Letter: Send a Potent Legislative Team to St. Paul

"We should all feel most proud of the contributions of Hann, Stensrud and Loon and grateful the result was not a tax increase."

To the Editor:

Eden Prairie and Minnetonka are well represented in high places in the Minnesota Legislature. 

The near miraculous fiscal turn-around did not just happen.  Inefficiencies were discovered in education, health care entitlements and many more major programs. 

The hardworking team of Rep. Jenifer Loon, Rep. Kirk Stensrud and Senator David Hann worked effectively, dealing with complex pieces of legislation designed to streamline and improve state government.  It has been suggested that slight-of-hand accounting methods are largely responsible with erasing the multi-billion dollar deficit faced by our determined Republican team, but this was not the case. 

Rep. Loon and Rep. Stensrud sit on the House Commerce Committee and Senator Hann actually Chairs the Senate Health Policy Committee.  Talk about being in positions to positively influence crucial legislation!  And influence it they did. 

We should all feel most proud of the contributions of Hann, Stensrud and Loon and grateful the result was not a tax increase.  I don't know about your family, but ours cannot afford to send unnecessary dollars to St. Paul when better alternatives exist. 

The next time you see any of these three elected officials, please thank them for allowing us to keep our hard-earned dollars in our own possession.  They worked hard to make that happen and have earned our votes this November.

Jack Haedicke

Co-chair, Senate District 48 Republicans

Eden Prairie

Tommy Johnson October 16, 2012 at 02:56 PM
***"It has been suggested that slight-of-hand accounting methods are largely responsible with erasing the multi-billion dollar deficit faced by our determined Republican team, but this was not the case."*** That's actually true, but only if you consider that a school payment "shift" isn't a "slight of hand" operation. Because the facts are out there. http://www.amsd.org/pdfs/AMSD%20Budget%20Survey%202011-2012%20%20Sept%202011.pdf ****"School districts are being forced to borrow millions of dollars just to stay afloat, meaning they’re spending extra money on interest paying that money back. In Rep. Stensrud’s district last year, the Eden Prairie Public School District had to borrow $15 million, costing them $300,000; the Minnetonka Public School District had to borrow over $6 million, costing them nearly $47,000; and the Hopkins Public School District had to borrow $4 million, costing them $40,000."*** That's quite a record. But that's also what people should expect from a Party that on the state level, nearly got evicted for non-payment of their office space, and is over a million dollars in debt. People should also expect these same Republicans to lecture you on living within your means, which is something they seem to repeatedly fail to do themselves.
David October 16, 2012 at 04:28 PM
This whole "the surplus isn't real!" argument was used by the left against Gov. Walker in WI last year as well. That lie was exposed then as this DFL lie is patently false now. And what Tommy doesn't want you to know is that $2 billion of the $2.4 billion was taken from the schools in the 2009-10 cycle BY THE DEMOCRATS. That's right, folks, the DFL is accusing the GOP of taking the whole $2.4 billion when in fact it is THEY who took the lion's share when they still controlled the legislature. This year, Republicans passed H.F. 2083 to fully repay last year’s K-12 funds and also begin chipping away at the delayed funds they inherited from the DFL. Democrats voted against it, but Republicans still passed it and DFL Governor Dayton vetoed it. The DFL should have paid back the BILLIONS they took from schools and demand Dayton not veto payback before accusing Republicans of taking anything. And the kicker is that even taking an extra $2 BILLION from schools, the DFL STILL COULDN"T BALANCE THE BUDGET leaving a $6 Billion deficit in their wake. The cost of DFL state control can be easily seen in the state ledger: GOP Surplus to DFL shortfall and back to GOP surplus. http://www.sd48gop.com/graphics/budget_turnaround.jpg And those, as Tommy likes to say, are the facts.
Tommy Johnson October 16, 2012 at 04:44 PM
@ David: Imagine that - a link to the GOP SD48 website. Now THERE'S a real "non-biased" site! Let me ask you, "David" - are you the "Dave Johnson" listed on that site, as a Vice Chair of the SD 48 GOP?
Tommy Johnson October 16, 2012 at 04:59 PM
***"Dear Speaker Zellers: I have vetoed and am returning H. F. No. 2083, Chapter No. 154, a bill which would raid the State's budget reserves to buy back part of the remaining school shift. I fully share the Legislature's desire to repay the debt to school districts as quickly as possible. For this reason, my budget proposals last year did not rely on additional borrowing from either our schools or our future (tobacco bonds). During this session, I supported legislation that would repay the school districts with revenues raised from closing corporate tax loopholes, which allow companies to avoid paying Minnesota taxes on their foreign operations. Unfortunately, the legislative majority decided that protecting large corporations' tax breaks for operating overseas was more important than paying back our schools responsibly. Instead, this bill raids the just-filled budget reserve to pay back the rest of last year's school shift. Admittedly, this notion has superficial appeal. After all, there is no ready constituency for protecting the budget reserve. However, this action would wrongly perpetuate the terrible legislative practice of the past decade: trying to solve an immediate financial problem by substituting a larger problem, which will not be visible until later. . . Sincerely, Mark Dayton Governor"*** More, here: http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/cco/journals/2011-12/J0416102.htm#8361
Political Mama October 16, 2012 at 05:48 PM
Had the party that panders to illegal votes not been so effective in soliciting said illegal votes, the state GOP would not have had to divert south cash flow to the RECOUNT efforts. And still. Voter fraud was endorsed by the MN SC.
Tommy Johnson October 16, 2012 at 05:56 PM
***"Voter fraud was endorsed by the MN SC."*** The Minnesota Supreme Court endorsed Voter Fraud??!? Was that the Minnesota Supreme Court led by Pawlenty appointee Chief Justice Eric Magnuson, or the current Mn SC, led by Palwenty appointee Chief Justice Lorie Gildea? Can't make this stuff up.
Jeff Simon October 16, 2012 at 06:06 PM
Over 6,000 fraudulent votes of just one type: the type where a same day registration is done with an invalid address. There are other types of fraud too, with felons, the deceased and multiple votes. The DFL "fraud is as common as winning the lottery" reminds me of when people said "tobacco is good for you."
David October 16, 2012 at 06:18 PM
The content for the graphic, had Tommy bothered to actually view it before jumping to conclusions, cam from the MN Management and Budget office, not the GOP party. Try actually READING things before spouting off, Two Putt.
Tommy Johnson October 16, 2012 at 06:19 PM
"There is no evidence of fraud in this election. And maybe it's the law out there; maybe it's the character of the people in Minnesota. We don't have any fraud." Republican Lawyer Joe Friedberg, under oath, testifying before the Minnesota Supreme Court, 01 June 2009 Who is a reasonable person to believe? Somebody alleging fraud, on a blog, or a Republican Lawyer, testifying under oath before the State Supreme Court? Class? Class? Anyone?
David October 16, 2012 at 06:27 PM
