Up to the minute Amber Alert Information

Sunday, October 07, 2007

Tax and Spend

The following letter to the editor appeared in the October 4, 2007, issue of the Chisago County Press in response to our Reagan Day Dinner press release. It is reproduced below for the reader’s convenience since it is not online.

"Tax and spend" applies to whom?

To the editor:
First there was Americans for Tax Reform. Then, Citizens against Government Waste. Now, Chisago County GOP. Who will be the first GOPer to protest the National Debt? Who will be the first GOPer to protest the governor signing tax increases of – $1.1 billion for Twins stadium, $60 million for entertainment tax (not allowed at Metrodome), and $250 million for the U of M stadium?

That’s our "NO NEW TAXES" governor at his finest. He certainly got us great national PR after the bridge collapse too. You can bet the bank it won’t be anyone from the three above groups.

Their first spoken words were "tax and spend Democrats" and they’ll probably be their last. They make money lenders from 2000 years ago look like saints!

Would anyone dare suggest that the $9 trillion in GOP debt starting with Regan [sic] contributes to Wall Street brokers getting up to $50 million in bonuses last year. But, they must spend an awful lot of time writing all those bonds for China, Japan, India, etc. Another $190 billion coming for Iraq, 2008. Cut those taxes, make them permanent. Yea, Yea, Yea!

I love the GOP spin machine. "Only 3 cents on $20." (equals $1,001,000,000) [sic] Remember folks, for 25 years you will be paying $2.5 million for each Division I (4/year) Gophers’ football games. Let’s not forget the $1.8 + million salary/year for the coach. Most distressing is they’ll probably lose most of those games.

Then there’s Carl Pohlad. Companies like 3M have billions of dollars invested in buildings and infrastructure. They create thousands of jobs. Carl has 40 + super-rich ball players. They come, they go. The taxpayers build him a stadium. When he doesn’t like it anymore, they build him a new one.

FYI: In March of this year, Carl was 349th, $2.6 billion on Forbes richest Americans list. Now in September he has moved up to 114th $3.1 billion. Poor Carl, is it just part of the rich getting richer, or is he already getting some of the $200 million bump in ‘team’ value expected when those 40 warm bodies move into the new stadium?

Personally, if I was [sic] governor [sic] Pawlenty, I would have a tough time being able to look in a mirror.

Then there’s our local version of the boys in DC. So Pete Nelson was your MC? My first question for you is why did you vote Pete, and Sen. Nienow out of office? I know Pete voted for the stadium and the senator didn’t. Was that enough reason for Sen. Nienow to go? I’ve known for the nine years I’ve lived here that the GOP has been the majority party. Well? It’s too bad you didn’t have the courage to tell your governor to not tax working people to build a sports palace for the 114th richest American. Better yet, after the bridge collapse, you might have suggested he take that tax money back, and apply it to our infrastructure.

Since your GOP coffers are well replenished, I hope you might also this fall be able [sic] help replenish food shelves, Anonymous Santa, etc.

Dick Brennan
Chisago City


The Reagan Day press release prompted this writer to fulminate against Carl Pohlad and the Twins receiving tax dollars. He asks who among the GOP will protest public funding of the Twins Stadium?

Actually, a great many conservatives did and still don’t like it. The Taxpayers League of Minnesota went on record against public funding of the stadium. Click here and scroll down to "Stadium Subsidies" for their commentary. The Taxpayers League opposes public money for a Viking stadium as well.

Citizens Against Government Waste also were fighting the use of tax dollars for the stadium.

Americans for Tax Reform also expressed their opposition to it.

Brennan missed the most obvious person who opposes the stadium subsidy. The Reagan Day guest speaker, Jason Lewis, is such a conspicuous opponent of it that we do not need to provide any documentation for that assertion.

Any criticism the letter writer gives to the GOP for approving the use of public funds for the Twins stadium must also be leveled against the DFL. When the vote came down, each party was about evenly divided on the issue.

Vote source.
Minnesota Senate: passed 34-32
Aye: 22 Dems and 12 Reps
Nay: 16 Dems and 16 Reps

Minnesota House: passed 71-61
Aye: 34 Dems and 37 Reps
Nay: 30 Dems and 31 Reps
Abstain: 1 Dem

In both the House and Senate, more Democrats voted in favor than Dems opposed. In the House, just two more Dems voting against the stadium would have killed the bill. In the Senate, only 6 more Dems voting nay would have stopped the project. Without the Dems, this bill would not have passed.

Perhaps this article sums it up well: Twins' stadium opponents were tired of the fight; supporters weren't.

Conservatives are getting tired of tax and spend Republicans, but they can’t hold a candle to the tax and spend Democrats of the last session, so that shoe fits.

We welcome Mr. Brennan to help us fight the tax and spend crowd in any party. Let’s not get tired again.

1 comment:

GOP Mom said...

I am one of those conservatives opposed to government funding for a stadium. Period. I wonder if I could get those same funds to say, renovate a movie theatre? Expand a Barnes & Noble? Probably not. But those constituents who voted for those officials who voted for the tax bear sole responsibility. Not the GOP.