The Administration proposes the consolidation of the state's Childcare Assistance Programs. To be eligible for benefits under the proposed consolidated system, families must have incomes at or below 50% of the State Median Income (SMI) and be working 20 hours a week (i.e. Basic Sliding Fee) or have an approved MFIP employment plan. MFIP families will transition off the system when their incomes reach 75% of SMI. (MFIP: MN Family Investment Program assists low-income families working toward self-sufficiency.)

Until this proposal, Basic Sliding Fee childcare has been subject to a separate capped appropriation, consistently resulting in a shortfall and waiting list of eligible participants, currently about 3,400 working families. To be eligible for Basic Sliding Fee, a working family must fall below 75% of the State Median Income (SMI). With the proposed consolidation of the Childcare Assistance Programs, the Administration reduces the income eligibility from 75% to 50% of the SMI.

The Administration wants to say it has "fully funded" childcare and eliminated waiting lists. However, by lowering the eligibility from 75% to 50%, they are eliminating the waiting list by eliminating participants. Under the proposed guidelines, 6,000 families currently receiving assistance would no longer be eligible. Traditionally, the Basic Sliding Fee program has worked well in creating an incentive for self-sufficiency. Instead, lowering the eligibility will effectively create a disincentive to work for a large population of currently working families.

The Administration also proposes to eliminate the state's Dependent Care Tax Credit, a $500 refundable tax credit. This tax credit is targeted towards the same families eligible for Basic Sliding Fee. With the elimination of this tax credit, not only do many working families lose their eligibility for childcare assistance they will also lose the tax credit.

In July 2002, unless state law is changed, an estimated 5,200 families will use up their current 60-month lifetime limit as participants in the MN Family Investment Program (MFIP) and will no longer be eligible for assistance. Is it ethical or effective to impose an arbitrary deadline because they are not achieving self-sufficiency fast enough? Keep in mind that the vast majority of participants who use MFIP do all that is expected of them. Did you know that more than two-thirds of people served by MFIP are children? We need to promote, not erode the anti-poverty intent of MFIP. The issues around MFIP and TANF (Federal block grant $: Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) spending are complex and numerous: time limits, sanctions, education and training, childcare, affordable housing, assistance to legal non-citizens, teen pregnancy prevention, and more. The administration proposes increasing the maximum MFIP sanction to 50% for participants not in compliance. Increasing sanctions mistakenly focuses on a punitive approach, rather than providing more effective methods of assistance for families having difficulty achieving self-sufficiency.

Choice is going to be under even more attacks this year based on last fall’s election results. The State Senate, which for many years has staved off the attacks on Minnesota women’s reproductive rights, has now lost its pro-choice advantage. At best, we are even with up to three Senators that could vote either way.

Late-Term Abortion Ban (HF 42): The anti-choice legislators in the House were fast at it with the introduction of a bill to ban late-term abortion (HF 42) on the second day of the 2001 session. This bill’s intent is to prohibit late-term abortions entirely, even in the event where the woman’s health or life is at stake. Again, the anti-choice lobby uses the term ‘partial birth’ which is misleading and inflammatory. This type of procedure is already prohibited under current statutes with exceptions relating to the woman’s health. There is no Senate companion to HF 42 at this point, which means it will not get anywhere without support in both bodies. We will be following this closely.

State Constitutional Amendment (HF 54/SF 51): The next initiative for the anti-choice legislators this session is to amend the Minnesota State Constitution to read as follows: "Sec. 13. Nothing in this constitution may be construed to relate to abortion in a manner different from the Constitution of the United States. The proposed amendment shall be submitted to the people at the 2002 general election. The question submitted shall be:

Shall the Minnesota constitution be amended to provide that it may not be interpreted
to relate to abortion in a manner different from the United States Constitution?"

On the surface it looks to be a non-issue because the U.S. Constitution does not at the present time contain any provision pertaining to abortion. However, there is an anti-choice strategy at work:

• The anti-choice lobby wants to push this amendment through as many state legislatures as possible. Once this is accomplished, they hope to amend the U.S. Constitution to make abortion illegal throughout the country.

• By mirroring federal law, all current protections in MN law would be wiped out. This bill is an attack to public funding of abortions for low-income women and the privacy laws that MN has protected for so many years.

• This type of legislation only requires a simple majority of votes in each body to be placed on the 2002 ballot and does not require the Governor's signature, thus by-passing the chance for a veto from Governor Ventura. If this issue does get placed on the 2002 ballot, it will require a major public education effort to combat our opposition.

24-Hour Waiting Period (HF 262/SF 217) and (HF 410): The third tactic the anti-choice legislators are trying again is the 24-hour waiting period before a woman can receive an abortion. They call it ‘Informed Consent’ or, misleadingly, ‘A Woman’s Right to Know’. The language of Senate File 217 (HF 262) is much the same as that of the one passed last year but vetoed by the Governor. A second version (HF 410) has also been introduced. The legislation requires a woman seeking an abortion to be provided specified information from the physician performing the abortion and then wait 24 hours to obtain the procedure. This legislation is designed specifically to create barriers for women who wish to obtain an abortion. Doctors' names would also be disclosed. The intent to disclose the name of the doctor performing the procedure - we believe - is in order to intimidate and harass these professionals so providers give up the practice. The legislation includes injunctions on the clinics in an attempt to close them and language that infringes on a patient’s right to privacy.

Unlike the proposed constitutional amendment, the bills will need the governor's signature to become law. Because of the uncertainty now in the Senate, it could very well be that Governor Ventura will be our sole defender on these issues. In addition to contacting your own legislators to let them know how you feel about the erosion of our reproductive rights, contact the Governor’s office to thank him for last year’s veto and to let him know that we expect no less from him this year. Governor Jesse Ventura: 651-296-3391 (metro) or 800-657-3717 (out-state). You may write to the Governor at: 130 State Capitol, 75 Constitution Ave., St. Paul, MN 55155.

Racial profiling is the practice by law enforcement officers of initiating actions based on the race, ethnicity or national origin of an individual, rather than the behavior of that individual. It therefore violates the civil rights of citizens of color, and undermines public confidence in the police. The first step toward eliminating racial profiling is identifying it.

Senator Linda Berglin is sponsoring a bill (# not available at publication) that will require all law enforcement officers in the state to record the following information for all drivers stopped:

• the reason for the stop
• the race and gender of the driver
• whether the driver and/or the vehicle was searched, and if so, the justification for and results of the search
• whether the driver was ticketed and/or arrested

Unlike the bill sponsored by Representative Richard Stanek (HF 505), which would only suggest that law enforcement agencies record this data voluntarily, Senator Berglin's bill would ensure that data is collected thoroughly and uniformly throughout the state. Senator Berglin's bill also includes provisions for anti-profiling training for police officers, and implementation of accountability measures to encourage officers and agencies to eliminate the practice of racial profiling.

Battered women's services are now included in the Dept. of Public Safety and that budget faces a $3.5 million cut. The MN Coalition for Battered Women (MCBW) and the MN Coalition Against Sexual Assault (MCASA) are working with legislators to craft a package bill combining policy and funding, in addition to restoring the funding cuts. Their goals are: (1) a domestic violence omnibus bill, (2) seeking custody presumption in family law that would preclude abusers from getting custody of children, and (3) eliminating the slated sunset of the advisory councils. We will keep you informed.