As for Dayton's letter Tommy posts. His words mean nothing. He vetoed the payback and that's the fact. And isn't it interesting that Tommy doesn't dispute the fact that the DFL took the $2 billion from the schools he's so worried about when THEY were in charge and they voted against paying back EVEN a mere $400 or so last year when the state was running a surplus It's immoral for the state to hoard money when they owe the schools a debt, so says DFL Rep Steve Simon. Yet that's exactly what the DFL and Dayton chose to do. Force the schools to go yet another year so the DFL could keep giving more of our money to their friends. And since we're calling out people, here's a link to Two Putt Tommy and how he treats people he doesn't like. He's a DFL agitator who has a history of verbally harrassing people and crashing private events like he did just this last Saturday in MTKA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yeUbfJ0zQI He's been being a a living example of his Party's mascot for years: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:SNQPvJxf0jYJ:www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2010/03/22/dfl-blogger-harasses-volunteer/+two+putt+tommy+harasses+volunteer&hl=en&gl=us&prmd=imvns&strip=1 I give no weight to the political blathering of a man this unhinged and extreme.
Tommy Johnson October 16, 2012 at 06:45 PM
***"As for Dayton's letter Tommy posts. His words mean nothing.*"""" Well hey, "David" - if you say so! After all, no one speaks with more credibility than an anonymous poster on a blog, yes?
David October 16, 2012 at 06:49 PM
As I stated elswhere when Two Putt pulled out his, "This one guy says nothin' happened, so nothin' happened" argument: The GOP lawyer couldn't know that the state hadn't figured out at that time that it had 6,000 false addresses. Your continued reliance on a single person's opinion as your only evidence supporting your claim shows the weakness of your argument. Sorry, law enforcement did NOT look into it. It's not their job to do so. Cite your source that says they did. And how does one county looking into it constitute a complete search? It doesn't. Your continued argument by anecdote (one lawyer's opinion proves there's not fraud, one county looking into voter cards constitutes the whole state looking into it, etc.) reinforces how desperate you are for ANY straw to support your preposterous claims. It's the job of the SOS to look into it and Ritchie refused to do so on video while being interviewed by WCCO. Your claim of red herrings holds almost as much weight and your continued spouting of one lawyer's opinion as the decisive settling of the issue.
David October 16, 2012 at 07:01 PM
yep, Tommy, just like you saying don't believe what the state budget office says because you don't like it. Know a man by his actions, not his words. Dayton can say he supports paying schools back, but given the chance to do so he chose not to, as did the entire DFL. As my mom used to say, "His actions speak so loudly, I can't hear his words."
Tommy Johnson October 16, 2012 at 07:05 PM
***"The GOP lawyer couldn't know that the state hadn't figured out at that time that it had 6,000 false addresses."*** Too funny! From www.MinnesotaMajority.com: ***"POST-ELECTION FINDINGS Since we were not confident in the assurances from the secretary of state’s office, we examined the voter records following the 2008 general election. Although updates to the statewide voter registration system are required to be complete within 6 weeks following an election, the secretary of state’s office did not report compete updates until late April of 2009, at which point we obtained the latest voter history records, which were the basis for our post-election analysis. First and foremost, we discovered that the number of voters accounted for having cast a ballot in the secretary of state’s voter files did not match the number of ballots certified by the election canvassing board. There were approximately 40,000 more ballots counted than voter histories to account for them."*** Everyone catch the dates? From the quote: "April of 2009" Date the Republican Lawyer testified "no fraud" to the State Supreme Court? 01 June 2009 But "David" claims the Republican Lawyer couldn't know there was a possibility of fraud??!? Complete BS. Friedberg knew what MinnesotaMakeItUp.org was saying; but Friedberg still testified "no evidence of fraud." He had to; he was under oath. Timelines don't lie. "David"? I'll leave that for others to draw their own conclusion.
David October 16, 2012 at 07:22 PM
Still touting your whole argument on the opinion of 1 man, I see. Neither he, Ritchie nor you have or can account for how 6,000 people voted who gave a false address in an election where over 1,000 felons voted and 312 votes made Al "rape is funny" Franken a senator. Flog one lawyer's opinion all you want, it's no more definitive than your opinion or mine. With a 70% approval rating which includes majorities of both independents and Democrats, you can flail onlne all you want. In 3 weeks, we'll see what the people have to say about it.
Tommy Johnson October 16, 2012 at 07:25 PM
***"...and your continued spouting of one lawyer's opinion..."*** What reasonable people will recognize is "David"'s repeated attempts to categorize a Republican Lawyer's testimony - under oath - as an "opinion." But desperate people will do desperate things, and desperate people like "David" will do and say anything they think they have to to inflict an unnecessary and unfunded state mandate for partisan political means. Just a little while ago, the Minnesota Council of Churches, which - according to their press release, announced: "...represents one million Christians across the state of Minnesota, announced the MCC’s official opposition to the voter restriction amendment." ***"The Reverend Peg Chamberlain, MCC’s Executive Director, and St. Paul Synod of the ELCA Bishop Peter Rogness, MCC’s President and Board Chair, spoke about the complications and consequences the amendment would have on Minnesota voters. In particular, MCC representatives voiced concerns about the barriers to voting accessibility for hundreds of thousands of Minnesotans; financial stewardship including expenses to the poor, the elderly and the homeless, and the costs and complications of instituting a new system of provisional balloting when much more pressing needs remain for struggling communities around the state."*** So what we have here, is a Republican Lawyer testifying - under oath - that there's no fraud, and now this. Can't wait to read "David"'s next spin....
Tommy Johnson October 16, 2012 at 07:42 PM
