I've only been to county fairs, never to any state fairs. Thus I have not been to the Minnesota State Fair. I do know that food on a stick is common, and that Minnesota takes it quite a ways (hotdish on stick?). So when there is to be an anthology of murder mysteries set at the Minnesota State Fair, there could be only one name for it: Murder on a Stick.

Current Mood: amused

My weight is higher than it ought to be. The price of motorfuel is already quite high and likely to keep rising. The gas tax in Minnesota is increasing as well. Also, it is no longer Winter and hasn't been for a while now. So I checked on the bicycle I bought a few years ago and didn't ride very much. Part of that was that I didn't have a way to lock it up. That's a simple enough thing, but I just never did anything about it.

Last week I pumped up the tires and took a quick ride down the street, not venturing very far as the license/registration had expired some years ago. Like I said, I didn't ride it very much. Today I checked the tires and they had held the air fine. I went to the local license bureau to take care of the registration and was told that bicycles were no longer licensed or registered. So after not spending any money on that, I went to Shopko and picked up a cable and lock set.

Weather will still be a factor, of course. I don't plan on riding in the rain. But now I can burn calories (something I ought to be doing) rather than gasoline for a few things around town. I'll also get around a bit faster and easier, and have an increased range compared to walking. At least I will eventually get around more that way. I know I'll have to ease into things slowly.

Current Mood: pleased

A year or two ago I wrote about the DFL doing nothing but waiting for Governor Pawlenty to come up with a budget so they could rip on it (and him) without bothering to come up with anything of their own. (I'd link to that post if I could quickly find it.)

This year is different. The DFLers in the Minnesota Senate came up with a budget, and even passed it. It's not ideal, and I likely won't agree with a lot of it, but they actually came up something this session instead of just whining about what others come up with. Now that they have some ideas of their own they have a chance of being taken seriously. That their budget isn't nothing but increased spending and higher taxes, though it does have some of that, but has at least some cuts and uses some extensions of current taxes that are scheduled to fade (rather than explicit tax increases) helps them. For once, they're appearing to be somewhat responsible. That they didn't automatically increase school spending is impressive. Has the DFL realized that throwing yet more money at something that wastes money to get lousy results is a bad idea? Am I hallucinating?

It'll be interesting to see what happens this year with both parties having budget proposals, and each with at least some good points.

Current Mood: amazed

It's been amusing to see the various polls disagree with each other. I expect each one weights things differently and has a different sample-space (adults? registered voters? likely voters?). It's even more amusing to hear the various analysts and media types trying to make sense of apparently conflicting numbers. I wonder if, the evening of November 2nd, it will be like four years ago with jumping the gun in a contest to be the first to call the election or if it will be like two years ago with everyone being careful and wanting to actually have the right stuff to report. I expect the first, I hope for the second.

Meanwhile the news here in Minnesota is that the Independence Party will appear on the ballot this fall. There was doubt due to an obscure and rather clumsy election law that required the top (primary) vote-getter of a party to get at least 10% of the votes someone in his party got in the last general election. It's even clumsier than I just put it. Even the state attorney general figured it wasn't constitutional, and said so to the state Supreme Court, which agreed. This was fast-tracked as the ballots had to be finalized by very early October so that absentee ballots can be printed. The result is that the minor parties should have an easier time of appearing on the ballot.

One of the problems was that the Minnesota primary is almost useless, so few bother to vote in it. Both the Republican and the DFL (Democrats) party do the caucus thing in Minnesota, so the major parties aren't a reason to go the primary. Also, the primary is after the conventions, so it would hardly matter even with the caucuses. With only minor parties on the primary for anything statewide, it should be no wonder that few bother. I recall that one of the major parties tried to change to a caucus in Wisconsin (to avoid the open primaries there) and got voter apathy as a result. They went back to taking the primary seriously after that.

And there is the debate scheduled for Thursday in Florida. Four hurricanes and now this. Filibuster Cartoons summed it up well.

( Preserved comment(s) )

Current Mood: blah

Record rainfalls.
Schools closed.
Livestock moving to the higher ground.
Some pastureland looking more like a lake.
Stocks of sandbags being depleted.
Roads closed due to flooding.
Stranded people being rescued by boat.

That's not from Ivan, or any other hurricane. That's what happened overnight and this morning in southeast Minnesota.

