10 questions with state Rep. Marty Seifert

The pace has been fast-paced so far in the 2008 legislative session, sometimes on the floor of the House and Senate chambers — sometimes off of it.

Lawmakers have overridden Gov. Tim Pawlenty's veto of a transportation bill that includes a gas-tax increase, they have removed Carol Molnau from the top of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and have wrestled with a variety of funding requests.

State Rep. Marty Seifert, R-Marshall, is the House Republican leader and has, at times, found himself in the center of headline-making debate and hard decisions this session. To get a feel for where the Legislature is at roughly mid-term, Independent Editor Dana Yost asked Seifert 10 questions on a variety of topics.

Here are his responses, verbatim from an e-mail from Seifert.



1) Are you satisfied with progress so far this year? What has gotten done that pleases you, what hasn't gotten done that you thought would have?

The progress was very fast on bills to raise taxes, which certainly concerns me. Just passing a bunch of bills quickly (if they are wrong) doesn't mean that the legislation is good. The tax increases in the transportation bill will hit people harder than anyone was ever explained because the DFL moved so fast.

The big change people will notice is the jump in license tab fees when they buy or exchange vehicles. This could be several hundred dollars more. The Constitutional amendment to raise taxes for dedicated funding for various good things is also something that moved quickly and at least

the voters will have a chance to stop it later. The bonding bill breaks the debt limit by $100 million, so while there are some good things in it, I'm upset that our children and grandchildren will get saddled with record debt for wasteful projects like $11 million for gorilla exhibits.

Being in the minority, there isn't a lot of things that I've been pleased with so far. If the GOP were in charge and I were speaker, we would have laid out a responsible budget-balancing plan first; a health reform package that utilizes market forces next, a bonding bill that lives within the debt limit and some education reforms that start treating all kids equally.

I wish the items above would be dealt with, but are not.



2) You recently released results of your annual district residents survey. What in there tells you you are on the right track in terms of representing the district? Were there any surprising results?

The survey results were not too surprising. They were inserted in all the newspapers in Marshall and Redwood Falls, so there was no targeting according to politics. The answers were quite conservative, even from people that I know are DFLers. My thoughts on various questions reflect that of the district results. Many lawmakers never bother doing a questionnaire and I feel it gives residents a chance to have their say. The comments are always refreshing too.



3) What is the status of the bonding bill — how close are the Legislature and Gov. Pawlenty to reaching agreement? What is the status of local projects in the bonding bill?

The Bonding Bill is at $925 million in the Legislature, which is $100 million over the traditional debt limit. It will be vetoed, either outright or line-item vetoed thoroughly. The local projects relating to SMSU, the MERIT Center, Sports Complex, etc. were either in the House or Senate bills.

The final determination won't be known for several days in conference committee. Basically, the legislature and Governor are apart by $100 million. One would think that a good bill could be produced without busting the debt limit. If we start down the road of breaking the debt limit, I am fearful this state will start becoming like Washington, D.C. where the Congress just borrows more and more without making tough choices. I do not want to be any part of irresponsible borrowing.



4) State media reports ongoing divisions over the tax bill. What are they and can they be resolved?

The biggest problem is the DFL wanting to eliminate the JOB-Z program. Thousands of new jobs, mostly in rural Minnesota have been created due to this policy. It looks to me that it is more partisan posturing to beat up the Governor than serious lawmaking. Frankly, eliminating JOB-Z does little to help the state treasury as the jobs mostly would leave the state "but for" the JOB-Z policy. There will be some back and forth about how much the "corporate loopholes" should be

closed. Businesses are struggling and beating them up with more taxes will just mean more lay-offs. That's not good for anyone.



5) Cities groups are hoping for an increase in LGA funding, some of them saying it is essentially property tax relief. Do you agree with that?

With the treasury in deficit, it's tough to see any increase in LGA happening this year. I have been ok with LGA for needs and for property tax relief, but it seems no matter what happens to LGA, property taxes keep going up. I'd like to have a partnerships with some guarantees that property taxes will go down if more LGA is given.



6) One of the Republican members of the House who defected to support an override of the governor's transportation veto has said she won't seek re-election? Do you anticipate more repercussions on this? As you reflect back, what do you think about your handling of the six rogue Republicans?

(Rep.) Kathy Tinglestad won't run again. She was elected the same year as I and is a friend. The local party gave her a rough time for voting for the tax increases. Certainly, Kathy has the right to run or not run, but we all have to be accountable to our districts in how we vote. That

includes the people who nominate us. I wish her well as she did make a mark on the Legislature.

The media totally blew up what happened with the 6 Republicans who over-rode the veto. Essentially, they had minor titles removed. Now that we are at bill deadlines, those titles mean absolutely nothing.

The media over-looked the DFL voting 100 percent for the tax increases. There was little to no coverage of their pressure tactics to vote lock-step. I respect everyone's right to vote how they want. However, as a caucus membership,there was expectations that upholding vetoes are important

and these members knew going into the vote all the things that might happen like their local party being mad at them. I can't help that. I do not regret what I did as Leader. Many people feel I didn't do enough and many felt I did too much. Until you walk in a caucus leader's shoes, you have no idea how much responsibility you have.



7) What does the removal of Carol Molnau as MnDOT commissioner mean for that department and for the Pawlenty administration in general?

It looked to me as a swipe at the Governor, but the reality is that she is gone. The Department of Transportation needs to have a new person as a result and I am in hopes we can find someone capable and willing to serve. There's a lot of new money for the DOT to spend, so I hope that the person has a good grasp of budgets, management, transportation and engineering.



8) Do you think the bridge victim compensation plan will reach accord and is it fair?

I think an agreement will be reached on this fund. I voted for the House bill, but tend to favor the Senate version with some finance caps and accountability in it. My guess is that a middle ground will be found.



9) A preliminary investigation has begun into the attorney general's office over apparent "union busting." The investigation is being done by the Office of the Legislative Auditor, the third such investigation of public officials this year. Should the public be troubled about ethics among state policymakers or is this a good checks-and-balances system at work?

Ethics in government is a big deal. Without it, nothing else matters much. I'm troubled at the reports I've seen about the Attorney General's office. It's more about the pressure to bring cases without merit and nasty tactics of employee management than the union issue for many. Employees don't magically decided to unionize out of the blue: generally, there's a reason for it. I trust that the Auditor will give us some much needed information related to this subject. For now, I've

reserved comment on the matter and will see how the investigation goes.



10) What will happen to K-12 and higher ed funding requests?

Many of us warned the public how bad the K-12 bill was last year. We tried to make it better, but were ignored. In the meantime, the deficit appeared. I don't see much coming this year — the inequities in funding are stark. It will be a major issue in the coming elections. The Higher Education budget will be trimmed, but not as much as the Governor requested it to be.