Legislative Update
Dear Neighbors,
Thankfully, there are only three days left – including today – to pass bills in St. Paul before we adjourn. Things are moving and changing quickly, making it extremely difficult to know what will come to the floor next. Several bills remain that the majority would like to pass that I’m not convinced will make life better for Minnesotans. However, I remain hopeful that some of my friends across the aisle will have the decency to work with us to find common-sense and bipartisan solutions.
What’s Left?
With the limited time left, a few large bills remain to be heard on the House floor, in addition to the numerous conference committee reports being returned from the Senate. Conference committees are where the differences between House and Senate versions of a bill are discussed to align the language and send to the governor. These are harder to track as they all vary in the time they take in negotiation, and we are never 100% sure when the majority will bring them to the floor.
Bills, on the other hand, are much easier to track. Though anything can happen in these last few days, here are the remaining bills we expect to be heard at some point.
-
SF37 – Equal Rights Amendment
-
HF 4746 – Uber and Lyft Bill
-
HF 5274 – Sports betting authorization and prohibition of historic Horse Racing Game
-
HF 3267 – Ranked choice voting for local elections
-
HF 4657 – Criminal defense relating to a victim’s sexual orientation limited
-
HF 5162 & HF 5220 – Cash and general obligation bonding bills
These remaining bills are somewhat complicated and, in some cases, very partisan. As time winds down this session, I fear time will run out before we can find serious and common-sense solutions Minnesotans deserve. One party may be running the state today, but that doesn’t mean that one party has all the right answers.
We’re debating the “New ERA” bill on the floor as I write this. It is a very different statement than the one Minnesotans made when we ratified the national Equal Rights Amendment in 1973. Minnesotans deserve a constitution that recognizes that every person is entitled to equal rights and justice under the law regardless of who they are.
If this bill passes, the following ballot question will be placed to voters in the 2026 general election:
"Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to say that all persons shall be guaranteed equal rights under the laws of this state, and shall not be discriminated against on account of race, color, national origin, ancestry, disability, or sex, including pregnancy, gender, and sexual orientation?"
The problem many of us have is that this bill purports that the Minnesota Constitution doesn’t protect equal rights, that the Minnesota Human Rights Act is inadequate, and that we need to change our constitution to include only certain groups for constitutional protection.
Glaringly omitted from this list are age, religious institutions, and the freedom of religion. That’s part of the problem when a list is established. Obviously, there will be omissions. All means all and equal rights must include everyone. This proposal cherry-picks certain groups to provide constitutional protections to, leaving other groups behind.
|
 The other bills are also largely problematic. The so-called “Uber and Lyft fix” does not prevent Uber and Lyft from leaving Minnesota because Uber and Lyft did not agree to what the bill contains. The sports betting bill, while it does legalize sports gambling, does damage to our local charities like your VFWs or local youth sports organizations. They will receive a small tax cut, but nothing close enough to offset the losses imposed last year. Statewide Ranked Choice Voting is not ready for prime time. It remains confusing, doesn’t improve voter participation, and frankly, it’s unnecessary.
Paid Family and Medical Leave
Last year, the House passed a bill creating a public plan mandating employers provide for up to 20 weeks of paid family and medical leave. The program is paid for by employees and employers with a new payroll tax. Only 13 states have a program like this, and none have one so expansive or expensive. The “technical correction” bill heard in the House this week added another $735 million in costs before the program has even started. Policies that ignore costs and economic realities are always a bad idea, even if the underlying idea is a good one. To make a program like this work, we must work together and find the proper balance between costs and benefits.
Have a good weekend,
Danny Nadeau
|
