 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
LWVMN Capitol Letter™Volume XXXIII Issue 1, January 21, 2007The Capitol Letter™ is a report of the activities of the LWVMN volunteer lobbyists. It is published approximately every two weeks during the Legislative Session. Printable PDF Version
EducationLWVMN Position: All Minnesota children should have equal access to a good public education. State funding for education should be at a level that makes programs of comparable substance and quality available to all. A student's access to a good education should not depend on the wealth of his or her school district. Kay Kessel, lobbyist, (612) 926-1387 In preparation for the 2007 Legislative Session, there was an Alliance for Student Achievement Conference early last fall and the Center for Rural Policy and Development Conference on November 15. These conferences provided valuable academic research and information from professors and legislators. In addition, P.S. Minnesota, a new coalition of educators dedicated to the idea that public schools should not be an afterthought, had their own contribution. Sen. LeRoy Stumpf (DFL-1-Plummer) spoke at the Rural Conference. As Chair of the Senate Education Budget Division for many years, he made these points:
Professor Greg Thorson, U of M Morris, presented his research on education finance. His summary included the information that most of $1.7 billion pumped into education went to relieve wealthiest tax payers in the wealthiest districts. Sauk Rapids’ Superintendent Greg Vandal was P.S. Minnesota’s spokesperson at both conferences. This coalition evolved from early work by Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s Education Finance Reform Task Force, originally chaired by Ric Dressen, now superintendent of Edina Schools. More will be reported about their goal which is to change the way we fund public schools in Minnesota. When the state did not renew funding for the original task force, three state organizations (Schools for Equity in Education, the Minnesota Rural Education Association and the Association of Metropolitan School Districts) picked up the tab so PS MN’s John Myers could continue work on school finance. P.S. Minnesota is also endorsed by Parents United for Public Schools. P.S. Minnesota will be presenting financial information to both Senate and House Education committees the week of Jan. 15. The 2007 education committees are established and the following legislators are chairs of the Senate and House committees.
The new legislators on the committees introduced themselves and many came to the legislature because of their experience as teachers or school board members. All want adequate funding for public schools. When Sen. Wiger held his first Education Committee meeting, he offered two resolutions:
Both Sen. Stumpf and Rep. Greiling, the two education finance chairs, have held meetings reviewing and educating new members and lobbyists about the education finance formulas. Strong bipartisan cooperation was observed at the initial meetings. I invite our LWVMN members to come to the Capitol with me and observe these important committees and talk with the legislators who will be shaping education finance. Education funding makes up almost half of our state budget. Sen. Stumpf’s committee meets on Tuesday and Wednesday mornings at 9:00 in room 112 at the Capitol and Rep. Greiling’s committee meets Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday afternoons at 2:00 in room 10 in the State Office Building. Please let me know if you would like to come with me, or get a friend and go on your own. For information on Senate committee schedules: State Government FinanceLWVMN Position: Support of a balanced and diversified revenue system that is equitable, progressive, and reliable. Support of long-term financial management projections and a budget reserve. (1995) LWVMN Position: LWVMN believes that the highest priority areas for state spending are the following: (1) K-12 (regular) education; (2) Health Care; (3) Environmental protection.... Nancy Witta, lobbyist, (612) 928-7007 As the legislative session begins there is a distinct sense of optimism pervading the Capitol. Both the legislature and the governor have voiced a determination to improve education and health care funding, and have evidenced a sense of urgency about transportation needs. The governor’s budget is yet to be formally presented but in light of recent statements from the administration there is still a resistance to consider new taxes. The projected $2 billion surplus for the biennium 2007-08 can be expected to shrink considerably since it does not include any inflation on expenditures. (Some experts say that the real surplus in the biennium will be approximately $1 billion.) The surplus calls into question the boom and bust nature of Minnesota’s revenue stream. Is the tax system as stable as it should be? Will the legislature and the governor give serious consideration to reforming a tax system that has been so erratic? While it will be tempting to fund sorely needed expansion of education and health care programs from the surplus, how can the funding be sustained beyond the immediate biennium? Prudence would dictate that the surplus be used to add to the budget reserve and programs of an immediate need that do not require long-term sustainability. A flurry of tax bills has already been introduced. Three are in the form of constitutional amendments:
