The Capitol Letter™ is a report of the activities of the LWVMN volunteer
lobbyists. It is published approximately every two weeks during the
Legislative Session.
Election Law
LWVMN Position: Support of improvements in election laws regulating election procedures, voting and school district elections.
Minnesota will have a new primary election date. In October, 2009, Congress
passed the Military and Overseas Voting Empowerment (MOVE) Act requiring states
to provide military and other overseas voters with ballots at least 45 days ahead
of an election. In accord with the federal mandate, on February 25 the Minnesota
House of Representatives voted 126-5 on HF2552 authored by Rep. Steve Simon (DFL-44A-Saint Louis Park)
to move the primary to the second Tuesday in August. The Senate bill, SF2551
authored by Sen. Terri Bonoff (DFL-43-Minnetonka), had passed the legislation in the second week
of session. The bill is now on its way to Gov. Tim Pawlenty's desk
where it is expected he will sign it into law.
Rep. Steve Simon discusses election issues
at the March 26 LWVMN Action Committee meeting.
The MOVE Act was prompted by the fact that ballots by military and other overseas
voters are often rejected for arriving late, due in part to the quick rate of return
required with the primary scheduled for the second Tuesday in September. Although
the bill had significant support, there were several amendments offered on the House
floor, including amendments to require registered voters to present photo identification
before being allowed to vote and to restrict the number of people a voter can vouch
for on Election Day. These amendments were unsuccessful. LWVMN opposed
both of these measures.
Other election modifications that are moving through the Legislature include
changes to absentee ballot procedures that would establish ballot boards to count
absentee ballots, instead of the current system of sending absentee ballots to the
precincts to be counted on Election Day. The bill, SF2622
authored by Sen. Katie Sieben (DFL-57-Newport), passed the Senate State and Local Government Operations and Oversight Committee
and is awaiting floor action in the Senate. LWV Edina member and election
judge Ardis Wexler testified in support of the changes.
Its companion, HF3111 authored by Rep. Ryan Winkler (DFL-44B-Golden Valley),
is scheduled for a hearing in the House State and Local Government Operations Reform, Technology and Elections Committee
on March 2.
Election housekeeping bills SF2388/HF3108,
also authored by Sen. Sieben and Rep. Winkler, are progressing through the committee
process. "Housekeeping" bills allow agencies to tidy up statutes which have
become obsolete or cumbersome or otherwise needing slight modification. The
Senate version passed out of its committee on February 22 and the House companion
will be heard in committee on March 4.
Other legislation that LWVMN is watching includes HF3110/SF2888,
authored by Rep. Dan Severson (R-14A-Sauk Rapids) and Sen. Chris Gerlach (R-37-Apple Valley). These
bills would eliminate the option of vouching for people who register on Election
Day. The only exception would be residents of residential facilities being
vouched for by an employee of the facility. It also removes student IDs and
fee statements from the list of documents that can be used to register on Election
Day. Neither bill has been scheduled for a hearing. Although the intention
behind the bills is unclear, the results would surely be to suppress the student
vote.
Photo ID Commentary
Last week on the House floor, Rep. Tom Emmer (R-19B-Delano) again offered his amendment
to require registered voters to produce current photo IDs before being allowed to
cast their ballot. The measure was defeated 58-73, with little debate.
Unfortunately, those who share our opposition to photo ID declined the opportunity
to explain their position. Instead, we will offer ours.
Voting is a constitutional right
Proponents of photo ID like to reference other occasions where we are asked to
show an ID, like renting a movie or writing a check. Voting, unlike commercial
transactions between private parties, is a constitutional right.
Many people do not have the necessary documents to vote
It is true that if asked to produce a photo ID, most of us will be able to reach
into our wallet and produce the requested document. But for many people, it
is not that easy. The Brennan Center's
Citizens Without Proof report found that as many as 11% of United States citizens
do not have a current, government-issued photo ID at any given time. This
includes as many as 18 percent of senior citizens. Other people who are disproportionately
impacted are people with disabilities, minority voters, low-income citizens and
students who move frequently.
For many of these voters it is not a simple task to drive - or find someone to
drive them - the many miles from their homes to the government office to stand in
line and update their identification. We have been told by some of our rural
allies in the Legislature that their opposition to the photo ID requirement comes,
in part, from the impact this would have on the elderly women in their district.
