Business Bets On Bonoff

Monday, 28 June 2010 10:25 Last Updated on Monday, 28 June 2010 22:44

I read Charlie Weaver's Star Trib commentary this morning and was nodding my head. 

The top 10 percent already account for more than half of state income taxes. And they pay more in overall state and local taxes than 70 percent of taxpayers combined. That seems pretty fair.

Minnesota can't afford to engage in this kind of class warfare. The global recession has focused everyone's attention on the importance of a strong economy, the jobs it provides and the tax dollars it generates. "Tax the Rich" might be a good campaign slogan, but the future of our state depends on tax and spending policies that encourage business investment, job creation and economic growth.

I couldn't agree more.  Charlie Weaver is the Executive Director of the Minnesota Business Partnership and the  Coalition of Minnesota Businesses is their 501(c)(3) public-policy arm.  Last week Politics in Minnesota interviewed Weaver in "Some advocacy groups eyeing legislative races"

Weaver said this kind of advocacy is “critical. Pieces like that are meant to educate as much as anything. Often what we find in education reform you need to start at the grassroots. If parents don’t care, legislators don’t care.”

Weaver said the Coalition is both criticizing DFLers who voted against alternative licensure and supporting DFLers like Sens. Terri Bonoff and Kathy Saltzman who voted for it.

“Specifically, on that vote, there were some courageous Democrats and we will support them,” Weaver said.

The Coalition will continue to target voters on education issues. The group’s method of communicating will include newspaper ads, lawn signs, and, in some areas, television.

Why did the Coalition of Minnesota Businesses-- knowing that Senator Bonoff is a bold, proud tax-increaser--support her campaign with independent expenditures extolling her virtue on an alternative licensure for teachers vote?  Because this is the number one concern of Minnesota businesses?  No.  Because they think she'll win, so they place their chips.

Oh, but Bonoff was just quoted in the Strib standing strong against "taxing the rich" you say?    Per Bonoff, from the Star Tribune May 11, 2010.

"It was not a tough vote for me," said Sen. Terri Bonoff, of her vote Monday against raising income taxes by $435 million. That's not to say Bonoff's Minnetonka constituents want fewer services. She says most high-wage earners in her district might stomach higher taxes -- just not higher income taxes."

"I'm not tax-averse, but it has to make sense," she said.

I'l say she isn't adverse...she voted on a tax hike on top wage earners only 12 months earlier when she voted "YAY" on May 8, 2009 to increase the top tier.  Per H.F. 885 Conference Committee which read:

So, was that a tough vote for her?  Nah.  It's not tough to vote for what you really want:  higher taxes on those who are already taxed enough.  But, it's really not tough to not vote for the things you want when it's an election year favoring your opponent's party.  Such is the way of an ambitious flip-flopping politician.

Can I ask why the political reporter at the Star Tribune, Rachel Stassen-Berger, has such a bad memory and doesn't ask the obvious question:  Senator Bonoff, if your constituents don't want higher income taxes, why did you vote last year to raise their income taxes?  Do these reporters even casually follow critical votes and have any memory or do any research?

Don't get me wrong.  I like business.  I like big business.  I like small business.  I like anybody who produces jobs and creates prosperity.  What I don't like is their "advocacy" groups helping an already well-funded DFL candidate who has clearly voted to raise taxes on the same people who create jobs.  These groups like to "educate" the public.  Perhaps their members need to be educated too.

• Bonoff voted for a $1 Billion tax increase one year ago that would have signficantly raised income taxes in Minnesota. (which Gov. Pawlenty vetoed)
• Bonoff bragged about leading the charge to override Pawlenty's veto of the $6 Billion tax increase two years ago.

Maybe the business executives who give money to this group like Billions of dollars in new taxes that the DFL and moderate Republicans have brought us.  Who knows, maybe they really liked Bonoff's attempt to completely ban cell phone use while driving in Minnesota a few months ago.  I mean, if that isn't business-friendly legislation, what is?

The recent Supreme Court ruling, which allows corporations to play on a level playing field with the Unions in the game of political ads, is a good thing.  But don't make the mistake of thinking it will lead to more conservative leadership at the state or federal level.  It will only lead to where it always leads....giving large special interest groups an easy way to place their bets on the winners so that they earn a spot at the table.

Americans are waking up to the game.  We understand what's going on and we don't like it. 

If you don't like the game, donate to Norann Dillon today.

KSTP Fails in Proper Reporting of EP City Council Meeting

Wednesday, 16 June 2010 08:41 Last Updated on Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:04

Last night I found a last minute babysitter and headed over to Eden Prairie City Hall to witness the 30 minute public open forum before the regular City Council meeting.  I'm glad I did.  Because if I wouldn't have gone and seen with my own eyes what happened, I would have been left to believe this version on the truth on KSTP news last night.

The KSTP News headline reads:  "Residents Blast E.P. Mayor Over Allegations of False Expense"  The reporter says "Residents showed up to blast Mayor Phil Young,"....yes that's true.  Three residents showed up to blast Mayor Phil Young.

The City Council Chambers were full with people standing in the back and the room was AT LEAST 10-1 in support of Mayor Phil Young.

There were three local liberals scheduled to speak.  MN Progressive Project Blogger Tommy Johnson was one.  Tommy spoke first (looking quite dapper in a rare suited appearance.)  He called for the Mayor's resignation, then there was another speaker who did the same.  After both of these speakers there was applause from perhaps seven people around the room. 

There were EIGHT speakers in support of Mayor Young.  After the first speaker addressed the audience in support of Mayor Young there was very loud sustained applause.  No cheers, no talking, just loud sustained applause that seemed to go on for at least a minute.  There was loud applause after each speaker who asked Mayor Young to stand up to these attacks.  Each speaker in support of the Mayor acknowledged that you can't make these types of mistakes with taxpayer dollars at stake, one speaker said that she could easily see how it could happen based on her own experiences with sales reports.  But each of these speaker spoke passionately about the leadership of the Mayor and some spoke with disgust about the behind-the-scenes-political targeting that's going on in City Hall right now.

Former City Council member Jan Mosman also spoke but was relatively neutral in tone-- she was down the speakers list and perhaps tweeked her comments a bit after reading the mood of the room.  Mosman is a part of the Ron Case/Prairie Home Living/Left Side of the Prairie gang.  I heard the lady next to Mosman say, (after the very light applause for Tommy Johnson,) "I don't like the applause."  To which I was thinking, "Yeah, I'll bet you don't."

I guess it was my job to tote a videocamera there and put the whole thing on the internet so that people could see what really happened instead of getting their news from the local media....is there somebody out there who wants to pay me for this?  Yeah, I didn't think so. 

KSTP concludes with a dramatic "follow-the-man-to-the-car-after-the-meeting-moment" where Mayor Young makes "no comment" on the matter.  He can't comment because he's under investigation by the very people feeding this story to the media!

I haven't commented on what's gone on because I don't have the facts, I only know what the Star Tribune has reported and I'm often skeptical of the Star Tribune's reporting most certainly when it comes to a potential "Republican scandal."  I still don't have the facts.  I do know this:  Mike Freeman, the elected Hennepin County Attorney --who is highly respected by all sides and happens to be a Democrat-- fully investigated the matter and said this was a case of "sloppy bookeeping" and nothing more.  So what does the Plymouth police department do?  They decide that's not good enough and put more taxpayer money to waste with further investigation.  Are there political connections between the City of Plymouth and the City of Eden Prairie?  Why are they not satisfied with the findings of the Hennepin County Attorney?

I look forward to all of the facts of this situation coming to light.  When a City Manager signs off on expense reports for three years and then all-of-a-sudden decides to do a "routine" self-audit, I'm skeptical.  Especially a City Manager who's M.O. follows that of EP Schools Superintendent Melissa Krull....

1.  use taxpayer money to select and hire expensive private companies to "survey" the community...these surveys alway seem to reinforce what an excellent job you're doing

2.   use taxpayer money to hire marketing consultants to help you design ballot questions to usurp the will of will of the people when a referendum that you supported fails (community center anyone?)

3.  present yourself to the community as the leader of the organization- when you're staff- (Neal gives the "State of the City" address, Krull heads the EP Chamber of Commerce)

4.  Use taxpayer money for your very own public relations newsletter (the full color inserts into the EP News are Neal's and a huge waste of money- did you notice last month that he promoted his very own custom made acrylic "City Manager" awards that he personally bestowed upon chosen city employees?)

5.  Act behind closed doors, plot against those people who don't approve of the work you're doing or who may be a threat to your power

6. Build political power and wield that power to further entrench yourself into the local government funded by the taxpayers

It's time for somebody to resign....and it isn't Mayor Phil Young.

