Say, 'No,' to super-majority amendment: media editorials

Two Greater Minnesota newspaper editorials said, “No,” to the proposed constitutional amendment requiring a super-majority vote of 60 percent by the Minnesota Legislature to raise taxes.

The bluntest editorial, from the Fargo Forum, said, “Forum editorial: Say ‘no’ to lazy lawmakers.” The Forum objected to the harm the super-majority amendment would cause by allowing a minority of lawmakers to “hold the budget process hostage” and the likelihood that such an amendment would harm Greater Minnesota since there are more legislative votes in the metro area.

The Worthington Daily Globe agreed. With its editorial titled,  “Editorial: Amendment is a big NO” the Daily Globe pointed out that Greater Minnesota communities all across the state “have suffered significantly as a result of declining state aid over the years, creating a larger imbalance between metro-area suburbs and Greater Minnesota.”

The Daily Globe added, “Now comes a proposal that would do even more damage.” It called the super majority amendment “unnecessary and unwise.”

Furthermore, the Forum editorial said, that if a super-majority constitutional amendment passes, when legislators can’t increase taxes, additional costs will be passed on to local governments. “Finally, a super-majority amendment is a convenient cover for lawmakers who don’t want to do the heavy lifting,” the editorial said. “Instead of tackling the difficult jobs they were hired to tackle, they can hide behind a super-majority constitutional amendment.”

The Daily Globe added that the passage of a super majority bill would increase, not lessen, the partisan battles at the Legislature.