The DFL’s “Forecast” for this biennium calls for a 37% increase in Health and Human Services (HHS) spending.
And the DFL is portraying any spending proposal less than a 37% increase as a “cut”.
And the media is, for the most part, carrying that meme without question.
Bob Collins at MPR does, in fact, question it, although his piece’s headline, “Despite warnings of cuts to child protection, House committee passes cuts in human services”, manages to hit the “decreasing the increase is a cut” and “the GOP is balancing the budget on the backs of womynandchyldryn and the poor” memes with admirable economy.
Jessica Webster, a staff attorney for Legal Aid, said the bill will hurt more than just children. “One of the things that’s frustrating, when we get these pieces of legislation, there’s nothing here that shows the people who receive these services,” she said. “Low-income people who are sick, who have serious injuries, poor people who have ill or injured children, battered women in battered women’s shelters, people living in homeless shelters, homeless youth, displaced homemakers, the developmentally disabled, people with low IQ, people who are mentally ill. All of these people are unable to work.”
The thing is, the GOP’s bill doesn’t “cut” anything from the previous budget.
But Republicans said they were not cutting the programs, since the programs had already been cut by lawmakers in their last-minute deal with then Gov. Tim Pawlenty.
“These folks having genuine needs, but over the last year or so, what this bill does just maintains… so what was done in the last year would be continuing,” Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer said. “You hear some of these phrases …. what we do is we make spending permanent.”
The bill continues the cuts to which Governor Pawlenty and the DFL-dominated legislature agreed in the last budget.
And it sends the message that HHS spending will not be going up by a over a third.
Health and Human Services are going to have to stretch their dollars further, just like the rest of us.
Nope. Your numbers are wrong. I suspect you know that.
Conservatives ignore billions of dollars we received in stimulus aids in the last biennium that were specifically provided to help us avoid making disastrous spending cuts. http://mnpublius.com/post/1298760398/tom-emmers-budget-the-complete-fact-check
It’s “math” like this that led Mark Buesgens to propose a $2.4 billion cut to education — a 17 percent cut from the current biennium’s spending — and claim it wasn’t a cut. You guys are doing exactly the same with health and human services spending.
Conservatives ignore billions of dollars we received in stimulus aids
No, we did not. We opposed them as the financial trickery they were. Money borrowed from China or printed out of thin air.
So Jeff, is it only a 20% increase that’s being called a “cut”? When does the number actually decrease? Impress us, please.
Are we creating a population MORE dependent on government services, or LESS dependent on government services? “The sky is falling,” only works if the sky actually falls. If government’s job is to minimize misfortune, we can’t print enough money.
But, I suppose, we can try.
Memo to GOP in St. Paul: If you’re gonna take a hit for “cutting” programs, then why not actually CUT them?!?!?! If the Media and the DFL (sorry for repeating myself) are going to lash you for phantom “cuts” that are actually decreases in the rate of increase, how’s about REALLY cutting them! You paid for this by taking the hit…so reap the benefits!
Um, Jeff, your link does not do anything to establish whether the DFL does, or does not, desire to increase HHS spending by 37%.
Keep in mind here that if government spending increases more quickly than growth of GDP, it is by definition unsustainable. Given that GDP grows 3-5% in a very good year, a 37% hike over two years is clearly unsustainable, and hard choices NEED to be made.
That’s right Jeff. Thanks for the liberal talking points. We don’t have the money, but let’s just keep gouging the working people of Minnesota for more socialism. And the more people you can make dependent on government for their mere existance, the more fat-dumb-and-DFL-voting fools you can make.
The problem is, Jeffy…the workers are done with this foolish spending and the adults are now in charge in St. Paul (exception: Governor Jack Daniels)
You poor bastards in Minnesota will now know the horror of seeing your state’s budget reset to 2007 values.
Panic in the streets!
Vital services cut!
State institutions gutted!
MPR’s budget NOT increased!
This ain’t “Back to the Future”. It’s real life. Hope you guys enjoy life back there in the dark age of 2007.
Nope. Your numbers are wrong. I suspect you know that.
Well, no, Jeff. If I knew I was wrong, I woudln’t write it.
Conservatives ignore billions of dollars we received in stimulus aids in the last biennium that were specifically provided to help us avoid making disastrous spending cuts. http://mnpublius.com/post/1298760398/tom-emmers-budget-the-complete-fact-check
Nope. I’m aware of it. Opposed it, too.
That is the larger point – and the larger opportunity the GOP has, here, to transform this state; the DFL has always taken one-time, temporary money, like surpluses and stimuli, and turned it into permanent entitlements, and figured they could just gull or bull or shame the taxpayers into make the spending permanent.
I’m not “ignoring” anything, Jeff. I never do. I’m saying it’s time to stop it. It’s time to stop balancing the DFL’s profligacy on the backs of the working taxpayer.
It’s “math” like this that led Mark Buesgens to propose a $2.4 billion cut to education — a 17 percent cut from the current biennium’s spending — and claim it wasn’t a cut. You guys are doing exactly the same with health and human services spending.
I guess I should figure a DFLer’s idea of negotiation is to “start with what ones opponent wants, and work your way up”. For Republicans, anyway.
Check the election results from last November, Jeff. We’re done with that.
Nice “complete fact check”, Jeff Rosenberg. I never laughed so hard. When I read:
“In fact, in all cases he’s cutting spending from its projected levels”
I thought:
“Wow. Either Jeff Rosenberg really has no concept of how NOT to spend money, or he thinks every government program in place today is absolute essential, as in Monty Python ‘Every Sperm Is Sacred’ essential”.
