Constitutional Crisis

Regarding my reference on Friday to the Democrats' attempt to bury MPR's snout even deeper in the public trough, long time Fraters reader and free lance pundit Gary Larson chimes in:

Is your Friday post about MPR for real? Funding for MPR in that bill for a constitutional amendment divvying up the sales tax? Wow! I was not aware.

Reminds me, again, not to support public radio, MPR or any NPR-affiliate, whose list of contributors end up being used for Dems' pitches for campaign funds.

I forgot once - or rather, my wife did, and we gave again, to support classical music, missing nowadays on radio. I say, buy the damn tapes for Prokofiev and Shostakovich. Beats supporting partisan radio.

That it does. And it's guys like Gary who continue to support the struggling classical cassette tape industry in this nation and for that we should all salute him.

To answer his question, yes Gary there is a plan by the Senate Democrats to play Santa Claus with the public money, by raising sales taxes three-eights of a percent statewide, for the next 25 years, and giving part of the proceeds to Minnesota Public Radio. Of the estimated $270 million dollars extra PER YEAR the government would confiscate from the Minnesota public, $59 million PER YEAR would go to the Arts, Humanities, Museum, and Public Broadcasting Fund. Of that, $13 million PER YEAR would go to pubic broadcasting. And I thought we had some sort of budget crisis in this state?

Remember, this spending is above and beyond the millions public broadcasting already receives from the state and federal government. All of it your money being used to bring you the reasonable, objective commentary from the likes of Garrison Keillor, Nina Totenberg and Bob Collins.

Odds are this scheme to attach MPR, in leech-like fashion, to the Minnesota Constitution won't pass. It has to survive a conference committee with a Republican led House of Representatives that is opposed to it. It has to be signed into law (I think) by a Republican Governor who is opposed to it. Then it would have to be approved via a public referendum.

Insurmountable impediments, you might think. But, given the fact that this proposal is mixed in with a scheme to earmark funding for the sacrosanct fishing and hunting lobbies, things could get weird and I have no confidence that Republican leadership would necessarily stand on principle on this (or any) issue.

And if it comes time for the public to vote on this proposal, DFL Senator Tom Rukavina gives us a peek at the level of rhetoric we will be subject to. His premise being that, of course we need to spend hundreds of millions more on environmental and conservation projects. But ...

We all know that we're going to have to cut something to pay for this," he said. "And I don't think even our sporting community, our anglers and our hunters, want us to hurt senior citizens and vulnerable adults and all the other people who we've put fees on and co-pays on in order to pay for things."

So, raising taxes to pay for public broadcasting is all about not hurting senior citizens and vulnerable adults? Just what is he saying about Garrison Keilor, Nina Totenberg and Bob Collins?

The Elder Adds: Saint Paul is joined in his opposition to making funding for MPR a part of the state constitution by (gulp) the Star Tribune editorial board:

Minnesota Public Radio listeners could not have missed the pleas for help in recent days. The Minnesota Legislature is about to put some public broadcasters in line for a dedicated share of sales tax money, an indignant MPR president Bill Kling huffed, and the House wants to leave out MPR! Call your legislator!...

...Kling has this much right: Call your legislator. Tell him or her that it's outrageous that some cultural organizations are in line for constitutionally favored status, while others are not. But then say that the remedy isn't to offer a constitutionally dedicated revenue stream to more organizations, but to do it for none of them. And if those legislators say that the arts and natural resources need more money, tell them they can pass a tax increase for those purposes, right now.

It's rare day when the Strib editorial crew comes across a tax or funding increase that it doesn't like. Which demonstrates just how egregiously irresponsible this proposal really is.