1. 2010 bonding bill - to be or not to be?

2. Which Job does He Want?

3. Match Spending with Revenue - What an Idea

4. Northstar - Taxpayers get Railroaded

5. Ford Runs Over Prius

6. Time is Running Out!

1. 2010 bonding bill - to be or not to be?

As next year's legislative session approaches discussions regarding the 2010 bonding bill are ratcheting up. Each even-numbered year the Legislature shifts its focus from the budget to consideration of building projects around the state. These projects range from state trails and parks to buildings on college campuses and zoos, all of which are paid for by the issuance of state bonds.

The list of projects under consideration is always three to four times the number the Legislature ends up funding in the final bill. This takes the horse trading and political gamesmanship to a new level. However, the debate next year may not be as much about the overall dollar amount of the bill, but whether there should even be a bonding bill. In legislative circles of the big spenders, that statement is almost considered blasphemy. But there are sound economic reasons for taking this fiscally prudent approach.

To read more click here.

2. Which Job does He Want?

The Minnesota Campaign Finance Board ruled last Monday in response to a complaint that Mayor Rybak spent money on a gubernatorial campaign months before he filed the requisite paperwork to do so.

In its decision the Board said that a May poll paid for by his mayoral campaign "provided support to a gubernatorial campaign by Mayor Rybak." Mayor Rybak argued that it wasn't until late September did he decide to run and only at that point he began "acting like a candidate." However, neither the Board, nor anyone else for that matter bought his argument.

The poll included people inside and outside of Minneapolis and solicited opinions about four DFLers who were running for governor and included statements about what he would do for state government throughout Minnesota and how he would reform government across Minnesota.

Immediately after the Board's decision Mayor Rybak filed the required paperwork to run for Governor - what job does he really want?

To read more click here.

3. Match Spending with Revenue - What an Idea

In an effort to force the Legislature to live within its means, Governor Pawlenty is proposing to let Minnesotans vote on a "Spending Accountability Amendment" to the state Constitution that would cap spending at the level of revenue actually received during the previous budget period.

As Gov. Pawlenty points out, from1960 to 2003, state general fund spending increased by an average of more than 21 percent per two-year budget cycle. To put that in perspective, per capita income in Minnesota typically grows at about 5 percent per two-year budget cycle. State government spending grew more than four times faster than per capita income.

Despite the soundness of the idea to end state budgets that are based on hope, rather than reality, liberals are already crying foul and gearing up to combat the idea with new taxes.

To read more click here.

4. Northstar - Taxpayers get Railroaded

"A Day Late and a Dollar Short," that's the headline for the newly unveiled Northstar Commuter Rail Line. When originally planned in the late 1990's the project estimate was approximately $200 million for an 80-mile line between downtown Minneapolis and St. Cloud. However, the real cost spiked to a stunning $320 million for a 40-mile route ending in Big Lake.

The Northstar boondoggle cost taxpayers a $120 million more than officials projected to build and worse will require a $13.5 million subsidy per year to operate.

Some may ask what explanation there is for such a mismanagement of money. The Executive Director of the Northstar Commuter Rail Development Authority (NCDA) answered that by saying it was, "learning more about what was necessary to get the project done."

Did we hear that right? NCDA's excuse for going $120 million over budget and laying half of the track was poor planning?

To read more click here.

5. Ford Runs Over Prius

Billed as a way for the government to put more fuel-efficient vehicles on highways, the popular $3 billion "Cash for Clunkers" program mostly involved swaps of old Ford or Chevrolet pickups for new ones that got only marginally better gas mileage.

The single most common swap -- which occurred more than 8,200 times -- involved Ford F150 pickup owners who took advantage of a government rebate to trade their old trucks for new Ford F150s. They were 17 times more likely to buy a new F150 than, say, a Toyota Prius. The fuel economy for the new trucks ranged from 15 mpg to 17 mpg based on engine size and other factors, an improvement of just 1 mpg to 3 mpg over the clunkers.

In scores of deals, the government reported spending a total of $562,500 in rebates for new cars and trucks that got worse or the same mileage as the trade-ins -- in apparent violation of the program's requirements.

To read more click here.

6. Time is Running Out!

Time is running out to claim your stimulus cash from the Stupid Stimulus Spending Contest! November is quickly coming to an end so send us the most outrageous, ridiculous or down right egregious ways you have seen stimulus money being spent and win!

With the vast and growing number of ways the Obama Administration is wasting your tax dollars - this assignment should be easy!

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it the Taxpayers League the most outrageous way in which the U.S. Federal Government is spending stimulus money by November 30, 2009 and win!

1st Place - $100
2nd Place - $50
3rd Place - $20

If your story is a winner, you will receive a stuffed pig to accompany your cash winnings. Don't delay send your entry today!