Tom Emmer opposed Legacy Act before supporting it [VIDEO]

• Funny, Kirk. I knew exactly what I was voting for when I voted for the amendment. I'm sorry you feel fleeced. But you weren't fleeced. Any amendment like this one, creating a permanent change in the constitution, not just a law, needed to be built on compromise. I knew that and the crafters of the amendment knew that. The Gaiman event is old news. Sometimes, you have to spend money to make money or to raise awareneess of an ongoing project. In this case, the event was, itself, before the controversy, of regional significance and importance in promoting the rest of the series. Gaiman is an internationally recognized author who donated the fees to charity. You may not have approved of the expenditure, but I expect that there are some ATV trails that will be maintained using this funding that would offend me -- if I didn't realize that compromise is the core of government. ... One way not to feel fleeced in the future is to read the ballot before you vote. In this case, you didn't even need to read anything before you got to the voting booth. You only had to read the ballot. I recommend it.

• Funny how no one has brought up this outrageous fleecing of money from this fund. $150,000 of which was earmarked for the "Club Book project". Paying a single author $45,000 � all of it coming directly from so-called legacy-amendment funds � for an appearance at Stillwater Junior High School in the kickoff event of Club Book, a project of the Metropolitan Library Services Agency. $45,000 to a author for a couple hours to entertain a couple hundred people? see here- http://politicsinminnesota.com/blog/2010/04/%E2%80%98club-book%E2%80%99-organizers-defend-pricey-allocation/ or here- http://www.startribune.com/entertainment/books/93044694.html This Liberal sickness is wide spread and needs to stop! Can't you just be honest and generate funds for your own wasteful projects without stealing from another? All this was accomplished very incognito like. Talk about misleading taxpayers. All those commercials to generate support for this bill, and not one, do I ever recall, mentioning "dog parks" or "book clubs". The fleecing of America through liberal deception! Also you forgot to mention Emmer was outnumbered 2-1 in the Senate. Perhaps he was trying to be more "bipartisan". Funny how the democrats suggested that would make Republicans more appealing.(being more bipartisan) Just more lies to get their way and raise taxes.

• Thank you David for pointing out what my analyticle mind doesn't always translate. I guess my point is Tom is trying to play suburban, exurbans and outstate people against urban residents. He is pandering to this notion that too much monies are being spent on dog parks in the states most populus city. A city in which you must pay for a liscense to bring your dog to a dog park, and hence are paying for part of the upkeep, and in some cases building of the parks mentioned. Mr. Emmer, is scrammbling because he knows he has to make up alot of ground on an opponent who has far more funding, and a stronger (by numbers) base. The reason I mentioned the NRA (toms wearing a button), PFE, and DU is because these orginizations were a major presence at the game fair, and were showing support for this candidate. I have had many, many experiences with all 3 of these orginzations as part of conservation groups across the state. They agree with the sentiment of Mr. Emmer that if your not an NRA, gun loving conservative, your not a REAL American. I disagree, I have seen PFE put a road through a wetland, I have seen DU turn a naturual prairie into a wetland, I have seen the NRA do shooting exibitions, and leave the feild they used looking like a city dump. I am not a fan of anybody who speaks out of both sides of there mouths, that includes Emmer, and the 3 orginizations I mentioned.

• Most Emmer supporters would be for this amendment if it solely had to do with wildlife (hunting). Since it actually encompasses a great deal of Minnesota culture, they don't. It is a great investment in our state amd I was thrilled to vote yes for it.

• It was the "Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment" as passed. The very title indicates the compromises necessary to pass it, and it should be honored as passed, not as Emmer wishes it were passed. The text as it appeared on the ballot: "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to dedicate funding to protect our drinking water sources; to protect, enhance, and restore our wetlands, prairies, forests, and fish, game, and wildlife habitat; to preserve our arts and cultural heritage; to support our parks and trails; and to protect, enhance, and restore our lakes, rivers, streams, and groundwater by increasing the sales and use tax rate beginning July 1, 2009, by three-eighths of one percent on taxable sales until the year 2034?" .... I see "parks and trails" and I see "arts and cultural heritage." That's the compromise necessary to pass, and it should be honored.

• Arjay, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. This CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT was a bad idea from the beginning. It was misleadingly called the "Clean Water Legacy Act" and it's being used for theaters and dog parks. "Uneducated masses" indeed. You, for not understanding either the legislation or its misappropriation and most of the people who voted for it without bothering to look into it. I'm sure most of them thought, "Well, sure! I'm all for clean water!" It's funny that you're conflating the issues, adding a dash of organizations that aren't really involved and then stirring in some extra snark to make yourself sound important, funny or smart. Not everything is a conspiracy. Root for your guy, but climb off the crazy train. And if you don't know anything about what the amendment was supposed to do, don't call people "uneducated." Just because you want dog parks doesn't mean government can misappropriate my money to build them.

• The funding is supposed to be for fish and wildlife arjay, not a place for Yuppies to frolic with their puppies

• Its really funny nobody has an issue of misappropriation when its happening to education (Thanks T-Paw) or LGA. But when the NRA, PFE, or DU gets involved well hell no your not taking monies from other programs. These extreme rightwing orginizations have been stirring up the 2nd ammendment issue (which isn't an issue) for decades. Spreading false fear to their uneducated masses. All the while raking in money and laughing all the way to the bank.

• Michael Wilson is correct; while he may not like the Amendment, his job is to uphold our state constitution, and not allow the continued misappropriation of our money (yours and mine). Did you not understand that? It's pretty clear.

• "fish and wildlife habitat and not dog parks in Minneapolis"? Honestly if I had been there I'd slapped that bastard so hard he'd still be asking what happened. Gee wiz you mean the most populus city in the state? The one that in fact sees far less in state funding than its citizens provide? Go back to your hole in the sticks Tom, if we are going to give funding based on sales taxes for a specific sport or activity then we would have a hockey areana every other block, a bike path down every major and minor road. (average bike cost $500 a fishin pole $125). This guy is so out of touch its not even funny.

• Uh, this is so misleading I can barely bring myself to comment. It's not at all a "conversion"and certainly not a flip-flop. He said clearly that he opposed the tax, specifically, it's permanent addition to our state Constitution. What he said was that it's now a fact and can't be debated any longer, so he, as governor, will make sure that the money is spent where it's supposed to be spent. In other words, while he may not like the Amendment, his job is to uphold our state constitution, and not allow the continued misappropriation of our money (yours and mine). He NEVER said he supports it, just that he will make sure it does what it's supposed to do (the job of the Governor). How can you possibly lie so brazenly for political gain? I understand disagreeing with Emmer, or supporting Dayton, but you're clearly lying to help your guy. That's morally wrong, isn't it?

TotalComments: 11