Let businesses hire who they want by reducing the time and cost for each hire, so we can close the gap between posted jobs and job hires so businesses can stop spinning their wheels. This is number one measure we must take, not only because fiscal and monetary policy are not good tools for creating private sector employment at this time, but because by increasing jobs and job security we can create greater certainty and consumer spending to drive business growth that is badly needed to pull us out of the recession.

Overcome long-term workforce shortages with policies that let companies hire the best, most productive people for work they really need done now, not meeting illegal affirmative action goals. Reward a broad range of workforce skills and good work attitudes. The work ethic is not a quirky idea of older people, it is the basis of the workplace. Provide liberal education to the industrial class, workers who want to improve society. Protect the right and duty of individuals to work and perform without favor for any classification like gender, race, age or disability. This does not mean that reasonable accommodations for disabilities should not be made, since work for disabled is an important right.

MCCOLLUM POSITIONS

We still can't see the emergence from the recession, as McCollum claims. We're still holding our breath on the economy of the U.S., of Europe, and the industrial nations as a whole. What is clear is we're losing our position among nations, and we've got to energize. There has been no bold policymaking, as McCollum claims. The stimulus has been a failure, especially if you look at projects like the Central Corridor, which it is documented is already destroying businesses in the Lowertown area and presents an imminent threat to hundreds if not thousands of businesses in the path of this project. McCollum says we have to be smart about infrastructure development, but there is nothing smart about Central Corridor. I would challenge Betty to state what 50,000 private sector jobs were "boosted" in Minnesota and what vital national investments were made. Why does the federal government need to "partner" with the private sector, why pick winners and losers, why not just get out of the way, why not regulate illegal affirmative action and comparable worth bureaucracy and let business get back to market-based wage systems?

The simple fact is that the stimulus and the bank bailouts were bungled. Now the big three or four banks have crowded out regional and community banks or bought them outright. They used bailout funds to do this. Nancy Pelosi and McCollum failed to help private individuals impacted by this disaster. It doesn't matter that the taxpayers were or will be paid back, consumers were not protected.

Public-private partnerships to promote innovation in clean energy, bioscience, manufacturing and technology will not drive the economy of the future and create good jobs. Government should get out of the way, back off from cap-and-trade and let private industry make these market-based decisions. We must not have government make the decisions of what energy or technology will emerge in the future because it will be clunky and non-competitive. The simple fact is that the Obama administration is about to sell GM to the Chinese, and with it the U.S. auto industry. We face a serious crisis.

McCollum says "America’s vital infrastructure must be rebuilt for our country to remain globally competitive." Do we need to destroy the infrastructure of University Avenue? Do we need a train system that destroys businesses, jobs and neighborhoods? Does the train make St. Paul "globally competitive?" This is a disastrous "public-private partnership."

COLLETT POSITIONS

Collett's formula will not create private-sector jobs. She does not discuss barriers to employment at all, and in fact seems to support measures like S.B. 1070, and other measures which penalize employers and seeks to maintain artificially high labor costs. Further, while she vaguely references layers of duplicative regulations, she presents no solutions.

I agree that layers of regulations are a problem. I think the solution is the federal government should return regulatory authority, along with functions and powers like education, to this state as much as possible. We have a federal system, but we should reduce federal regulations except where it is necessary. Under the interstate commerce authority of the Constitution citizens, not lobbyists, need to be watchdogs on conduct. Right now we need to let Minnesota lead in simplifying regulation for businesses here.

I would work with the governor and legislature to make sure we are not overregulating businesses in Minnesota, and where Minnesota regulations are adequate, I would work with the Congress as a whole to get the federal government out of the way and let us handle it. Then Minnesota can make sure it is not chasing corporations to neighboring states because of regulations. Where aid of Congress is needed, such as where unsafe products including financial products are being sold from companies based in other states or nations, I would help protect our consumers through legislation or encouraging regulations. But part of the high costs of regulations is government bureaucracy, not to protect consumers but bureaucratic jobs. Minnesota legislators and the governor should lead in this area, and be clear what the legitimate government interest is in all regulation, and streamline government to focus only on that. This is one reason why private-public partnership is not appropriate, because this can create conflicts of interest as happened in the BP spill.

While corporate tax rates may be too high, we should not use the average of the European Union as a benchmark, as Collett suggests, and such correlation will have little impact on creating jobs or economic growth. European companies have much higher costs because of labor rules, and we are competing against individual countries like Germany, not the whole Union. We need a different benchmark based on what is best for our Minnesota businesses. We need to raise revenue, but must not quash economic vitality and growth, especially in this age where many world markets are just opening. It is in this light that we must look at the corporate tax burden. Our taxes should be fair and not favor certain industries or companies, so we create an even playing field for competitive enterprise.