A Legislature that last week appeared reasonably on course to meet a Monday adjournment date hit the brakes over the weekend. Republican majorities let it be known that the year's most-watched bill, authorizing a new Vikings stadium, would have to wait for tax and bonding bills -- and if those bills weren't received in the governor's office to GOP satisfaction, the wait could be indefinite.

That's a high-risk strategy, one we hope will be revised in talks with DFL Gov. Mark Dayton that are in progress at this writing. It risks a "lose-lose-lose" outcome, one that concludes with a vetoed tax bill, no bonding or stadium bills, none of the jobs those three measures could bring, and fresh reason for Minnesotans to doubt the governing capacity of their elected leaders.

That prospect loomed larger late Saturday when an all-GOP tax conference committee released the tax bill it intends to send to Dayton. The bill is an improvement over its House and Senate antecedents (see box, right). It no longer cuts property tax refunds to low-income renters in order to pay for business tax cuts and no longer raids state reserve funds in the coming year.

But it still adds $145 million to the $1.1 billion state deficit already anticipated in 2014-15 and takes an ever-bigger bite from state revenues after that. Dayton said publicly for weeks that he will oppose measures that make the next state budget harder to balance. This tax bill tests his resolve. Our hunch is that he is not bluffing -- and that after years of watching state government struggle with deficits, most Minnesotans appreciate his fiscal caution.

There's nothing unusual about the GOP move to hold one or more gubernatorially desired bills hostage to compel action on one the governor opposes. That's a common end-of-session ploy.

What is different in 2012 is that two of the bills in play -- the stadium and bonding bills -- are not ones Republicans can pass on their own. Because bonding requires a 60 percent supermajority, and the stadium bill is unlikely to win over a pocket of principled resistance, Republicans need DFL cooperation to pass those bills. They won't get it by trying to compel a DFL governor to sign a tax bill he doesn't like.

Fortunately, ongoing talks among Dayton and legislators indicate that a "win-win" finish to the 2012 session is still possible. From our vantage, it doesn't look all that difficult. The tax cuts in the GOP bill are not overly large in the next year. Neither is their focus on business tax relief objectionable at a time when the economy needs bolstering.

It's the size of their future "tails" that's most troublesome. If the bill's authors were to make their biggest tax cut -- a statewide business property tax freeze -- expire after one or even two years, Dayton's signature would be easier to win. If they were to add one or more revenue-raising measures that Dayton and legislators in both parties support -- for example, requiring more online retailers to collect sales taxes -- better yet.

This year's tax legislating should end with a mutual vow to return to the negotiating table in 2013. Regardless of which party controls the Legislature, next year's lawmakers have work to do to improve the competitiveness of the state tax code and make revenue growth better keep pace with state needs. This year's tax bill ought to be small, but it can whet Minnesota's appetite for bigger changes to come.

---------------

Readers, what do you think? To offer an opinion considered for publication as a letter to the editor, please fill out this form. Follow us on Twitter @StribOpinion and Facebook at facebook.com/StribOpinion