Terri Bonoff's Push Polling in SD43

Monday, 14 June 2010 17:09 Last Updated on Tuesday, 15 June 2010 08:06

Terri Bonoff's campaign must be worried, what else would explain nasty push-polling this early in the game? 

Her opponent, Norann Dillon, has been all over the District for months now meeting withcommunity organizations, local business owners, and voters at their doors.   A PTO President and "soccer mom" with a degree in Mathematics and years of work in the non-profit world, she's a great candidate and carries a Republican endorsement.  While Bonoff and the DFL may act like they have this one in the bag, their polling tells a different story.  They know very well that the district is conservative and voted Republican for some 20 years before Bonoff  won the State Senate seat in a special election in 2005.   

According to residents of Senate District 43 (Plymouth, Minnetonka) phone calls have been coming in over the last few days from a Denver-based company with a script that started off by asking questions about voters and if they viewed the following candidates favorably/unfavorably/no opinion:

1. Tom Emmer
2. Sarah Anderson (Republican State Representative)
3. Anderson's DFL Opponent
4. State Senator Terri Bonoff
5. Norann Dillon
6. The job Tim Pawlenty has done as governor
7. The Tea Party

• Bonoff's support for the Dream Act (giving tuition breaks to students whose parents are illegals)
• Bonoff's vote for the Gas Tax.....the "gas tax"?  you mean the $6.6 Billion DFL tax increase from 2008? Not only did Bonoff vote for the bill that became law, she has proudly proclaimed that she lead the way to override Governor Pawlenty's veto...and now we have a what $5 Billion budget deficit.  Go figure.
• Bonoff"was not beholden to her party"   (gotta love the non-negative-negative)   She was sure beholden to her party last spring when she voted with her party to create the highest state income tax rate outside of New York City. 

Here's another negative I'd like to add to the polll:  Bonoff campaigned hard for President Obama, she also raised "at least $50,000" for his race according to Ralph Nader's Public Citizen.  I wonder how Barack Obama is polling these days in SD43?  

They then pushed negatives about Dillon, although I've received different reports about exactly what was stated, both people concluded that the poll ended with this gem:  "NorannDillon is a far-right extremist with no solutions to solving our massive budget crisis." 

Of course the meaning of "far right extremist" is somebody who opposes the Democrats controlling all three branches of the federal government and acutally expresses an opinion about it. 

And we all know Bonoff's solution to solving our massive budget crisis:  tax tax tax, spend spend spend, and hope hope hope that everything will get better.

Terri Bonoff's Minnesota Taxpayer's League Score this session was 8%, she's refers to the "global warming crisis" and is a staunch supporter of cap and trade both here in Minnesota and nationally, she led the charge to have cell phone usage COMPLETELY BANNED in the state of Minnesota, she brags about increasing taxes in billion dollar increments..,she does not "fit the district" she simply fit the bill for a while.  Maybe it's time for a change as they say.

They ended by asking the respondents if anyone in their household or immediate family was a member of a labor union.  Seeing as Bonoff's endorsed by the Government workers Union AFSCME, the last question comes as no surprise.  However I would be interested to learn if AFSCME had any role in this poll.  Our tax dollars at work?

Dillon is the underdog in this race, no doubt about it.  When you can raise $50,000+ for Obama, it means you are connected to big money liberal donors.  When you have the funds to have outstate polling companies running nasty push polls before the 4th of July, it means you're gearing up to spend that money on hard-hitting attacks.  Be careful Senator Bonoff, because money isn't going to buy this election....not this year.

The Nonexistent Economic Impact of Mayor Coleman's Boycott

Thursday, 10 June 2010 14:33 Last Updated on Friday, 11 June 2010 08:15

It took over a month of back and forth with the Mayor's Deputy Chief of Staff, Bob Hume, but I finally got an answer to an obvious question.  A question that neither the St. Paul Pioneer Press nor the Star Tribune nor any other major media organization who covered Chirs Coleman's dramatic boycott announcement on April 28th plainly asked:

What, exactly, will be the economic impact to the State of Arizona from Mayor Chris Coleman's boycott?

Answer:  Approximately $4,687 per year in lost income to the businesses in the State of Arizona. 

That was the average amount spent by City of St Paul employees on food, lodging, and non-airfare transportation per year since 2006 while attending conferences held in the Grand Canyon State.

Mayor Coleman reaped far more than that in free publicity for the stunt, wouldn't you say?

 Update:  This post made Politics in Minnesota Morning Report :)