Pedding Your Influence

If you are a principled conservative – or just a taxpaying and/or gun-owning citizen who’s sick of being taken for a ripe suck and/or a “potential criminal” – you have two orders of business before you today:

  • Call or fax (or email) your Republican representative (and/or as many other Republican representatives as you can) to tell them to back the Governor on the veto of the Mass Transit Subsidy “Transportation” Bill.
  • Call or fax (or email) your rep and/or Senator about Michael Paymar’s gun registration bill – the bill that’d treat every law-abiding gun owner in Minnesota as a criminal first, while doing nothing to so much as inconvenience real criminals.

I put “Or email” in tiny type because, as Kevin correctly notes in the comment section, “Emails make little difference, they get alot of them. Faxes, and especially calls, are more likely to make an impact”.

He’s right, of course. Emails are cheap; everyone writes ’em, and way too many of them are the equivalent of political spam – one email with hundreds of legislators on the cc: line.
But legislators, like talk show hosts, know that every phone call they get represents 100 other people who didn’t call.

So – find and call (or email) your Senator, and then do the same with your Representative.

Be polite. But tell ’em where you sit.

Because nothing says “democracy” like the knowledge that the constituents are not only watching, but they’re pissed, too.

28 thoughts on “Pedding Your Influence

  1. My state senator, Terri Bonoff (DFL-Jackass), emailed me with a link to her “Capitol Weekly Update”. It contained a long winded article about her co-sponsored transit bill, with its 6.6 billion in new spending. The funny thing about it was it didn’t mention anything about any tax increases. Not one word about the tax increases.

    She did brag about how she got lease taxes directed to transit, but failed to mention that less than 3% of the people in her district use public transit.

    I replied to her email, but if I don’t get a response I’m going to give her office a call.

    I’m saving her “Capitol Weekly Update” as an example of the most deliberate disingenuous constituent communication I have ever seen.

    http://www.senate.mn/senators/43Bonoff/update/Bonoff%20Update%202-2008.pdf

  2. MoN,

    You should start a blog. Seriously. You’ve got TONS of good stuff to write about.

    Think about it.

  3. I hope that isn’t a “please go away and start your own blog” kind of message.

    I am looking for a good western suburbs blog, any suggestions?

  4. How much money was the Republican’s counter proposal going to spend. It is my understanding that the spending isn’t what is at the heart of the dispute but the method of funding. Isn’t that the case?

    Flash

  5. It’s the target of the spending, transit vs. roads and bridges, and the funding method, raising taxes vs. bonding or diverting other revenues (prioritizing).

    and now, for me, it’s Bonoff’s cowardice.

  6. I am looking for a good western suburbs blog, any suggestions?

    There’s some brilliant writing over at Anti-Strib….

  7. Kermit, how high does the bonding have to get before you say it is enough.

    I’m not a fan of some of this revenue, but I accept the fact we need more than just an unlimited credit card. I have E-Mails out to both the GOP and the DFL. I asked for their priority project list with spending and their funding proposal. I sent both E-Mails this AM to same or similar staffers. The DFL has already responded, the GOP has not yet. I’ll give them till the end of the day and will post tomorrow with what I have. It will be fair.

    I have a genuine interest in cutting through the partisan politics of it all and seeing through my own eyes how far apart the two sides are. Hardly anyone denys we can’t go another session without addressing our infrastructure needs.

    The only thing that seems crystal clear to me so far is ANY revenue increase is simply off the table by this Governor. I feel that is unreasonable. I have somewhat of an issue with the 1/4 cent sales tax increase, but have no problem with a nickel on gas. Common ground can’t be sought, or effective negotiations take place, unless everything is on the table going in. The fact the Governor is playing hard ball is why this bill exists, and the vulnerable GOP members in Purple districts are considering jumping ship.

    Flash

  8. Flash, I am tired of the BS about how the gas tax hasn’t been raised for 20 years. Saying that revenues haven’t increased is a bald-faced lie. There are many more cars on the road (50%? 75%?) and they are all buying gas.