Nobody's right to vote should hinge on their mobility, distance from a government
service center or economic resources.
Photo ID requirements solve no known problem.
Voter impersonation, the only type of voter fraud that could be prevented by
a photo ID requirement, is nonexistent; there is no record of voter impersonation
in Minnesota. It is difficult to comprehend how one would carry out this type
of fraud without detection – you would need the name of a registered voter that
you were certain was not going to be at the polls, and would then need to go, in-person,
to the precinct in that voter's neighborhood and commit perjury by representing
yourself as that voter.
In 2004, then Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer stated that only 14 of over 2,800,000
votes cast that year were fraudulent – a rate of five ten-thousandths of a percent.
None of them were voter impersonation. Furthermore, photo ID would do nothing
to prevent the problem of felons or non-citizens with permanent resident status
from voting as this is not noted on a driver's license.
Judicial Selection
LWVMN Position: Support the merit selection/retention election method for selecting Minnesota's judges.
I can now report progress in our efforts to get HF224 a
hearing.1 Rep. Gene Pelowski (DFL-31A-Winona)
who chairs the House State and Local Government Operations Reform, Technology and Elections Committee,
has agreed to hold a hearing on the bill Thursday, March 4. This bill calls for
a constitutional amendment to change the way we choose judges in Minnesota.
Instead of direct, contested elections, there would be a system of retention elections
incorporating merit selection and a judicial evaluation commission.
LWVMN members who are constituents of committee legislators have been working
intensely on getting this hearing and lining up support in the committee.
Thank you.
If the bill passes this committee, then in order to survive it will need to be
heard and passed in the House Civil Justice Committee. Unfortunately, the committee
chair, Rep. Joe Mullery (DFL-58A-Minneapolis), seems not inclined to hear the bill.
There is a great deal at stake here. If we in Minnesota do nothing, we
can expect our judicial elections to turn into races about money and influence,
at enormous cost to our democracy. As
Jeffrey Toobin stated on Bill Moyers' Journal (February 19):
I think judicial elections are really the untold story of Citizens
United v. FEC, the untold implication.2
Because when the decision happened, a lot of people said, "Okay. This means
that Exxon will spend millions of dollars to defeat Barack Obama when he runs for
reelection." I don't think there's any chance of that at all. That's
too high profile. There's too much money available from other sources in the
presidential race. But judicial elections are really a national scandal that
few people really know about. Because corporations in particular, and labor
unions to a lesser extent, have such tremendous interest in who's on state supreme
courts and even lower state courts, that's where they're going to put their money
and their energy because they'll get better bang for their buck there.
This is a critical time: please call, email, or visit your representative
and urge passage of HF224. If you are a constituent of
a member of the House Civil Justice Committee or know someone who is, please do what
you can to help.
1 See Feb. 19, 2010,
Capitol Letter™
for an explanation of this bill.
2
Ibid.
for an explanation of Citizens United.
State Government Finance
LWVMN 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 on State Government Spending: LWVMN believes that the highest priority areas for state spending are the following: (1) K-12 (regular) education; (2) Health Care; (3) Environmental protection....
Gov. Pawlenty's supplemental budget:
Is it financially sound?
Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) released his
proposed supplemental
budget, intended to deal with Minnesota's current $1.2 billion deficit.
His plan would make cuts to local government aid ($250 million), higher education
($47 m.), health and human services ($347 m.), and state agency funding ($181 m.).
These same areas took reductions on the chin last summer in the Governor's $2.7
billion series of unallotments.
Does the Governor's budget make financial sense?
- Shortsighted fix for a long term problem.
To achieve $1.2 billion in savings, the Governor's budget proposes $700 million
in permanent cuts, added to $500 million in temporary money transfers.
Those one-time transfers will have to be covered some other way in the next
budget. In fact, the $500 million is based on the assumption that Minnesota
will receive $387 million in extended health care assistance from the federal
government. But Congress has not yet passed the bill that would give our
state this money.
- The deficit will remain beyond this biennium.
The proposed budget still leaves a forecasted deficit close to $3 billion for
the 2012-13 biennium.
- Proposed tax cuts will contribute to future deficits.
