Letters to the editor

We’ve got mail!

Beyond the point of no return

I received and read the latest edition of your magazine and I find myself utterly depressed. With Gov. Walz in complete control, the $18 billion surplus will get frittered away with special interests, rebates for people who didn’t pay taxes, new state government departments, etc. I did find one piece humorous: Ron’s “Chairman’s” column. Nobody, including your organization, is going to “hold Walz, his administration, and the Democrats in the state legislature accountable.” They will ram through their agenda and nothing will stop them. They will implement their lunatic left agenda and turn around and get re-elected in 2024 and 2026. Ron also noted that “there is too much at stake, too many taxpayers who are angry about hard-earned money being stolen.” Sorry, but there aren’t enough angry taxpayers to outvote those with their hands being greased by Walz to continue voting in Democrat majorities. While I appreciate your work, ads, magazine, etc., you are absolutely fooling yourself if you think Minnesota is ever going to put conservatives in control. As your cover clearly states, Minnesota is off the cliff. And here we are past the point of return. It’s time to leave this state.

Timothy Anderson
Plymouth, MN

What’s old is new again

The Summer 2022 issue of Thinking Minnesota has an article titled “Walzifornia” about how Gov. Walz and the DFL are pushing the California Fuel Standard (CFS) Cap & Trade concept that Oregon and Washington have also adapted — only with more aggressive goals.

This reminds me of the pollution Cap & Trade system that Northern States Power (now Xcel) had promoted in the late 1960s and 1970s whereby less polluting power companies could sell pollution credits to power companies who were in pollution deficit. Back then this was about actual air and water pollution, not simply releasing CO2 into the atmosphere.

This system was furiously trashed by liberals and the DFL as merely a system to allow power companies like NSP, which was already cleaner than most other power companies, to sell credits to companies who were in a deficit. They claimed that it would not achieve the objective of cleaner air and water; instead, it would only provide
higher profits for NSP without lowering the cost of power for NSP customers.

The DFL decided Cap & Trade was a horribly bad idea back then.

My questions for Walz and the DFL now are: What is different in principal between then and now to cause them to flip-flop? Why would Cap & Trade be horribly bad for pollution but really, really good for greenhouse gases?

Why, and under what conditions, is a Cap & Trade concept good, bad, or even workable and effective (e.g., why state-by-state versus a national or international market)? How can Minnesota remain economically competitive when we unilaterally impose such huge costs on ourselves and others don’t?

Or is the difference simply who comes up with the idea for whatever is the hot-button issue of the day, first?

Elmer Silbaugh
Big Lake, MN

Racist labels

I was reading the review of Ibram X. Kendi’s book How to Raise an Antiracist. The book makes the claim yet again that there is no such thing as not being a racist, you are either an anti-racist or you are a racist. I am so tired of fools who get attention for making such ridiculous statements. You may not be marching in the streets protesting rape, but your lack of activism on the matter does not make you a rapist. You may not be conducting a sit-in at a state capitol protesting murder, but your lack of activism does not make you a murderer. It amazes me how much traction such crazy people get in society today. No intelligent person should take them seriously.

Carl Hasbargen
Saint Paul, MN