TO THE EDITOR:

The continued negative rhetoric coming from a handful of letter writers to this paper is wearing thin.

If you read their letters closely, you probably noticed the one thing they have not criticized is the actual balanced budget compromise that I joined a bipartisan group of legislators to support. They would rather conjure up two years worth of criticism than tell you that our budget increases funding for local schools by 8 percent, increases Local Government Aid, locks up violent sex offenders for life without the chance of release and makes it tougher to purchase key ingredients for making methamphetamine, and these are just a few of the many highlights.
Ordinarily, a political party would spend its time after the session promoting its own accomplishments, but because they are chronically short of ideas, their only option is to bash, attack and criticize those of us who actually get things done. Their latest jab is to accuse us of not taking responsibility for what happens at the Capitol and once again criticize us for not supporting the alleged ìlights onî bill.

We all wish the partial shutdown could have been avoided and both Sen. Nienow and I expressed a willingness to consider a temporary funding bill that would have kept parts of government functioning for a short time while the governor worked out a budget agreement. But the same group that now sits back and accuses us of not wanting to compromise was unwilling to even consider a temporary funding bill.

Instead, they would only accept a bill to fund government for two years, nothing less, even though they knew there was not enough support in the Legislature to pass the two-year bill. Had they been willing to negotiate, I think the votes would have been there to keep things going for a few days.

Most of you who have read my other letters and columns over the years or spoke with me in person know why I would not support a two-year Lights On bill, because contrary to their accusations, I take responsibility for my ìnoî vote. The two-year Lights On bill would have cut funding for most schools, did not slow the rate of health care spending and would have removed any incentive for lawmakers to avoid a special session in the future. I could not honestly support that bill and in the end I think the compromise we made will be much better for Minnesota.

I hope readers are starting to see that these habitual letter writers offer nothing into the public discourse while at the same time decrying everyone else for being too partisan. It is okay for us to disagree on matters of policy, but that will not be possible until they stop with the cheap shots and come up with a legitimate policy solution of their own.

Pete Nelson
District 17B

Top of Page

©ECM Post Review

6448 Main Street
North Branch, MN 55056
Telephone: 651-674-7025
Fax: 651-674-7026
E-mail: editor.postreview@ecm-inc.com