Fairmont was on the western edge of the affected area and, as far as I've seen and heard, managed to escape the worst of this. Austin and Albert Lea weren't so lucky and did get the worst of it.

( Preserved comment(s) )

Current Mood: Dry

Minnesota's last Governor, Jesse Ventura, was a surprise to many on both sides of the political aisle. I've maintained for some time that his success was not purely based on celebrity and curiosity. That much may be able to open a door, but that much alone will not get someone invited in through that door.

When I first heard Ventura was running my reaction was on the order of, "You're kidding, right?" But I heard a few radio interviews and at least parts of a couple debates. Ventura was the guy making more sense than the DLFer (Democrat) and the Republican who were running for the same office.

There were a few things Jesse did that made him stand out, never mind his past in entertainment. One was that he was outspoken and consistent. Someone might not like what he said, but he didn't try to be whatever his current audience wanted to hear. Another was that when he didn't know something, or didn't know enough about something to make a reasonable comment on it, he said so. The stunned silence when he first did this is still memorable. No BSing an answer, but a simple admission that he didn't know - and would be rectifying that so he could give a real answer later. Yet another was that he refused to be baited into making promises that he knew he could not keep or would likely be unable to keep. More than once he asked reporters what part of "no" they did not understand.

All that was good, but there was something else. Something the neither the DFL/Democrats nor the Republicans seem to have completely caught on to. Other parties, even the Independence party that formed when Ventura left the Reform party, haven't quite grasped it either. Perhaps the Libertarians have figured it out, but they have another problem to work out.

It's this: Jesse Ventura had both halves of what is desirable. The Republicans have one half, or try to. They claim that less government is better and the hand on your wallet should be yours, not the government's. The DFL/Democrats have one half or try to. They claim that government should not try to legislate morality and whoever is in your bedroom or such is your business and not government's. Each group has half of the message: the best government is the one which interferes with you minimally, to paraphrase Thoreau. (The Libertarians have figured this out, but have carried it to what is too extreme for most people.)

The two major parties both miss the boat by being only half-right, when they're right at all. Either one could easily win the hearts and minds of many of the undecided and wavering by having the full message. That would require jettisoning part of their current base, however, so don't hold your breath.

The Democrats/DFL have a faction that seems intent on spending more money to solve problems by methods that have failed to work. The idea that equality of result can be guaranteed by government is the theme of this faction. Anyone who points out that this doesn't work gets painted as being heartless, even if all that is said is that maybe trying something different might get better results than doing the same old things over and over.

The Republicans have a faction intent on foisting their version of religion or morality on everyone, whether those others subscribe to those beliefs or not. Those who point out that that isn't the American Way, to the point of being forbidden in the Bill of Rights, get painted as evil and the downfall of our alleged civilization.

Both parties would be better off if they could just get past those factions and get on with the Jeffersonian ideals to which they both have claimed to hold. As it is, the primaries seem to allow each faction to control the party and presidential nominee with the result that neither party has a candidate which most people would really like to vote for. Instead, most people take a look at each party's nominee and vote against the most objectionable one that they see.

Even if one of the major parties managed to shake themselves of their extreme factions, they'd have a rough go for a while. There is a history and inertia and it would be some time before people would be willing to believe that the change was real and not just so much more election-year lip service. This is why even though a Republican House and Senate and White House have been spending more, the Democrats still have to fight off their long, sorry reputation as tax-and-spenders and can't simply claim the budget hawk position once (and still, to some degree) used by the Republicans. The Democrat's free-spending reputation precedes them, so even if they actually started acting like budget hawks, it would be some time before it was considered real. Likewise, even if the Republicans jettisoned the "religious right" this very instant, they'd still have a fight to get people to believe it was for real.

( Preserved comment(s) )

Current Mood: discontent

The DFL finally got around to releasing a state budget plan. Good for them. As could be expected, they call for tax increases. The DFL tries to say it's for the little guy and maintain that it isn't involved in class warfare - a delicate balance and a hard argument to swallow after watching them for a while. Their plan certainly is interesting, but not for what the DFL is saying about it. No, the three areas of tax increases are what is of interest. Now, before I get into them, remember the DFL just hates those regressive taxes that hit the little guy...

1. A new income tax bracket, 9.4% (the current highest is 7.85%) for those making above $135,000 or $250,000 for joint returns. This is no surprise, it's a standard "they have more money, so we take more from them" DFL tax. This is considered a "progressive" tax: if you make any economic progress, we'll take more from you.

2. A change in corporate taxes. This, however it stated, as closing loopholes, as reform, whatever, will be an increase. Ah, but it's just those big evil corporations, so it's no big deal, right? Wrong. "There is no such thing as a corporate tax." Sure, they exist in the tax code and companies pay them. Guess where they get the money from? Their customers. Every cost a company has is passed on to their customers or, perhaps, their employees who don't see the raises or benefits they might have. So who gets hit? The little guy who works for and/or buys from those corporations. Sure sound regressive, doesn't it? Of course, this added price of goods is just "inflation" and that can be blamed on federal economic policies, nevermind if they actually deserve any of that blame.

3. A tripling of the cigarette tax. And who smokes cigarettes? In other years the DFL would be howling at how evil and regressive this tax is. But this time it's their idea, so it's not a regressive, but a means of "discouraging youth smoking" (and smoking in general). In other words, it's social engineering with the tax code.

So, it looks like two of the three tax changes the DFL is suggesting are the very kind they claim to be vehemently against.

Now, to be fair, the Republicans have also suggested a similar change in the cigarette tax, but it would be a swap: a much-hated health care tax would go away. And I admit a bias, I have a hard time considering something that discourages tobacco use to be all bad. There is problem of principle, though. "First they socially engineered the cigarettes, but I didn't smoke cigarettes, so I didn't care..." Alarmist? You might say so. But remember this: The earlier an alarm is raised, the easier it is to put out the fire.

Current Mood: eh

Governor Pawlenty suggested something that has some folks upset. He suggested that protesters who commit illegal acts should be required to pay for the cost of their arrest. I disagree, but not the way some do. Why limit it to protesters? Why not have all criminals pay for their arrest? That would, after all, be non-discriminatory.

Some are claiming this would be a violation of first amendment rights. Nonsense. Signs and bumper stickers would not be illegal. Attending rallies would not be illegal. Marching would not be illegal. Publishing would not be illegal. Speaking one's mind would not be illegal. Disrupting and interfering with other people's lives, however, would now have a price for the disrupter. As it is now, only those whose lives are disrupted pay for the misbehavior of the disrupters. Misusing law enforcement as a publicity tool is not free speech, but freeloading. And freeloading is not constitutionally protected.

No, not a war protest. A tax protest at the state capitol yesterday. There were signs that read "Liberate Minnesota" and "Cut spending now" there. This was in support of Governor Pawlenty and his stand of not raising taxes.

The interesting thing is that this event, organized by the Minnesota Taxpayers League, was on a weekday, unlike all previous MTL events. This was done so that legislators would actually see them for once. Why wasn't this done before? Because, unlike so many other demonstrators, these folks actually work and had to take time off from their jobs.

Despite the complete (and hardly unexpected) absence of DFLers, this does show that their view is not the sole view of the public. And the DFL budget proposal? Oh, that's right. There still isn't one. I find that rather telling.

Current Mood: pleased

It became evident last year that the state would be running a deficit if nothing was done.

So now governor Pawlenty, who ran with a no tax increase promise, must deal with the current problem. Since it's his first year in office, he has to take into account the next few years as well. He has proposed a budget that balances, and might even have a (very) small surplus. It's not perfect, but it will do what it is supposed to do: not raise taxes and not run a deficit.

Since there are no tax increases, it means cuts in some things, cuts of some things, and not-as-big-as-hoped increases in still other things. Actual state spending will be up from last year, but the increase won't be as large as it was the last several several years.

Naturally everyone who is in any way not getting as much as they were planning on is howling about how unfair and mean-spirited this is and how Minnesota will turn into a "cold Mississippi" with poor services. This though the budget deficit would have been about $4 billion - and Wisconsin, with a similar population, geography, and industry spends about $4 billion less on its budget and is hardly a "cold Mississippi."[1] Pawlenty's budget has per capita spending not much different from Iowa, Illinois, or Wisconsin.

Yet the criticism seems endless. One thing is missing, though. There is a glaring omission. None of the critics has produced a state budget of their own. There has been no counter-proposal. And where is the DFL? Not showing an alternate budget around. Instead, they seem to just say how mean and horrible Pawlenty is - for having the audacity to keep his campaign promise.

