The fall election looms. A complicated decision awaits all of us in the choice of the next president. Closer to home, things are a little less complicated in choices for the state Legislature, and even a little clarity is like a breath of fresh air.

Rather than wait for the propaganda mailers, letters and staged public events from the candidates and other groups, I want to pose a question now: As residents of rural Minnesota, why are we supposed to be opposed to transit options in the Twin Cities metropolitan area?

In particular, why has the state Republican Party decided to make opposition to light rail one of their litmus test items? Apparently this partisan opposition is only true in Minnesota. Many in the GOP elsewhere don’t feel that way; some are even supporters, given the efficiency it provides in moving large numbers of people without requiring more cars and expensive freeways.

Does Rep. Bennett agree with this state party obsession? Does she think that any transit is questionable, and light transit in particular must be opposed by any means possible? What about Mr. Schindler? Or the two major party candidates for state Senate?

Opposition to transit and light rail is not going to get my vote, and here’s the reason why, for those who care to know: Local control. This is not really an issue of how best to spend limited resources on transportation infrastructure. This is an issue of whether rural politicians will let institutions and residents of the Twin Cities decide for themselves how to fund light rail planning and construction. Supporters of light rail in the Twin Cities were not asking legislators for money; they were asking for permission to make decisions about how to raise the needed revenue themselves. And rural legislators said no. They said a very loud no to local control.

There is a potential downside that makes this kind of “just say no” politics dangerous. What happens when we draw these battle lines with neighbors to the north in the metro area, including many of our own children and grandchildren (and nieces, nephews, cousins … the list goes on)? What happens to Minnesota if we stop caring about the quality of life everywhere and only pay attention to the quality of life in our own towns or our own homes?

It’s inevitable that the residents of the Twin Cities metropolitan area will continue to gain more and more political power, and at some point they won’t need votes from rural residents in the Legislature. I think we can trust them to remember the way we rural voters threw obstacles in their path when it came to their ability to make decisions about local issues.

 

David Behling

Albert Lea