Posted on 12/30/2009 3:12:32 PM PST by LiveFreeOrDie2001
A Minnesota judge has ordered the state to reinstate money for a food program that Gov. Tim Pawlenty cut from the budget, saying he acted unconstitutionally.
Several people in the program for the poor sought an injunction to restore money while their court case proceeds
Ramsey County District Judge Kathleen Gearin granted their wish in an order on Wednesday. Her temporary restraining order keeps the money intact indefinitely.
The case stems from $2.7 billion in cuts the Republican governor announced this summer to balance the budget. He took the action using an executive power that allows the governor to trim spending on his own. He and the Democratic-controlled Legislature failed to agree on a budget.
An attorney for Pawlenty had argued that the state would have trouble paying its bills if the administration lost because others hit by cuts would see it as an invitation to file similar lawsuits.
With all due respect, you have no idea what you’re talking about. Read my post above.
A frown is just a smile turned upside down!
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=16A.152
Subd6 doesn’t mention anything about “unanticipated” shortfalls.
You might want to first read the Statute in question before relying on some idiot judges skewed ruling.
Liberty and compulsion at the hands of government (threat automatically implied to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) are not compatible.
When was the last time someone had to force you to use something "good"?
Free people reserve "force" for two classes of person: 1. criminals (narrow definition) and 2. the adjudicated insane. Where you find force used against those that don't fall into the two categories you can guess that the use of force is unconstitutional/immoral.
The concept of America is about maximum human liberty with minimum government interference.
Have a safe and happy New Year!
A good test.
We’ll see if Pawlenty has any sharp nails in his paws...
If the commissioner determines that probable receipts for the general fund will be less than anticipated, and that the amount available for the remainder of the biennium will be less than needed, the commissioner shall, with the approval of the governor, and after consulting the Legislative Advisory Commission, reduce the amount in the budget reserve account as needed to balance expenditures with revenue.
You might want to read the entire statute, as well the briefs submitted by both sides before relying on the news media (who do not have law degrees, mind you) to properly interpret a legal ruling. Documents can be found here: http://www.mncourts.gov/district/2/?page=3775.
I hope he has the guts to say something like “That b!+c# has made her ruling, now lets see her enforce it.”
That would GUARANTEE his nomination for President. If he wanted it.
What’s the judge going to do when the checks start bouncing? Send goons to the mall to shake down shoppers?
That is incorrect. The election was stolen by the Franken forces.
I would except I don’t know how you define gutless.
There’s more to this than immediately appears. The Minnesota gov has the unusual power to remove budget items after signing the budget, so there is a constitutional issue here.
I bet this ruling gets overturned.
It looks like the Commissioner and Governor did exactly what they were supposed to do in the event of a budget overage.
And back atcha X10.
But that is not what happened here.
On the other hand (as happened here), if the budget shortfall occurs prior to the setting of the budget, is known to everyone involved, and the legislature passes a budget which is signed into law, the governor cannot then immediately turn around and declare insufficient funds and trigger the allotment. If he believed there was not enough funds prior to signing the budget, he needs to use his veto power (which Pawlenty did for some of the requested programs the DFL wanted funded). This is exactly what happened here.
If this is somehow constitutional, then a governor could do this any year. Obviously, this cannot be allowed, unless we want to do away with the legislative process.
Happy New Year!
Pawlenty will appeal judge’s ruling that overruled his budget cuts
http://www.twincities.com/ci_14101323?nclick_check=1
better get better lawyers than Normy had
Part of the basis for a tripartate system is exactly this.
What this now says is that even though the Governor has this power, he can't use it and must sit down, shut up, and write the checks.
Which would you prefer? An Executive that uses a negative power to not enforce bad law? Or one that just does whatever he wants regardless of whatever the law says?
Pawlenty is doing the first, Obama the second.
Think about it...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.