Letter: Supports David Gaither for Senate District 44
Why one Minnetonka man is voting for David Gaither in Senate District 44.
To the Editor:
Elections are about differences. To all reports both David Gaither and Terri Bonoff, the candidates for State Senate in Senate District 44 (roughly Plymouth and Minnetonka), are nice people. They both support education reform. They both care about the district. So what separates them? What are the differences? Why should you vote for one over the other? One word. Government.
Bonoff’s record suggests that she thinks the government isn't big enough. She’s voted for more and better-paid bureaucrats administering more laws and regulations. And she’s voted for more taxes to pay for all that. Don’t take my word for it. Google her voting record. Gaither takes a different view. He is a small businessman that understands how too much red tape gets in the way of opportunity.
He will fight to slow the growth of government and insist that it live within its means just like the rest of us. If you think our current state government, the biggest we’ve ever had, still isn’t big enough, then you should vote for Bonoff. If you think Mark Dayton should have a blank check to help Barack Obama spread the wealth around, vote for Bonoff, who was one of Obama's biggest fundraisers in the state of Minnesota.
If, on the other hand, you think we're taxed and regulated enough already then you should vote for David Gaither. Elections are about differences. The role of government is the difference in this election. Vote accordingly.
David Faith
Minnetonka
Daryl Fryxell
1:41 pm on Monday, October 1, 2012
David, thank you for drawing the sharp distinction between these two candidates.
Put party labels aside for the moment. In most elections, you have one candidate that stands on the side of the taxpayer and the other that stands for the notion that government can never be too big.
Fundamentally, each voter must cast off the usual stereotypes they may hold about the parties and examine each candidate's philosophy and record. Choose the one that stands with "we the people" and is willing to end the tax and spend madness before our state goes bankrupt like the nation of Greece and and the state of California.
Brian Matthews
11:48 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Senator Terri Bonoff has been effective in diminishing government, contrary to your post. She spearheaded a change to the state's bloated system by cutting 70 different IT departments and merging them into one. She has effectively sought and succeeded at reforming the business of government, making it more efficient and effective. Senator Terri Bonoff has also worked with both sides of the aisle to create a better system of government for our state and our community, including the Angel Investment Tax Credit to help start-up businesses, and the Minnetonka Immersion Program. Most recently, Senator Bonoff has worked to protect the citizens of Plymouth from a new transmission line in their back yard.
Daryl Fryxell
1:01 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Brian, don't accept Terri's talking points on blind faith. The IT consolidation did not reduce the number of IT employees, nor did it reduce overall IT expenditures. It created a much larger and more cumbersome IT department, with more "management" level employees than ever before. The state is spending more money on IT than it ever has.
It's simply a shell game. Shuffle everything and hide the pea from the taxpayer. They've been doing it for years. Don't be fooled.
rob_h78
1:16 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Brian and Daryl.
Can you both post where we can find the information you are referencing to the IT consolidation?
One side says it cut and consolidated - the other side says it expanded and made more cumbersome.
As a voter who is not in the department or government - I don't know what the truth is - where can I find details on what occurred so I can see for myself?
rob_h78
12:01 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
While we can review Bonoff's record - where can I find details (real details, not general ideas) and not all of her votes I agree with, exactly what Gaither will propose and fight for?
I reviewed his website, including his priorities page (http://www.davidgaither.com/davidgaither.com/Davids_Priorities.html ) and I see general concepts but those don't provide enough detail so that I can compare exactly what he will do with what Bonoff has voted for such as:
"We must encourage our businesses to create jobs by eliminating excessive regulation, onerous liability laws and burdensome taxes"
--- What regulations will he want to cut? What Liability Laws will he seek to Eliminate? What Taxes will he want to reduce or get rid of?
"Legislators must be courageous in cutting marginal programs and separating wants from needs."
-- What programs does he consider marginal? Some examples of "wants" vs "needs" would be helpful for voters also.
"Raising taxes to fund growth in government is the wrong answer for our citizens, our businesses and our kids."
-- Fair enough, so how does he propose to cut government spending at all levels, or does he want to re-prioritize funds already available, if so, where will he shift the money?
"We must be willing to change old models and implement initiatives that make sense for students and parents."
-- What does this mean with respect to details on what he wants to do?
rob_h78
12:02 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
"LANES BEFORE TRAINS
One of the essential ingredients for a robust economy is the ability to transport goods quickly and efficiently, while at the same time providing employees with congestion free commutes. We should prioritize our spending on a transportation system that has the greatest utility, which is the expansion of our roads to accommodate individual commuters, mass transit and commerce."
-- What roadways will have priority to be expanded and the related costs per person per mile and does he believe we can construct them fast enough to handle the increase growth?
Daryl Fryxell
12:56 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Rob, here is an idea. Write, call or email and ask Gaither or his campaign to answer your questions. Attend a candidate forum and ask him yourself.
Your questions sound legitimate, so ask them already. Don't just complain to the rest of us that his website isn't specific enough for you.
rob_h78
1:50 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Daryl - your post was fine until you got the point of "Complaining"...
I suppose I must apologize - as a Voter - for asking on a public blog where someone posted pro-actively to get people to vote for a Candidate, that we get details on what a candidate really wants to do - I realize now that only someone who is complaining would commit such an act...
However, and perhaps silly me, I think it is the job of someone who is running for office to pro-actively post the information and details rather than every voter having to run around to see if they can get a question answered - after all he is asking for my vote - I am not asking him to run.
So, again, I may not understand exactly how politicians run for office all of the time and again my pro-actively apology if this next question sounds as if I am complaining further but you did open this avenue...