All of these bills are a reflection of the failed attempt in the last legislative biennium to pass legislation on a constitutional amendment for the above purposes. LWVMN opposes the use of constitutional amendments to dedicate funds that can be appropriated by statute. While tax increases submitted in this manner are veto-proof, they are a clumsy and short-sighted way to set tax policy and rates. Rep. Ron Erhardt (R-41A-Edina) and Sen. Steve Murphy (DFL-28-Red Wing) have introduced HF23/SF5, a wide ranging transportation finance bill. This is a straightforward attempt to raise the revenues needed for current and future transportation needs and includes:
Finally, HF11 and SF25 were introduced by Rep. Tom Rukavina (DFL-05A-Virginia) and Sen. Cohen, respectively. These would require State expenditure forecasts to include a projected inflation adjustment. Of the 109 bills introduced through January 11, 50 were devoted to finance or taxes. A busy session is ahead. Election LawLWVUS Position: Voting is a fundamental citizen right that must be guaranteed. LWVUS Position: Promote the election of the President and Vice President by direct popular vote and abolish the electoral college. Support uniform national voting qualifications and procedures for presidential election. LWVMN Position: Support of improvements in election laws regulating election procedures, voting and school district elections. Gwen Myers, Action Committee Chair, (952) 545-8696 The Voting Rights Coalition (VRC)* spent the summer and fall working on voter service activities; LWVMN joined with the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits (MCN) in nonpartisan efforts to assure everyone the right to know the issues through debates and voter guides, and the right to register and to vote without harassment. The election went very well, although there were some problems getting accurate information out to group homes, for example, and to the Indian community. On Election Day it became clear that perhaps the most important law we were able to pass last year was on polling-place challengers. The law requires an individual who challenges another’s right to vote to be a resident of Minnesota and to swear that he/she has personal knowledge of the person being challenged. The horrendous stories of the 2004 election were not repeated and there were very few complaints about intimidating challengers. Since the election the VRC has been reviewing issues for our legislative agenda. Secretary of State Mark Ritchie has allowed Beth Fraser, his Director of Governmental Affairs, to meet with us several times as we have worked on our agenda. Our shared goal is to assure all qualified citizens in Minnesota the right to vote. At the top of our list is automatic voter registration for citizens who get a drivers’ license or state ID card, if they are otherwise eligible to vote. This is a priority for Secretary Ritchie. Identification for Election Day registration includes a cluster of issues to broaden acceptable documentation. These include government-issued IDs from other states, additional IDs listed in the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), lease-agreements and bills delivered and paid on-line. Absentee voting represents another cluster of ideas to make the process easier for military personnel, students, the elderly and the disabled. Allowing absentee voting without requiring a reason is at the top of this list, along with eliminating the requirement that a witness be a registered voter in Minnesota – a difficult hurdle for out-of-state college students and military personnel. The Disability Law Center has a small cluster of issues, some of which may be resolved administratively, such as better training for election judges on the AutoMark machines and a clarification on the number of voters an individual may assist by translating the ballot. Extending agent-delivery of ballots to home-bound voters would require legislation. Other issues include increasing the post-election audit requirement to a statistically significant percentage, translating voting materials into a number of languages, restoring a felon’s voting rights upon release from prison, allowing tenants to display political signs in their windows, and allowing non-partisan election judges to serve as long as both major parties are represented at each precinct. The next few weeks will be spent putting these ideas into bills and finding authors in each House. A number of these items passed the Senate last session, but failed to get hearings in the House. We hope to have better luck this year. *The Voting Rights Coalition includes the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits, Take Action Minnesota, Education Minnesota, AFL-CIO, League of Minnesota Cities, MN Trial Lawyers, the Disability Law Center, ACORN, the Joint Religious Legislative Coalition and LWVMN, among others, and is chaired by C. Scott Cooper of Take Action Minnesota. Reproductive ChoiceLWVUS