Constance Sheppard wrote:
> perhaps NRP isn't in the interest of the majority of
> Minnesotans, and was thus destined to fail.
The house and senate were brought into the NRP planning
early on. The voted to an encoded that they would support
it to the tune of $20 million/year for 20 years. In order
to vote against NRP on the tax bill, they had to go back and
write out the committment they made. It was hateful,
spiteful, and etc.
I could make an argument that NRP is good for Minnesota,
that it has wasted far less money than many a government
driven program, and that neighborhoods got some things done
to improve the city.
>
> I'm not making a value judgment about the NRP
> situation, because I frankly don't know enough about
> the whole thing. What I AM trying to do is point out
> that our house Republicans are, in fact, human beings
> who try to do the job they were elected to do, just
> like the Democrats.
In the instance of the NRP, I argue, they were not "just
doing their job." What I was saying was that, in times past
the Democrats have not behaved all that splendidly either,
arrogance being one of the faults they have displayed. I
also argued that unless some different form of discourse or
whatever is undertaken in the legie, it will always be
acrimonious and spiteful and decisions made that way cannot
be good decisions.
WizardMarks, Central
>
> It sure ain't for the money, anyway!
>
> Connie Sheppard
> Ward 6 - Ventura Village
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
> http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
> Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
> http://e-democracy.org/mpls
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
