Posted on 05/19/2011 6:55:56 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Tim Pawlenty is not bashful when it comes to touting the A grade that the Cato Institute gave him in 2010 for his handling of fiscal issues as governor of Minnesota.
“I was just one of four governors in the country named by the Cato Institute to get an A grade in terms of fiscally conservative discipline,” he told CBN last October. In February, during an appearance on the Today show, Pawlenty said, “I’m only one of four governors in the country that got an A from the Cato Institute for the best fiscal discipline and management in the United States of America.” In March, he told Fox News’s Sean Hannity that “the Cato Institute gave me one of four A grades for governors in the country, one of four.” And in case Hannity had forgotten since then, Pawlenty repeated the fact on Hannity’s show earlier this week: “The Cato Institute gave me an A grade, one of only four governors in the country to get that grade.”
No doubt, Pawlenty’s A is impressive. But it’s the only one he received, despite being graded four times. In 2005, Pawlenty received a B. He sank to a C in 2006 and rose back to a B in 2008.
While Pawlenty received a glowing write-up from Cato in 2010, other years’ assessments were mixed. In early 2005, he was praised for making “good use of his executive authority to cut spending,” but urged to propose tax cuts. The following year, the report was grimmer, stating that Pawlenty had “started looking like a big spender. His [2005] budget . . . boosted spending by close to 6 percent mainly fueled by a casino license fee.” In 2008, there was concern over his corporate-tax hike and his backing of “substantial increases in fees and charges,” but there was also admiration for Pawlenty’s “impressive” list of vetoes, “including rejecting a gasoline tax increase, a hike in the top personal income tax rate, and various bloated spending bills.”
Generally, Pawlenty’s grades were about on par with the other governors now considering a 2012 bid. Utah governor Jon Huntsman got B’s in 2006 and 2008. Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney was dinged with C’s in both 2004 and 2006. The worst grade went to Indiana governor Mitch Daniels, who received a D in 2006 for his “abysmal” tax record, including “his endorsement of higher taxes.” Daniels received B’s in 2008 and 2010.
Pawlenty, however, can point out that he is the only GOP governor considering a bid who has ever received an A. Chris Edwards, director of tax-policy studies at the Cato Institute and writer of the report in recent years, speaks highly of Pawlenty. “Based on his performance as governor, he’s likely to follow a pretty limited-government approach if he is elected president, more so than a governor who got a B or a C,” Edwards says.
He also says that Pawlenty did “very well” his last five years in office “in restraining spending and opposing tax increases.”
But ultimately, nabbing an A grade doesn’t guarantee a candidate conservative votes. Another governor who received an A from Cato? Florida’s Charlie Crist.
— Katrina Trinko is an NRO staff reporter.
He is a BIG FAKE conservative!
As far as I can tell, using a Reagan litmus test, Cain is the best candidate in the field thus far. Unfortunately I don’t see him getting the nomination.
Sorry - since this is a Pawlenty thread I should address that...I see guys like Pawlenty and Daniels as the next best possibility, though certainly not ideal. If the country is paying attention I think anyone in the GOP field could savage Obama in a debate; the problem is I’m not sure most of them are willing to do so.
You are dead wrong. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. I’m from Minnesota, I’ve seen what he’s done first hand. He has man handled the legislature in this state (the House had NEVER been under Republican control, that’s how liberal this state is, until the last election). He is double-freaking great. The Dems hate him, he frustates them to tears.
I concur. He faced down enormous pressures from the dem legislature to raise taxes. He stood strong.
No, he's not perfect.
But on balance, he did a good job in Minnesota and would make a good President.
You can keep him!
There is a 99% chance Pawlenty would lose his home state in a landslide against Obama — that makes him a guaranteed loser.
I’m voting for a winner, someone who can cary their home state.
Facts to back it? He’s not my favorite but I’ll let the dem sites do the criticising and attacking. He didn’t do a bad job on the first debate
Dennis Miller on Romney/Pawlenty ticket: I’d pick Pawlenty as a running mate. And I would have a bumper sticker that said, “A Mitt and a Paw but no handout for you.”
A competent, experienced, conservative governor. Sounds pretty good. Of the possible candidates in or not-yet-in the race, Pawlenty is the one who sounds like he might make the best president and would also have a chance to win. That's how I'm leaning right now, but that could change. That's why we have campaigns.
I disagree. I think he is very likely to get the nomination.
I’d rather have a business man who needs political advisors than a politician who needs business advisors.
He has the best communication skills going, except maybe for Palin, without the irritating voice she has when she gets excited during a speech. (I always try to imagine what it would be like to be with a woman who sounds like that when she’s angry at me, and Sarah’s voice often makes me wince.)
He makes great, articulate arguments from principle.
He is a plain speaker, which resonates heavily with voters these days.
He is absolutely race-card proof, which takes the biggest arrow out of the Democrats’ quiver.
He was a mathematician for the Navy Dept., which, along with his extraordinary business background, takes away another key Democrat talking point, which is that conservative candidates are dumb.
He will eat Obama’s lunch in any debate.
He is likeable, relaxed and yet completely professional.
I think once he builds a bit more momentum and name recognition among Republicans, he will pretty much be unstoppable in the primaries.
True, he has no foreign policy experience, but that complaint is made against every presidential candidate running against an incumbent. Besides, unlike Obama, Cain’s ultimate foreign policy goals, however his policies may evolve, are 100% focused on preserving America’s best interests and national sovereignty.
Actually, for these reasons, I think he is by far the most electable of Republican candidates.
Pick someone from Idaho. Guaranteed to win their home state.
Pawlenty's from a swing state in a swing region. In a close race he could lose Minnesota but win the presidency, or carry Minnesota and get some key electoral votes.
In a blowout, it doesn't matter what state the nominee is from.
He won two gubernatorial contests in Mn. I’m 99% sure you’re wrong.
bumping your post. I’m also pulling for Cain, but would willingly vote for ANYONE running against BO.
I would vote for vandersloot over Obama if allowed to do so.
Nicely summarized, and I agree on all points...Cain is by far the best candidate out there now, but I have little faith in the nomination process. Still pissed off about 2008.
He is definitely a FISCAL conservative (at least compared to the rest of the clowns in this state.)
However, I’m not certain that’s enough to satisfy most people.
Tim Pawlenty, Mr. Milk Toast himself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.