Position: Protect the constitutional right of privacy of the individual to make reproductive choices. Anne Salisbury, Action Committee Co-chair, (651) 430-1091 Reproductive choice issues stand a better chance of being positively addressed this session. Many newly elected and seasoned legislators seem to be willing to look with more favor on the civil and human rights of women and the sexual concerns that come with being female. Legislation that last year was held hostage on politically motivated social grounds, and even used as a bargaining tool, may actually pass this year. Comprehensive sexuality education legislation finally is expected to get a hearing in the House this year. It should be a no-brainer if Minnesotans really care about reducing the number of abortions and sexually transmitted diseases among young people. Students in grades 7 through 12 should receive age-appropriate and medically accurate information so that they can make responsible decisions for their own lives when it comes to intimate relationships. Watch for this legislation and support its passage! The 2005 cut of 50% in funding for Family Planning Special Projects (FPSP) begins this year. Fortunately, legislation to restore these cuts is intended. Otherwise women who rely on publicly supported contraceptive services will see these services substantially reduced. This would put many low-income women at risk for unintended pregnancies and potential abortions. Let your legislators know that you want to see FPSP funding restored and increased! Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, a strong anti-choice organization, wants to see the Minnesota Supreme Court decision in Women of the State of Minnesota by Doe v. Gomez reversed. In 1995 the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that state medical assistance for low income women cannot "cover pregnancy-related services by funding prenatal care and childbirth but not abortion." Minnesota’s law currently provides greater protection for reproductive choice than the U.S. Constitution; consequently, legislation that would cut or ban state funding for abortion services is unconstitutional in Minnesota. However, there are legislators who may propose such legislation. We need to be watchful and stand against inroads to reproductive choice for all. In 50% of Minnesota’s hospitals, survivors of sexual assault cannot receive emergency contraception due to hospital policy, and some victims are not even told of this option and where to obtain it. Minnesota needs an Emergency Care for Sexual Assault Victims Act requiring that rape victims be offered emergency contraception. Watch for an Action Alert on this issue. Along with LWVMN, there are many other organizations working on choice issues at the state capitol. They include Midwest Health Center for Women, MN Council of Jewish Women, National Organization for Women - Minnesota Chapter, Minnesota Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, Minnesota Women's Campaign Fund, NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota, Planned Parenthood of MN/South Dakota/North Dakota, and Pro-Choice Resources. Sexuality Education for Life-Minnesota is working on advancing comprehensive sexual health education as well as protecting minors' consent, along with some of the organizations listed above. The Minnesota Public Health Association also works on minors' consent. EnvironmentLWVUS Position: Natural resources should be managed as interrelated parts of life-supporting ecosystems. Resources should be conserved and protected to assure their future availability. Pollution of these resources should be controlled in order to preserve the physical, chemical and biological integrity of the ecosystem and to protect public health. LWVUS Position - Water: LWVUS supports measures to reduce water pollution from direct point-source discharges and from indirect non-point sources; and policies to achieve quality essential for maintaining species populations and diversity, including measures to protect lakes, estuaries, wetlands and in-stream flows. LWVMN Position - Natural Resources: Promote an environment beneficial to life though the protection and wise management of natural resources in the public interest by recognizing the interrelationships of air quality, energy, land use, waste management and water resources. LWVMN Position - Water Resources: Support of a state role in the preservation and management of Minnesota's water resources through protection, allocation, conservation, pricing and interbasin transfer policies protective of Minnesota's current and future needs. LWVMN Position - Land Use: Support an overall land use plan with maximum cooperation and implementation at the regional and local levels, with state help in developing and exercising land use management, with opportunity for maximum local decision making, and with regional planning and regulation for matters of more than local control. LWVMN Position - Air Quality: Support measures to reduce air pollution from vehicular and stationary sources LWVMN Position - Solid Waste: Support of measures to reduce generation of solid waste and ensure safe treatment, storage and disposal of all wastes. Gwen Myers, Action Committee Chair, (952) 545-8696 Clean Water LegacyLWVMN is again supporting the Minnesota Environmental Partnership’s (MEP’s) Clean Water Legacy (CWL), a plan calling for the investment of $100 million each year to prepare water clean-up plans for polluted lakes and rivers, and to restore them to biological, chemical and physical health. Minnesota’s water quality is deteriorating. More than 1,900 of our lakes and rivers do not meet the minimum state water quality standards and the vast majority of our bodies of water have not even been tested. These are the lakes we swim in, the rivers we canoe, and the streams we fish. We need to develop a clean-up plan for each pollutant and we must give local governments the funds to help the state deal with their local problems. The 2006 Legislature passed the CWL, but provided only $25 million in one-time funding. This was enough to make a start on the problem of deteriorating water quality, but we need $100 million per year to pay for a comprehensive polluted waters assessment, clean-up, and pollution-prevention program. MEP and LWVMN support the $100 million in annual funding to allow:
We will also be working to repeal the "offsets" included in the 2006 bill. This provision enables the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to allow additional pollution by pointing to an unrelated pollution reduction in the same watershed; this encourages pollution. Great Lakes CompactLWVMN is part of a coalition of civic and environmental groups who will be pressing the Legislature to ratify the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact in the 2007 Legislative session. In 2005 the Great Lakes governors and the premiers of Ontario and Quebec endorsed precedent setting agreements to protect and conserve the Great Lakes. The purpose of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact is to retain regional control over and to protect the health of the Great Lakes. To go into effect, the compact must be ratified by all eight Great Lakes states, the two Canadian Great Lakes provinces, and the U.S. Congress. Seemingly an inexhaustible water source, the Great Lakes were a one-time "gift of the glaciers"; the actual drainage basin of the five lakes is comparatively small, and rainfall and snow melt replenish only one percent of the Great Lakes annually. Couple that fact with the growing demand for water from within and without the basin—for utilities, agriculture, manufacturing, and housing—along with the proposals to export water to distant parts of the United States and to foreign countries, and the threat to our lakes is clear. Global warming and consequent increased evaporation compound the problem. Advantages of the Great Lakes Compact include the following:
The Great Lakes Compact was heard in the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee on January 16. A report on its progress will be in the next Capitol Letter™. If any LWV member has time to spend on the issue of water, the Action Committee can use some help. Contact Gwen Myers. Thank you. Thanks to MEP and the National Wildlife Federation for much of the information in this report. EnergyLWVUS Position: Energy goals and policies that acknowledge the United States as a responsible member of the world community; reduction of energy growth rates; use of a variety of energy sources, with emphasis on conserving energy and using energy-efficient technologies; the environmentally sound use of energy resources, with consideration of the entire cycle of energy production; predominant reliance on renewable resources; policies that limit reliance on nuclear fission; action by appropriate levels of government to encourage the use of renewable resources and energy conservation through funding for research and development, financial incentives, rate-setting policies and mandatory standards; mandatory energy conservation measures, including thermal standards for building efficiency, new appliance standards and standards for new automobiles with no relaxation of auto-emission control requirements; policies to reduce energy demand and minimize the need for new generating capacity through techniques such as marginal cost or peak-load pricing or demand management programs; maintaining deregulation of oil and natural gas prices; assistance for low-income individuals when energy policies bear unduly on the poor. Julie Risser, lobbyist, (952) 927-7538 Passage of a Renewable Energy Standards (RES) bill this session looks promising. Sen. Ellen Anderson (DFL-66-Saint Paul) and Rep. Aaron Peterson (DFL-20A-Appleton) are the chief authors of SF4 and HF4 respectively. The bills establish Renewable Energy Standards and call for 25% of our state’s electricity generation to come from renewable energy sources by 2020. Renewable energy sources include solar, wind, hydroelectric with a capacity of less than 100 megawatts, hydrogen, and biomass. Utilities would need to produce 11% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2013, 15% by 2015, and 25% by 2020. Failure to comply would bring financial penalty. Sen. Yvonne Prettner Solon (DFL-7-Duluth) introduced SF74 which modifies existing Renewable Energy Objectives (REO) legislation. The bill calls for utilities to meet individual renewable energy targets. If a utility has difficulty generating its targeted percentage of electricity from renewable sources, it can purchase renewable energy credits. The bill also allows utilities to count energy generated from technology that blends or co-fires a non-renewable material with a renewable (Subd.5 2b). However, only the amount of energy generated from the renewable source would count. Both bills allow renewable energy standards/objectives revision if compliance produces undesirable impacts on a utility’s reliability or on the utility’s ratepayers. More energy legislation is likely to come. The Governor may introduce a comprehensive energy bill that contains an RES component. Alternatively, the Governor may opt to alter renewable energy objective legislation and avoid establishing standards for Renewable Energy Sources. On another front, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) approved dry cask storage of high-level nuclear waste at the Monticello nuclear power plant on September 30, 2006. If the Legislature fails to take action this decision will stand and Monticello will continue operations until 2030. Environment/Trails and OHVsLWVUS Position: Natural resources should be managed as interrelated parts of life-supporting ecosystems. Resources should be conserved and protected to assure their future availability. Pollution of these resources should be controlled in order to preserve the physical, chemical and biological integrity of the ecosystem and to protect public health. Gwen Myers, Action Committee Chair, (952) 545-8696 The Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Coalition’s* agenda this year is a variation on a theme, a theme of protecting our lakes and streams, wetlands, forests and prairies from wanton destruction inflicted by all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), off-road motorcycles (ORMs) and 4x4 off-road mudder trucks, in Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) parlance, off-road vehicles (ORVs). In 2003 the Legislature instructed the DNR to limit OHVs to designated trails in our state forests, i.e. to trails posted open to particular OHVs. Prior to this, ATVs and ORMs could go on any trail in nearly all state forests. While it was illegal to take off cross-county in these "managed forests," once one or two ATVs had done so, a new trail was created. The DNR often posted these illegal trails "Closed," but those signs did not last long. This remains true. The result is "trail creep" and the 2003 law was designed to eliminate this situation. In 2005 the northern legislators persuaded House and Senate leadership to reverse the 2003 compromise in state forests north of State Highway 2, thus returning 74% of our state forests to a "go anywhere," managed designation. A primary goal of our coalition is to return to the 2003 compromise and put the DNR back on track to certify all state forests as either "limited," (closed unless posted open) or "closed" (no motorized recreation allowed). A second goal is to require the DNR to designate "heritage areas," large tracts of land closed to motorized recreation, in every state forest. These would provide areas for people engaged in such old fashioned activities as hiking, bird watching, berry picking, hunting on foot - all reflective of our Minnesota outdoor heritage. Third, we would like to prohibit 4x4 mudder truck trails in our state forests; they do incredible damage to the land and belong in public challenge areas designed for trucks and other OHVs. In fact, both houses passed such a bill in 2006, but the conference committee ignored their wishes and cut the language from the bill. Rep. Frank Moe (DFL-04A-Bemidji), the House author, is determined to shepherd this bill through the process and get it to the governor’s desk this year. A number of challenges are expected from the mechanized recreation enthusiasts. The first is a bill to open the North Shore State Trail to ATVs, introduced by Rep. Tom Hackbarth (R-48A-Cedar). HF59 includes a number of hiking and riding trails in the Arrowhead region, in addition to the ATV proposal, but no money is requested to implement any of the proposals. This has been referred to the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee, which has a new chairman, Rep. Kent Eken (DFL-02A-Twin Valley). We look forward to working with him. *The OHV Coalition includes Minnesota Environmental Partnership, Audubon Minnesota, Audubon Minneapolis, the XXJack Pine Coalition, the Isaac Walton League, the Sierra Club, North Star Chapter and LWVMN. TransportationLWVMN’s Transportation Position is based on LWVUS Natural Resources and Positions and the LWVMN State Government Spending Position. LWVUS Position: LWVUS supports comprehensive long-range planning; wise decision making requires consideration of environmental, public health, social and economic impacts of proposed plans... LWVUS Position - Air Quality: Support for measures to reduce vehicular pollution, including... development of more energy-efficient transportation systems. LWVUS Position - Land Use: Support for land-use planning that reflects conservation and wise management of resources. LWVMN