Comments on: Pawlenty responds to Supreme Court ruling on constitutionality of unallotment

By: Vaughn

Vaughn — Sat, 15 May 2010 19:58:54 +0000

OK – The State Supreme Court ruled against Pawlenty for using unallotments to balance the budget. Since the Legislature and Gov. Pawlenty never agreed on a balanced budget, and I believe the state constitution requires a balanced budget – What is the process? Go back to extended sessions & shut down the state when the Gov & Legislature cannot agree? Does anyone think the Legislature would have agreed to the dollar amount of cuts the Gov did? What if the Gov had not done the draconian cuts he did, and the state now had to make up that deficit either in additional cuts or tax increases. This would be a worse mess.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 07 May 2010 12:37:44 +0000

What did we win? A “special diet program”? I think it is telling that in spite of this victory neither of the Twin City mayors is planning on changing their budgets. Even Democrats can understand that you don’t bleed the budget to the point of making MN bonds rated as junk – like they have done in Greece. There is another lesson there – treat your citizens like children and they act like children. Another example of the failure of socialism. I hope MN and the rest of the U.S. will consider this when they vote this November.

By: cyberaim

cyberaim — Thu, 06 May 2010 12:06:54 +0000

Well, Mr. Pawlenty did not win and he should not have! BTW the Dems here do not sit around thinking of ways to spend money we do not have – in fact, most of the Dems here are the ones who actually know how budget properly – Pawlenty does not. He has gotten rid of many programs that actually bring in more money for Minnesota. He has taken from funds that are not part of the General fund, that was slated for programs to help our Vets and in other area’s as well.

He is more concerned with how he looks on the cover of a book for the purpose of trying to run for 2014 presidential nominee. If you open the cover, there is plenty of Pawlenty of worry about.

By: Kent

Kent — Thu, 06 May 2010 07:33:15 +0000

@T-Paw: Explain to me “our hard earned benefits”. The State of Minnesota owes us nothing, other than stay the hell out of the way. Sounds like you and your family must be on several entitlement programs.

By: david wilson

david wilson — Thu, 06 May 2010 04:42:01 +0000

Sorry Greg. It doesn’t work that way. Your childish polemic aside a balanced budget is the law. If you want programs and services then you need to fund them. Raising taxes, in and of itself, is not the unpatriotic dirty business that you and the governor make it out to be. I seem to remember a bridge that had years of deferred maintenance. People like you wanted to use it, but as in the nursery rhyme, it “all fall down.”

By: Greg Boll

Greg Boll — Thu, 06 May 2010 00:59:46 +0000

The solution is for the Legislature to raise taxes and spend, and raise taxes and spend, and raise taxes and spend, and…whoops…..everyone is broke!

By: Randy

Randy — Wed, 05 May 2010 21:01:22 +0000

Of course, this does not hurt him with the Republican base one bit. As the state continues its decline into a sterile wasteland, he can stand proudly by and announce that he didn’t raise taxes! After all–why would he care? He’s out of office and some other Governor will have to deal with it.

If he is forced to raise taxes, he will be painted as yet another victim of an activist judiciary. It’s a win-win for him.

By: T-Paw Is A Jerk

T-Paw Is A Jerk — Wed, 05 May 2010 19:51:57 +0000

Gee, how will Mr. Governor screw all of us out of our hard earned benefits now?

Too bad T-Paw! We win, you lose.