More, from the Minnesota Council of Churces: ***"(The Reverend) Peg Chamberlain said the MCC’s decision to oppose the voter restriction amendment was a “call upon our congregations and members to be vigorously engaged to defeat the voter ID amendment. The voter ID amendment seems innocuous enough. But when we started to unwrap it, we began to see the threat this could pose to the right to vote for tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of Minnesotans.”*** It's a not only a bad bill; it's an EXPENSIVE bad bill. Vote "No" on November 6th.
David October 16, 2012 at 07:47 PM
It is just one man's opinion. His being under oath only means that he spoke what he believed to be the truth. Tommy would have us believe that placing him under oath makes him omnicient. It doesn't. Just as all of this comment string is merely our opinions, were we placed under oath, we'd still be speaking just our opinions as we believe them to be true. Doesn't make them true (as exemplified by Tommy's tortured logic commments), it just means that person believes it to be true. There are plenty of other people who believe there is fraud (as shown by the 1,000 felons who voted) and whose opinions are just as valid.
David October 16, 2012 at 07:52 PM
And the MN Council of Churchs is certainly my first stop to get legal opinons on the constitutionality of a proposed law. Let's see, who could we ask who migh have a smidge more legal background than the learned Juris Doctors of the MCC? Well, we COULD try the US Supreme Court: "In a 6-to-3 ruling in one of the most awaited election-law cases in years, the court rejected arguments that Indiana’s law imposes unjustified burdens on people who are old, poor or members of minority groups and less likely to have driver’s licenses or other acceptable forms of identification. Because Indiana’s law is considered the strictest in the country, similar laws in the other 20 or so states that have photo-identification rules would appear to have a good chance of surviving scrutiny...Justice John Paul Stevens, who announced the judgment of the court and wrote an opinion in which Chief John G. Roberts Jr. and Anthony M. Kennedy joined, alluded to — and brushed aside — complaints that the law benefits Republicans and works against Democrats, whose ranks are more likely to include poor people or those in minority groups." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/washington/28cnd-scotus.html?_r=2& Got that? Some OTHER lawyers gave their opinion on the the argument that Voter ID threatens the 'right' to vote and dismissed it entirely. When a liberal like Stevens tells you your arguments are "BS" that should be a clue. But not for Tommy. Go figure.
David October 16, 2012 at 08:00 PM
Additionally, the University of Missouri studied if the voter ID laws in ID and GA actually DID do what the Left, in its Tommy-like histrionics, claim it does. Their conclusion? "After controlling for several factors that influence county-wide turnout, there is no consistent or statistically significant evidence that the photo ID law depressed turnout in counties with greater percentages of minority, poor or elderly voters. Contrary to conventional wisdom, turnout in Democratic-leaning counties actually increased in the wake of the new photo ID requirements, all else constant.” http://munews.missouri.edu/news-releases/2008/0102-voter-id.php They actually saw a rise in voting among Democratic groups, eh? Ya don't say....And GA has a few minorities in the state, too, unlike MN. Currently, there are 31 states which have some form of Voter ID law, some of which going back 22 years. So I look forward to Two Putt listing the links to all the news stories from the past 2 decades reporting the masses of seniors, minorities and students who have been disenfranchised for years by the laws. Oh, that's right. He can't because there are none. And I am done poking the animals. Two Putt is a Kool Aid Drinker and no amount of evidence will change his view. He is married to the Progressive religion which requires no proof, just blind faith. So flail away, Tommy. November is gonna be a tough month for you.
Tommy Johnson October 16, 2012 at 08:21 PM
***"It is just one man's opinion. His being under oath only means that he spoke what he believed to be the truth."*** Too funny! Republican Lawyer Joe Friedberg was representing Norm Coleman's campaign when he testified "There is no evidence of fraud in this election. And maybe it's the law out there; maybe it's the character of the people in Minnesota. We don't have any fraud." There was a lot riding on that Recount - a Senate seat. Not only was Coleman's campaign doing and looking at everything it could to win, it had the financial backing of the state and nation Republican Parties - all told, millions of dollars on just Coleman's side of the aisle was spent just on legal fees. The recount was,by all accounts, the most expensive in American history. That "David" continues to push "one man's opinion" shows how out of touch with reality he is. Or honesty. Or, I suppose, both.
Beavis Friesl October 16, 2012 at 08:35 PM
David is not a Republican. He is a neo-con, a tea bagger, a homophobe, an intolerant biggot. I encourage everyone to vote "No" so that David, his buddy Darryl and others like them can finally come out of the closet.
Jeff Simon October 16, 2012 at 08:50 PM
@Beavis: name calling -- that's all you got? Makes you feel good, but does it convince the independent and undecided?
Daryl Fryxell October 16, 2012 at 09:22 PM
When lawyers argue before the Supreme Court, they are not "testifying." As I understand it, "testimony" consists of statements under oath before a judicial body. They don't put lawyers under oath. What would be the point? Like DFLers, they never tell the truth anyway.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »