March 21, 2000 Legislative Newsletter
|HOME| CALENDAR | ACTION | LEGISLATIVE | MN NOW TIMES | ACTIVIST LINKS | SITE MAP |
"Just go out there and do what you have to do." ---Martina Navratilova
The session is nearing its end. In these final weeks things will move rapidly so it is important to respond to these actions as soon as you get them. If you do not have much time, stay focused on the most pressing issues: Choice and MFIP Sanctions. Phone calls will be the best way to contact your legislators at this point. (For phone numbers call Senate Information at 1-888-234-1112 or House Information at 1-800-657-3550.) When actions refer to contacting House and Senate leadership this means Steve Sviggum and Tim Pawlenty in the House, and Roger Moe and Ember Reichgott Junge in the Senate.
Rachel Callanan, Legislative Coordinator
Kathleen Murphy, Legislative Committee Chair
Choice:
Oppose "Women’s Right to Know" Legislation! This legislation, also known as "informed consent" or 24-hour waiting period, requires a woman seeking an abortion to be provided adequate information from the physician performing the abortion and then wait 24 hours to obtain the procedure. It was designed specifically to create barriers for women, especially those who must travel distances to get an abortion. Doctor's names would also be required to be released to patients making appointments, creating a very dangerous situation for doctors as they can more easily be targets of violence and harassment. In both the Minnesota House and Senate, a repeat of tactics by anti-choice legislators and lobbyists was used to apply the bill to the Health and Human Services Omnibus Finance bills. The Omnibus bills are multi-million dollar funding bills with allocations for such items as nursing homes and the large TANF Reserve proposal discussed below. By attaching the 24-hour waiting period legislation to a necessary funding bill, anti-choice extremists hope to force members of the House & Senate to accept their unnecessary restrictions on abortion.
The Senate was able to adopt gentler language provided by Senator John Hottinger (DFL–24, Mankato). The Hottinger amendment replaces the 24-hour waiting period with a one-hour period, takes out the physician disclosure and offers the information and waiting period on a voluntary basis. The 24-hour wait was reapplied by an amendment offered by Charlie Berg (I–13, Chokio) passing by a vote of 34-30. The next opportunity to withdraw any of this language is in the conference committee, which is where the omnibus bill is headed since the Senate version does not match the House bill. With six different areas being covered in the omnibus bill, it’s anyone’s guess as to which legislators might be on the conference committee to determine the fate of the restrictions. One last resort is the Governor. Ventura has said over and over again that he will veto any legislation that further restricts abortion. If he holds true to his word, the Omnibus funding bill may get wiped out altogether and the two houses may not have the required 2/3 vote to override his decision.
Action: Contact legislators and ask them to make it their priority to fight any anti-choice legislation included in these omnibus bills. Call the Governor and thank him for his strong position on choice.
Safe Haven/Newborns Bill: The "feel good bill of the session" required close monitoring by both the pro-choice groups and the Archdiocese of St. Paul to keep the MCCL (Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life) from using the bill as a vehicle for abortion legislation. Senate File 2615 (Foley) allows hospitals to receive unharmed newborns with no criminal prosecution to the persons who drop off a baby within 72 hours of birth. The bill sailed through three Senate committees with minor amendments and passed 59-0 on the Senate floor on February 28th. The House version (HF 2945) authored by Rep. Barb Sykora (R–43B, Excelsior) was not so lucky, despite two letters from Archbishop Harry Flynn requesting urgency and "no amendments [be] attached which would place its passage at risk in either body." The House majority ignored the request and has kept the language that could eventually be tied to the "Women’s Right to Know" abortion legislation. The bill has yet to be approved by the full House and if the language is not changed, the two versions will go to a conference committee of both Senate and House members.
Action: Contact House members and ask them to keep the Newborns Bill free of abortion restrictions.
Economic Justice Issues:
TANF Reserve:
As described in the previous issue of the Legislative Newsletter, Minnesota’s TANF Reserve is the unspent portion of the federal block grant money the state received to fund its welfare program, Minnesota Family Investment Plan (MFIP). This unspent money is at risk of being taken back by the federal government unless it is used for welfare programs in the state. Gov. Ventura’s administration developed a strong proposal to use $173 million of the TANF Reserve for a number of programs targeted at hard-to-employ MFIP participants. MN NOW embraces the Governor’s proposals; however, they have not come through the legislative process unscathed.
