I look forward to our esteemed DFL Rep’s reply to this…Not that he will and if so with some smarmy comment because he cannot or knows not how to answer it..

Your update states the House DFL budget framework is paid for using new
revenue, spending cuts, and reforms. Please tell me where your alleged
spending cuts and reforms are?

What specifically are you cutting? What specifically are your so called

You then confuse investing with spending by claiming that spending an
additional $1 billion will strengthen Minnesota’s economic future through
spending on including $700 million for early childhood education through
post-secondary, $250 million in property tax relief, and $46 million in
job creation.

Please tell me what the measurable outcomes of this will be? I see a
whole lot of new spending proposed on education but dont see any listed
outcomes of what that spending will be used for? Will it improve schools?
Will it improve test scores? Will it improve teacher performance? Or is
it a bump in formulary aid only?

Is your $250 million in property levy relief across the board or directed
only at LGA and other local government spending unaccountabile programs
and spending – propping up spending rather than finding workable solutions
to improve efficiencies at the local level?

And $46 million in job creation? Really??? And you list that as a
priority? Or should I say your constituent service department who writes
this for you.

You also claim that these important investments reflect Minnesota values
and are paid for with fairness. So increasing the gas tax, alcohol taxes,
snack taxes, sales taxes are fair? Fair to whom? You suggest that
putting a surtax on top of a new income tax tier putting us right behind
California as one of the top taxed states in the nation is fair? How
about a 50% surtax on legislators pay – now that would be fair! How about
a tax on stupidity – sure would reduce the output of it in St. Paul!

I take offense to your "Most importantly, we will not take an all-cuts or
gimmick-filled approach that voters rejected last fall." Your updates are
paid for by taxpayer dollars and should not be political in nature or do I
have to remind you of that again. In the future I suggest you keep your
political banter out of your updates unless you plan to pay for them with
campaign funds.

The alleged priorities of jobs and paying back the school shift surely was
short lived as the return to the tax and spend plus paying back your union
buddies sure set in a return to reality for taxpayers, families and
businesses. You may baffle some with your political rhetoric and pretend
that something is being done in St. Paul. Guess its up to the rest of us
to set the record straight.