ELECTION ADMINISTRATION
INITIATIVES THAT ARE GOING TO BE COMING FORWARD THAT GOVERNOR
DAYTON HAS BEEN AS ADAMANT AS GOVERNOR PAWLENTY IN SAYING THAT
HE WILL NOT SIGN LEGISLATION THAT DOES NOT HAVE A STRONG
BIPARTISAN VOTE IN THE LEGISLATURE.
HE'S NOT GOING TO SIGN PARTISAN LEGISLATION REGARDING ELECTION
ADMINISTRATION, AND I APPLAUD HIM FOR THAT AND ALSO FORMER
GOVERNOR PAWLENTY. >> SENATOR THOMPSON, REAL
QUICKLY. >> I DON'T HAVE A LOT TO SAY
ABOUT THE JUNE PRIMARY. I HADN'T THOUGHT A LOT ABOUT IT
UNTIL I GOT HERE, AND I FIEWND IT INTERESTING HOFIND ITINTERESY
ARE, VERY MUCH ON BOTH SIDES. THE TRADE OFF AS SENATOR REST
SAYS, IF YOU MOVE THE PRIMARY EARLIER YOU HAVE MORE TIME FOR
THE GENERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN. IF YOU MOVE THE PRIMARY UP, IT
GETS CLOSER TO THE END OF SESSION AND MAKES IT MORE
DIFFICULT TO FIGHT OFF A PRIMARY CHALLENGE.
>> I DO NOT SUPPORT A JUNE PRIMARY.
I LIKE RIGHT WHERE IT IS. IT'S UNFORTUNATE VOTERS DON'T
PARTICIPATE IN IT. WE HAD MORE OF A PARTICIPATION,
KIDS ARE BACK IN SCHOOL. >> WE WOULD BE OUT F COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FEDERAL MANDATE, YOU KNOW.
KEEP THAT IN MIND, THAT I SUPPORT.
I WANT THE MILITARY FOLKS IN AFGHANISTAN TO BE ABLE TO VOTE.
>> AND TO BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE AND GET OUT THERE AND VOTE.
>> REPRESENTATIVE LESCH IS IN HIS DUTY THAT HAPPENS TO BE IN
ELECTION TIME, HE SHOULD BE ABLE TO VOTE ABSENTEE.
>> ONE TIME I DIDN'T VOTE INSIDE I WAS 18 YEARS OLD.
IT'S WHEN I WAS AT FORT BENING, AND I TRIED AS BEST I COULD.
IT'S A SUCH A PAIN, AND I WAS SURPRISED HOW DIFFICULT IT WAS.
THEY HAVE POSTERS, HEY, IF YOU WANT, YOU HAVE GOT YOUR VOTING
ASSISTANCE AND ALL THIS STUFF. FORGET ABOUT IT.
I THINK IT'S A GOOD MOVE EITHER WAY.
IF NOTHING ELSE, OUR PEOPLE WHO ARE SERVING SHOULD BE VOTING
BECAUSE THEY HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL STAKE IN IT.
>> WE ONLY HAVE A MINUTE LEFT. THIS VIEWER DOESN'T THINK THE
CIGARETTE TAX INCREASE ISN'T A GOOD IDEA.
ANOTHER VIEWER THINKS THEY SHOULD BE TAXES ALCOHOL MORE
THAN CIGARETTES. >> THERE'S ALREADY ALMOST $2 ON
A CIGARETTE. IT HURTS THE LOWER INCOME FOLKS
MORE THAN ANYBODY. >> WE WILL BE HEARING A BILL BY
A REPUBLICAN SENATOR TO RAISE THE TOBACCO TAX EVEN HIGHER THIS
COMING DATE. >> THE GOVERNOR HAS HISTORICALLY
OPPOSED THE CIGARETTE TAX AND PUT IT IN HIS BUDGET FOR VARIOUS
OTHER REASONS, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY WE HAVE TO COME TOGETHER
AND ASSURE WE HAVE A FULL PACK. >> IF YOU ARE DOING IT FOR TAX
REASONS, IT'S A BAD TAX. IF YOU THINK PEOPLE OUGHT TO
QUIT SMOKING MAKE IT ILLEGAL. >> I WANT TO THANK OUR PANEL FOR
YOUR RESPONSES, AND WE HAD A GREAT DISCUSSION, AND I WANT TO
THANK YOU, THE VIEWERS FOR PARTICIPATING AND QUESTIONS WE
DIDN'T GET TO. JOIN US NEXT WEEK AND ALL THE
WEEKS THAT FOLLOW FOR THE UP COMING PROGRAMS OF "YOUR
LEGISLATORS". THANK YOU AND GOOD NIGHT.
FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE PROGRAM, WHO HAS BEEN A
GUEST AND WATCH ALL THE PAST EPISODES.
THERE'S A PHOTO GALLERY, INFORMATIVE LINKS AND MUCH MORE.
YOU CAN ALSO GET INVOLVED AND STAY IN TOUCH BY FOLLOWING US ON
TWITTER AND JOIN THE DISCUSSION ON OUR FACEBOOK PAGE.
THANK YOU FOR WATCHING "YOUR LEGISLATORS".
>>> "YOUR LEGISLATORS" IS MADE POSSIBLE IN PART BY THE GENEROUS
FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF MEET MEMBERS, MAKING MINNESOTA CLEAN
WATERS, SAFE COMMUNITIES AND VETERANS CARE HAPPEN.
WE WORK HARD FOR MINNESOTANS.