The status quo is almost always a warm, comforting feeling. No matter how often people complain about Minnesota's interminable winters, or Cyndy Brucato's mummy-like visage staring soullessly from KSTP evening newscasts, eternally hungering for the blood of Amy Hockert, they would still be profoundly disturbed these constants were suddenly stripped from their lives.
This is why our fair state, Democrats, Republicans and disinterested bystanders alike, should take comfort in the fact that the legislative and executive branches of our government have once again demonstrated that the grand tradition of willfully and maliciously idiotic governance is alive and well in Saint Paul. Perhaps a winged unicorn floated down from the heavens to convince legislators that they could easily pass a $925 billion bonding bill through the governor's office when they had already vomited forth approximately $293 million in bonding for transportation projects and the University of Minnesota bioscience initiative - for a grand total of about $1.2 billion in bonding - far more than the 3 percent of the state's revenue that has been the rule for so many years. This profligate spending not only endangers the state's credit rating, but it will likely bring a plague of lesbian biker gangs down upon the state. Lesbian biker gangs are wont to frequent locales of questionable taste and credit, after all.
Compounding this circus of stupidity was Gov. Pawlenty, his eyes alight with the fire of ineptitude, wielding his veto pen with the judicious approach normally associated with crack-addled nymphomanical squirrels. With but a stroke of red ink, away goes the gorilla habitat at the Como Zoo - those damn dirty apes should expect nothing but the same great gobs of crap they fling at zoo-goers. A simple slash to funding for those savages in Red Lake - how dare they expect help from the state in the form of a loan to the school district! And a quick twitch of the wrist spells a monumental "fuck you" to the DFL controlled metro area, where the Central Corridor, a project Gov. Pawlenty has been on board with, loses the $70 million in bonding earmarked for it.
Now, I'm against excessive bondage as much as the next guy. And the legislature obviously expected to bend over for a severe spanking after being warned repeatedly by Pawlenty that exceeding the $825 million level would bring justice as swift and as sure as the Hulkster has 22" pythons - for lo, Gov. Pawlenty doth bring the thunder. But the cuts to the Central Corridor light rail line funding are baffling on the surface. Even more so because this loss of funding jeopardizes the $400 million federal dollars for the line. No federal funding means no rail line, since Minnesota can't afford new toys all by itself, and Tim seems insistent on taking his and going home.
There are, of course, any number of people crediting Pawlenty with political genius, saying that with time left in the legislative session, an agreement can be hammered out to save light rail. That the governor made a strong statement aimed at bringing the pure cold light of reality to an out of control group of legislators. In reality, rather than making sensible cuts to get the budget down to a level he deems reasonable, according to Senate research, he seems to have vindictively targeted DFL controlled districts for his cuts. 98 percent of the budget cuts came from DFL districts. And while the taut buttocks of the state's volleyball players will suffer little from the loss of a planned addition to the National Volleyball Center in Rochester, the cut to the Central Corridor is an unwelcome visitor to the much-vaunted nethers of Minnesota we call the metro area.
Luckily, our politicians have, over time, inured us to the bizarre sensations that accompany these unwelcome visitors. For what would Minnesota be without the cold, unlubricated hand of government intruding in parts unknown and heretofore unexplored?
You accused the governor of playing partisan politics by virture of the fact that 98 percent of his vetoes were on Democrat projects (and you weren't the only one). I'm just providing the context for the statement, which is to say the bill breaks down by about the same percentage. If there's a political party to blame for that, it would be the party of the bill's authors.
I could point to House minority research that shows 97 percent of the entire bill was for Democrat projects, so that 98 percent of the vetoes were likewise according to Senate majority research doesn't seem particularly out of proportion.