But fear not, political watchers — all is not lost!
As the 2007 legislative session moves inexorably onward, Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty and his DFL colleagues in the Legislature find themselves at loggerheads on an increase in the gas tax to fund transit projects as well as a bill to allow domestic partnership benefits for state employees in same-sex relationships.
Politically, Governor Pawlenty has no good reason to think twice about vetoing both bills — AFSCME and gay rights organizations have already tried to unseat him, and he has long claimed the mantle of anti-tax crusader. The question is, does Pawlenty have a rational, as opposed to political, reason to sign these bills?
For all the bloviation of the anti-tax-at-all-costs crowd, increasing the state gas tax by ten cents per gallon doesn't hurt Marty Seifert's friend Joe Sixpack too badly at the pump: On a purchase of 15 gallons, this means an extra $1.50 per purchase. When those 15 gallons already cost over $35, it simply isn't that big an increase. Given that the people most likely to be upset by a different frame — that of "increasing the gas tax by 50%" are on the fringe of the Republican Party's right wing, is it reasonable to ask Governor Pawlenty if his national aspirations dictate a move to the middle on this issue? Perhaps to bolster his credentials on transportation issues?
The same goes for domestic partner benefits. In neither of the Governor's two statewide victories did he get especially close to 50% of the vote. Whether he's on the GOP presidential ticket as John McCain's VP candidate or simply seeking to deliver Minnesota to the Arizona Senator's Win column, the Governor simply does not and will not have the pull with Minnesotan voters to deliver the state to any candidate as long as he espouses a hard-right stance on social issues.
Note that these issues don't even touch on the solid, common-sense reasons to support these initiatives on their merits. Is it really so much to ask that a Governor governs for all his constituents, and not just a radical conservative fringe?