Thoughts on the session wrap-up

Friends,

Minnesota’s 2013 session is history, the legislature is adjourned. As I look back at what I have written over the course of this session, I note that I started it with gratitude and hope. I was grateful for how well the GOP budget from 2011-12 was working-out. In addition to hope, I had a word of encouragement for the new DFL majority. Looking at the physical condition of the Capitol building and seeing in its decay an analogy for the harm brought on generations of Minnesotans by decades of the Senate DFL’s bad taxing, spending and social policies – I encouraged them to not neglect our  history.  Our tradition of limited government preserves our individual freedoms to speak and act without the interference of the state. By keeping Minnesotans free we help insure our continued prosperity and happiness.

As the early weeks of the session progressed, I wrote about hope. I advocated for the DFL to adopt bi-partisan, time-tested reforms (competition, concentration, community) that would allow Minnesota to prosper. I praised the DFL when a given policy proposal supported these reforms (e.g. having health insurance providers compete for the state’s business) and I critiqued them when their proposals flew in the face of common sense (taxing all people so that middle and high–income families could have new, state-funded goods like free school lunch). 

Five months later, I am still filled with hope and gratitude - though a bit bruised. Even though the DFL legislative majority and the governor seem to have forgotten it, we still livein a country and a state that constitutionally limit government. Though we are less free than we were in January, groups and individuals still have some rights to speak, to act according to conscience, and to prosper by their labors. 

Good news first: The budget passed by the GOP majority in 2011-12 (characterized by sane tax policy and reducing government waste) continues to yield benefits to the state. In February, economists reported that Minnesota’s net general fund receipts were $114 million (3.9 percent) more than forecast in November and December. In April it was reported that Minnesota’s net general fund revenues during February and March, were $145 million (6.0 percent) more than forecast. Further, receipts from each of the three major taxes (sales, income and corporate) exceeded projections.

Put succinctly, under the GOP majority’s 2011-12 budget, tax revenues are growing. If the current DFL majority simply wanted more money to spend, all they needed to do was agree to “do no harm”. Under current law the rich and middle class were working and generating more tax revenues. Similarly businesses were growing and generating more corporate taxes and people were buying more and generating more sales taxes.

Less-good news next: The DFL majority and the Governor are not content to generate more government revenue thru the growth of personal and business income. The DFL don’t just want more money for the state government, they want much more money for the state government and more state government in our lives. Their permanent $2.05 billion tax increase includes a new 4th tier income tax bracket starting at $250,000 per couple ($150,000 individual), increased cigarette taxes; taxes on retail stores and manufacturing facilities that store material and/or repair their equipment, business taxes, sales tax broadening (but no clothing or consumer services) and more fees.

Unionization of small business operators providing child care; beware if your private business (like neighborhood family child care providers) accepts government payments for low-income customers, the DFL is conspiring to union-ize it. Private family daycare providers will now be considered unionized state employees - is your business next?

While neither the state nor the federal government established marriage, Minnesota’s DFL have taken it upon themselves to redefine this independent institution. If the state can change the definition of an independent institution, then it can force individuals and independent organizations to adopt that definition too. The experience of other states shows us that businesses that cater to and recognize marriages are the first to face the force of government’s enforcement powers. Hopefully future legislation will re-instate protections for citizens' freedom of conscience.

Yours in Faith, Family, Freedom
Dan Hall