Minneapolis Star Tribune. February 29, 2024.
Editorial: Save, don’t spend, state surplus
Additional $3.7 billion likely will be needed to address a projected deficit in the next biennium.
Thanks to the productivity of taxpaying workers and employers in Minnesota, the state is now expected to have a $3.7 billion surplus for the 2024-2025 biennium.
Even though that’s $1.3 billion more than the December forecast, lawmakers should be in a savings mode. The new estimate released Thursday by Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB) also reflects a structural deficit in the next biennium of nearly $1.5 billion. Part of this is due to spending exceeding revenue by about $636 million over that two-year span, and part of it is due to inflation — which, as the last few years have shown, can rise quickly due to events well beyond the State Capitol’s control.
Holding the line on new spending — and, as crucially, new taxes — is in the hands of the DFL-controlled Legislature and DFL Gov. Tim Walz, and the legislative and executive branches should proceed prudently during the ongoing legislative session.
That is especially the case after last year’s landmark session, which drew down most of the projected $17.5 billion surplus on mostly worthy initiatives. But, as the Star Tribune Editorial Board urged before lawmakers convened in February, this even-year session, by design, is supposed to focus on fixing previously passed legislation, conducting oversight and planning, as well as directing longer-term capital investments through a state bonding bill — which still will, after all, be “new” spending.
“It is worth noting that caution should still be exercised this session when it comes to ongoing spending,” Management and Budget Commissioner Erin Campbell said at a news conference following the release of the report. “The imbalance will need to be addressed in the biennial budget.”
Addressing this imbalance may occur, in part, through higher-than-anticipated revenue that would be reflected in future forecasts. But lawmakers shouldn’t jeopardize the chance of that fortuitous outcome by further burdening the state’s business community, which already is contending with changes and challenges from some of last year’s legislation. After all, it’s a positive sign for the state’s economy that most of the projected $1.3 billion is due to corporate tax revenue, which, MMB said in a statement, “shows the largest change, driven by higher-than-expected corporate profits through the forecast horizon. Spending estimates are largely unchanged from November.”
That’s the way the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce would like it to stay. In a statement, Beth Kadoun, the chamber’s vice president for tax and fiscal policy, said that the forecast “continues to show a concerning long-term structural deficit due to the double-digit increases in government spending from last session. Lawmakers must avoid any new mandates, reject additional government spending and find ways to lower costs and regulatory burdens to strengthen Minnesota’s future economic growth. Costs matter.”
They sure do. So does economic growth, and Minnesota, so far, has been able to maintain its economic trajectory amid the spate of spending committed to last year — something Walz noted on Thursday when he said that “Our economy is humming along.” He also seemed to concur that now is not the right time for any new investments and taxes. “The forecast doesn’t change our focus for this session. We’re focused on implementation and infrastructure.”
And just in case any other DFLers are reticent to adopt the cautious approach advocated by the Chamber of Commerce, Republican lawmakers and Walz, they should heed the words of their DFL colleague Ann Rest, chair of the Senate Taxes Committee. When asked at a chamber pre-session panel discussion about legislators talking to her about new programs or higher taxes, the New Hope DFLer said, “I have only one word for them, and that word is ‘no.’”
___
Mankato Free Press. March 1, 2024.
Editorial: Public Safety: Gun law ’honor system” failed again in police shooting case
The shooter in the Burnsville public safety responder killings obtained some of his weaponry through loopholes in gun laws that can’t stop “straw buyers” from becoming arms dealers.
He was legally prohibited from owning guns, but he had a cache anyway.
The manager of the Modern Sportsman Gunshop and Range in Burnsville told the Star Tribune that the lower receiver of an AR-15 rifle found at the shooter’s house was purchased legally at his shop Jan. 15. It was part of the cache of weapons seized by law enforcement from the home of Shannon Gooden, who fired 100 rounds at responers, killing two officers and a paramedic.
The store had received the weapon part from an out-of-state online retailer who shipped it to the store for delivery to the person who took possession of it after passing a background check. This is known as “straw buying” — a legal buyer passing along a gun to people who are prohibited from having them.
The straw buyer is being investigated for the felony by the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. Gooden was not allowed to possess firearms due to previous convictions for assault. County attorneys opposed his petition to obtain guns due to orders for protection that had been filed against him.
But judges and law enforce officials say ensuring that such individuals surrender their firearms relies on the “honor system.” Very few jurisdictions have formal procedures in place for taking possession of weapons or checking in on those who shouldn’t have weapons.
Thomas Chittum, formerly of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, told the Star Tribune:
“A very small minority of jurisdictions actually have some proactive approach to ensuring someone has divested. In most places, there is no formal mechanism. It’s a place where I think law enforcement, public safety and the courts could make significant strides.”
The ATF is attempting to educate licensed gun dealers how to spot straw purchases and prevent them from happening. Minnesota Republican legislative leaders are proposing a system where authorities will ensure guns are removed from homes of those who are prohibited from owning them.
We have long advocated enforcing existing gun laws and increasing penalties for straw buyers. But the progress has been slow. Just last year, Minnesota Democrats finally passed a red flag law that allows authorities a legal remedy to remove guns from someone who is a danger to themselves and others.
The BCA has specificed where Gooden got his guns, but it won’t be surprising to find he got them from a straw buyer or obtained them some other way, of which there are many.
The ease of obtaining guns remains a significant problem, according to Chief U.S. District Judge Patrick Schiltz.
“If I had 100 defendants in my courtroom and I told them all that they have one hour to go buy a firearm and get back to the courtroom, 95 of them could do it,” Schiltz told the Star Tribune.
A nationwide 2017 survey by the Annals of Internal Medicine showed 22% of gun transfers in the U.S. happened without any background check. The Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence reports that 45% of online purchases involve no background check.
Minnesota should toughen gun confiscation follow-up, and local authorities should take them seriously.
Some states have figured out how to make it work.
In King County, Washington, which includes Seattle, authorities have a follow up surrender-guns program involving judges, law enforcement and attorneys. It’s labor intensive, but it seems to close the loophole.
But that’s the exception.
These new laws will not stop all gun violence. No law will. And it may seem like these new laws don’t make much difference with the upward trajectory of gun violence.
But the new laws are well worth it if they make a difference even once or twice. And as the Burnsville killing case shows, police officers’ lives are the ones these laws might save.
END