Well, Pawlenty vetoed the bill. No surprises there. His office generally doesn't respond to detractors (can't say if he responds to supporters, either, since I can't say I've supported him that often) so I guess I won't even get a letter with some excuses written all over it.
STrib got a good photo of the borrow and spend Republicans. They were overjoyed to be vetoing this bill. Many are (still) confused to what the Governor considers a Tax or a Fee. It will be interesting if they propose anything other than borrowing for roads this summer when he is forced to call a special session because of his pledge.
Mary Liz Holberg (R-Lakeville) had this to say about the MVST changes:
House Transportation Finance Chairwoman Mary Liz Holberg, R-Lakeville, who stood with the governor Thursday, said she would oppose the constitutional measure unless its funding formula is changed to guarantee that most of the money goes to roads. As currently drafted, it could direct it all to transit, she said.
The problem is, that simply isn't true. The constitutional amendment is to approriate 60 percent for roads (HUTDF) and 40 percent for transit between 2007 and 2011. After 2011 100% of the MVST would be dedicated towards transportation. Currently about 23% goes to transit and 31% goes to roads. The change approximately doubles the amount that goes to each while reducing the amount put into the general fund. I simply can't explain her viewpoint on the amendment.
