They didn't get the headline they wanted

Hey la, hey la, Mark Dayton's back. To his old tricks again, that is:

Earlier in the week, Dayton chastised Senate DFLers for not passing the measure swiftly enough. On Thursday, Dayton and Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk, DFL-Cook, joined together to direct their wrath at Republicans.

“There is no good reason for Senate Republicans to block the bill’s passage,” Dayton said. If Republican legislators force any further delays, “they will be solely responsible for denying income tax cuts to thousands of Minnesotans.”

The measure is nearly certain to pass Friday because Republicans are out of options to block it.

The measure is tax relief, of course, much of it from new taxes that the DFL lege and the governor passed into law last year. Let's be clear on a few things:

• The legislature has been in session for a month, so if passing this bill was a top priority, it could have been addressed rather a long time ago.
• The primary reason that the tax bill was held up is because Bakk and the rest of his DFL colleagues in the Senate want a brand new office building with a $90 million price tag.
• A lot of the taxes that got jammed down last year came about because the lege rushed to finish their work and there wasn't much time for debate.
• The Republicans aren't looking to block tax relief.

Bakk was pretty amusing yesterday:

Bakk called the Senate’s refusal to speed the process “shenanigans.”

“I think it’s a bit disingenuous for people to say they can’t do it today because they haven’t read it. It’s 62 pages and they had it yesterday,” Bakk said. “I don’t believe that that’s the reason.”

Actually, it is the reason. And delaying things is a tactic that every minority party, everywhere, uses. He knows that. But he and Dayton wanted a headline -- GOP Stops Tax Cut Bill, or somesuch.

Instead, the Star Tribune website shows the following this morning:

C'mon, that was supposed to say "obstructionist"

We'll have to see if the headline changes to suit Dayton's needs later on, but let's give credit where due to the Strib and to reporter Baird Helgeson, especially for these two utterly accurate observations:

Passing a tax relief measure would be a significant political coup for Dayton and House DFLers, who are up for re-election in November. The measure also contains the first significant tax breaks in years, paid for out of the state’s $1.2 billion projected budget surplus.

and

The measure includes the repeal of several new business sales taxes, including one on warehousing services that takes effect in less than two weeks.

Republicans have ripped Dayton for suggesting he was not fully aware of the new sales taxes when he signed them into law last year, and is now trying to do away with them after enduring blistering criticism.

Emphasis mine. Yes, a number of the taxes being repealed are new. In some respects, the DFL game here is a variation on the "broken window" fallacy, as Frederic Bastiat explained:

Have you ever witnessed the anger of the good shopkeeper, James B., when his careless son happened to break a square of glass? If you have been present at such a scene, you will most assuredly bear witness to the fact, that every one of the spectators, were there even thirty of them, by common consent apparently, offered the unfortunate owner this invariable consolation - "It is an ill wind that blows nobody good. Everybody must live, and what would become of the glaziers if panes of glass were never broken?"

Now, this form of condolence contains an entire theory, which it will be well to show up in this simple case, seeing that it is precisely the same as that which, unhappily, regulates the greater part of our economical institutions.

Suppose it cost six francs to repair the damage, and you say that the accident brings six francs to the glazier's trade - that it encourages that trade to the amount of six francs - I grant it; I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly. The glazier comes, performs his task, receives his six francs, rubs his hands, and, in his heart, blesses the careless child. All this is that which is seen.

But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion, as is too often the case, that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, "Stop there! your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen."
It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library. In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented.

Let us take a view of industry in general, as affected by this circumstance. The window being broken, the glazier's trade is encouraged to the amount of six francs; this is that which is seen. If the window had not been broken, the shoemaker's trade (or some other) would have been encouraged to the amount of six francs; this is that which is not seen.

And if that which is not seen is taken into consideration, because it is a negative fact, as well as that which is seen, because it is a positive fact, it will be understood that neither industry in general, nor the sum total of national labour, is affected, whether windows are broken or not.

This legislature and this governor have been breaking a lot of windows. Piggy banks, too.