Marriage could be game changer in governor's race.

We held a press conference releasing a poll on marriage, marriage amendment and effect on governor's race. Very interesting results. 54% of likely voters want support marriage between one man and one woman, 60% say the people should decide the issue not the state legislature or the courts, and 36% said they would switch candidates support based on the candidate's position on marriage. Of that 36%, about 7 in 10 would switch to a pro-marriage candidate.

When people were surveyed on the gubernatorial candidates in late August, Dayton had 42%, Emmer 33% and Horner 12%. When people found out where they stood on marriage and allowing the people to vote, it swung the election to Emmer with 42%, Dayton 36% and Horner 9%.

Certainly, the economy and jobs are the paramount issue in people's minds with unemployment over 9.5% nationwide. But marriage is a critical issue. It's both a private and public institution which people feel strongly about, especially those who believe it's a God-ordained institution between a man and a woman. I would argue the economy and marriage are intimately related. In fact, the economy ultimately stands on the well-being our families and marriage. When marriage break up so will our economy. Fact is children raised by a single parent are 5 to 6 times more likely to live in poverty.

Looks like there will be a homosexual marriage push at the Minnesota state legislature this year.

As a Minnesota Independent newsblog article points out there will likely be a push for homosexual marriage in the upcoming Minnesota legislative session. Senator Marty, the chief sponsor of the bill in the state Senate and candidate for governor, is both a firm believer in homosexual marriage and I'm sure interested in gaining the support of the gay community. They're a significant DFL party constituency.

Senator Marty's goal is to get the bill passed out of the committee though he doesn't expect it to necessarily pass the legislature.

“I’d like to have a hearing and a vote — assuming we have the votes– to begin moving the bill through the process,” he said. “Attitudes are rapidly changing, and by having a thoughtful discussion in committee, I think we can assist in that effort.”

I think a hearing would both give the issue a higher profile in the state and help make it a campaign issue in the fall; especially since all the DFL candidates for governor are pro-homosexual marriage.

To raise taxes or not to raise taxes, that is the question.

The Star Tribune ran a story Sunday entitled, "Governor's race is all about taxes. Minnesota's budget budget picture is so bleak that some candidates are already discussing tax increases". The big issue in the governor's race and the elephant in the room is whether or not to raise taxes to close an expected $5.4 billion budget deficit in the next biennium.

Talk of tax increases can sink a gubernatorial candidate during good times.

These are not good times.

That's why the message that major DFL candidates are offering recession-weary Minnesota voters seems so unlikely: We must raise taxes, because cuts alone can't do it.

GOP candidates say the state must manage without taxes, or risk further economic malaise.

The painful solution may end up somewhere in between. Minnesota faces a $5.4 billion shortfall through 2013, which amounts to a staggering $1,038 for every man, woman and child if nothing else changed.

Of course, Representative Tom Rukavina says anybody who says they will not raise taxes is either a liar or stupid.

"Anybody saying you can do it with cuts -- on either side of the aisle -- is a liar or stupid," said state Rep. Tom Rukavina, a DFL candidate for governor.

But even assuming Democrats are willing to go 50/50 tax increases and spending cuts, that's still a $2,000 tax increase on a family of four. Those are big bucks.

The problem is up to now the hope was the economy would strengthen and there wouldn't need to be tax increases. Or more likely, we've built in structural deficits resulting from built in spending increases unsustainable with our current tax base. Now with the financial crisis and deep recession the problem has only worsened.

I think fundamentally government is too big and doing too many things. From the bureaucratic nature of public education and public universities to skyrocketing health care costs, we've been living beyond our means. Government needs to do things differently. And of course necessity is the mother of invention.

I wonder if the public isn't ready for a return to simpler and smaller government. We'll certainly see how it plays out in the governor's race and in the next several years at the legislature.

Will homosexual marriage be a big wedge issue in the 2010 Minnesota Governor's race? Let's hope so.

It's interesting that all DFL candidates for governor in Minnesota have staked out a position more liberal than the majority of voters in Maine. They support homosexual marriage.

Eric Black in a MinnPost column entitled, "All DFL guv candidates back gay marriage: A wedge issue in the making?" points out the uniformity of DFL candidates for governor in favor of homosexual marriage. And as the title points out, this could be a wedge issue in the governor's race. My response is: I certainly hope so.

The unanimity of DFL gubernatorial candidates on the issue points out the influence homosexual activists have on the DFL party and apparently none of the candidates have moral sensibilities on the nature of marriage being between a man and a woman. And if they do or did, they've certainly been submerged by political ambition. They realize they can't be the DFL candidate for governor if they don't toe the line on homosexual marriage.

Some are more outspoken on this than others.

Some of the Dem candidates bring this up even in their brief two- or three-minute summaries of what they will do as governor. Former state Rep. Matt Entenza features prominently in the "issues" section of his campaign website that he co-authored the first bill that would have "redefined the legal definition of marriage to explicitly include two persons of the same gender." Others don't bring it up unless asked. But when asked, all say they will sign a same-sex marriage bill, although I gather the most current term for the idea is "marriage equality" (which is not an unreasonable term, but certainly has the whiff of the political Marketing Department about it).

None of the Republican gubernatorial candidates favor legalizing same-sex marriage.

In other words, leaving aside for the moment the Independence Party nominee (there are still no publicly known candidates from that party), the 2010 election will offer Minnesotans a fairly clear choice on, among other issues, gay marriage.

This story is all about movement, specifically movement on the political thinkability of gay marriage. If it seems intuitively obvious that the DFL would nominate a gay marriage advocate for governor, allow me to point out that it is unprecedented. With one possible exception, no major-party nominee for governor of Minnesota has ever been four-square for legalizing same-sex marriage.

The possible exception is state Sen. John Marty, who was the DFL nominee in 1994 and who is running for the nomination again this year (and who says that he expects to sign marriage equality into law within about three years). Marty says he has favored full equality for gays for many years, and did so in 1994, but doesn't recall whether his published positions that year included explicit reference to marriage....

Black interviews DFL state Senator Tom Bakk from the Iron Range who says he now supports homosexual marriage but believes economic issues will be the key ones in the upcoming election.

I think economic issues will be key in lots of people's minds, but marriage will be important to many people as well.

I would argue the two are intimately related. Unless we have strong marriages we won't have a strong economy. The family is the foundation of our economic system. If families are breaking up that ultimately leaves our economy vulnerable. So it's short sighted, at best, to think it's just about the economy and ignore what's happening to marriage and families. Homosexual marriage is an arrow pointed right at the heart of the institution of marriage in our society.