Support Democrats

To the editor:

I attended the Senate District 51 candidate forum this past Wednesday.

The Republicans recited their shopworn bumper sticker slogans.

The Democrats offered specific proposals for what they would do once elected.

Republicans have failed to get the job done, with their state government shutdown and lackluster ballot amendment initiatives.

Democrats will accomplish more in job creation, education funding, and health care for Minnesotans.

Bill Randall

  • Joe G

    Vote for Democrats? No thank you Bill. I lived in Minneapolis, the town is full of Democrats. High crime, higher taxes, horrible schools. Dakota County is fairly Conservative / Republican. You can pack your bags and head north into the city of Minneapolis or St.Paul to see what they can do for you. I was not happy with what the Democrats in Minneapolis were doing with my money. I knew I could not get them out of office so I voted with my feet and moved to a better place with lower taxes, better schools, better service from the city and county and guess what? No Democrats in any public office where I live. Coincidence? I think not.

    • bill

      if you’re not happy with the way politicians spend “your money”, then get involved with politics and change the system from the inside out.

    • Michele

      Come on, Joe. For a city, where people are piled onto each other, Minneapolis does a pretty good job. And when you moved out here, IF you are employed in Minneapolis, you are moving the income AND the tax revenue with you. That’s the problem with the burbs. They suck the life out of the city. They work there, they take money from the businesses there, but they don’t stay to make it better. And then they feel righteous about it.

      It’s called looking out for number one.

      • Rosie from Rosemount

        Michele, I understand where you are coming from. Comparatively, Minneapolis and St. Paul are highly livable cities. I don’t even think people are piled on top of each other, especially when compared to Brooklyn or Boston or even Denver and Phoenix these days. People live in the burbs and in rural areas for a variety of reasons, including being near those with whom they share religious, political or social beliefs, and people live in cities for the same reasons. Some people like being able to do almost anything at any time of day while others want to watch the sunrise over the forest or hear birds instead of traffic. Cities ascend and cities decline, and some that decline ascend again. I do not believe that overt social engineering is a solution to decline and decay. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I do not think the government should regulate my perception of what is acceptable to my lifestyle and what is not.There are many examples where the burbs actually breath life INTO a city. It really does work both ways.

        • Michele

          Well said, Rosie, and it can, if we’re careful. I myself love living here. I like to visit Minneapolis, but I always love coming home to the green.

          And it’s true, people live here for many different reasons. Joe made his reasons clear. I just wonder how far you can run, rather than try to help make a place better. Faribault? Iowa? Mars?

          Rosie, you and I come from different political beliefs, but I don’t think either of us going anywhere, are we? : )

  • Gary Shade

    Are you kidding Bill? You say Republicans shut down the government? Dayton was the one that rejected the Republican budget only weeks later to come back and adopt the same budget he originally rejected!

    You can have your own opinion. Not your own facts.

    • RollieB

      From the MinnPost Poll on the 2011 MN Gov shut down:

      “Among independents, 46 percent “blamed” the Republicans, 18 percent blamed Dayton and 25 percent both.”

      • Rosie from Rosemount

        Blame is attached when things go bad, praise is attached when things go well. What went wrong with the sutdown? Yes, Mr. Dayton did not preserve his alleged priniples and buckled and signed, but what harm was done? Show me one more person today who has been negatively impacted by the budget or the sut down. You can’t do it and nobody can. Things continue to improve in this state, from school test scores to the unemployment rate. Perhaps government shutdowns should be more frequent if they give us results like this!

        • RollieB

          Rosie, Minnesota lost some $50 million in revenues that the state cannot recover, spent nearly $10.5 million in costs related to unemployment insurance, and spent another $10 million on special expenses associated with closing and then reopening many state services. I hope we don’t go through that again.

    • Colin Lee

      It’s not a matter of blame. The Republicans handed Dayton a budget filled with poison pills. For example: a gerrymandered redistricting plan, a divisive voter suppression bill, and a total ban on stem cell research were all attached to the budget Governor Dayton was initially asked to sign.

      Now ask yourself… whether or not you agree with the above poison pills, do they belong IN THE BUDGET? These bill lines are called poison pills because the provisions are politically toxic and divisive. No one who understands Minnesota politics expected the governor to sign something so irresponsible.

      The budget sent the governor was also unconstitutional due to Article IV, Section 17 of the Minnesota Constitution which requires “No law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title.”

      If the budget he signed was the same as the budget he rejected, then why didn’t the final text contain these poison pills.

      • RollieB

        Thanks for the details, Colin. Yes, I remember there being what you refer to as a “poison pill” segment in the Republican budget, but couldn’t recall the details at the time of the post. Thanks for the history lesson. Good luck!

      • Jan Dobson

        Colin begins his comment with, “It’s not a matter of blame.” In his very next sentence he blames Republicans.

        Ah, what?

  • Jan Dobson

    Hi Joe G.

    Before you start feeling too secure you might want to check out a new approach to taxation favored by PrezBO. “Regionalism” seeks to steal tax revenues from suburbs to revitalize their core cities.

    America’s cities grew as vital hubs of commerce and prosperity. Lethal taxation and overregulation have reduced many of them to lifeless municipal corpses. “Regionalism” is a perverse life-support system that will destroy suburbs with the same overregulation and lethal taxation that kills cities.

    • Michele

      Whoa, Jan. People work in the city and the tax revenue goes to the suburbs in which they live. That is, in part, what is killing the cities. There’s your “lethal taxation.” And go into the city, and you see all kinds of small business growth. Mom and Pop stores. Braiding salons. Coffee shops. Where’s the overregulation?

      • Jan Dobson

        If I understand you correctly, Michele, you think forcing fiscally stable suburban municipalities to support fiscally unstable urban economies is fair. That doesn’t sound fair to me. What it sounds like is redistribution of wealth on a city/town scale. By your way of thinking, would the same sort of redistribution apply to a state/state scale? That is, will a prosperous state like Minnesota be responsible for shoring up California when that state’s economy completely collapses?

        • Michele

          Jan, the cities came first, before the suburbs. Without the cities, the suburbs would be nonexistent. And they are our base for our culture, for who we are. As for the instability, it’s because the people who work there don’t feel any responsibility toward that community. And that’s the bottom line. Take the money and get OUT. Can’t blame the cities for that.

          And it is singularly alien to me, not to feel responsible for the community in which you work.

          The city is part of Minnesota. It is part of who we are. So, I won’t take your bait. If California needs shoring up, it needs to look to the federal government.

          • Jan Dobson

            And from where will the federal government get money for a California bailout?