Pawlenty to Raise Taxes!

With a pending veto in the wings, and the Governor's use of unallotment ruled illegal, yes illegal, where does that leave us . . . the constitution:

If money on hand in any fund is not sufficient to pay all non-refunding certificates of indebtedness issued on a fund during any biennium and all certificates refunding the same, plus interest thereon, which are outstanding on December 1 immediately following the close of the biennium, the state auditor shall levy upon all taxable property in the state a tax collectible in the ensuing year sufficient to pay the same on or before December 1 of the ensuing year with interest to the date or dates of payment.

Scattered throughout the Constitution is revenue fail safes in case of indebtedness. The property tax, as we know, is very regressive, effecting lower income earners at a much higher percentage, but the Governor has had no problem having the less fortunate amongst us continue to carry the water so he can protect his wealthy donors.

The current revenue option sitting on the Governor's desk, equals out the income tax disparity in the state, while still having the richest amongst us paying less of a burden than those in the lower income deciles.


Why is it that this "no new tax" Governor, who by his actions, will now be raising taxes, chooses to put the burden on those who are already paying a higher percentage with less to give? Is his race to the White House really more important than the citizens of Minnesota?

Flash