Gov. Pawlenty's plan also calls for a 20 percent corporate tax cut, a 20 percent
reduction in small business taxes and several other tax incentives designed
to encourage economic growth. The suggested business tax cuts will have
only minimal effect this year, but they are likely to cost the state an estimated
$800 million in lost revenue by 2013-14. According to House Taxes Committee
Chair Rep. Ann Lenczewski (DFL-40B-Bloomington) these cuts would create a large unfunded liability
for Minnesota and increase a future budget deficit by $800 million.1
- K-12 school districts taken to the cleaners.
The Governor already "shifted" $1.8 billion in payments to K-12 schools last
summer. The supplemental budget does not face up to repaying this obligation.
The K-12 repayments would be put off to a future beyond the 2012-13 budget.
The schools would not be repaid until the state has a surplus and the budget
reserve (now at $0) is replenished.2
Can anyone predict when that will happen?
Sen. Larry Pogemiller, Rep. Lyndon Carlson,
and Commissioner Tom Hanson discuss
the Governor’s supplemental budget proposal.
(Courtesy of the Minnesota House of Representatives)
This $1.8 billion is one more obligation which would be kicked down the road,
creating a financial hardship for school districts and a financial burden for the
state.
In other words, the Governor's proposal may balance the budget now,
but it leaves a bigger deficit for future governors and legislatures.
Gov. Pawlenty, however, does not have the only budget proposal in town.
According to Rep. Lenczewski, her bill (HF3082) solves the
$1.2 billion deficit by actually cutting $1.2 billion in spending. The Governor's
proposal includes $700 million in spending cuts plus $500 million in one-time transfers
which end up adding $500 million to the next biennium's deficit. Rep. Lenczewski's
bill is pending in the House Finance Committee.
What's next?
- The February economic forecast, expected March 2, will give us an update
on the likely size of the deficit for this biennium, whether less than, more
than, or equal to $1.2 billion.
- DFL leaders say they will release their own budget plan sometime after the
release of the February budget forecast.
- The proposed supplemental budget will be drafted into bills and introduced
in the legislature starting in early March.
. . . stay tuned!
1
House Taxes Committee hearing Feb. 24, 2010, and "Governor's 2010 supplemental
budget recommendations on Tax Revenues" prepared by House Fiscal Staff and reviewed
at that hearing.
2 Testimony by Tom Hanson, Commissioner
of Minnesota Management and Budget, at the Feb. 16, 2010 meeting of the Legislative
Commission on Planning and Fiscal Policy, Subcommittee on a Balanced Budget.
Metropolitan Issues
CMAL Position: Support the Metropolitan Council as the decision-making body for metropolitan needs... Support provisions for coordinated metropolitan services focused through the Metropolitan Council. Support retention of an appointed Metropolitan Council with greater use of its existing powers. (1969, 1976, 1993)
CMAL Position: Support the Metropolitan Council as the single metropolitan agency planning and coordinating a diverse transportation system, meeting varied needs and having approval authority over this system's major capital expenditures. New funding sources should be service related.
"Complete Streets" legislation received a hearing in
the House Transportation Finance and Policy Division. Advocates for community
health and people with disabilities spoke in support of the bill. The bill
(HF2801) authored by Rep. Mike Obermueller (DFL-38B-Eagan) mandates
"complete streets" for state roads.1
Several items were clarified in the hearing, including that use of the policy
is mandated for state roads and only encouraged on local roads. Cities and
counties will be permitted but not required to adopt a "complete streets" policy.
Reports will be required during the three-year pilot program to identify statutory
barriers to complete streets, to provide updates on stakeholder collaboration and
to make recommendations for statutory changes. HF2801
was passed as amended and returned to the full House Finance Committee.
The companion bill, SF2461 sponsored by Sen. Tony Lourey (DFL-8-Kerrick)
is awaiting action in the Senate Transportation Committee.
Education
LWVMN 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.
Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) released his supplemental budget on Monday February
15.1 In the budget, Gov. Pawlenty
pledges to hold K-12 education "harmless." The reality is that classrooms
feel the pain when education funding is stagnant or when the governor "shifts" payments
to the schools to a later, unspecified, date – or borrows from schools to pay state
government bills.