Position - State Government Spending: Support for maintaining a viable state-wide transportation system, including public transit. Julie Risser, lobbyist, (952) 927-7538 The state’s unmet transportation needs are front and center this session. In November, 2006 Minnesota voters approved amending the State Constitution to dedicate the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST) to roads and transit. Passage of the amendment provides revenue for transportation and transit investment, however revenue from MVST is not sufficient to fill the State’s estimated $2 billion-a-year road and transportation gap (StarTribune, January 6, 2007). To generate some of the revenue needed to fill the gap, Sen. Steve Murphy (DFL-28-Red Wing) and Rep. Ron Erhardt (R-41A-Edina) introduced SF5 and HF23 respectively. The legislation would generate an estimated $850 million a year in new revenue. It includes county wheelage taxes of up to $20 per year on each motor vehicle (except motorcycles), raising vehicle registration taxes, and increasing Minnesota’s gas tax by 10 cents per gallon. E85 and M85 would see smaller tax increases; the E85 tax would rise 7.1 cents per gallon and M85 tax 5.7 cents per gallon. It allows counties to increase the sales tax by a half-cent to generate funds for road and transit needs. The legislation would create a transit fund for the MVST revenue so that separate accounts exist for greater Minnesota and the metropolitan area, and it would create a Road User Fee task force "to study the future of highway funding and alternatives to existing highway user tax mechanisms." Governor Pawlenty has stated he will veto any gas tax increase. While this does not bode well for the Murphy/Erhardt bill in its current form there may be enough votes in the legislature to override a veto by the Governor. LWVMN is part of a coalition supporting Transportation Choices 2020 Initiative or TC2020. TC2020 aims to expand transit options by improving bicycling and walking facilities, investing in bus and rail transitways in the metro area with connections to cities in greater Minnesota, and expanding Park & Ride capacity. At the writing of this report the legislation has not been introduced. Health CareLWVUS Position: LWVUS believes that a basic level of quality health care at an affordable cost should be available to all US residents. Other US health care policy goals should include the equitable distribution of services, efficient and economical delivery of care, advancement of medical research and technology, and a reasonable total national expenditure level for health care. LWVUS favors a national health insurance plan financed through general taxes in place of individual insurance premiums [and] is opposed to a strictly private market-based model of financing the health care system... (1993) Mary Lou Hill, lobbyist, (612) 374-4218 Long-term CareSeniors and Workers for Quality met on Dec 13, 2006 and on Jan 8, 2007 to prepare for the new legislative session. This coalition consists of labor unions representing workers and advocate and service organizations working to improve care of the elderly and disabled. Members have set up appointments with legislators from the House Health and Human Services Committee as well as with other interested legislators. Legislators will be presented with information packets containing a summary of legislative proposals developed and supported by the coalition as well as lists of member organizations with contact names and phone numbers. Included in the platform for 2007 are the following:
This would be a pilot project to make good health care more affordable and to evaluate if this should be made permanent and extended to other health care workers. Ask Legislature to direct Commissioners of the Minnesota Department of Health and the Minnesota Department of Human Services to use monies saved from reduction of nursing home beds to train long-term caregivers in specialty fields and to subsidize class fees for students enrolling in the standardized training curriculum. In addition to the above platform items, Seniors and Workers for Quality supports the Safe Patient Handling Act, a proposal from the Minnesota Nurses Association (MNA), a member of the coalition. This act proposes that staff at licensed health care facilities be required to use mechanical assist equipment for the lifting, moving and transferring of patients. The act includes a request for training monies as well. The MNA believes that the implementation of this proposal will greatly reduce the large number of injuries suffered by both patients and staff during manual lifts. Mental HealthLWVMN Position: Support of a comprehensive and coordinated system of programs and services for mentally ill adults and emotionally disturbed children and adolescents (hereafter referred to as "persons with mental illness"). Priority should be given to persons with serious and persistent mental illness and/or acute mental illness. Minnesota public policy and funding should sustain an array of community-based services, which are available and accessible to persons with mental illness. Administration of that policy should provide clients with appropriate and adequate services. Barbara