The Shifting Winds, Part 3

We are in the midst of the “switch” phase of an amazing political “bait and switch” operation in Minnesota.

I have previously written (Part 1 and Part 2) about how Minnesota’s Democrats campaigned relentlessly on the “school shift” education funding issue.

Now safely in office, and in the majority, Democrats want to delay paying back the school shift and are getting cover from local public school officials around the state to go back on promises made during the campaign.

Minnesota Public Radio News reports,

“To make up for budget shortfalls, Minnesota lawmakers delayed $1.1 billion in payments to schools in recent years.  Some lawmakers are calling for the state to deliver the payments in full this year.  But school administrators [say] they'd rather receive an increase in funding from the state this year, and have their IOU paid back over the next several years.

Now they tell us.  MPR adds,

“The desire to repay schools sooner rather than later may be a byproduct of last fall's election when both parties decried the budget-balancing tactics that led to the debt and promised to be more fiscally responsible.”

“May be?”  “Both parties?”  Actually, it was the self-appointed “good-government” gatekeepers who drove the issue, as much as the Democrats themselves.

During my recent adventures in electoral politics, I did a series of candidate forums, covering any number of topics and constituencies.  Of course, I participated in the forum hosted by the local chapter of the League of Women Voters.  There was only one question that we candidates were given in advance of the event,

“What specific measures would you support to reduce the State budget deficit and to repay the money owed to school districts?”

Likewise, the Edina Public Schools forum hosted by the local Parent Leadership Council provided candidates with a series of prepared questions.  Question #2 read as follows,

“In light of recent school funding shifts and growing financial pressures on local, state and federal budgets, how does the State ensure adequate and predictable funding for local schools.”

True, my Democrat opponent in the race did send out this statement in a mailer during the campaign,

“Ron is committed to paying back the money the state borrowed from the school districts”

But this sort of campaigning went on all over the state.  The time for local school officials to object to the demagoguery was last fall.  Now comes their complaint (as reported by MPR),

"If all the money is taken to pay back the shift in one lump sum, there will be no dollars left over to fund any increases in state aid."

Yes.  And that statement was equally true back in October.