ST. PAUL -- Northeastern Minnesota lawmakers took a variety of stands on a state budget-balancing bill that passed by wide margins in both the House and Senate on Thursday.

Most in the House joined with their Democratic-Farmer-Labor caucus in rejecting the measure, saying it would hurt schools, poor people and health care while forcing local governments to increase property taxes.

"Our big deal last year was the state was going to come in and take over education and we took money away from local government to do that... now this deal puts an education burden right back out there,'' said Rep. Mary Murphy, DFL-Hermantown.

The measure cuts about $60 million for local schools, state colleges and universities while slicing $95 million from the Department of Health and Human Services.

"This would severely hamper the whole magnet school concept,'' said Rep. Dale Swapinski, DFL-Duluth. "These schools benefit both our students of color and the students that go to magnet schools for the unique curriculums they offer.''

The fix, designed by House and Senate leaders in conference committee, doesn't look far enough into the state's fiscal future and leaves unsolved bigger budget shortfalls in 2004 and 2005, members of the DFL minority in the House complained.

The compact is an attempt to pacify the public in an election year and gloss over bad tax legislation pushed into law by House Republicans last session, said Rep. Tom Rukavina, DFL-Virginia. He assailed the measure, saying Republicans were trying to mislead the public with a tax fix that would come back to haunt them.

"We have a saying on the Range,'' Rukavina said on the House floor Thursday. "Don't put this monkey on my back.''

In the Senate, Sen. Doug Johnson, DFL-Tower, introduced the bill he pulled together with Republican counterparts in the House.

The quick compromise between the two parties -- just 18 days into the legislative session -- was historic, Johnson said. He doesn't like everything about the measure and is especially troubled by the cuts to education and the Minnesota Conservation Corps. Still, it was better than the cuts Gov. Jesse Ventura would make if lawmakers didn't craft a budget solution.

Sen. Becky Lourey, DFL-Kerrick, said the solution was irresponsible because it taps almost all of the state's reserve accounts and doesn't recognize inflation's impact. While she disagrees with Ventura on where cuts should be made and where the money to fix the shortfall should come from, she agrees that the budget should be balanced through 2005. An income tax increase is an option that shouldn't be ruled out, she said.

"It's ironic that the only tax increases we are willing to consider are ones that would build baseball stadiums, while kids in those very same cities are undergoing cuts to their schools,'' she said.

Sen. Bob Lessard, I-International Falls, said senators backing the measure were gambling that the economy will improve. "I hope they are right,'' he said.

He backs Ventura's conservative approach on balancing the budget through 2005.

"It's a philosophical difference,'' Lessard said. "Do you want to look four years down the pike? Or do you only want to look two years down the pike? I think we should look four years down the road or it's a betting game.''