Flanigan, lobbyist, (612) 928-8033 Our major priority for the session is to build in protections for persons with serious and persistent mental illness (SPMI)—to which our position assigns priority—in legislative proposals to implement the Governor’s Mental Health Initiative. As proposed, this would assign most public patients with mental illnesses to managed health plans; these do not always provide the services that persons with SPMI require. Some features of the plan passed last year, but the major bill was not funded. We will continue to support the extension of full mental health benefits to persons on MinnesotaCare and General Assistance Medical Care. We will plan to support most provisions of the mental health bill which will be introduced in the House by Rep. Mindy Greiling (DFL-54A-Roseville) and in the Senate by Sen. John Marty (DFL-54-Roseville). Firearms SafetyLWVUS Position: Protect the health and safety of citizens through limiting the accessibility and regulating the ownership of handguns and semi-automatic assault weapons, and support the allocation of resources to better regulate and monitor gun dealers. LWVMN Position: Action to support restrictions on the sale, possession and use of firearms by private parties in the state of Minnesota. Lynne Westphal, lobbyist, (952) 941-8493 During the past few years most of the laws promoting gun safety have been weakened, including the Brady Law which imposed a waiting period for background checks before purchasing a gun. Law enforcement personnel can no longer retain gun sales information for more than 24 hours, and the Assault Weapons Ban was allowed to sunset. In the face of a dramatic spike in gun violence in Minneapolis during the last year, a number of Minnesota groups, civic leaders, and hunters have been meeting to discuss the most effective means for reducing gun deaths and injuries. These meetings have resulted in a new umbrella group, PROTECT Minnesota. PROTECT Minnesota is talking to a broad population, including gun owners, as we continue building strong support and consensus for future action. ImmigrationLWVMN Position: Support incorporating immigrants into our communities by providing access to education, by endorsing the development of secure identification documents, and by respecting the right of law enforcement personnel to perform their duties without the burden of interpreting federal immigration policies. All Minnesota residents, regardless of their immigration status, should be eligible for in-state tuition at state colleges and universities under the same conditions, such as one year's state residency or graduation from a Minnesota high school. Oppose residents with legal immigrant status running for local office. State funding of Adult Basic Education for each program site should be adequate to meet the needs of the eligible residents. Judy Stuthman, LWVMN Board Member, (651) 644-8588 At one of the citizenship ceremonies on January 10th, I watched a young Ethiopian man put his hand over his heart, close his eyes and bow his head in prayer as the music to our National Anthem was played – an emotional moment for him and the other 250 immigrants at that ceremony who had taken the step to invest their and their families’ futures in the United States of America. Becoming a citizen is not an easy process and it will become more difficult in the near future – some have described it as a "second fence" being built. After living in the U.S. for five years, an immigrant may apply for citizenship. A new naturalization exam is currently being tested in 10 cities, all outside of Minnesota. What is self-government? What are "inalienable rights"? How many amendments does the Constitution have?* These are three of the 144 questions on the pilot test. The application form is going from 10 pages to 29, and the fees are going from $400 to $800 per person (it was $250 in 2002). When Director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Dr. Emilio Gonzalez was asked about this high cost and the difficulties some might have paying it, he responded that citizenship was priceless and people would be willing to pay anything for it. Minnesota organizations working with immigrants (AFFIRM, One Minnesota) hope that the Minnesota Legislature will invest in these new Minnesotans. Their priorities for immigrants in state legislation include healthcare, education, citizenship, public safety, and housing – priorities shared by most all in our state. Immigrants should not be purposefully excluded from any proposed legislation. Demographics show that as our Minnesota population ages, immigrants will become an increasingly important part of our workforce. This workforce should be well-educated, healthy and secure. This is a good investment for our state, our economy and our people. Immigrant advocates are planning their legislative program and analyzing bills as they are introduced, looking for provisions that impact our newest residents. *The answers to those citizenship questions: Self government is when powers come from the people and the government responds to the people; "Inalienable rights" are individual rights that people are born with; The Constitution has 27 amendments. |
|||||||