Culture of Corruption, Part 2

It was a big week for Minnesota’s political culture of corruption.  [See Part 1 here.]

The state’s Legislative Auditor determined that Democrat Governor Mark Dayton broke the law by taking a campaign staffer along for a trip on a state-owned airplane.  Last month, when this story first surfaced, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported that the Governor’s spokesman, Matt Swenson, said,

It is appropriate for campaign staffers to travel with the governor to campaign events if that travel is paid for by the campaign.

Clearly the Legislative Auditor disagreed.  The same audit turned up yet another disturbing incident involving the Democrat Governor.

During the state Government Shutdown of 2011, Gov. Dayton—with much fanfare—hired former U.S. Attorney (under Bill Clinton) and Democrat super lawyer David Lillehaug as Special Counsel.  The Star Tribune reported that, at the time of Lillehaug’s hiring, it was announced that his work would be conducted,

pro bono (without cost to the state). 

In the event, Lillehaug’s work was less pro bono and more professional, with the attorney collecting $77,000 in fees from the state government.  Lillehaug now sits as Dayton’s appointee to the state Supreme Court. 

This week also saw the Democrat-controlled state senate move ahead with their new, white elephant office building.  Not everyone was happy.  The Star Tribune reported,

The $63 million building and adjoining $27 million parking facilities drew fire after being included at the last minute in the 2013 legislative session tax bill—unusual for construction projects, which typically are part of the bonding bill. Republicans have been sharply critical of what they consider the building’s opulent design and only 44 offices.

Yes, you did the math correctly:  $90 million for 44 offices works out to more than $2 million per office. 

The unifying theme of these incidents is the inability of Democrats to distinguish between their money and the taxpayers’.  One of the many downsides of one-party rule is that the ruling party comes to think of the state’s resources as their own:  what’s good for the party is good for the citizen.  In particular, Democrats appear to believe that their good intentions relieve them of the need to follow the legal niceties.