This is especially true when Minnesotans expect more from their public schools.
The achievement gap is filled with students with a variety of educational needs,
and many things outside the schools impact students and their learning. When
families can't afford basic necessities, medical care, or transportation, classrooms
are impacted by students who are traumatized by family problems. The achievement
gap is not the only gap that public schools face.
The Governor has requested that the legislature formalize the 2009 shifts in
education funding. This continues to be the political football described in
the Feb. 19 Capitol Letter™.2 Legislation
has been introduced in both houses which would formalize the shifts, thus better
guaranteeing the actuality of the payments. The bill, SF2305/HF2683,
is sponsored by Sen. Terri Bonoff (DFL-43-Minnetonka) in the Senate and Rep. Denise Dittrich (DFL-47A-Champlin)
in the House. At a Senate hearing on Feb. 16, Eric Knelman of the fiscal staff
made it clear that this is a muddy area legislatively and legally. Legislators
around the table asked many questions. You can view the power-point presentation
by following the link below.3
Many school districts, are asking the legislature to remove the levy cap so they
can propose increased local funding as the legislature fails to adequately fund
public education. Critics cite concerns that such a change would increase
current school funding inequities; many Minnesota communities will not vote for
school levies that would raise their property taxes. LWVMN supports equal
access to a good public education, and the Minnesota constitutional provision requiring
a "uniform system of public schools" flies in the face of this proposal.
Another issue bubbling to the surface is Minnesota's application for federal
funds under
Race to the Top. Minnesota Department of Education Commissioner Alice Seagren
reported to the House K-12 Education Policy and Oversight Committee that the Minnesota
Attorney General Lori Swanson has declared that the grant application
conforms with state law. Rep. Mindy Greiling (DFL-54A-Roseville) noted that local control
has been a major strength of Minnesota's current Alternative Compensation (Q-Comp)
program and questioned why Minnesota would change direction at this time. Rep. Kathy Brynaert (DFL-23B-Mankato)
is wary of the proposal to link student achievement data directly to teachers –
a concern shared by Education Minnesota in testimony. It should be noted
that several states, in order to be eligible for
Race to the Top funds, have called special legislative sessions to repeal laws
that had prohibited that very link! House K-12 Education Policy and Oversight Committee
members want to learn more about Race to the Top. They are not alone.
Rep. Marsha Swails (DFL-56B-Woodbury), and Rep. Carol McFarlane (R-53B-White Bear Lake) introduced HF2840
establishing a collaborative governance council to the House K-12 Education Finance Division.
The authors spent the summer traveling the state and meeting with members of all
the cooperative districts. The committee gave unanimous support to the authors'
presentation, which was followed by testimony from representatives from each of
the suggested council members.4
Rep. Ann Lenczewski (DFL-40B-Bloomington) introduced a balanced budget bill (HF3082)
that would probably cut school aid by approximately 5.67%, according to the Minnesota School Boards Association.
Rep. Lenczewski argues she is just trying to be honest about present financial problems
and not push the issues down the road to another biennium.
Two bills were quickly approved by the House K-12 Education Policy and Oversight Committee
that should change licensure for non-traditional teachers, such as Teach for America
members (HF3074/HF3093).5
There are companion bills in the Senate.
The Legislative Auditor's Report regarding the success of alternative education
programs could prove to be a boon to Minnesota's application for federal Race to
the Top funds.6 HF664/SF1531
proposed by Rep. Andy Welti (DFL-30B-Plainview) and Sen. Patricia Torres Ray (DFL-62-Minneapolis), would direct
the Minnesota Department of Education to develop mental health curriculum that is
age appropriate, but not mandate its use in schools.
There are many other bills making their way through the legislative process.
For further information please see the Parents United for Public Schools website.7
Sign up for their newsletter if you wish to stay up-to-date.
1
Twin City Daily Planet, Feb. 16, 2010
2
Capitol Letter™,
Feb. 19, 2010
3
E-12 Education Finance Shift Discussion Powerpoint presentation by Eric
L. Nauman, Fiscal Analyst
4 Council Members include include:
League of Minnesota Cities, Minnesota Association of Townships, Association of Minnesota Counties, Minnesota School Boards Association, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees,
Education Minnesota, SEIU, two senators appointed by Majority and
Minority leaders, two representatives from the majority and minority parties.
5
Alternative teacher licensure bills get committee OK, Session Daily, Feb.
25, 2010
6
Report gives positive review to alternative education programs, Session
Daily, Feb. 3, 2010
7
Parents United Update for Feb. 26, 2010
Early Childhood Education
LWVUS Position: Support policies and programs at all levels... that promote the well being, encourage the full development and ensure the safety of all children. These include... early childhood education.
LWVMN Position: Equal Opportunity support of increased state responsibility in creating equal public educational opportunities for all Minnesota children....
LWVMN Position: Support coordinated public policies and funding to ensure safe, affordable, quality child care throughout the state.
The week of February 22, the House Early Childhood Finance and Policy Division,
chaired by Rep. Nora Slawik (DFL-55B-Maplewood), heard testimony from three researchers: Dr.
Megan Gunnar, Regents Professor of Child Development, University of Minnesota; Dr.
Robert Anda, Senior Scientific Consultant, Centers for Disease Control; and Dr.
Richard Chase, Senior Research Scientist, Wilder Research.
Dr. Gunnar's presentation, "The Impact of Toxic Stress on Brain Development and
Health," described how early experience, positive and negative, shapes "brain architecture"
in the young child. According to the National Scientific Council on the Developing
Child:
Healthy development of brain architecture depends on interaction experts
call ‘Serve and Return,' based on games like tennis and volleyball. Young
children instinctively reach out for interaction, through babbling, facial expressions,
words, gestures, cries, etc. and adults respond by getting in sync and doing
the same.
Toxic stress interrupts this healthy development. Dr. Gunnar explained
that sources of toxic stress in young children include these risk factors:
neglect, abuse, exposure to violence, a parent's mental illness, parental substance
abuse, homelessness/high mobility, death of parent, incarceration of parent, and
other factors. Significant adversity impairs development in the first three
years, and can influence a range of lifelong outcomes in the areas of learning,
behavior, and physical and mental health disorders. Dr. Gunnar noted that
prevention of toxic stress is more effective that remediation and maximizes return
on investment.
A healthier population begins with reducing toxic stress in early childhood,
not just trying to change adult behavior. Early childhood intervention
programs can be a vehicle for enhancing lifelong health, not just preparing
children to succeed in school.1
In his presentation "Life Course Development: How Early Childhood Experiences
Affect Health and Life Trajectories Across the Lifespan," Dr. Robert Anda reported
on research showing that adverse childhood experiences increase the risk of heart
disease, chronic lung disease, liver disease, suicide, injuries, HIV, STDs, and
other risks for the leading causes of death. "Adverse Childhood Experiences
are a leading determinant of health and social well-being of (sic) from adolescence
to late adulthood."2
Dr. Richard Chase, in his presentation, "The Well-being and Vulnerabilities of
Children Age 3 and Younger in Minnesota," provided a thorough discussion of current
and projected demographic trends in Minnesota, including child poverty, prenatal
care, access to Head Start, use of licensed child care and FFN (family friend and
neighbor) care, and reasons for early intervention, among other topics. Although
most young children are doing well, vulnerable populations are growing, and troubling
trends exist. Among the implications of this research are the following:
Things will get worse if we do nothing or cut services to young children, and "School
readiness requires more than quality early care and education for 3- and 4-year-olds."3
Concerning the Governor's budget, Ready 4 K reports the following: "As
part of his budget solution, the Governor has proposed cutting early care and education
by $12 million in 2010-2011, largely in the form of cuts to child care for working
families, harming those that can least afford it."4
Environment
Safe Drug Disposal
LWVUS Position: Pollution of resources should be controlled in order to preserve the physical, chemical and biological integrity of ecosystems and to protect public health.
Since his election in 2006, Rep. Paul Gardner (DFL-53A-Shoreview) has provided leadership
at the State Capitol for environmental issues by promoting the concept of product
stewardship. A product stewardship program requires industries to take some
financial responsibility for waste material if they produce products that are difficult
to dispose of safely.
The Safe Drug Disposal Act of 2009, HF1217/SF1568,
authored by Rep. Gardner and Sen. John Doll (DFL-40-Burnsville), sets up a product stewardship
program for unused pharmaceutical products. The goal is to keep them out of
our wastewater, groundwater and drinking water.
