Capitol Letter for March 22, 2024

The Capitol Letter™ is a recurring publication that provides reports from LWV Minnesota volunteer Observer Corps and Lobby Corps members on what is happening in the current legislative session.

 

LWVMN ADVOCACY

  • LWVMN Submitted a Letter of Support for the successful inclusion of HF4182 - the Equal Access to Broadband Act in the Commerce policy bill. HF4182 aims for more equitable deployment of broadband to all residents. We spoke about how accessible, trusted and nonpartisan information provided by local community media stations is vital to our democracy. Moreover, many of our candidate forums and informational programs rely on community stations to reach wider audiences.

  • We also submitted Testimony in Support of HF4904 to defend democracy by creating better representation for all voters. Election and Redistricting Policy Coordinator, Paul Huffman writes, “HF 4904 effectively balances the needs of cities for an orderly, manageable process, with the needs of voters to have the opportunity to ask for changes in their form of local government.” You can read the report below from Thursday’s State and Local Government Committee to see that this bill had bipartisan support.

Observer Reports

  • LWVMN Observer Corps Member Amy Caucutt

    HF4043 (Prison gerrymandering reform) was presented by author Rep Agbaje with an A-1 amendment which she noted generalizes the technology that may be used to collect data. This bill already appears in the omnibus House Elections bill HF4772 (DE-1 amendment), but has probably made stops in both this committee and civil law, so that the entire omnibus bill does not have to. There were no testifiers, and only one committee member had a question. Rep Nadeau (R) wondered why the author did not include college students. Answer was that students may already choose where to report to the census (college dorm or parents' house), but prisoners have no choice. No other discussion, and the bill passed and was sent to the floor. Coverage from MN House News

  • LWVMN Observer Corps Member Kathleen Oganovic

    (Content warning – this report mentions suicide.)

    HF1930 (Freiberg) - End of Life Options Act - Discussion of Article 1 Section 11 / Insurance or Annuity Policies & Article 2 Section / Suicide Provisions. The Eligibility Criteria for medical aid in dying are- a person must be: 1) An adult, aged 18 or older; 2) Terminally ill with a prognosis of 6 months or less to live; 3) Mentally capable of making an informed healthcare decision; and 4) Resident of Minnesota. Individuals are not eligible because of age or disability.

    Testimony in Favor: Thaddeus Mason Pope / Law Professor at Hamline Mitchell Law - Life and health insurance policies cannot be conditioned upon or be affected by the use or non-use of Medical Aid in Dying (MAID). This is standard language in MAID bills in 10 other states and will be used by 20 other states in future MAID bills.

    Dr. Ellen Kennedy / Executive Director of World Without Genocide - This bill provides insurance protection for patients and their families but keeps insurance policy provisions the same as they were before or after the decision to choose MAID in the following ways: The insurance policy rate cannot be conditional or affected by a patient’s choice of making or rescinding a request for MAID; A patient’s choice of MAID does not invalidate any part of a life, health, or accident insurance policy; An insurance provider cannot deny or change health care benefits otherwise available to a person with a terminal illness who has an existing insurance policy based on the availability of MAID, the person’s request for MAID medication or the absence of a request for MAID medication; An insurance provider may not try to coerce a patient with a terminal disease to choose MAID. When a patient chooses to end his/her life by opting for MAID an insurance policy provider cannot deny the payment of death benefits based on the terms of the policy related to suicide.

    Dr. Michael Tedford / Otolaryngologist Surgeon (Ear, Nose, and Throat Specialist) - said that he is an advocate for his patients. His role as a healer for patients at the end of their lives is to provide comfort and care, to respect patients’ values and to respond to patients’ needs. This includes supporting their decision to utilize MAID and to minimize suffering at the end of life. Patients turn to him for every question related to health insurance coverage and costs for hospice care and comfort care. To his knowledge, coverage has never been denied by an insurance provider.

    Brian Fleming / President of the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors - According to Minnesota Statute, a provider of a life insurance policy issued in our state may exclude or restrict liability for any death benefit in the event that the insured person dies as a result of suicide with one year from the date of the issue of the policy. Also, if the insured person dies by suicide within one year from the date of issue of the policy the insurance policy provider is required to refund all premiums paid for coverage of a death benefit. Said that this statue does not apply to MAID, because choosing to die with MAID is not suicide. This statute exists because an insurance provider does not want a client to buy a life insurance policy for the purpose of family members collecting the death benefit. The insurance provider must assess the buyer’s potential risk to the insurance company. Questions are asked about risky life work / style choices such as a dangerous job or fondness of skydiving to determine the appropriate rate for the type of insurance requested to ensure reasonable insurance rates that will cover anticipated events.