Pawlenty's critics would like to be taken seriously, but have all failed to do the one thing that would make that possible: suggest a real, workable alternative to the Pawlenty proposal.

Pawlenty may not be Ventura, but he'll do.

[1] Pawlenty responded to the "cold Mississippi" line by noting that and quipping that there should be no problem with being a "cold Wisconsin."

Current Mood: good

I finally got around to filling out my taxes for 2002. The federal form was actually trivial, as I could telefile and let the IRS automata do the work. This went very well indeed and I now await a non-trivial sum of my money being given back to me by direct deposit.

The state taxes did not go so well. In previous years I could telefile (save once when a pension plan was ended at work - resulting in a tiny sum given to me and big headache with forms at tax time) and last year I was even able to deal with MN taxes on the web - for free. This year the form booklet makes a big deal of it "Want to throw this book away? You can with e-file!" But it's not what it seems.

To e-file in MN (which I did at no charge last year) now requires one pay a service to handle it for one. There are some free options, but one must make very little to use them. And none seem to be true web systems. The downloading and running of a special client program is required. Oh, and these programs tend to be (presumably Windows) PC only. Forget everyone else. And the big one? The one that would let some folks file free? Intuit & TurboTax. The product activation and spyware people. Not on MY machinery, damnit!

So now the state of MN gets to deal with paper just like they don't want, because I'd like all of my money back, not going into some (sleazy) third-party's pockets. Fine. I fill out the forms. Yes, plural. No more sending the W2 and/or 1099 but I get to fill out M1W with what the W2 and 1099 say. Not bad. Except, (you knew there had to be an except, didn't you?) the M1W wants the 7 digit MN state ID number. Guess what is not on the 1099? Right. No 7 digit state ID number. There are other numbers, but none are 7 digits. So instead of finishing M1W last night, I get to call US Bank today to get this 7 digit number.

I call the bank. They don't know what I'm talking about. And these people I am to trust with my money? There is discussion while I'm on hold. I'm asked for my social security number, which shouldn't be needed, but fine, they are a bank and are therefore one of the few places that has any legal right to ask. They get it. There is much bewilderment evident from the snippets I can hear while I'm on hold. Finally a person, presumably more senior at the bank, other than the one who answered my call actually gets around to talking to me, rather than about me. We talk. I mention the 7 digit number and read the text on form M1W verbatim for this person. I am asked my phone number, as they will call the main office and get back to me.

Not just too much later I get an outside call. It's the bank. Pat tells me they have the number I need. I write it down. It was a number on the 1099 form. It is not a 7 digit number. It is a 9 digit number. I point this out. Pat says they know, but the 9 digit number is what they were told to tell people. I write that down and finally finish the M1W, noting that I did call and that's the number they gave me.

So now either there is an idiot (not Pat) at US Bank who is insisting on the wrong number, or there is an idiot working the for the state of Minnesota who can't tell 7 digits from 9 digits. And then here I am, trying to be honest and good, and filling out the forms the way they say they should be filled out... and wondering if this confusion will result in less than timely refund of a smaller, but still non-trivial, amount of my money back to me.

And now I wait.

While I wait, I can plan. I plan to get a nice fast machine for to run linux on. It will probably be a (not as low end as I'd figured) Wal-Mart box, but I'm open to some suggestion. With at least two exceptions: I refuse to get either a GateWay or a Dell. The frustration level they generate is not what I desire.

Current Mood: aggravated

Heard my first radio campaign ad this morning. It starts off like a commercial for a mechanic or car advice show. One person tells how something doesn't work right, is always pulling to the left, and though he's tried to get rid of it and had it twelve years, it keeps running. The reply? "You have a bad Wellstone..." and goes on with a few things about Wellstone's voting record.

I suppose this is one of those nasty evil vicious "negative attack-ads" the DFL (Minnesota's version of the "Democratic" Party) complains about. If they don't want Wellstone's voting record brought up, doesn't that say something? Wellstone's TV ads bring up Enron and such and say how he'd keep that sort of thing from happening. Just like he had for the last twelve years, huh?

Current Mood: amused
Current Music: Mediocre "Classic" Rock