Why are all these private groups campaigning so hard for this amendment?

Because of the successful system in Missouri.

Missouri has had dedicated funding since the 1970's & its the most successful conservation system in the US. NO way can the private groups can keep up with raffle tickets against ethanol farm subisides et al.

Why should hunters & anglers have to foot the entire bill for conservation & habitat?

Its about time the birders & non hunters and anglers chip in.

I am against new taxes and I am against old taxes, but I am for a $200 million a day war in Iraq and a $700 billion bailout. I don't know how to balance my checkbook.

Why balance it? Just send it off to Mr. the war president.

So because 1 out of 50 need a tax to support their system, we should too? Gee whiz, how do those other 48 states get it done? Oh that's right, MN is the only state with an environment that is worth anything. Those other states are just wastelands and don't need the money. Please........

Maybe it's because those 48 states have people who can balance a budget and make the hard decisions instead of passing the buck to the citizens when the going gets tough.

Vote NO and send it back to them until they do.

That's an understatement, and I agree.

Vote Yes for game & fish and have non-sportsmen finally chip in.

I would still end up "chipping-in" more then non-sportsmen.

Is that your whole argument?

Casey: I believe there are several reasons to oppose this constitutional amendment:

1. NO spending language focusing on a specific program area should be in the constitution. The existing state constitution delegates the power for spending public revenues to the legislature. We elect, for better or worse, a group of public representatives to speak (spend) for us. Those elected officials should not be allowed to pass off their responsibilities under the aeqis of a constitutional amendment.

2. Legislators should not be authorized to delegate spending decisions to bureaucrats and selected citizens. As a thiry year official of various state environmental and natural resource agencies, I have seen first hand the distortions of legislative intend that occur when agency employees, university officials, NGOs, and 'citizens' allocate tax dollars. While the legislative allocation process can be really ugly, at least legislators are accountable.

3. The state environmental and natural resource agencies are actually awash in funds...sufficiently so that agencies often have overlapping programs and employees addressing the same issue. Despite several reorganization studies over the last two decades, Minnesota's water management structure remains fragmented, redundant, and ossified. Since this proposed amendment would simply recognize this existing incredible maze of programs and bureaucrats, there is no quid pro quo for agencies, legislators, and the NGOs to clean up (literally and figuratively) our environmental and natural resource mess.

4. Past performance with other similar funding mechanisms. If you investigate the allocation of funds through programs such as the LCCMR and the Lake Superior Coastal program, you will detect an underlying strategy for the state agencies involved to reward their supporting constituencies with grant funding. Much of the funding goes to those NGOs and affilliate local gov'ts and agencies that politically support the state agencies. As with other similar state and federal grant programs, these proposed funds would simply be supplements to the General Fund, Fish and Wildlife Fund and other accounts.
If programs funds aren't appropriated, we'll just apply to the Ol'Trapper Slush Fund.

5. The proposed amendment is no substitute for wisdom, judgement, and political courage. More money in a dedicated account will not make us a Missouri...if that is our goal. Given a sense of urgency, legislative leadership, a willingness to set really tough program priorities within our existing agencies, and agency heads who are willing to reexamine their turf, we wouldn't need a constitutional amendment. Just look at the Governor's Water Cabinet...big deal. We are just so passive as citizens and local elected officials that we do not hold our legislators and agency heads accountable for more effective and efficient environmental management.

6. There are no clearly articulated performance goals for environmental or natural resource accomplishments.

Senator Tom Baak had the courage to oppose this constitutional amendment during the last legislative session. Please read his remarkable speech on the subject. It took real courage to oppose this amendment and he is paying the price politically...but it is that willingness to stand up for a principle that is lacking among most legislators and agency leaders.

basslkjohn,

Great post!

How does the quote go, right to your own opinion, not your own facts?

At first I thought it was just a failure to read carefully. However, at this point, I'm prepared to say that you know the above information is false. We've discussed it; publicly:
Previous Post - Page 2

There are several states which use a dedicated tax to support their system. Texas does it with a sporting goods tax, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, and Washington State do it with Real Estate Taxes, Virginia with Motor Vehicle Transfer Taxes. This isn't a new and scary concept. And this isn't the first time you've created your own data.

Big letters in bold red print, funny slogans, and great avatars brought to you by the people who develop thoughts for other people for a living. At what point does mis-representation of the truth turn out to be a lie? I understand the tactic. The playbook. The cause you feel a need to crush. But is it worth all of the false rhetoric? If you truly feel that your thoughts and beliefs are more valid, then why the need for trickery?

It calls into question the validity and credibility of every word you've written here. Worse yet, it detracts from the debate which needs to happen, and prevents true discourse and exchange of information; which I feel is at the root of the very existence of this site.

Hopefully the debate can continue without more selections from the science fiction section of the library.

Joel

So the other side doesn't have a playbook? No trickery either? You know that isn't true.





I have not "created" data.

Sorry if you don't believe in my data, but just because you don't agree with it please don't call it made up in an attempt to discredit me or my posts.

[note from admin-please read forum policy before posting again.]

It's a link to this website's sponsors. Check it out. There are a lot of great people and products in there.

[note from admin-please read forum policy before posting again.]

This thread is getting a little ugly