    Testimony in Opposition: Dr. Peter Daly / Orthopedic Surgeon - Article 1 Section 11 does not provide appropriate safeguards to prevent abuse by insurance providers who may want to deny healthcare coverage: The Statutory language in the bill is open ended and the terms such as coercion are not defined.; The bill does not address the obvious incentive for healthcare insurance companies to propose a less expensive course of care which is a conflict of interest.; The bill does not include penalties for insurance providers who will only pay for a less expensive level of care. With no penalties or mechanisms for monitoring behavior of healthcare insurance providers to enforce compliance to pay for the appropriate care for patients with chronic illness, severe illness or disability these patients will be given the potentially unreliable diagnosis of being terminally ill with a prognosis of 6 months or less to live to qualify for MAID. He believes that cancer patients needing expensive treatments like a bone marrow transplant will be denied in favor of MAID.

    Kathy Blaeser / Co-Director of Minnesotans Concerned for Life - This bill will encourage insurance companies to deny coverage for expensive medical treatment in favor of life ending medication if it is passed. It is well known that patients often have to fight insurance providers for coverage of health care. She believes that with the passage of this bill insurance providers will see no need for long-term care for the elderly or disabled.

    Dr. Robert Tibesar / Otolaryngologist Surgeon - Article 1 Section 11 gives insurance providers the advantage in denying coverage for healthcare needs. They are in a business driven by the profit motive with a bureaucracy that supports increasing the cost of premiums to patients and lowering the cost of coverage. When doctors and patients try to fight the system, healthcare coverage is denied or delayed causing patients to give up. Patients will be coerced into choosing Physician Aided Suicide (PAS). This practice will limit healthcare availability for everyone.

    Member Discussion: Representative Harry Niska (R) - Questioned if insurance companies can convince a patient to request MAID. Frieberg’s response. The penalty for doing so would be a felony. MAID bills in other states have worked well with no reports of coercion. Representative Isaac Schultz (R) - He is concerned that the influence of Social Media will over time convince people that MAID is okay. He believes that with no requirement for Medicare or Medicaid patients to be told about all healthcare options stated in the bill, less wealthy citizens will be at a disadvantage as compared to wealthier citizens. Chair and Representative Zach Stephenson’s response - These comments are outside the scope of this hearing. Representative Tim O’Driscoll (R) - He was concerned that this hearing did not discuss Article 1 Section 12 / Death Certificates. He questions the validity of stating death from cancer on a death certificate when a patient has chosen MAID. He believes that the death certificate should state death by life ending medication. It is his belief that by not allowing diseases to flow naturally to a patient’s end of life, we are going to miss out on learning from the deaths of others. Representative Tina Liebling’s response (DFL) - I am bothered by your suggestion that it would be a good action for us to let patients suffer pain related to a terminal disease for the benefit of the rest of us to learn more about how the disease causes death. Your statement is utterly indefensible, and it is absolutely terrifying that you think that way. Frieberg’s response - MAID is not suicide because patients who would choose the MAID option are already dying. Chair Stephenson called for a voice vote - The YES votes won, and the bill will be forwarded to the Ways and Means Committee.

  • LWVMN Observer Corps Member Diane Dahl

    HF2821 (Sencer-Mura) - The bill would establish a process for requesting a racial equity impact note for legislation, specifically with bills that deal with economic development. A process like this has been considered for some years including through a working group report and follows the lead of other states. A racial equity impact note is needed, because hard data on the impact to different racial groups will lead to better, and more equitable decisions made.

    Several individuals testified in support: Vayong Moua, Director of Racial and Health Equity Advocacy for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota, stated this is a moral imperative for our state. There are gross inequities in outcomes for such health concerns such as COVID, cancer, diabetes, and mental health issues which present an annual cost to Minnesota of $2.6 Billion annually, loss of productivity and lives, and family resources. The proposed bill could represent a tool for early detection and prevention, as well as improved access to care.

    Michael E Alward, a Physician with Community University Health Care, stated that Minnesota has the largest health disparities in the country with regards to race. He gave the example of the crack cocaine epidemic which could have been treated realistically as a health care crisis if addressed earlier.

    Nicole Donoso, a Policy Organizer for Voices for Racial Justice gave an example of how a proposed "reform" in the PayDay lending program could have presented undue financial hardship on communities of color if not identified as it was.

    Antonia Wilcoxon, President of the Minnesota Public Health Association, pointed out that such a measure will enhance the government's function in improving the health of Minnesotans by understanding that not all of our communities are affected equally.

    Faith Jackson, Chief Equity and Inclusion Officer for the City of Bloomington, pointed out that increased awareness of the social determinants of health are better understood by this approach.

    An amendment was proposed by Representative Jon Kosnik, to remove some of the suggested data sources in the bill, but it was defeated. Rep. Bernie Perryman spoke of expanding the list of data resources in the bill. Representatives Carlie Kotyza-Witthuhn and Sandra Feist spoke in favor of the bill. It was proposed that the bill be sent to the Health Finance and Policy Committee, but this was defeated on a voice vote. The bill was thus approved to be sent on to the State and Local Government Committee. Coverage from MN House News

  • LWVMN Observer Corps Member Cathy Thom

    HF4904 (Greenman - DFL) - Statutory cities authorized to create wards for election of city council members if approved by voters via a local ballot measure. This bill addresses local vote dilution when having all at-large elections for city councilors can dilute the votes of minority or low income voters so that they don't get any candidates or councilors who they can relate to and are intimately familiar with issues faced by communities. This bill provides an option - it is not a mandate for cities.

    Testifiers: Alex Hassel - League of MN Cities - Testified that LMC does not have a position, but pointed out that only charter cities have the authority to create ward systems, and most cities in MN are statutory cities, not charter cities. The process is complicated, so some tweaking in the amendments has made this a bit easier, but perhaps more could be done to make it even easier.

    Member Discussion: Rep. Jim Joy (R) supports the bill - “To give it back to local control is always in my favor.” Rep. Koznick (R) - Asked how creating wards helps to lessen minority vote dilution. Rep. Greenman replied that minority voters could have 40% of the vote, but may never get a candidate of their choice elected because their votes are diluted in at-large vote across the city, where the majority of voters elect candidates who look and think like them. Rep. Koznick stated that insinuating that all minority voters vote the same is not necessarily true and thus should be "treated with caution." Rep. Greenman replied that statistics bear this out, and if they don't, then ward structures wouldn't be necessary in those cases. Rep. Freiberg (DFL) - Said he likes the bill, and thinks it could go even further in regard to making it easier for statutory cities to create ward structures. Rep. Nadeau (R) - Asked about the complexity of the bill - Rep. Greenman replied that the language to which he is referring has been corrected and simplified within the adopted A1 amendment. The bill was laid over for further discussion. Additional Coverage from MN House News

  • LWVMN Observer Corps Member Cathy Thom

    SF4729 (Carlson - DFL) - Omnibus Elections Policy Bill - This bill includes: the prison gerrymandering bill; Senator Putnam's exceptions to the definition of "lobbyist"; strengthening of doxing rules; campaign finance reporting and fines increased for violations; strengthening of electioneering rules to include "target audience" provisions for emails and texts, and narrows audience to 2500 or more from 10,000 or more; increases options for students to prove their residence for voting purposes; expands absentee ballot witnessing options for those casting them from out of state; expansion and clarification of election and ballot information on non-English language requirements for certain precincts; requires exit pollers to check in with head judges before starting their work; allows preliminary election results to be tentatively reported even if there are still some absentee ballots to count that were turned in on election day; and clarifies the deadline to request a recount of presidential elector votes. The bill also incorporates all elements of the MN Voting Rights Act; the requested option to call a special election to fill certain county office vacancies and the option of appointment for more school board vacancies; calls for a study of possible regulation of lobbyist activities within local jurisdictions; and refines the definition and penalties for illegal use of "deep fake" technology in elections. Other minor provisions were also included - it is a 59-page bill.

    The Republicans offered several amendments. Only a few were accepted:

    Senator Koran (R) offered an amendment which clarified the language regarding all government offices to use the web domain suffix ".gov" if they administer absentee balloting, even townships. He said that there is a cost involved in this, the Voter Fund could help cover this. The amendment was accepted as a friendly amendment and passed via a unanimous voice vote.

    Senator Mathews (R) offered an amendment that would allow school board vacancies to be filled by appointment except in cases where a school board member was removed from their position rather than resigned for benign reasons such as a move or change in personal situation. A clause to shorten the number of days for appointment prior to a November election was rejected after discussion and deleted pending further discussion with school board stakeholders. The amendment as amended passed via 7-6 roll call vote. Senator Marty (DFL) abstained.

    Senator Anderson (R) offered the A14 Amendment, which would require that absentee ballot applications or sample ballots distributed by non-governmental organizations include disclosures regarding who sent it, for what purpose, and that it is not an official ballot. The Amendment is a bill that was originally introduced by Senator Coleman (R).

    One notable amendment that was rejected: Senator Bahr offered an amendment that would move all local elections except cities of the first class to even numbered years. It was a bipartisan bill that did not get time to be heard in committee. A representative from the MN association of School Business Officers (MASBO) said that school elections might be problematic because sometimes referenda are unexpectedly needed to take effect the next year, and they cannot wait until the next even-numbered year to ask voters for that funding. Senator Bahr said that another reason schools like to have referendums in odd numbered years is because they are sometimes more often to pass when turnout is lower, which seems undemocratic. Senator Mitchel (DFL) added that there are problems with school board candidates trying to compete with everyone else for funding and volunteers. Alex Hassel testified that The League of Minnesota Cities knows that some cities like to have their councils elected in odd years so that it doesn't get lost in all of the noise of even year elections. Senators Mitchell, Carlson, and Westlin said that they have to oppose the amendment because the issues are complex, stakeholders need to weigh in more, and a more robust decision must be had in regard to it. The amendment failed via a 6-8 roll call vote.

    The bill passed to be referred to the Judiciary and Public Safety Committee via a voice vote.

  • LWVMN Observer Corps Member Fern Panda

    HF3577 (Jordan) - Packaging Waste and Cost Reduction Act, requires companies to pay to recycle their packaging and by 2032, all of our packaging would have to be reusable, recyclable or compostable. The A4 amendment added an exemption list including medical devices and drugs, pesticides and insecticides and animal medicines. It also exempted newspapers with a circulation of less than 20,000 and edited the statewide recycling list which includes specific collection requirements based on population to account for differences between the Metro and greater Minnesota. Rep. Jordan said that there are two sections that are under the purview of this committee, which are the anti-competitive conduct section and an enforcement section. Both of these sections are standard boilerplate enforcement language consistent with other product stewardship laws on the books.

    Testifiers: Kurt Koudelka from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency said Minnesota generates 6.1 millions of tons of waste per year, but only recycles 45% of it. The MPCA will be charged with oversight of the Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) and the approval and denial of plans. In addition, the agency oversees the implementation of the statewide performance metrics for waste prevention, reuse and recycling issues. There is no need to wait for another report on recycling. This bill has an anti-competitive program similar to other stewardship programs.

    Peter Glessing of Medical Alley says he is still looking at the amendment. He thinks the amendment is a significant step. He is grateful that Rep. Jordan has now put medical devices as an exemption.

    Amber Backus from National Waste and Recycling Association says our companies have been an integral part of Minnesota's nation leading recycling rates but under the bill will no longer have control over the recycling portion of their businesses. The bill empowers brand manufacturers through PRO to establish stewardship plans. These plans decide how NWRA members would be reimbursed for providing recycling services, what the reimbursement rates would be and the terms and conditions for the contracts and this can be done in an anti-competitive way. She says that although MPCA says that they use the standard oversight, she thinks that it is not good enough. Past oversight was developed on new businesses and this one is on existing businesses. The recycling companies have limited due process protection and there are huge penalties of up to $25,000 per day for first-time violators.

    Julie Ketchum of Waste Management would like to come in on the antitrust issues and conflict of interest. She thinks that the brand businesses and the PRO will collaborate with one another behind closed doors, making decisions that benefit some members at the expense of their competitors who are not members. The advisory board appointed by the MPCA has to have recyclers on it. Lastly, there is no legislative oversight for the actions of the MPCA, the PRO or the advisory board.

    Member Discussion: Representative Niska responded that there needs to be a response to the antitrust provisions given that the PRO is making a lot of policy making decisions outside the public view. There is still work that needs to be done. It is not good that one sector of the economy gets together to make the rules on another sector of the economy. Representative Scott echoed what Rep NIska said. Rep. Scott believes that it is alarming and unfair that a few people in the PRO may have a self-interest with an inside tract and thinks that there is still a lot of work to be done. Roll call vote: 8 in favor and 5 against. The vote was along party lines. The bill now goes to the Ways and Means Committee.

Capitol LetterLWV MinnesotaHF4043, HF1930, HF2821, HF4904, SF4729, HF3577