It's always a treat to read Don Davis's coverage this time of year for those of us who want to know what's on the mind of Republican legislators in Minnesota's wild, wild west.
In today's Unclear whether or not Minnesota will raise taxes in upcoming session we read:
In most years, Republicans could be expected to reject any tax increase proposal. But some in the GOP, including a leader or two, say there could be tax increases for priority items such as nursing homes and transportation. . . .
"I don't think this is the time of year you rule out taxes," Rep. Paul Torkelson, R-Hanska, said. "This is the time you throw all the spaghetti against the wall and see what sticks."
House speaker-designate Kurt Daudt, R-Crown, has left the door open, if only slightly, for new tax revenues.
That's not exactly the sort of rhetoric we saw in the flood of charming postcards that the Minnesota Jobs Coalition--headed then by the guy who's now the executive director for Daudt's caucus--but okay then.
Later in the article, Davis reports:
Republicans campaigned before the November election against the $2 billion tax increase approved by Dayton and his Democratic legislative colleagues when the DFL controlled the Legislature and governor's office the past two years.
Some Republicans could consider a tax increase as a top priority. For Rep. Paul Anderson, R-Starbuck, that exception would be nursing homes.
"At least on the nursing homes, I would support some kind of an increase of some form of tax or revenue increase," Anderson said. "I think it is that serious out here in rural Minnesota."
To be fair to Anderson, he discussed such raises during the election. St. Cloud Times reporter Mark Sommerhauser wrote in Anderson, Wagner agree on House 12B priorities:
Both say more money is needed for Minnesota's roads and bridges and that they're willing to consider tax increases to generate it.
Both say state funding for senior care is a leading concern for the largely rural District 12B.
Anderson and Wagner both say they'd consider increasing fuel taxes to generate that revenue. Anderson said in an interview that his support for such an increase would be linked to how the new revenues would be split between urban and rural projects.
Anderson struck a different note in response to a Times questionnaire, saying he's not sure if the public would support a gas-tax increase.
. . . Both candidates also say state funding for senior care is a concern.
In response to the Times questionnaire, Anderson said he'd consider supporting a tax increase if the additional revenue went to nursing homes.
"We are close to a crisis situation, I think, in funding long-term care," Anderson said.
However, Anderson did sound a different note in a December 14, 2014 Legislative Update district message posted by the Douglas County Republicans:
. . . My approach will be to set a budget that funds our priorities without increasing taxes. Just two years ago the current House majority passed the largest tax increase our state has ever seen. That turned into rising revenue for the state, but families have not had the same luxury since earnings have remained flat.
A top priority in the upcoming legislative session should be to provide those people with tax relief instead of rushing out to find new ways to spend their money.
As Torkelson told Davis, who knows what will stick.
Photo: Representative Paul Anderson (R-Starbuck), who may or may not be open to tax hikes or tax cuts. We'll see what sticks--and how they'll pay for their agenda.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Comments