Post in Shhh!... Legislature's $371 Subsidy Undermines Central Cities

May 01 18:43 UTC

This is such a big issue that I honestly have no idea how to respond.  I
thought of something wonkish, then thought of a few obscene analogies I
could us in an attempt at gutter humor, and then I thought of being a bit
cynical and esoteric.  That's what I'm going to go with.

This particular issue is, indeed, one of the worst examples of something
coming from a backroom deal.  But why is this surprising?  That's how
things are done in a state that is changing over from a rural majority
with an urban power base to no clear majority and a suburban power base.
The power dynamic has been shifting for a generation, and will continue
to.

That's just part of the reason why our Saint Paul legislative delegation
has been woefully ineffective.  We also have Minneapolis to thank for
taking their King Lion's share of the spoils which the Suburban power base
has allocated to inner cities.  The truth is that Minneapolis uses us as a
patsy, and no one has seriously complained yet.

This is also an illustration of precisely what I meant months ago when I
said that there is no social or political unit that can be called "The
Twin Cities Metro Area".  We are in competition with each other for
resources, and we certainly will be at least until the power shift is over
with.  That's probably another generation at least, so fasten your seat
belts.

Backroom deals and inflexibility are to be expected to at least some
extent, especially given the competition from the changing power dynamic.
The Central Corridor, for example, has not changed in technology, route,
or basic conception for 20 years despite many hours of "Public Input".
That's because the people who wanted it (mostly Peter McLaughlin) have
taken the basic idea and steered it through whatever process they had to
while keeping it intact.  You can come up with whatever process you want,
but if someone has an idea to ram through or a deal to broker in private
it will be done, and the public process will be abused as so much theatre.
 This should not surprise anyone - it's how things are done.

So what should we be outraged about here - the process, the proposal, the
harsh routine we're getting on our bonding requests?  The short answer is
"All of the above".  If someone is at the Capitol to advocate for Saint
Paul, they should pull everything out of their hat and argue like all Hell
for at least a few crumbs.  One of the best ways to do that is to derail
this until we get our share, and that means it's time to argue like all
Hell and burn up as much of the limited floor session time as you can.

Who wants to bet that they will?  Anyone?

Me neither.  You can guess what I think is the real reason the Saint Paul
delegation hasn't been effective at bringing home the bacon.  There's a
lot stacked against us right now, but I don't see anyone really out there
shutting the place down to get what we want.

[side note:  someone here mentioned having a "s**t-in" at the Capitol,
where we occupy all the bathrooms as a protest for Saint Paul's share
getting flushed.  Saul Alinksy threatened that at O'Hare airport once, and
the mere threat of it got the union what they wanted in a heartbeat.  I'm
up for doing this, if for no other reason than you all know I'm full of
s**t.]