Oppose increased MFIP Sanctions! The first and most urgent message to legislators is to oppose 100% sanctions. The house version of the TANF Reserve spending, sponsored by Rep. Goodno, includes a 100% sanction of a family’s MFIP grant after six instances of noncompliance with the program’s requirements. (The Governor’s proposal did not include 100% sanctions and this provision was taken out of the Senate version in committee.) This type of sanction is unacceptable for at least three reasons: 1.) It is a punitive approach that does not adequately address problems with inconsistent sanctioning taking place now; 2.) It mistakenly focuses on punishing those who are not in compliance rather than providing better, more effective methods of assisting them in attaining self-sufficiency; and 3.) It pulls the safety net completely out from under children, defeating the central purpose of welfare—to remedy child poverty.
Action: Contact Senators and Representatives and ask them to oppose the increased sanctions in the House version of the TANF Reserve bill.
Support Affordable Housing! The Governor’s proposal and the Senate’s version make the important connection between attaining self-sufficiency and the need for housing by committing to use the TANF reserve to support affordable housing. The House version does not currently provide for use of the TANF reserve or other funding sources for affordable housing. The house version also does not repeal the $100 housing penalty that will go into effect next year. This law counts $100 of HUD subsidized housing as unearned income for MFIP families, thereby reducing their MFIP grant. Repealing this law will allow MFIP participants to retain more of their grant, giving them a better chance at attaining self-sufficiency.
Action: Contact your Representative and House leadership. Let them know that welfare reform won’t work without affordable housing. Remind them that the affordable housing shortage is hurting families and businesses statewide. Urge them to tap the TANF Reserve for housing production and preservation. Ask them to support the provision in the Senate version of the welfare bill that repeals the $100 housing penalty.
Support Workforce Development! —particularly the provision in the House bill that establishes a program of grants to nonprofits to provide nontraditional career assistance and training to female caregivers on MFIP. The Senate bill does not have a similar provision.
Action: Contact legislators and leadership (particularly in the Senate) with the message that this is the type of program that will have a meaningful impact on MFIP families by providing them the skills and training to get good jobs.
Violence Against Women:
Support the Creation of Director for the Prevention of Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault! (S.F. 2980 and H.F. 3331). This bill creates a Director for Prevention of Domestic and Sexual Violence within the Department of Public Safety. It also creates an interagency task force to monitor violence issues across agencies to make sure the system is working effectively against violence. The bill is ready to go to the floor in both the Senate and the House at any time.
Action: Call your legislators and House and Senate leadership one more time to ask them to support this bill. Let them know that they need to SUPPORT the bill AS IS, with NO AMENDMENTS.
Harassment Order Update (S.F. 3580/H.F. 2516). The bill to eliminate the Harassment Order fee waiver and to expand the definition of harassment has passed through committees in both the House and Senate with some amendments and is ready to go to the floors of each body. (Differences in the bills will likely be resolved between the authors, so there will likely be no need to send them to conference committee.) The fee waiver elimination was unfortunately preserved in each version, but in the House version, the fee has been reduced from $132-35 to $50. This compromise is not optimal, but it is an improvement over the original version. In addition to reducing the filing fee to $50, another positive aspect is that the process of filing in forma pauperis (which allows filing fees to be waived for low-income people) will be made more clear through work with court administrators. The expanded definition of harassment in the original bill has been scaled back a bit, but will still allow for a single incident of sexual assault or domestic abuse to form the basis for a harassment order. Under the current definition you must prove multiple instances of harassing behavior which excludes many circumstances of harassment.
Action: Contact legislators and House and Senate leadership; ask them to vote in favor of this bill with reduced fees and expanded definition of harassment.
Support Domestic Abuse Civil Remedies in the House! S.F. 11, which originally created a separate civil action for domestic abuse, passed on the Senate floor in an amended form. This bill was scaled back substantially and the only portion that remains is an extension of the statute of limitations (the time period allowed between the incident and the filing of a lawsuit) from 2 years to 6 years. This was disappointing news because the original version firmly established and defined a specific action for domestic abuse; giving this type of action the attention it deserves. However, we can still support the extension of the statute of limitations because it does benefit battered women by creating a bigger window of opportunity to file a lawsuit. The House has not seen this bill yet this year, so they will need immediate encouragement to support this bill when it comes up on the floor.
Action: Contact Representatives and House Leadership; ask them to pass this bill this year.
Support the Senate’s version of the Parenting Plan Bill! The legislation referred to as the parenting plan bill in the Legislative Update in the last issue of the MN NOW Times, was actually information on a related child custody bill. The broader Parenting Plan bill that should have been referenced is H.F. 3311/S.F. 3169. This bill is a fairly complex restructuring of Minnesota’s family law system that incorporates recommendations from the Parenting Task Force to reduce conflict in child custody cases. Certain portions of this bill created particular problems for families that experienced domestic violence. In the Senate version, these problems were largely addressed in several amendments by Sen. Berglin and the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Kiscaden. Problems with the House version remain. Both bills are scheduled to go to the floors of each legislative body any day and the differences between the House and Senate version are great enough that the bill is likely to end up in conference committee.
Action: Contact House and Senate members and leadership and ask them to support the Senate version of the Parenting Plan bill.
Unicameral:
Despite Governor Jesse Ventura’s efforts to keep the unicameral issue alive, his impassioned pleas to Greater Minnesotans to urge law makers to put this initiative on the ballot in November seem to have fallen on deaf ears. Staffers and aides report that very few (if any) calls are coming in to encourage the prospect of a single house legislature. In both the House and the Senate, the bills (H.F. 159/S.F. 43) had stalled in their respective committees after passing with no recommendation out of the Government Operations committees. In a move on the House floor, Rep. Tony Kielkucki (R–20B, Lester Prairie) attempted to recall the bill from the State Government Finance Committee where it had received a 5-5 vote, stopping the bill from being passed on for further consideration. Kielkucki withdrew his motion after intense debate about whether the full House can subvert the committee process. Currently the legislation is going nowhere, although House Speaker Steve Sviggum (R –28B, Kenyon) has said that he will employ another rarely used procedural motion to pull it from committee. It will remain to be seen whether the Speaker’s bill will get further special treatment or be used as a bargaining chip with the Governor.
Covenant Marriage:
Senator Steve Dille (R–20, Dassel) and Representative Elaine Harder (R–22B, Jackson) tried to pass legislation that would allow for couples to opt into a stricter marriage, demanding more preparation going in and making it more difficult to get out. Both SF 1955 and HF 1571 were accompanied by Dr. William Doherty, director of marriage & family therapy programs at the University of Minnesota, to urge support on the basis that "most people aspire to a permanent, lifelong union [and] this is a responsible thing for people to agree on in advance." Many legislators on both sides, and in both houses, brought up concerns about the definition of ‘high quality counseling’ and how it would be provided. Many also questioned the four exceptions allowed to circumvent the 2-year waiting period. The bill specifies adultery, abandonment, abuse and felony conviction as the only grounds for immediate dissolution. The bill ultimately failed in the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Family Law by a vote of 5-4. It fared only marginally better in the House by passing out of the Judiciary Finance committee with no recommendation only to be debated again in the Ways & Means committee with no results. Due to the Senate vote and the confusion created in the discussion, it was tabled by Representative Dave Bishop (R–30B, Rochester) for no further action. Kathleen Murphy, on behalf of Minnesota NOW, testified in both houses against the bill.
Other Legislation We Have Been Tracking:
Family Planning/Healthcare legislation that we are monitoring includes a bill authored by Linda Berglin (DFL–61, Mpls.). Senate File 3133, also called the Essential Community Provider Bill, would allow for the designation of Medicaid and Medicare funding to culturally specific health care clinics. It passed the Senate 65-0 but the House version (H.F. 3356, Abeler), was killed in committee due to concerns about how it would affect current Planned Parenthood clinic funding. In another piece of legislation that redefined registered combined charitable organizations (H.F. 2910/S.F. 2500), an amendment was added in the House Government Operations committee stating that any organization which provides, promotes, or directly refers for abortions, shall be ineligible to receive state employee charitable funds. The language in the Senate file was kept clean and that version passed in both houses. Two additional healthcare bills we were monitoring this year, the Maternity Benefits bill (H.F. 3906) and the Ovarian Cancer Screening/Healing Touch bill (H.F. 2581/S.F. 3304) did not make it out of committees so did not advance in the legislature this year.
Racial Justice: The Bias Crime bill (S.F. 887/H.F.1502) passed in the Senate and has yet to be heard on the House floor. It looks like there is strong support for this bill so no action is necessary at this time.
© 2000 Minnesota NOW