When they’re not busy with petty attacks against the DFL, the MNGOP’s big focus this year is supposed to be “reform.” That’s the agenda they hope will convince the public to forget about how the GOP sold them out last year when it comes time to vote. Of course, their so-called “reform” is just the same garbage the GOP has been pushing for the last 30 years, but at least it’s a better election-year platform than “sorry we put the state $1.4 billion in debt!”

Ryan Winkler (DFL-Golden Valley) says that if we’re going to talk about “reform,” we should be starting by reforming the legislature itself. Winkler and other DFL legislators are introducing a package of reforms that includes the following:

• Require parties to disclose when legislators are on the party payroll.
• Prohibit party officials from holding public jobs in the House, Senate, and Joint Legislative Commissions.
• Ban closed door meetings and meetings between midnight and 7 am.
• Require the Legislature to institute a plan for record retention.
• Prevent future state shutdowns by continuing appropriations at current levels if no budget agreement is reached by the end of the budget period.
• Create a redistricting commission to draw political boundaries in the future.
• Limit the amount a governor can unilaterally reduce spending via the process known as “unallotment.”

These all seem like simple common sense to me. The redistricting commission might be a bit controversial, but there’s one major reason to support it: The legislature and Governor haven’t been able to agree on a redistricting plan for decades now, making the existing system completely useless.

So will the GOP legislature consider these reforms? Given that they haven’t been written for them by the masters at ALEC, it’s unlikely.

In light of the good news that we have an unexpected budget surplus, State Rep. Ryan Winkler (DFL-Golden Valley) called for lawmakers to spend the money responsibly by using it to pay down the debt we have accumulated to our schools:

The State of Minnesota just found a $20 bill in its pocket. We haven’t solved our money problems. So Minnesota politicians should not repeat past mistakes and use a small budget surplus to offer tax cuts or rebates to tax payers. This surplus should be used to move us toward a responsible budget by paying back tobacco bonds and paying down the school shift.

We have tremendous obstacles to future prosperity that we must address: a shrinking middle class, reduced research and development, an aging population, and an education system that isn’t preparing enough students for the world economy. We can’t tackle any of these problems without sound state finances [via press release].

In my opinion, there should be no question that this is how we must use the surplus. We now owe our schools over $3 billion, and as a result, they are borrowing money in record amounts. We shouldn’t be balancing the budget on the backs of our children.

I would add one caveat, though: I think we need to be cautious and hold onto the money for now. I don’t trust that the surplus will materialize as forecast, and we shouldn’t spend it until we’re absolutely sure. Once we are, though, it must go toward paying back our schools.

Here’s the news, via press release:

State Rep. Ryan Winkler (DFL – Golden Valley) will introduce legislation during the coming special session that would create a constitutional amendment to prevent appropriation bonds from being used to balance budget deficits. This legislation would not apply to the current budget framework, which reportedly will use $1.4 billion in borrowing and shifts. However, Winkler said it would prevent this irresponsible budget practice from being used in the future.

“We are constitutionally required to balance our budget every two years - that’s the right thing to do,” said Winkler. “Borrowing from our future revenues is simply using a loophole to skirt our constitutional responsibility and we should never do it again.”

For years now, Minnesota has been using shifts, accounting tricks, and the like to make our budget appear balanced on paper. In reality, we’re going deeper and deeper into debt, despite the constitutional requirement that we have a balanced budget. It’s about time someone stood up for responsible budgeting.

I imagine Winkler will get a lot of support for this amendment, although it may be better suited to the next proper session, rather than what I imagine will be a very brief special session. I know that DFLers are fed up with the endless budget gimmicks. And despite their leadership’s irresponsible budget proposal in this biennium, I know many of the Republican rank and file are fed up, too.

It’s time for Minnesota to get its act together. Our legislators need to have the courage to make tough choices. And if the people of Minnesota need to force them to do so, then so be it.

Rep. Ryan Winkler (DFL-Golden Valley) sent a letter [PDF] yesterday to the MN Chamber of Commerce and MN Business Partnership asking them to join the fight for equal marriage. Winkler makes an excellent point: a constitutional ban on marriage could actually harm these businesses’ recruitment. 

