The California Prop 8 vote was four years ago, in 2008. In 2009, according to the poll Eric is citing, opponents still outnumbered supporters 49-41, so the Prop 8 vote fell within that time frame.

But the point I believe is being made here is that the trend is shifting, and what was true even four years ago may be seeing some significant shifts since then (at least "significant" from the standpoint of a minority becoming a majority). After all, look what happened in Maine in just...

The MPR article also says:

"The report found no evidence of fraud among state employees. In fact, the biggest reason dependents were declared ineligible was because state employees didn't submit the appropriate paperwork by the audit's deadline. About 1,000 dependents who lost benefits due to the audit were re-enrolled for coverage for next year."

So before those talk radio jocks get all juiced up for that "red meat", they would do well to read the above passage. And that...

I'd love to see xeriscaping catch on in Minnesota. Get rid of the cultural norm of all those water-wasting green lawns, and put in more colorful and interesting prairie-style plantings. Rainwater gardens. Well-designed hardscapes. And so on.

That's only one example of areas where changes are needed, of course, but it's low-hanging fruit and long overdue.

I don't know why these always have to be couched as "all or nothing" choices. In my original post, I inquired about thoughts on either removing OR adjusting the cap. Lots of thoughts here on the effects of removing. Not much discussion on the potential benefit of adjusting.

So if instead of removing the cap, it were instead adjusted upwards (presumably with the maximum benefit proportionally raised?) - what then?

And yes, I know that the less you raise it, the less effect it...