You Say “TomAYto”, I say “Grenade”
By Mitch Berg
If we were to build a Minnesota political time capsule, and needed to capture for posterity the smug sense of entitlement the DFL has today, I’d put in a bunch of carefully-folded Lori Sturdevant columns.
But to capture the distilled core of the “conventional wisdom”, whatever it is at any given moment, I’d go to Rachel Stassen-Berger, the Strib’s politics correspondent, who has a knack for capturing what Minnesota’s clubby, self-referential political “elite” are thinking at any moment better than anyone else in Twin Cities media today.
And she shows it in today’s piece on the writeup the governor got in the Wall Street Journal; “WSJ: What’s bad for Minnesota is good for Pawlenty“.
In a piece that turns logic on its head, the Wall Street Journal opines that Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s political ambitions got a boost from the Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision that his budget balancing was illegal.
It’s been a bad week for Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty. Of course, it’s also been a good week for Republican Presidential Contender Tim Pawlenty.
Well, no. It’s been a good week for both of them.
Pawlenty has held the line for eight years against a mostly-hostile legislature. As the article notes, while Minnesota’s budgets rose 21% every biennium from 1960 (the year he was born) until he took office, he’s reduced it to 2% per biennium during his terms in office, and has actually cut spending in this last go-around.
Or did, until the Supreme Court of Minnesota (SCOM) tossed his unallotments from the last session, putting billions in spending back on the table, to be hashed out between him and the Legislature.
So what does Pawlenty, who is a lame duck on the state level and has nothing to lose on the national level, actually lose with this? A few weeks in a room “negotiating” with DFLers.
What does he gain?
- A cherry on the sundae of his conservative credentials.
- A big, hot potato – actually, several billion of them – tossed back into the lap of his would-be successor’s opponent’s lap. Margaret Anderson-Kelliher is going to have to spend a few weeks dealing with the fallout of her spending orgy at a time when Minnesotans are starting to get fed up with spending, when Tom Emmer is well-placed to make hay with it. It’s possible even the customary media blackout won’t be enough to whitewash Kelliher this time.
- Weeks and weeks of DFL puffery to shoot at.
- Finally – and perhaps best of all – the chance to outmaneuver the DFL like a middleweight boxer in his prime taking on a fat athsmatic drunk in an alley one last time.
No, the only loser will be the Minnesota taxpayer – and only if Pawlenty loses, and then only ’til November. If they’re smart.
As the SurveyUSA poll hints they just might be.
By the way, Blois Olson – a long-time acquaintance who will one day be the Larry Jacobs of the 2010s – is quoted:
Democrats will counter that there’s no defining Pawlenty achievement, and no significant animating idea behind this record. There’s no “one big thing” that he’s done, says Blois Olson, a prominent political commentator.
Which is a classically-liberal thing to say. Democrats like to see lots of evidence that they moved the levers and pushed the buttons of government more than most; it’s why Democrats love light rail and big warehouse schools.
To a conservative, less is more.
In sum, this week’s events define what Mr. Pawlenty is: a classic, fiscally conservative Midwestern Republican governor. In a period of voter discontent, Republicans have two years to decide whether that’s the right stuff for the times.
It’s a great start.
May 7th, 2010 at 12:12 pm
I find it difficult to believe that Democrats think this is a positive. They’ll have to balance the budget, and the deficit is enough that taxes “on the rich” won’t be enough to balance this budget.
In fact, you can argue that Pawlenty did the DFL a favor with his unallotments: the DFL got to claim that they were responsible and funded things, but that Evil Rethuglican Pawlenty was heartless and wouldn’t do it “for the children.” Now the DFL will have to face the music and try to actually fund what they vote for and in this environment that’s dangerous.
May 7th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
Please, “Margaret Anderson-Kelliher” and “orgy” should never appear in one sentence. Some of us have delicate digestive systems.
May 7th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
I agree Kermit, no truer words have ever been said! icky, icky, icky….barf.
May 7th, 2010 at 12:31 pm
Exactly the way I see it Mitch. And while MAK is trapped in the capitol, Entenza and Dayton are out and about making their cases, tossing empty promises out of their respective limousine windows.
May 7th, 2010 at 12:31 pm
You hit the nail on the head, Mitch. Blois’ “one big thing” perfectly encapsulates the liberal ethos about politics & governing. A politician just isn’t a politician unless he or she leaves their name etched onto a building or program. I’d say it reflects the liberal zeitgeist but such attitudes stretch back to the beginning of governance. Surely Roman Senators wanted to make sure their names were immoralized somewhere along the vomitorium.
Anyone picking up a copy of the “Politico” or reading some the other Washingtonian media can see it reflected today in the punditry’s puzzlement that D.C. has accomplished so much in the past year but remains so unpopular. It’s a rather sophomoric view of the electorate – everybody loves a winner, therefore the people will just love seeing Congress pass anything.
The ideological difference in looking back at Pawlenty’s tenure is that he has done “one big thing”, at least several times in tackling budget deficits without raising taxes. For better or worse, he’ll be remembered for those stands while the Sturdevent et al’s quintessential Republican, Arne Carlson, is currently remembered for…um….wait a second…something about bipartisanship…eh, endorsing Obama? Carlson’s reign, at least towards the end, processed more pork than Jimmy Dean, little of which is remembered while even less is credited to him (he played a role in getting the Xcel Center built but most people assoicate that with Norm Coleman).
Perhaps Pawlenty’s true “one big thing” was to change the course of the debate in Minnesota from automatically asking “how much” when it came to spending to starting to ask “why”?
May 7th, 2010 at 12:45 pm
Now “Margaret Anderson-Kelliher” and “vomitorium” are very appropriate in a single sentence.
May 7th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
I need to puke.
May 7th, 2010 at 1:53 pm
Has any journalist ever asked MAK “What part of NO don’t you understand?”
May 7th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
danggit, I’m stuck on orgy, and thinking of lotions and robes and…
May 7th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
stfu
May 7th, 2010 at 3:28 pm
I’m stuck on orgy, and thinking of lotions
And trying desperately not to be crushed under a moaning MAK.
Sorry, I couldn’t resist. I’m going to take a shower now. With lye.
May 7th, 2010 at 3:51 pm
a moa…. WTF??
That may well be the most effed up comment evah, Kerm.
May 7th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
The beauty of the Internet, it’s theatre of the mind. Often macabre…
May 7th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
this thread is degrading into anti-strib territory. Mitch I thought you had standards!? 😉
May 9th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
danggit, I’m stuck on orgy, and thinking of lotions and robes and…
The Romans didn’t have soap, Jeff Kouba. Instead they rubbed oil on themselves and scraped it off. I’m sure they stank of oil, sardines, and garlic. Yuk.