In Minnesota, 70% of Fortune 500 companies offer domestic partnership benefits to same-sex couples and families. Nearly every company in Minnesota whose brand is well known offers these benefits, with a total of more than 290 Minnesota employers offering domestic partner benefits.

Minnesota’s economy relies on a talented, educated workforce. The ability to recruit individuals with these qualities is crucial for our state’s businesses. In the United States, more than twenty states and metropolitan jurisdictions that compete economically with Minnesota recognize same-sex couples and families, and fourteen offer full recognition of these families’ rights. Of course Minnesota’s businesses compete globally—and thirty nine countries offer full recognition of same-sex couples’s rights.

In this competitive environment, Minnesota businesses will be harmed if a prohibition on marriage equality is made part of our constitution. We write to request your leadership in stopping this misguided proposal. Minnesota’s business leaders have understandably weighed in on tax and regulation issues that affect competitiveness. Similarly, we ask that you send a strong message to the Legislature that the same-sex marriage amendment is bad for business.

My first thought: I wonder how Target will respond.

This morning, I wrote that the MNGOP was operating with made-up budget numbers that could bring a fiscal disaster. What I didn’t really think about was where those budget numbers came from in the first place. The answer is deeply disturbing: They’re getting them from unnamed private organizations. In a letter to Speaker Kurt Zellers, Rep. Ryan Winkler (DFL-Golden Valley) decried the practice:

During your March 25th press briefing you made a surprising revelation about the fiscal projections House and Senate leaders are using to create the ominbus budget bills. Specifically, you acknowledged that fiscal chairs are “depending on figures from private business and from other states” to create the budget rather than using the non-partisan fiscal notes from Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB). 

Your reliance on private vendors to create the public’s budget is unprecedented and deeply concerning. With a $5 billion budget deficit, we must use facts, figures and verifiable public data to create a reliable budget for the next two years. [Rep. Ryan Winkler (PDF), via MN Progressive Project]

This raises a major question: What private groups, exactly, is the MNGOP relying on for its made-up numbers? The answer is that we have no idea. In his letter, Winkler formally called for Zellers and his caucus to answer a number of important questions about their made-up budget numbers?

Read More

Before offering any solution to the $6.2 billion shortfall, Republicans are instead focused on denying some Minnesotans the right to vote. Tea Party conservatives in the legislature continued their assault on the state’s elections system today by introducing costly legislation that will only make the deficit worse. 

Minnesota citizens have a right to vote. Passing this legislation would then require all Minnesotans have the right to a free photo I.D. – which would cost the state millions of dollars and create a whole new layer of state bureaucracy….

A photo I.D. requirement is not only costly; it makes voting more difficult for senior citizens, students, and rural Minnesotans. Right now a quarter of Minnesota seniors have no photo I.D., voters in rural Minnesota have to drive great distances to get one, and students’ drivers licenses are for addresses at their parents’ residences.

Rep. Ryan Winkler (D-Golden Valley), via press release

On the first day of the legislative session, Minority Leader Paul Thissen proposed a rule that would have made solving the budget crisis the legislature’s number one priority. Here’s Thissen’s proposed rule:

During an odd-numbered year, a House or Senate bill that proposes a constitutional amendment must not be considered in a committee or on the calendar for the day, the fiscal calendar, or any other floor calendar until bills necessary to provide a balanced general fund budget for the biennium beginning on July 1 of that year have been enacted into law.

House Republicans referred it to a committee to kill it, but the DFL won’t give up on the budget that easily. Rep. Ryan Winkler (DFL-Golden Valley) sent a letter to Majority Leader Matt Dean, who is also the chair of the rules committee, asking him to hold a hearing immediately and adopt Thissen’s rule.

Considering the severity of Minnesota’s economic and fiscal crises, I was disappointed that as Majority Leader you did not encourage all members to vote for Representative Thissen’s amendment. As Speaker Zellers himself has stated, job creation and the budget deficit must be the legislature’s highest priorities.

Now I am asking you, as chair of the Rules Committee, to hold a hearing on this measure as soon as possible. I also request that you include this provision in the Permanent Rules that you will soon propose.

You can view Winkler’s full letter here [PDF].