John Berns not seeking reelection

Rep. John Berns, the legislator representing House District 33b, announced earlier this week that he will not seek reelection. He cites personal, family, and financial reasons as the driver behind his decision. I first saw the news in the Sun Sailor.

Rep. Berns has represented the district well, in a moderately conservative fashion that suits the district's profile. It is understandable that the office's impact on income and the demanding peak period of legislative work doesn't capture a young family man like Berns. Berns served his district, did a good job for his term, and will now give someone else their chance at public service.

Thank you to Rep. Berns for his service, and I'm sure we'll provide plenty of coverage of this November candidate field as it becomes a bit clearer.

Is it still called property tax if it is tied to income?

As we go through the month of May, we'll see several prominent bills discussed at the state capitol. One such bill is the effort to change the way property taxes are paid. http://www.twincities.com/ci_9165066

The bill, authored by Ann Lenczewski, a DFLer from Bloomington, would shift property tax relief to those earning under $200,000 and whose property taxes account for more than 2% of their income. Who pays for it? Those whose property taxes are less than 2% of their income, and those whose households earn more than $200,000.

I don't like this bill on two levels: First, property taxes, along with sales taxes, are one of the last taxes tied to a discretionary purchase. You buy a $500,000 house, you probably will pay a few thousand dollars a year in property taxes. Likewise, if you are frugal and buy a $150,000 condo, you will have a lower tax bill. Your choice.

This bill would create a disincentive to live below your means and save money. If you earn a healthy income but choose to live in a modest home, you would see your property taxes increase to help cover the taxes of the person who was not as frugal on the housing front. It essentially eliminates anyting resembling a property tax and adds to an already considerable income tax here in Minnesota.

The second reason I don't like this bill is because it includes a cap on the amount of increase for local taxes as a component of the property tax. Under the bill, local taxes could only increase by 3% or the rate of inflation. In fairness to Lenczewski, this was an addition suggested by Governor Pawlenty. As I've written before, I don't like the state telling the cities what to do. If Shorewood decides to build a state-of-the-art community center that will require property taxes to increase by 6% a year, they should be able to. (for the record, I would disagree with this type of spending, but I think the council should be the ones to veto the idea, not a state-set cap). I'm not a tax-and-spend liberal, but I also believe in local control of fiscal matters.

I don't like this bill. We already have a plenty progressive tax code in Minnesota, and the property taxes you pay are one of the last taxes determined by something other than how much you earn. I'd like to see property taxes continue to be tied to property values and local levies, not earnings.

State Politics: Not a Week for Moderation

This week at the capitol has had its share of drama and suspense. Earlier in the week, the legislature overrode Pawlenty's veto of the transportation bill with a narrow vote. Today, the Senate voted to reject Molnau's appointment as MNDOT head (yes, she had been on the job for five years).

If this week is any indication, political moderation is not a virtue in St. Paul at the moment. The veto override passed largely because of the "six defecters", the six Republicans who voted with the Democrats. They were promptly punished by being stripped of committeeship appointments and have been slammed left and right by partisan talk show hosts and some fellow legislators. Today's Molnau vote appears to have been along party lines, with Democrats getting the public "firing" that they've been drooling after for months.

One of my favorite books is "A Man's Reach" by late Governor Elmer Andersen and Lori Sturdevant. In it, Andersen talks about how politics didn't get so personal in his day. A shared interest in moving Minnesota ahead transcended the winner-take-all mentality that we see more of today. Sure, politics weren't squeaky clean back then -- Andersen's failure to get re-elected as Governor wreaked of his opponent sharing questionable information and effectively manipulating what was a long news cycle back then -- but you have to think it was more collaborative than it has been in the past decade. Moderates were viewed as the powerful bridge between the two parties, not a weakness within partisan caucus.

The irony of this week's situation is that Tim Pawlenty, a Governor viewed as some in the state as ultra-conservative and unbecoming of a Minnesotan on spending issues, was shot down with a thud at his National Governor's Association meeting in DC. His ideas for controlling greenhouse emissions were apparently much too radical for some of his more conservative peers. A Governor who is being labeled as too conservative here at home is being labeled as too moderate on the national scene.

While this week has been one of the more partisan-charged ones St. Paul has seen in a while, we can hope for a few more moderate developments during the remainder of this session:

1. Governor Pawlenty not being deterred by the poor response to his moderation in DC. That type of approach will certainly fall on a more receptive audience at home.
2. The "six defecting" Republicans continuing to be the difference on key votes during the session, continuing to vote for their district on every issue, and not being further punished by the Republicans if they vote to the left or being bashed by the DFL if they vote with the right.
3. A debate on how to treat the looming $1 billion deficit which is not simply a call to raise taxes again (from the DFL) versus a call to cut state investment to the bone (from Republicans).
4. A bonding bill which displays comprimise from both parties.

Here's to moderation.