Is Mr. Gaither or his supporters concerned about posting specifics to Patch or to his Website?
Daryl Fryxell
2:22 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Rob, I am actually quite sympathetic to your view that candidates need to be specific in their campaign statements. For example, I would really like to see a list of marginal government programs that Gaither would cut.
In fact, I find it very frustrating when GOP candidates/officeholders tell me that they stand for smaller government, but don't have an action plan for cutting anything. I want tax cuts and spending cuts. NOW.
If I was writing their campaign materials, I'd list cut after cut. I'd list laws that I would repeal. Their campaign consultants, however, have entirely different ideas. Be vague. Don't offend anyone, blah blah blah. I think it's hogwash and I like it when citizens ask candidates for specifics because, while they can't anticipate every question, candidates need to have given these matters serious thought BEFORE they run for office.
Having said all of that, on balance, Gaither is still the best candidate and gives us the best chance to control spending and taxes. Terri will just go along with the same old DFL rubbish.
Brian Matthews
2:55 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
SENATOR Bonoff has rarely 'towed' the party line on any issue. Of her bills that she has offered they have almost always been bi-partisanly supported. She has also been endorsed by a variety of business organizations like the Minnesota Chamber, TwinWest Chamber, unions like MAPE, and other organizations. Those organizations had known Mr. Gaither's record and decided not to support him. Rather they chose to support a credible, reliable, and innovative person by endorsing Senator Bonoff.
This is her IT consolidation work (now housed under the Office of Enterprise Technology) -
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/revisor/pages/search_status/status_detail.php?b=Senate&f=SF0490&ssn=0&y=2011
Or the Sunset Advisory Commission - to help reduce and keep Minnesota departments accountable-
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/revisor/pages/search_status/status_detail.php?b=Senate&f=HF2555&ssn=0&y=2012
Tim Anderson
11:04 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
There's an analysis of chamber position votes for 2012 on http://northstarliberty.blogspot.com/. It shows that 100% of the R's vote with the Chamber more than frequently than any of the D's. That meansTerri's voting record is the best of the worst. So if you're the Chamber, you've got DFL members and (a) you're trying to be bi-partisan (b) you're not sure she's going to lose (c) she's the #2 person in the DFL caucus and you don't want to tick her off (d) she did vote for the corporate welfare of the Vikings Stadium for you (e) she likes the corporate welfare that is light rail - which Gaither doesn't, and (f) you know the Republican is going to vote in your favor anyway, isn't the safest bet to support her? It's just politics.
Brian Matthews
11:48 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Convenient to link to a partisan website when in fact you can link directly to her Chamber voting record. http://www.mnchamber.com/action-center/grassroots-center/find-your-legislators-results.cfm
Or a synopsis of the most important legislation highlighted by the Chamber.
http://www.mnchamber.com/action-center/grassroots-center/2012-house-commentary.cfm
Even the best Republicans only voted with the Chamber 85% of the time - seems like Senator Bonoff's record of 77% is much better than you have painted her. Also to note, most Democrats only voted with the Chamber an average of 33% of the time.
Brian Matthews
11:50 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Convenient to link to a partisan website when in fact you can link directly to her Chamber voting record. http://www.mnchamber.com/action-center/grassroots-center/find-your-legislators-results.cfm
Or a synopsis of the most important legislation highlighted by the Chamber.
http://www.mnchamber.com/action-center/grassroots-center/2012-house-commentary.cfm
Even the best Republicans only voted with the Chamber 85% of the time - seems like Senator Bonoff's record of 77% is much better than you have painted her. Also to note, most Democrats only voted with the Chamber an average of 33% of the time.
Tim Anderson
12:20 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Brian - In some respects we're saying the same thing. While the blog may be right leaning, I chose it because of the graphic. The data came from the Chamber website. I fully acknowledge that she voted with the Chamber 77% of the time. But still, that was less than any of the rest of the Republicans. In 2012 9 of the Republicans voted with the Chamber 100% of the time. The Republican who voted the fewest # of times with the chamber voted over 80% of the time. And yes, some of the Democrats voted with the Chamber 0% of the time. So as as a member of the Chamber if Commerce special interest group, if I'm looking for bi-partisanship, I'd endorse Terri, because she voted in my favor more than any other Democrat. But it still wasn't as many times as the least favorable Republican.
Daryl Fryxell
3:22 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Brian, thank you. Terri is endorsed by MAPE, the union of overpaid, underworked government bureaucrats. That is really all we need to know.
I realize that, as a hardcore liberal, she wants to try and attract votes by portraying herself as a moderate. Again, the facts don't support that specious claim. It is fully understandable that she would not want the voters to know that she is a liberal. But we just aren't that stupid.
Brian Matthews
3:44 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Daryl,
I'm not insinuating that you or any voter is stupid. Where are these facts that you speak of? Oh, that's right, you don't have them. Where's the proof? You have all of these 'claims' but alas, no proof. I also said she was endorsed by the MInnesota Chamber and TwinWest. Both are credible organizations who research the candidates that they endorse - but they didn't endorse your candidate? Why is that? Is he really good for business if credible business organizations who want to reform government aren't willing to endorse him? The only thing that is ridiculous in this conversation is that you are trying to paint someone who has done so much for this community as some left-wing extremist, when I think you are the one that is extreme. But don't we both have better things to do? I know I do. I look forward to sparing with you some other day.
Kelly
7:51 am on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Daryl, We get it. You hate Democrats and liberals. You would have saved us a whole lot of time to have just said that at the beginning rather than appearing to be thoughtful.