Well, I hope you enjoy taking it in the wallet then. All I know is that if “mushy” Republicans like Phil Krinkie would have been reelected, the veto probably would not have been overridden.

J,
That amendment actually said that AT LEAST 40 percent to transit and NO MORE than 60% to roads. And that was motor vehicle sales tax, not gas tax. As I remember the gas tax increase only pays the interest on bonding of new road projects, meaning the Legislature has to pass a bonding bill with the project in it first. But I may be wrong on that one. I do agree bonding is a good way to build roads, but I think we have some pretty dire need for some immediate work and that may be worth a little inclusion in the budget.

To me, one of the biggest stupidities in this backbreaker of a tax bill was that it was a tax bill at all. You BOND for roads and bridges. That way, you get the whole amount of money up front, when you sell the bonds, and can start building right away. As a tax, you only spend what comes in every year. Those “emergency” repairs just have to wait.

Forget that there are 132 house members and 2/3 were required to override the veto. One might ask, if they were interested, where did the other 74 vote come from if only 6 Republicans voted to override? Where indeed?

Might they have come from DFL members that were elected in 2006? DFL members that might not have been elected if conservatives would have voted for the “less liberal” Republicans, some of which, would undoubtedly voted against the override?

But no, let’s continue to focus on the 6 Republicans, and of course being “Conservative First, Republicans Second.”