P-B editorial on tax bill veto was misguided
The Post-Bulletin's May 16 editorial mistakenly labels Gov. Dayton's veto of the latest Republican tax bill as the sign of more gridlock to come.
This view is short-sighted at best. The writer's fundamental assumption that stadium, bonding, and taxes would be "bundled" distorts the clear picture presented by Dayton.
The stadium was "stand-alone" legislation, as were bonding and taxes. The stadium had bipartisan support and opposition. It had to be treated separately.
There were three bonding positions, with even the Republican majorities in the House and Senate divided. These votes were compromises. Most politicians did not want to lose the Vikings "on their watch." The bonding bill was almost a mathematical compromise. Unfortunately, our Republican senators did not have the desire/clout to get the Mayo Civic Center funded, even with strong support from Dayton.
Concerning the tax bill, Gov. Dayton's initial veto letter made two things perfectly clear: The bill could not add to the deficit, and real property tax relief had to be spread among all classes of taxpayers. The deficit and real property taxes are major constituent concerns.
It was the Republicans, however, crafting the last tax proposal without any Democratic input, who missed the opportunity to go "into 2013 with a bit more goodwill and the likelihood of bipartisan cooperation in St. Paul."
Kenneth R. Moen