Old medications often get flushed down the toilet, and the chemical compounds
do not break down in the wastewater treatment process. Many of these compounds
are endocrine disruptors, meaning that they can change the DNA of fish and other
aquatic life. They can also end up in our drinking water when it comes from
a source into which treated wastewater feeds, like the Mississippi River.
Currently no mechanism exists to limit the contamination of surface waters and groundwater
from the improper disposal of expired and unused pharmaceuticals by consumers and
health care providers.
The Safe Drug Disposal Act provides several steps to limit this contamination
by creating a collection system for unused drugs, funded by drug manufacturers.
It would prohibit the currently required practice of flushing pharmaceuticals by
health care facilities. The bill also develops strategies to reduce the quantity
of unused prescription drugs through more thoughtful prescription methods.
At this point, the bill has passed the House Environment Policy and Oversight Committee
and the House Health Care and Human Services Policy and Oversight Committee. It has
been referred to the House Public Safety Policy and Oversight Committee, where no hearing
has yet been scheduled. In the Senate the bill has been referred to the Senate Health, Housing and Family Security Committee.
No hearing has been scheduled.
Sulfide Mining
LWVUS 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 proposal to begin sulfide mining in Minnesota's Arrowhead region, described
in the Feb. 19 Capitol Letter™,1 will get three
hearings in the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee the week of March
8. The hearings will cover three aspects of the issue:
- At 12:30 p.m. on March 8, the committee will hear from PolyMet, the Canadian
company that is proposing a mining operation including three open-pit mines
to extract copper, nickel, etc., from sulfide ore. The history of mining
regulations in Minnesota will also be covered by the DNR. (Capitol, Room
107)
- At 6:00 p.m. on March 8 the committee will consider the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement prepared by the DNR and the Army Corps of Engineers.
(Capitol, Room 15)
- At 6:00 p.m. on March 10 the committee will consider our financial assurance
bill, SF2349, described in the Feb. 19
Capitol Letter™.
(Capitol, Room 15)
PolyMet will likely present a glowing report on the benefits of sulfide mining,
but it will be interesting to hear the DNR presentation on our mining regulations.
Opponents of our bill contend that our current mining regulations are among the
strictest in the nation, and guarantees in SF2349 are unnecessary.
In fact, these strict regulations are applied at the discretion of the DNR commissioner;
they are not required by law. We hope Committee Chair Sen. Satveer Chaudhary (DFL-50-Fridley)
will allow expert testimony on our mining regulations.
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) has not played well with the
experts. The Environmental Protection Agency "rated the DEIS as Environmentally
Unsatisfactory - Inadequate, or EU-3. Environmentally Unsatisfactory (EU)
indicates that [the EPA] review identified adverse environmental impacts that are
of sufficient magnitude that the EPA believes the proposed action must not proceed
as proposed."2 The EPA emphasized the
harm to water quality and to wetlands, with approximately 1,000 acres, high quality
and forested, Lake Superior watershed wetlands impacted. This latter issue
raises the possibility of "substantial and unacceptable adverse impacts on aquatic
resources of national importance."3
There will be testimony on the DEIS from a range of interests on our side, from
the Fond du Lac band of the Lake Superior Chippewa to the EPA, the Fish and Wildlife
Service, and our immediate allies like the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy and Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness.
The need for financial assurance, should this project be permitted, will be the
goal of our testimony at the third hearing. Sen. Jim Carlson (DFL-38-Eagan) (DFL-Eagan),
author of SF2349, will emphasize that the intention of the
bill is not to kill the project; it is to protect our clean water and to protect
Minnesota taxpayers. Planning for this encounter is underway.
Firearms
LWVUS 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.
Action for the 2010 Legislative Session:
If our bill to close the gun show loophole (HF2960)1
is to advance this session, it will have to pass first through the Crime Victims/Criminal
Records Division of the Public Safety Policy and Oversight Committee in the House.
We are working hard to generate support from committee members of both parties but
we currently appear to be short by one or two votes.