Either of which is silly.
A lesson in real world economics.
Me: Boss, I’ve been working hard this year. I would like a raise in pay.
Boss: THERE IS NO MONEY!
Me: But Boss, last year I got a bonus, this year I didn’t get a bonus, so, you see, my pay has really been cut this year. I’m just asking for last year’s pay. You don’t have to call it raise.
Boss: THERE IS NO MONEY!
Me: But my car is getting old. I need to replace it. If I do, my monthly expenditures will increase. If my pay doesn’t increase, it will amount to a pay cut, so I really need a wage increase just to stay even.
Boss: THERE IS NO MONEY!
Me:Look. I didn’t want to bring up personal issues, but my kid got into a little trouble with the law this year. I had to hire a lawyer. Cost me a fortune. So if you give me a raise, I’ll use the money to pay the lawyer. It won’t go into my pocket, It will just keep me on an even keel.
Boss: THERE IS NO MONEY!
You get the idea.
If you look at any state, county and city budget, the human services portion of the budget is huge. There has to be a lot of room for efficencies.
“people with low IQ, people who are mentally ill.”
You mean, liberals?
Well Jeff Rosenberg just got his butt handed to him. Expect crickets chirping in response.
I’m going to do something I almost never do. I’m going to give Jeff the chance to prove my conclusion that leftists are simply too stupid to deal with seriously is flawed.
Jeff, Terry just laid out an analogy that perfectly and precisely describes the Democrat talking point regarding what cuts are.
I invite you to either:
A. Show us why the analogy does not perfectly and precisely describe the Democrat talking point regarding what cuts are, or
B. Show us why we are wrong to believe the analogy illustrates an untenable position.
I’ll courteously wait for your answer…..
Don’t hold your breath, Swiftee.
*toe tapping*….trying to engage civilly…..waiting……
So there you have it friends.
Once again, I’ve scientifically proved (by repeating the experiment and getting identical results) that leftists are too stupid for an intelligent person to deal with seriously, and *must* be handled with mockery and derision.
Jeff, you are a dim-witted moron, please go sit by your dish until we call for you.
Jeff is also a coward. When you click on his name you get this:
http://www.tcdailyliberal.com/
Take him seriously? No frigging way.
Thank you Kerm, I’ve annotated my lab notebook accordingly.
I don’t know that Jeff Rosenberg is a coward, but his beef seems to be with the federal government, not with the Minnesota legislature. It is the fed that cruelly refuses to continue subsidizing the MN HHS sugared dreams of avarice.
Everybody needs money. Stand in line.
Sorry Terry. Jeff is a coward. Most of us are easily located for direct communication. I am at kahauge@yahoo.com, and used to blog at the now discredited anti-strib.com.
Those of us with integrity stand behind our words.
Whenever I hear people whining about wanting more money for the government, Kermit, I know that they will take it from poor people. They will talk about the taxing the rich, but we all know that the rich can take very good care of their money. That is, after all, why they are rich.
Some millionaires and billionaires are famous for saying they want their taxes increased — but refuse to just pay the amount they think is “fair” without other rich folks doing so as well. These guys are just trying to leverage their money and influence to achieve their goals — there is no leverage if you think that the rich should pay 50% or 90% tax and you are the only one who pays it.
So, in the end, the fat cats in state government will maintain healthy middle and upper-middle class lifestyles by taxing poor people on their vices and taxing the middle class with increased fees and sales taxes.
No rich person was ever beggared by FDR’s ruinous tax rates, but every working person today 12.5% of their income to FDR’s Social Security ponzi scheme. It starts at dollar one and stops when you make a $103,000. A great program brought to you by “tax the rich” liberals.
If Jeff passes as a “legitmate journalist” where the f do I sign up?
Kermit, good point, I used to link to my blog in my name but was tired of constantly getting my comments flagged, otherwise I’d still do it.
Ben, you have as much cred as Jeff does. Actually more, as those of us who are paying attention know that you are a real person. Jeff? I don’t know.
Jeff is in fact a real person. I’ve met him several times. Indeed, I believe Ben and Jeff have met.
Jeff’s a good guy. Wrong on most issues (as documented many times in this space), but not a bad guy.
OK, so Jeff is real and not bad. Duly noted. I have yet to see him respond to a challenge. Dog Gone has more cajones than Jeff has demonstrated.
Mitch, Jeff’s personality is a matter of opinion. His intelligence, and the credibility upon which his babble should be bestowed, however, is now a matter of documented scientific fact.
Jeff is a lefty, lefties are morons; ergo Jeff is a moron.
I’m sorry, Mitch, but consensus has been reached; nothing I can do about it.
I’ve met Jeff, too. He is a good guy. Had a very nice chat with him at the last MOB event, at which I had a nice chat with Ben as well. I don’t agree with Jeff on much, but he’s sincere in his beliefs. That counts for a lot with me.
But I will be the first to stand up and declare that Jeff Rosenberg is NOT a Somali pirate.
So far as we know.
swiftee said:
“I’m sorry, Mitch, but consensus has been reached; nothing I can do about it.”
For the second time in this thread I am laughing. 🙂
But I will be the first to stand up and declare that Jeff Rosenberg is NOT a Somali pirate.
So far as we know.
He is, however, a floor wax AND a dessert topping.
A dessert topping. With or without sprinkles?