    As for bonding, it is critical to maintain our AAA rating. If we stopped bonding tomorrow our rating would tank, and that’s a very bad thing. It’s just like your personal credit score. Either way we pay, but having that credit is crucial, because it guarantees us the lowest possible rate should we need to borrow.

    Enacting a regressive tax on the public is another very bad thing. I am always amused by the DFL pretending to care about average or “poor” folk while striving to take their money away.

  9. “Kermit, how high does the bonding have to get before you say it is enough.”

    From bondbuy.com

    “The Republican governor sought the maximum amount of new obligation borrowing allowed under a self-imposed debt cap that limits debt service to 3% of general fund revenues. ”

    Doesn’t “under 3%” sound about right to you.

    further

    “leaders of the state’s version of the Democratic Party … were critical of it, not for its size, but for its heavy focus on bridges and transportation.

  10. I didn’t say bonding is bad, I said basing our funding soley on borrowing is bad. At some point we will outlive our means and not be able to pay the debt load. How will that effect our rating. I think bonding for a 20-50 year road or bridge is a good idea. Bonding to fix a road for five years is a bad idea. I have a mortgage on my house, but I don’t put the can of paint on the credit card. hell, I didn’t put my windows on a credit card (well, I did for convenience but I paid off the balance right way). I did them piecemeal myself and when I was done they were all paid for.

    Again, the amount that is being spent in this bill is not what is in dispute, the funding is. The DFL has passed a balanced funding proposal that spreads the revenue across Bonding (good), Gas Tax (good) Debt Service Surcharge (?), Metro Sales tax (concerning). Vehicle Registration changes (user fee). Where does the GOP get their $6 Billion? They haven’t answered that question.

    Flash

  11. The Republicans would most likely defer the bike trails, choo choo trains and “arts funding” to come in way below $6 billion. This “transportation” bill has enough pork to damn a large Islamic republic.

  12. I’m still waiting to hear from them. At the bottom of their taxapalooza flyer they state:

    “”***THERE IS A BETTER WAY: THE REPUBLICAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN CONTAINS NO TAX INCREASES & OFFERS MORE MONEY FOR OUR ROADS & BRIDGES*** “”

    But no one can point me to this specific Republican Transportation Plan. If anyone has a link to the plan I would be love to see it.

    Flash

  13. Its not all there, it just says how he is going to spend the 1.7 bonding money (10-year bonding program.). The GOP flyer clearly states MORE MONEY FOR ROADS AND BRIDGES so the Governor’s site is a few billion short of that, even if you flat out cut the transit.

    System 10-year totals:

    Trunk Highways: $3.4 billion
    County State-Aid Highways: $1.5 billion
    Municipal City-Aid Streets: $392 million
    Greater Minnesota Transit: $58 million
    Metropolitan Area Transit: $1.1 billion

    Flash

  14. Thorley,

    Post is up as of about 4PM.

    Kermit,

    Not to be pedantic, but the word you’re looking for is “Scheiss”. “Schiessen” means “to shoot”, “Scheissen” means, er, well, you know.

    I guess they both apply.

  15. MoN. I saw that, it shows over 7 Billion in revenue, but where is the spending. This would appear they support ted tranist funding just like everyone else. Or where they going to spend that 1.9 Billion on something else.

    Again, this was about funding. There are some creative financing issues on their side I wish we could have considered. But their hard ball no new taxes tactics provided the open door for the DFL to swoop in and over ride the veto.

    You (collective Right wing you) want to point fingers, fine. But at some point the Gov should have come to the table with an open mind, and in the end it cost him. Hell, it cost all of us!

    Flash

  16. But at some point the Gov should have come to the table with an open mind,

    “Sorry about that incident in the alley late the other night; if only Kathy-Jo had just had an open mind and not fought back, she might have enjoyed it”.

    Flash blames the victim!

  17. “Flash blames the victim!”

    yes, but

    “Hell, it cost all of us!”

    he’s mad about it, gosh darn it.

  18. flash said:

    “Hell, it cost all of us!”

    I think it will probably cost the poorest among us the most.

    Who does the DFL represent these days?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.