Editorial: Governor should act now on bonding bill

Pawlenty needs to use his line-item veto.

Last update: April 3, 2008 - 6:23 PM

At his State of the State speech in February, Gov. Tim Pawlenty brandished a red pen before legislators as he called for tax and spending restraints.

"I call it the taxpayer protection pen, otherwise known as the veto pen,'' Pawlenty said as he fished it out of his left breast pocket. "As you know, I will not hesitate to use it ... ."

Governor, it's time for the pen.

In a legislative session marked by partisan rancor and grim economic news, legislators on Wednesday passed a $925 million state construction bill funding everything from a new $40 million Duluth convention center to renovations for the Como Zoo polar bear and gorilla exhibits.

While DFL leaders portray it as a timely economic stimulus, the bonding bill clocked in with $100 million more in spending than Pawlenty believes is necessary. The governor has through Monday to act on it, but so far it's unclear if he'll trim the package through a line-item veto or veto the entire bill, which would send it back to the Legislature. The best course of action -- though not the easiest one politically for Pawlenty -- is the line-item veto. The governor should cross off the bill's less critical projects, reach an acceptable spending level and get the important projects moving.

Without a line-item veto, there's a real risk that the bill could simply die. Twice before under Pawlenty's administration -- in 2004 and 2007 -- political stalemates killed bonding bills. This is not the year for a repeat. In this economic climate, there's a serious need for the jobs these projects would create. In addition, the bill authorizes spending for a proposal critical to the state's future growth: building four University of Minnesota bioscience research centers.

Pawlenty's target of $825 million is a reasonable one. Keep in mind that bonding means borrowing money. Borrowing the entire $925 million would put the state over its self-imposed ceiling on how much debt is prudent to carry. That guideline calls for limiting general obligations bonds to 3 percent or less of the state's general fund.

Some legislators have raised concerns that exceeding the ceiling would put the state's creditworthiness at risk. Although a Standard and Poor's analyst said Thursday that the bill would not automatically jeopardize the state's sterling AAA rating, the limit is one reason Minnesota is viewed by analysts as having sound financial management. Exceeding the limit is not a good idea.

The $100 million gap between the Legislature's bonding bill and what the governor thinks is reasonable may seem wide, but it's roughly 10 percent of the proposed total, and a fraction of the state's overall budget. Not that many projects would have to be put on hold to get the bill's spending in line. Legislatures often enlarge bonding bills to get the 60 percent supermajority required to pass them. Cutting the fat is the governor's job.

There are some very worthy projects in the bill and some that the state could clearly live without for the time being. Deciding which go and which stay would not be easy, and there would be political fallout from those choices. At the same time, this is a leadership opportunity for Pawlenty and a chance to back up his calls for fiscal restraint with quick, decisive action that would benefit the state.

Recent Editorials stories

Editorial: Temp school chief is a plus for St. Paul - April 3, 2008

Editorial: Temp school chief is a plus for St. Paul - Licensing issue should die while board searches for new leader. More

Comment on this story | Be the first to comment | Hide reader comments

New ideas for the public sector

THERE'S NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME to create a more efficient Minnesota. Facing large budget deficits at the state, county and local levels, Minnesotans are seeing with new clarity that the public sector must adapt to new economic realities. Only the smartest, most strategic reinvention will ensure that our tax dollars are spent on the best programs and services. Read more

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS