Talk:Tim Pawlenty

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, which aims to improve all articles related to Minnesota.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid	This article is on a subject of Mid-importance within Minnesota articles.
This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Look I understand that 2006 is an election year for the Governor, but this is not the place to make partisan jabs. This is an encyclopedia. This is no place for opinion or petty political moves. I thought wikipedia was better than that.

I'm going to single out one person in particular, Wakeenah, I understand you're a democrat from Minnesota. You obviously don't want the article on the Republican governor from your state to look anything but bad. But can we agree this is not the place for that? Maybe here in the discussion, but not in the article.

I'll admit, I'm a Republican and I'm a fan of Tim Pawlenty. However you won't find that in any of my writing, ever. I offer facts and only facts, and when dealing with this page in particular, I offer facts strictly dealing with the governor Tim Pawlenty. Nothing more, nothing less. User:StevenK

• I did not add the remarks about his "merciless budget slashing", someone else did that. All I added was the well-documented slip at the hockey game, which I merely thought was funny, and would have reported it no matter what the politics of the guy who said it. You should give me some credit for not posting the Governor's theme song for the state: "I Got Pawlenty o' Nothin'". >:) Wahkeenah 14:31, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Can I put my two cents in ? because I will. the whole thing was over in less than a week, most Minnesotans found it funny and thought it showed a human side to politican. Is the event worthy to be included in an encyclopedia article? I don't think so. Yes I voted for him in 02 and probably again in 06, yet I am not completely happy with him. The orginal version of how it was written was as a political poke. it has gotten better (at least as of the last time I check) but really it a very small thing that in the grand scope of things does not belong in the article. Not because it makes him look bad but because it is so unimportant and minor. Smith03 14:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I removed the budget thing on OCT 26 because it along with other things made in that edit were one side written with pov the state's overall budget has never been decreased during his term.

NHL Incident ? I think there can be a better title than this Smith03 14:55, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

• In fact, it started as a passing comment, and someone "improved" it by expanding it into a full-blown section. That's way overkill, and you're right that it doesn't merit long-term inclusion. So take it out already! By the way, as far as taxation is concerned, I am in favor of his tax proposal on cigarettes. I am always in favor of taxes on things I don't use. :b Wahkeenah 15:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

we all are in favor of taxing things we don't use :) Smith03 15:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

• • I took it out. A rare case of submitting to those who like to call this pretentious weblog an "encyclopedia". In the past year, since I discovered this site, I have been less and less impressed by it, on a daily basis.
  • Regarding the partisanship charge, I adhere to what columnist Art Buchwald once said: I'm against whoever is in office. And a Republican happens to be there currently. He's certainly an improvement on Jesse.
  • Cigarettes provide a two-pronged benefit: (1) increasing tax revenues and (2) reducing Social Security expenditures. Wahkeenah 15:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

This is terribly biased. I am adding a warning label.

~~Overly Critical Pawlenty Article~~

This article was overly critical of Tim Pawlenty and the Republican party. I am a moderate (I voted for Moe in 2002 and Kerry in 2004) from Minnesota who attended college in Wisconsin. I have met both Governors and believe that they are good men and good leaders for their respective states. However, after reading both of their articles in Wikipedia, I find that there seems to be favoritism to the DFL. In my opinion, Governor Pawlenty has done a good job balancing the budget and keeping spending focused on the most important public matters. In the article it described this as:

“Pawlenty was elected on a platform of balancing the state's budget without raising taxes. Estimates of his success have varied. One one side, during his first year as governor, Pawlenty balanced a $4.3 billion dollar deficit without raising taxes, mainly by reducing funding for state services.

The more controversial part of his approach to the budget came from his attempts to raise taxes by raising "fees" instead.”

In this part of the article the author downplays the positive part that he balanced a huge deficit and focuses more on the negative part about reducing funding for state services, controversy, and “fees”.

Balancing a budget has to be very difficult for anyone. Most people have a tough time balancing their personal budgets. In my opinion, Governor Pawlenty did as good of a job as anyone could have.

In contrast this next quote is from the Jim Doyle article:

“As Governor, Doyle has made investing in public schools, support for regional economic development, transportation reform, and funding of scientific pursuits such as stem cell research his major programs. However, with a GOP-controlled state legislature, Doyle has had difficulties turning many of his plans into actions.”

This section to me makes Jim Doyle look like the good guy (and he is a good guy) but the “GOP-controlled state legislature” is portayed as the bad guys because they are acting as a check and balance.

Just a note for comparison: Doyle’s “investment in public schools” made in-state annual tuition at UW-River Falls (the school I attended) $5322. A similar school, Minnesota State University – Moorhead has in-state annual tuition of $4464. These two are very comparable schools with similar strengths and resources (MSUM actually having a better student to faculty ratio). The article portrays Doyle as “investing in public schools” and Pawelnty in this way:

“As members of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities board complained, student shares of tuition increased by double-digit percentages in that year and the years following”

However, in the end, weren’t Minnesota’s tuitions lower?

I am in favor of being less critical of all the men and women that lead our country and states in the right direction. I know that not everyone will agree on individual issues (I certainly don't), but can’t we agree that our leaders are doing their best to make this country the best it can be today and in the future. I definitely think so.

• • A few things: 1) Please sign all comments, with the four ~'s. 2) Please refrain from partisan rhetoric. It's childish and will be caught, so it's a waste of your time. 3) In regards to the 'nhl incident', I too agree that it is not deserving of its own section, which is why I put it under a 'trivia' section. I suggest someone creates one, with several bits of trivia, as many other politicians have. Trilemma 22:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 the neutrality is terrible in this article 2 Article Neutrality 3 April 2006 Neutrality 4 First Elected Office 5 Personal and Family history 6 Lutheran??????????

[edit] the neutrality is terrible in this article

This article paints Pawlenty in an amazingly skewed but beautiful looking lime-light. It claims that the state government was "almost" shut down when in fact it was a complete "partial" shut down. Tim Pawlenty is awesome. The first time in the history of Minnesota. All state parks would have been closed on the Fourth of July Weekend if it wasn't for a last second emergency house meeting. Democrats and Republicans sat in a terrible deadlock for financial balancing issues throughout nearly the entire summer because Republicans wanted to cut a slew of social services and decrease corporate and highest income bracket taxation while the Democrats wanted to in fact increase the upper income bracket taxation along with corporate state financing.

http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/2908/1/351

In addition Pawlenty also failed to properly negotiate the transit strike which literally crippled thousands of lower class citizens from transportation to and from their work for over a month. The transit union also received massive health care slashing and benefit losses. The most any transit union has seen in the history of the Midwest.

>>Since 2002 the legislature has cut funding by 18 percent and the route system has been reduced by 7 percent. Metro Transit’s figures show that compared to similar cities the Minneapolis-St. Paul system brings in the highest per-passenger trip revenue while ranking second from the bottom in securing governmental subsidies.<< -IFCI

These are two very huge events that you can guarantee will see press again once elections roll around. Why are they not listed on wikipedia?

I have no issue listing the positive accomplishments that Pawlenty has contributed to, but I find it hypocritical from the conservative point of view to complain about the neutrality of this article when two very negative things during his 2005 career are completely glossed over.

I personally will not edit this article simply because I feel that my bias will skew it, however the original creator and current editors of the article obviously let their bias get in the way. This reads more like a resume created by Pawlenty himself than an actual article on the successes and failures of the current governor. I am incredibly disappointed with the community on this one and encourage a complete rewrite from a far less bias source. I have no idea why you people are concerned about a "trivia" section or the inane "NHL incident" when we can't even accurately and adequetly sum up what this person has and hasn't done in not even one full term.

Here is a very vague example of what we should be looking for: "In March of 2005 the Metro Transit Union was poised on striking due to benifit cuts to nearly the entire workforce. In an attempt to advert a potential public transpertation hault Pawlenty volunteered to take control of the negotiations from an early point in the strike. Unfortunetly no agreement was met and the strike which started on March 4th finally ended on April 16th as union workers abandon the negotiations, in turn recieving significant cuts to medical and personal benifits."

That documents Pawlenty's desire to aid Minnesota in a crucial time but also states his failure without adding bias insult. This was a very huge event for anyone living in the metro area. Roughly 50% of the state's population. It was the largest strike the Metro Transit had ever participated in since its advent. This made front page news for almost a month and a half.

With due respect to your opinion (which you should have signed with four ~'s), I believe you're off base. Mr. Pawlenty's article has been the subject of several partisan edits, primarily from the left, and I think this current version is probably the best in a while. I do think it would be nice to more extensively highlight the measures the Minnesota government has taken under him, but as you note, it's difficult to do so without it turning into partisan rhetoric. If I was from Minnesota (and not biased in favor of Pawlenty), I would work on it myself. Trilemma 21:50, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't think you people understand what I am trying to get at. I understand that a lot of the wording I used in the "discussion" section was partisan. I never once claimed otherwise. However I am ashamed at the fact that two of largest issues that the Minnesota Government faced, lead by Pawlenty in 2005 are completely glossed over. I noticed that no one responded to my example paragraph, which is what I am looking for. I don't care how you people feel about my opinion of the man. Those things are simply moot. Why is the Metro transit strike not mentioned in this article? Why is the government shutdown re-worded to imply that it almost happened when in fact it did? How can any of this be considered non-partisan when it blatantly paints a more positive picture of the functioning state of the Minnesota government? Ignore my comments like "crippling thousands of lower income people" (regardless of how obviously accurate it is) and focus on my example paragraph. Do you people honestly feel that I worded it in a partisan manner?::

Put it in if you feel it is important, make changes into what is already in the article. All I am saying is (any this would be for everyone) watch what words are used and check your sources on the facts. IMO the shutdown should be included it think it already is, but realise it took all sides (R and D) that lead to the shutdown and neither one was perfect. The bus strike same thing the drivers didnot feel they were being paid enough the met council which a state agency believe they were again if you want put it in but again try to be balance.

"Do you people honestly feel that I worded it in a partisan manner?::"

When this is proceeded by "Ignore my comments like "crippling thousands of lower income people" (regardless of how obviously accurate it is) and focus on my example paragraph." I think you may write in a partisan manner.

Smith03 14:17, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

"merciless budget slashing", I will try to use this as an example first of merciless is a pov term second budget slashing is a vague term and a loaded term the overall budget of Minn has not decrease it is true that certain parts of the budget have been reduce or cut but to say "merciless budget slashing", is just as bad as the quote from the tax league about a great leader. The NHL incident was about as noteable as putting something in about the deer that hit the capitol window last week when pawlenty was coming in the building with his daughter. the hockey quote was pointless and perhaps it was put in to make him look bad perhaps not but any political figure in wikipedia is a target for supporters to heap praise on and opponents to point out every bad thing. Also the information of where he was force to accept the 75 fee/tax hike. He suggested it in the first place. How can you be forced to accept something you put out in the first place?

What i don't like is that one person comes along on an article and writes all the bad stuff about a person so someone else comes along and writes all the good stuff. I don' have a problem pointing out his negatives but watch the adjectives such as "merciless", "literally crippled thousands of lower class citizens"

"Since 2002 the legislature has cut funding by 18 percent and the route system has been reduced by 7 percent. Metro Transit’s figures show that compared to similar cities the Minneapolis-St. Paul system brings in the highest per-passenger trip revenue while ranking second from the bottom in securing governmental subsidies"

you may what to note the Dems control the senate and thus have to at least go along with any cuts.

wanted to cut a slew of social services and decrease corporate and highest income bracket taxation while the Democrats wanted to in fact increase the upper income bracket taxation along with corporate state financing."

I don't recall the GOP advocating decreasing corp taxes and the highest income bracket I believe they wanted to leave it as it was. When I read that it sounds like the Gop wanted to screw the poor and help the rich while the Dems justed wanted to have rich people pay more in taxes. You may want to included the rational as to why each side advocated what they advocated, of course make sure you correctly state what each side was advocating in the first place

Sorry I keep doing this but omb.org who are they and what do they stand for? Is it possible that by using quotes from them is just as bad as taking quotes from taxpayers league? Are they truley non partisan?

http://www.ombwatch.org/article/archive/343 OMBwatch recommond sites] one of them is moveon.org Gee that groups really likes Republicans. Maybe that is not fair of me, but if you want to add good or bad stuff about pawlenty or anyone else know your source Smith03 00:33, 12 November 2005 (UTC) Let's not forget that during the prolonged Metro Transit bus strike of 2004, when many working citizens were in distress, Governor Pawlenty gave no sign of caring, getting involved, or otherwise lending his leadership skills to a volatile situation which created great hardship for many. I, for one, will never forget this, no matter how brightly Pawlenty seems to shine when things are going his way and there are no inconvenient difficulties assaulting the citizenry.

[edit] Article Neutrality

First, let me reiterate what has already been stated above: sign your comments with four tildes (~). Second, to ease following the discussion, use asterisks (*) to create a bullet and multiple asterisks to increase an indent. Now, on the topic of the article, if you feel that these issues are important to the article, please make them. Wikipedia is based on the principle of everyone being able to make changes that they see fit. Second, Wikipedia is not a place to argue politics, whether in discussion pages or articles. While I myself am a Republican, I do realize that some of the wording in the article is biased, and therefore made an effort to edit some of this language out. It is not the point of Wikipedia to argue over issues in the talk pages and then have no changes made to the article. If you would like something changed, change it. Thank to all of you for contributing to Wikipedia and best wishes. Airline 01:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

anyone know? "Governor Pawlenty was the first Minnesota Governor ever to cut education funding. " was actual dollars less from one budget to the next budget or was the spending not increase to a level that some wanted? because iirc classroom k-12 spending was the only item that was not cut during the 03 budget now perhaps that changed in 05 Smith03 00:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] April 2006 Neutrality

I posted an NPOV message on the top of this article. Certain phrases are impossible to pardon: "During his term, Governor Pawlenty created the Minnesota Academic Standards, new graduation requirements, and reorganized, renamed, and refocused the Department of Education to a mission of educating children."

"Governor Pawlenty provided the largest infusion of dollars into Minnesota's transportation infrastructure by restructuring and reforming the Minnesota Department of Transportation."

(The education bolding was my own emphasis there.) Sean Hayford O'Leary 01:14, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed it, there isn't any discussion going in about it nor any attempts to fix whatever is caused it to be placed in the first place. If someone thinks it belongs it should be acted on to some degree. Rx StrangeLove 01:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First Elected Office

Mr. Pawlenty's first elected office was not State Rep. Prior to being elected to the State Legislature, he served as a member of the Eagan City Council.

This may or may not be relevant to his Wiki article, but I think it does give readers a better sense of where he cut his political teeth.

Other feedback is welcome about whether this should be added or not.

go for it!!Smith03 02:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal and Family history

How did Tim Pawlenty play hockey for the Wild?209.162.8.244 23:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lutheran??????????

The Pawlentys are member of woodale church in Eden prairie and that is a member of Minnesota Baptist Conference and the Baptist General Conference.

http://woodale.org/pages/page.asp?page_id=8671

Smith03 15:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC)