 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Sign up for LWVMN E-News: |
LWVMN Capitol Letter™Volume XXXI Issue 10, July 26, 2005The 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 It has been an interesting year to be on the LWVMN Action Committee, monitoring the Education Finance Committees, the regular session, the special session, and the partial government shutdown. Through all the end-of-session excitement, the Education Finance Working Committee continued to meet and develop the policies that materialized in the final budget. The education advocates were fortunate in the leaders of the education committees in both houses. John Gunyou, Minnesota's finance commissioner in the Carlson administration, honored the few legislators who rose above party lines in a July 19 Star Tribune Op-Ed article. Four of those mentioned were on the Education Conference/Working Committee. They were co-chairs Rep. Barb Sykora (R-33B-Excelsior) and Sen. LeRoy Stumpf (DFL-1-Thief River Falls), and members Rep. Denise Dittrich (DFL-47A-Champlin) and Sen. Steve Kelley (DFL-44-Hopkins). Education lobbyists can confirm Gunyou's observation: "These legislators rose above partisan interests to steer their education committees toward real solutions." Education Working Committee meetings were constructive, and the committee was ready when the financial targets were decided. LWVMN focused on increasing education funding, but not at the expense of health and human services, which was the Governor's original proposal. The painful negotiations ended with a compromise, giving the largest boost to Education in several years and giving more funding for health issues including MinnesotaCare. Thank you to all the League members, your friends and family who took action from our Capitol reports and Action Alerts. Your voices were heard along with all the parents, educators, and citizens who support a strong public education system in Minnesota. What were the results? The Omnibus E-12 finance and policy bill (HF141 2005 special session) covering fiscal years 2006 and 2007 was signed into law at 11:15 a.m. on July 14, 2005. The Bill includes $800 million in total new spending for E-12 programs, which includes a 4% increase in the per-pupil funding in both years. Briefly, the steps along the way include:
When the Racino, income tax increase, and statewide business property tax increases were finally eliminated, and the Governor's new cigarette "health fee" revenue, which he first offered the day before the regular session ended, brought funding to the table, the final result was the following:
The $139 million in new levy options will support some of these programs, which helps districts that are able to pass levy referendums. There was still a $95 million in property tax recognition shift. Some of the new cigarette tax revenue was moved from Education primarily to Health and Human Services, so the MNCare program would remain intact. * The property tax recognition shift is one of the "gimmicks" enacted into law a few years ago to help with the deficit. It works like this: School districts can pass levies and start collecting some level of that funding early (recognize the revenue early). In doing so the Legislature said the state can withhold some of the districts' state education payments for a time because the district is receiving local revenue early, therefore creating a temporary savings to the state. This coming biennium that shift allows the state to book "savings" of $95 million. ** The property tax shift is more palatable to the districts than the payment shift (when the state just says we're going to pay you late) because they actually receive some revenue (early property tax revenue) which helps with their cash flow. The payment shift creates real problems for everyone as it hampers cash flow. Thanks to Sam Walseth, lobbyist for the Coalition for Children with Disabilities, for this explanation. Early Childhood EducationPre-K EducationLWVUS Position: Children at Risk LWVUS supports policies and programs at all levels... that promote the well being, encourage the full development and ensure the safety of all children. LWVMN Position: Equal Opportunity Support of increased state responsibility in creating equal public educational opportunities for all Minnesota children.... LWVMN Position: Equal Opportunity Support of policies to ensure equality of opportunity in... education and other public services for all persons. Child CareLWVUS Position: LWVUS supports programs, services and policies at all levels of government to expand the supply of affordable, quality child care for all who need it, in order to increase access to employment and to prevent and reduce poverty. LWVMN Position: Support of coordinated public policies and funding to ensure safe, affordable, quality child care throughout the state. Fran Hesch, lobbyist, (952) 936-0205 Although the House and Senate were extremely supportive of Early Child Care and Education throughout the session, the bills came out of conference committee greatly compromised. The picture was a bit brighter for Early Childhood Education than for Child Care. Early Childhood EducationMN Early Learning Foundation (MELF) was given $1 million. This is seed money for a public/private partnership to invest in Early Care and Education. The business community believes $30 million can be raised over the next few years. Head Start funding was restored by $4 million and Early Childhood Family Education (ECFE) funding was restored by $5.5 million. Although this represents a move in the right direction, this does not restore these programs to levels of a few years ago. Kindergarten readiness screening for three-year olds was adopted as policy (without funding) as was the coordination of early learning programs. Child CareThe proposed freeze on state rates for child care providers' reimbursements was negotiated to be lifted and rates increased 1.75% in Jan. 2006 for one year only. This means the proposed two-year freeze which was going to cost the child-care industry $70 million will amount to approximately $61.5 million; this will benefit child-care providers only a small amount. Although many working families are struggling to remain employed due to the high cost of child care, eligibility for receiving child care assistance was not broadened, and therefore remains largely inadequate. Health CareLWVUS Position: The League of Women Voters of the United States 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. (1993) The League favors a national health insurance plan financed through general taxes in place of individual insurance premiums. Mary Lou Hill, lobbyist, (612) 374-4218 Health Care WorkersAccording to the Seniors and Workers for Quality Coalition, the 2006-2007 state budget for health and human services was worth the wait. The package includes 2.26% COLA (cost of living) for each of the next two years for nursing homes and community-based services for the elderly and disabled. Seventy-five percent of the COLA is earmarked for employees and must not be used for management fees, administrators or central office staff. (Management increases and other expenses can come from the other 25%.) The bulk of the new money may be spent only for increased wages, benefits, payroll taxes, and staff increases. Now specified in law are union "sign off" language, Department of Human Services (DHS) approval of spending plans, and public posting of how the new money will be used. One disappointment is that in the first year nursing homes may count salary and benefit increases first provided after July 1, 2003 toward the 75% of COLA. Detailed public cost reports and DHS audit authority for nursing homes continue. Work continues as well on building a new nursing home reimbursement system to recognize and compensate quality staffing, but the implementation is gradual. Most of the initial measures in the system and those under development are tied to staffing (levels, turnover, retention, pool use). One percent of the nursing home COLA in the second year will be used to begin the new pay-for-performance system, so homes that score well will get even more. The Nursing Home Scholarship program remains intact. The scholarship program is finally extended to direct care workers in community-based services, with new funding through the Board of Nursing. MinnesotaCare remains intact, with improvements in coverage, for those workers who depend on the program for health insurance. The Seniors and Workers Coalition believes its advocacy made a difference. The Minnesota Universal Health Care Coalition (MUHCC) made itself known during the session by opposing the Governor's plan to remove 41,000 adults from MinnesotaCare and by working on legislation to remove Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) from administering the state's health programs. Also, MUHCC got the Prescription Drug Volume Purchasing Bill (SF22/HF839) introduced with bi-partisan support this session. Universal Health CareThe Coalition has been meeting with other groups around the state during the summer to prepare for next year's session. It plans meetings with legislators and with other advocacy groups as it works on bills for next session. Discussions indicate a need for a legislative health-care reform caucus to enable legislators and reform-minded individuals and groups to better plan, propose and enact health reform legislation in 2006. If you have the interest and the time to become an LWVMN intern lobbyist in this area, please contact the author or one of the Action Committee Co-Chairs: Anne Salisbury or Gwen Myers. 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. Pauline Nixon, lobbyist, (612) 872-0946 While the session went into overtime, mental health advocates have much to be thankful for. A large part of the credit for this year's accomplishments should go to Joel Ulland, Public Policy Director for the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, MN Chapter, and John Tschida, Vice President for Public Affairs/Research at the Courage Center, who together co-chaired the Coalition for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD). This Coalition developed a bill, the Minnesotans with Disabilities Act of 2005, and worked hard to get it passed. They were eminently successful; nearly every major component of their proposed bill became law. Based on Reports from CCD and from the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI), here are some of the accomplishments this session: MinnesotaCare: Eligibility for adults without children in MinnesotaCare was retained. In addition, the $5,000 cap on MinnesotaCare services was removed and services provided by a psychologist and licensed social worker were added. There will be co-payments for doctors' visits and visits to the emergency room. Premiums will be slightly increased. Dental Services: The $500 cap on dental services for Medical Assistance (MA), General Assistance Medical Care (GAMC), and MinnesotaCare enrollees was eliminated. This cap has significantly limited access to dental services and resulted in increased hospital emergency room utilization. Dental care is very important for people who take medication that creates dry mouth or affects one's gums. Co-payments: People on MA and GAMC will pay a maximum of $12 per month for their prescriptions. Previously the cap was $20 maximum per month. People living in group residential settings will be allowed to keep an additional $20 per month - which gives them more money to pay for their co-payments. Post Partum Depression: The Commissioner of Health, working with health care facilities, health and mental health providers, consumers and families, will develop materials and information on post partum depression - including treatment resources. Physicians, midwives and other health care professionals providing prenatal care to women must make this information available to women and their families. Hospitals and other health care facilities must provide departing new mothers and fathers and other family members with the information. Supportive Housing: The bonding bill contained $12 million for permanent supportive housing for people experiencing long-term homelessness. This is for persons who have been without a permanent residence for at least 12 months or on at least four occasions in the last three years, or are at significant risk of lacking a permanent residence for at least 12 months or on at least four occasions in the last three years. The housing must provide or coordinate with linkages to services necessary for residents to maintain housing stability and maximize opportunities for education and employment. While other gains were made, these were the most critical. During the session we also tried to get an increase in funding for the Bridges housing program for persons with serious mental illness. We were not successful and, of course, we will try again next year. Working with NAMI and job counselors from RISE, Inc. in Minneapolis and St. Cloud, we were successful in our efforts to have $600,000 added to Extended Employment programs across the state that stood to lose federal matching funds. The Governor's proposal to cut adults without children from MinnesotaCare drew a particularly strong public response and all of your calls and emails to the Governor and legislators made a difference. The Senate held out until it was agreed these adults would not be cut. Leading that effort was Sen. Linda Berglin (DFL-61-Minneapolis). She and Rep. Fran Bradley (R-29B-Rochester) co-chaired the working group that met in the special session on these health care issues. Their working relationship in those final days was positive and the many lobbyists observing their work were pleased to see it. Reproductive ChoiceLWVUS Position: Protect the constitutional right of the individual to make reproductive choices. Anne Salisbury, Action Committee Co-chair, (651) 430-1091 Minnesota's Legislative Special Session did nothing to further the League's Pro-Choice position. Though the bill for Comprehensive Sex Education in the schools did pass the Senate during the regular session, it was never brought up in the House. The Special Session conference committee (working group) talked and argued considerably about the measure. In the end, however, there were not enough votes to pass the amendment that would add Comprehensive Sex Education to the Omnibus Education Bill. The only good news is that this year was the closest legislators have ever come to requiring basic, comprehensive sex education in our schools. The Unborn Child Pain Prevention Act did pass as part of a major health bill. It states that doctors must inform pregnant women of possible (as yet unproven) pain to a late-term fetus in the event of an abortion, so that the woman can request an anesthetic for the fetus. Doctors regularly perform surgery to alleviate defects discovered in fetuses and do not use anesthesia. Therefore to require it for late-term abortions does not make much sense. The law affects about 1% of abortions performed annually. The apparent intent of the bill is to threaten doctors and thus reduce their willingness to perform abortions. And this can be seen as a threat to a woman's right to choose. Such tactics as the above have lessened the number of skilled practitioners of abortions in Minnesota. Similarly they have placed doctors in positions where they are subject to legal liabilities and cannot attend to the best health care needs of their patients. The number of places where physicians can learn how to perform abortions safely has also been affected by such restrictive legislation. Women who face unintended pregnancies have a right to make their own reproductive choices. The Legislature is chipping away at that right by reducing the number of doctors who are willing to provide abortion services. Fortunately, funding for Family Planning Special Projects (FPSP) was not cut. This means that local public health departments, tribal governments and 501(c)3 non-profit organizations can still apply for FPSP funds to provide family planning services to low-income, high risk individuals in Minnesota (Minnesota Department of Health website). Certainly with $2.5 million now available as yearly grants through the Positive Alternatives Act (Capitol Letter June 9, 2005) to crisis pregnancy centers endorsed by Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, family planning funding is the minimum the legislature could do to provide balance and give women options during their reproductive years. As you may recall, crisis pregnancy centers counsel women with unintended pregnancies to carry their pregnancies to term and do not even mention the possibility of an abortion. The 2006 Legislative session will surely address these issues again. 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. LWVMN Position: 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. Water Resources:LWVMN Position: 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. Land Use:LWVMN Position: 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. Air Quality:LWVMN Position: Support measures to reduce air pollution from vehicular and stationary sources Solid Waste:LWVMN Position: Support of measures to reduce generation of solid waste and ensure safe treatment, storage and disposal of all wastes. Allene Moesler, lobbyist, (507) 263-0726 For those who understand and appreciate the role that our wetlands, rivers, lakes and streams play in our quality of life and the contributions they make to the state economy, extreme disappointment best describes the action (and inaction) of the 2005 legislative session. The "Clean Water Legacy," if enacted, would have contributed $80 million toward the implementation of the Federal Clean Water Act in Minnesota. Even a coalition of major business, agriculture, local government and environmental organizations was able to agree with the legislature on the importance of protecting Minnesota's premier water resources for future generations. However, in the face of the "No New Taxes" pledge, there was no agreement on a funding source, so there is no "Clean Water Legacy." LWVMN served on a team with other Minnesota Environmental Partnership (MEP) organizations to defend the rights of local communities. The goal was to ensure that local communities still had the power to use effective planning and zoning tools when faced with development pressures. An effort to make local control more difficult by allowing just one member of a local board to determine the need for economic assessment documentation was defeated. At the end of session only some minor notification changes that were agreed to by the lead MEP organizations were made. The issues are likely to resurface in the 2006 session. The following was adapted from John Tuma's comments on the MEP website: The bonding bill had a total of $110 million in long-term funding for conservation and the environment. This was 73% of MEP's recommended bonding levels - an excellent result in the current climate. This level of conservation and environmental investments was one of the larger in the last decade. The proposals included some of our marquee projects, such as Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), Wildlife Management Area's and wastewater infrastructure. The Legislature failed to provide adequate funding for the bread-and-butter environmental programs. Less than a decade ago spending on these programs was more than 2% of the state budget. The budget passed by this Legislature will give only about 1% of our state budget to programs necessary to protect our outdoor heritage. This is the lowest funding in 30 years. The environment budget was one of the worst performing budget categories this session. This Legislature showed no inclination to provide any meaningful investments in our state's outdoor heritage. An effort to keep mercury out of Minnesota's water and fish made its debut in the Legislature this year. The ability to develop a strategy was hindered by the creation of new federal rules in March and by Minnesota Pollution Control Agency development of statewide goals under the Federal Clean Water Act for Mercury. There was a significant amount of grassroots education and some positive alliance-building with the fishing organizations in the state. Discussions at the Capitol indicate that the effort succeeded in putting this issue onto the legislative radar screen for the future. The MPCA is holding mercury Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) meetings statewide over the summer. 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 It's hard to believe that, with 70-80% of Minnesotans agreeing with our position on regulating Off-Highway Vehicles (OHVs), we can lose in the Legislature, but that's the way it worked this year. In fact, we lost ground that we'd gained in 2003. The governor and legislature did not just fail to impose further restrictions on OHVs, including ATVs, dirt-bike motorcycles and mudder trucks. They removed the restrictions we have on 74% of our state forest land by exempting the state forests north of Highway 2 from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) forest reclassification procedure and leaving them open to the "go-anywhere" policy that now exists. LWVMN and the 47 organizations that signed on to support the Minnesota Environmental Partnership's Protect Our Water package are sorely disappointed. This betrays the 2003 legislative compromise worked out among the DNR, legislators, ATV enthusiasts and the conservation community. The Environmental Working Group members voting to undo the 2003 compromise were Sen. Dallas Sams (DFL-11-Staples); Sen. Tom Bakk (DFL-6-Cook); Sen. Gary Kubly (DFL-20-Granite Falls); Rep. Tom Hackbarth (R-48A-Cedar); Rep. Dennis Ozment (R-37B-Rosemount); Rep. David Dill (DFL-06A-Crane Lake); Rep. Bob Gunther (R-24A-Fairmont); and Rep. Maxine Penas (R-01A-Badger). Sen. Kubly was the pivotal vote, and he was put in the position of trading his vote on this issue for support for local control over feed lot decisions. Our allies on this conference committee were Sen. Dennis Frederickson (R-21-New Ulm) and Sen. Ellen Anderson (DFL-66-St. Paul). It appears that Majority Leader Sen. Dean Johnson (DFL-13-Willmar) chose the membership of the committee with an eye to pleasing the northern Democrats at the expense of the environment. Sen. Kubly should not have been placed in that position and this issue never should have reached the floor. The House members of the committee were all motorized recreation enthusiasts, appointed by Speaker Rep. Steve Sviggum (R-28B-Kenyon). Sen. Johnson knew it was up to the Senate to protect the environment. When the bill reached the Senate floor on June 30, Sen. John Marty (DFL-54-Roseville) offered an amendment to protect the state forest land and remove the ATV language from the bill. It passed 34-25! Almost immediately after this vote, Majority Leader Johnson called for a caucus meeting. Sen. Johnson convinced the Senate Democrats that they needed to reconsider the Marty amendment that had passed and send the House an unaltered bill. This was a very difficult decision for many DFL environmentalists to make - follow the majority leader or vote for good environmental policy. When the DFL caucus returned to the Senate floor, they voted to reconsider and the second vote on the amendment failed, 26-37. (This maneuver was reminiscent of the House DFL caucus meeting on May 5 when House members were apparently instructed not to offer amendments to Rep. Hackbarth's ATV bill and not to pressure members to vote for pro-environment amendments.) After passing in the Senate, the bill quickly moved over to the House. In spite of well-reasoned arguments from Rep. Alice Hausman (DFL-66B-St. Paul) and Rep. Jean Wagenius (DFL-62B-Minneapolis), among others, the bill passed 93 to 41. In addition to opening 74% of our state forest land to ATVs, this legislative "compromise" set a 30-year low in conservation funding, failed to pass the Clean Water Legacy Act, failed to hold reckless ATV riders accountable for the destruction they cause, and failed to fund programs to curtail invasive species that threaten our waters. On the plus side, it did not provide $400,000 in the biennium to OHV lobbying organizations such at ATVAM to educate their members and police their activities, and it did not open the North Shore Trail to ATVs. Unfortunately, it did provide funds for the DNR to study this proposal. One wonders what percent of the state's population has to support environmental protection before the leadership of both parties notices. Please don't forget this issue if you see your legislators in the next few months, and write to thank those who share your concern for the environment. 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 In addition to energy developments reported in the last Capitol Letter, during the special session the sales tax exemption for solar electricity equipment was extended in perpetuity and expanded to include solar thermal (hot water) systems, in addition to electrical. This exemption, which helps lower the cost of solar energy, had been set to expire on August 1, 2005. Unfortunately, the Renewable Energy Standard (RES), which would require 20% of Minnesota's electricity to be generated from renewables, did not pass during the Special Session. It will be considered again in 2006. Monticello Nuclear Power PlantThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) held an Open House in Monticello, Minnesota, on June 30. It focused on Xcel Energy's application to relicense the Monticello Nuclear Power Plant; the current license for Monticello expires in 2010. Relicensing would allow the plant to operate until 2030. Because there is room in the storage pool only for waste generated through its current license term, 65 dry cask storage units would have to be added for spent nuclear fuel. Currently there is no dry cask storage at Monticello, so in addition to relicensing, Xcel has also applied to the state's Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and the NRC for the dry cask storage facility. Monticello is located along the Mississippi upstream from the Twin Cities. At the NRC Open House the public learned that relicensing the plant is based on the assumption that electricity demand will rise 2% annually. This is an arguable assumption since the state Department of Commerce projects a 1.6% load growth as the median forecast. Missing from the dialog was any discussion about reducing the consumption of electricity. The NRC's environmental study will include the "no-build" option to determine the effects on the environment if Monticello is not relicensed. Coal and natural gas plants which emit pollutants were presented by proponents at the Open House as the only viable alternatives to nuclear. Renewable energy proponents note, however, that Denmark now gets 20% of its electricity from the wind, so it does appear that wind turbines are a viable source of generation and should be included as an alternative source of power, as stand alone generation or in combination with other generation sources. The "Welcome to the NRC's Open House" handout clearly stated, "The NRC is gathering information necessary to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in support of the proposed renewal of the operating license for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant" (emphasis added.) The purpose of an EIS is to determine whether a proposal deserves support, not to gather evidence to support a decision already made. The NRC seems to be subverting the whole evaluation process. In 2003 the state authorized Xcel Energy to add more storage casks at the Prairie Island Nuclear Plant. Today, decisions to allow more storage for nuclear waste are in the hands of the PUC--a five-member board appointed by the Governor rather than the legislature. The public comment period on the scope of the NRC's EIS ends on August 2. Comments on specific environmental issues can be e-mailed to MonticelloEIS@nrc.gov Minnesota's Public Utilities Commission is also moving forward on Monticello's dry cask storage request. To get on the list-serve, contact the PUC, Robin.Benson@state.mn.us and the Environmental Quality Board's John.Wachtler@state.mn.us. The licenses for the two nuclear reactors at Prairie Island will expire in 2013 and 2014. Xcel Energy's 2004 Resource Plan clearly states that while Xcel seeks to relicense operations at Prairie Island and Monticello, coal-fired plants will probably remain the "base-load resource." CoalThere are several plans for coal plants in the works either in or near Minnesota: (1) Big Stone II--a 650 megawatt (MW) facility in South Dakota; (2) Coal Creek--a 500 MW facility in North Dakota; (3) a 790 MW facility in Council Bluffs, Iowa; (4) Excelsior Energy's proposed Mesaba plant, a 530 MW coal gasification plant initially slated for a vacant taconite facility on the Iron Range, but which now may be located on a 1000 wooded acre site near Big Diamond Lake in Itasca County, as noted in the Star Tribune on July 5; (5) Great River Energy is considering a 250-500 MW coal or coal gasification plant near Rosemount; and (6) Xcel is considering a 550 MW coal burning facility in Rosemount. ImmigrationLWVMN Position: LWVMN supports incorporating immigrants into our communities.... 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. Judy Stuthman, lobbyist, (651) 644-8588 The 2005 Legislative Session saw the DREAM ACT introduced for the fourth time, but not for the last time. The DREAM ACT would allow students who have attended a Minnesota high school for two or more years, graduated or achieved the equivalent, and been accepted into a state college or university to pay in-state tuition rates regardless of their immigration status. Since it enjoyed bi-partisan support from Republicans and Democrats, urban and rural legislators, passage seemed likely. Then two days before the regular session adjourned, the Governor insisted that it and only it be pulled from the Higher Education Omnibus Bill…and it was. On June 6, during the special session, it was introduced again as a stand-alone bill, but apparently no action was taken. Several hundred young Minnesota high school students will work again to gain its passage next session. It is not clear why the Governor wanted this bill pulled, but some speculated that he feared that it would violate federal law, based on claims made by opponents of a similar law in Kansas; however, on July 5, 2005, the U.S. District Court in Kansas dismissed all counts of the complaint against the Kansas law filed by FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform). Kansas is one of nine states that have enacted similar laws since 2001, but it is the only one that has been sued. Other states include California, Illinois, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and Washington. Twenty-one other states have considered it. Five states have tried to pass legislation restricting undocumented immigrants from receiving in-state tuition (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, North Carolina and Virginia), but none of these efforts has been successful. A new problem has arisen as some of the first undocumented students graduate from colleges. They do not have work visas, and it can take years to obtain that legal document. These students have lived in Minnesota, graduated from our high schools, received good grades, and have been accepted into a college. What could be better for the students and the citizens of Minnesota than for them to continue their education, graduate, and become working, taxpaying, and contributing members of our community? Something should be done to ensure that, as they graduate from college, they are able to change their immigration status to allow them this opportunity. |
|||||||