Sadly, our work to close the gun show loophole is going on with the backdrop
of an alarming number of gun homicides in Minneapolis so far this year to date and
approximately 30,000 gun deaths in the U.S. annually. Gun owners and non-gun
owners alike express overwhelming support for better screening of gun buyers.2
We are pushing legislators to examine our gun laws and how they contribute to this
unacceptable level of violence. Our coalition is holding elected officials
accountable for doing all they can to keep the public safe by screening out dangerous
firearms buyers.
Thirty thousand lives lost to gun violence are too many. Legislators need
to hear from advocates that this issue warrants their attention.
Health Care
LWVUS Position: A basic level of quality health care at an affordable cost should be available to all US residents…. LWVUS favors a national health insurance plan financed through general taxes in place of individual insurance premium... [and] is opposed to a strictly private market based model of financing the health care system…. (1993)
Single Payer Health Reform Bill Passes House Committee
On February 23 the Minnesota Health Act,1
HF135, passed the House Health Care and Human Services Policy and Oversight Committee,
chaired by Rep. Paul Thissen (DFL-63A-Minneapolis). This bill will ensure that all Minnesotans
receive high quality health care, regardless of their income. The hearing
room was packed with supporters as Rep. David Bly (DFL-25B-Northfield) presented the bill and
took friendly and hostile questions and comments. Rep. Patti Fritz (DFL-26B-Faribault),
Rep. Paul Gardner (DFL-53A-Shoreview), Rep. Jeff Hayden (DFL-61B-Minneapolis), Rep. Maria Ruud (DFL-42A-Minnetonka), Rep. Carolyn Laine (DFL-50A-Columbia Heights),
Rep. Tina Liebling (DFL-30A-Rochester), and Rep. Diane Loeffler (DFL-59A-Minneapolis) spoke in favor of the
bill. The crowd applauded many of the comments, including Rep. Laine's statement,
"We're all in this together." The bill passed with an 11-6 vote and was referred
to the Finance Committee.
Supporters of the Minnesota Health Plan fill the hearing
room for the Feb. 23 hearing.
(Courtesy of the Minnesota House of Representatives)
Those voting for the bill, in addition to those noted above, were Rep. Thissen,
Rep. Tom Huntley (DFL-07A-Duluth), Rep. Erin Murphy (DFL-64A-Saint Paul) and Rep. Cy Thao (DFL-65A-Saint Paul).
Committee members opposing the bill were: Rep. Jim Abeler (R-48B-Anoka), Rep. Julie Bunn (DFL-56A-Lake Elmo),
Rep. Steve Gottwalt (R-15A-Saint Cloud), Rep. Tim Kelly (R-28A-Red Wing), Rep. Tara Mack (R-37A-Apple Valley), and Rep. Paul Torkelson (R-21B-Nelson Township).
With the addition of Rep. Bobby Joe Champion (DFL-58B-Minneapolis), the bill now has 74 co-signers.
If your representative is among the supporters of the Minnesota Health Act, please
send them a note of thanks.
LWVMN belongs to the Minnesota Universal Health Care Coalition (MUHCC), a non-profit, non-partisan organization
that works for passage of single payer health care. There are 20 coalition
members with the recent additions of Take Action Minnesota and MPIRG.
Immigration
LWVMN 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. Support recognition. . . of the matricula consular as an acceptable document to prove identity for obtaining a driver's license. Oppose residents with legal immigrant status running for local office.
National News
While health care, the economy, and unemployment are the dominate issues in Washington
right now, some members of Congress are still hopeful that action will be taken
on comprehensive immigration reform. On December 15, 2009, Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez
(D-IL) held a press conference to introduce HR4321, the Comprehensive Immigration
Reform for America's Security and Prosperity Act of 2009 (CIR ASAP)—which at last
count had 89 original co-sponsors including the Congressional Hispanic, Black, Progressive,
and Asian Pacific American Caucuses. The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) released
a summary of key provisions in the bill, which includes:
- A legalization program for qualified undocumented
immigrants (and their spouses and children) who would first receive a conditional
nonimmigrant visa, valid for six years, after which they could apply for legal
permanent residence and eventually become U.S. citizens. The DREAM Act
is included; this would allow in-state tuition at state colleges and universities
regardless of immigration status if the individual had graduated from a state
high school and was otherwise qualified.
- Promotion of family unity through measures designed
to keep U.S. families together. The bill contains several measures designed
to reduce backlogs in family and employment immigrant and nonimmigrant visa
processing as well as other measures to prevent families from being separated.
- Reforming the legal immigration system and creating new
legal channels through the Prevent Unauthorized Migration Visa (PUM Visa)
that seeks to provide for safe, humanitarian migration. A new Labor Commission
would also be created to make recommendations on future legal immigration flows.
The bill reforms temporary worker programs and includes measures to protect
U.S. workers.
- Reforming enforcement activities by seeking to
ensure due process, judicial review and other protections during enforcement
activities.
- Border security provisions which seek to enhance
border security and achieve effective immigration enforcement in close collaboration
with border communities.
- Improving conditions of detention provisions which
seeks to protect U.S. citizens, legal permanent residents, and vulnerable populations.
- Improving the naturalization process and integration
to encourage citizenship among immigrant communities by providing for uniform
administration of the naturalization exam, creating incentives for English language
acquisition programs and requiring timely response on background checks and
an evaluation of their efficiency.
While many more immigration proposals are expected in the House and Senate in
the year ahead, Rep. Gutierrez's immigration reform bill is a good starting point
for Congress to thoughtfully and sensibly craft real immigration legislation that
seeks to solve our immigration problems —problems that have plagued our broken immigration
system for far too long.
Nuclear Energy
LWVUS Position: Oppose "increased reliance on nuclear fission," but recognize its place in the nation's energy mix. State and local LWVs may oppose licensing for construction of nuclear power plants on the basis of the national position.... [They] may call for the closing of operating nuclear power plants because of specific nongeneric health and safety problems with permission from LWVUS.
Full position pp. 54-56
On March 2 and 4, 2010, the Senate Energy, Utilities, Technology and Communications Committee
(EUTC) will consider whether Minnesota should maintain its moratorium on new nuclear
power reactors. SF355, authored by Sen. Amy Koch (R-19-Buffalo),
proposes that the moratorium be eliminated.
Last year, a surprise amendment on the Senate floor to repeal the nuclear moratorium
passed. The House, however, voted against repealing the moratorium.
This year, even legislators who favor keeping the moratorium are feeling pressure
to vote for a repeal.
Critics of repealing the moratorium argue that the problems that led to the Minnesota
moratorium, which was enacted in 1994, have not been solved. In fact, they
argue, the cost of nuclear power has skyrocketed, with new plants consistently exceeding
original cost estimates. President Barack Obama's recently announced intention
to promote nuclear power comes with a proposal for government-guaranteed loans for
the industry. Taxpayer groups oppose such loans, arguing that they place an
unreasonable risk on taxpayers when banks themselves are reluctant to lend money
for new nuclear projects, due in part to cost overruns and past defaults.
While nuclear proponents frequently point to France as having "solved" the nuclear
waste problem, the French are actually contending with their own disposal problems.
Reprocessing in France creates a mixed oxide fuel from spent fuel, but it does not
reduce radioactive waste. According to a recent report, cited below:
Reprocessing spent fuel involves treating the waste with nitric acid and
other strong chemicals which creates huge volumes of liquid radioactive waste.
Contrary to some claims, reprocessing does not eliminate the need for a geological
repository. In fact, the US Department of Energy estimates that reprocessing
spent fuel results in a six-fold increase in total
waste volume compared to the direct disposal of spent fuel.
Reprocessing pollutes water. French reprocessing operations discharge
about 100 million gallons of liquid radioactive waste into the English Channel
every year. This, together with reprocessing discharges to the Irish Sea
from Britain, has contaminated seafood all the way to the Arctic. Twelve
European countries have asked the French and British to stop but they refuse….
Although France generates almost 80% of its electricity from nuclear reactors,
they have not perfected nuclear energy or the disposal of radioactive waste.
Similar to the United States, radioactive waste continues to pollute or accumulate,
from reactors and reprocessing operations alike. The French, too, are
searching for a geologic repository, and it turns out that the French people
are just as prickly about having high-level radioactive waste in their neighborhoods
as Americans.
LWVMN opposes lifting the moratorium on new nuclear reactors.
Please contact your state senator and representative and urge
them to oppose SF355 and its House companion HF33.
