For more information contact: House GOP Communications 651-296-5520
Dear Neighbor,
Committee deadlines have caused a flurry of activity and many long days in the legislature these last few weeks. Numerous monumental and controversial bills have been debated in committee and in the media. I would like to give you an update on three significant topics.
Last Thursday, the governor released a supplemental budget which, due to strong public outcry, dropped his original proposal to expand sales tax to services, as well as, the tax on business-to-business transactions. I believe this was a step in the right direction, however, I still have grave concerns. For example, the governor's new fourth tier income tax bracket will hurt 92% of businesses in Minnesota who file through individual tax returns. In the current biennium Republicans have demonstrated our approach to economic growth works; by holding down taxes we turned the projected $6.2 billion dollar state budget deficit at the start of 2011, into the current $2.8 billion dollar budget surplus. Please follow this link to the Office of Minnesota Management and Budget February 2013 forecast for more detailed information.
A very important bill, House File 92, "Minimum Wage Regulated," was recently sent to the General Register and is now awaiting debate and a vote on the House floor. I am opposed to HF 92, since "studies indicate that a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage reduces the employment of low-skilled workers by 1 to 3 percent" (Economics, ISBN-13:978-1-111-97021-5, page 78). The 55+% minimum wage rate increase just in the first year, as authorized by HF 92, would likely result in a 5 - 15+% drop in employment for low-skilled workers. Also, increased minimum wage rates make it more difficult for young workers to obtain job training opportunities. Additionally, the drastic minimum wage increases in HF 92 will result in higher business costs and thereby increases in the cost of goods and services. For these reasons, I do not support House File 92 and will be voting against its passage.
Legislation to unionize child care providers serving low-income families, House File 950, is working its way through the Minnesota legislative process on a fast track. All child care providers will be impacted by the formation of a union, whether they serve families receiving assistance from the state or not. The union will be viewed as the primary voice for all providers on state laws and agency rules. The decisions made by the bargaining unit will affect all providers whether they are union members or not. Under HF 950 approximately 5,000 licensed child care providers will not be allowed to vote on whether to unionize, even though the formation of the union will directly impact their businesses, because they do not serve a family receiving assistance. Also, legal, non-licensed providers, neighbors, family, or friends, who receive child care assistance payments, will be allowed to vote on unionization and could determine the fate of licensed businesses. If HF 950 passes the legislature and is signed into law by the governor, child care providers who serve families receiving assistance from the state will need to join the union and pay union dues or choose not to be a union member and pay their “fair share” union fees, 85% of the union dues. Independent child care businesses already run on very tight budgets. Paying union dues or "fair share" union fees will only make their financial situation worse. For these reasons, I am opposed to HF 950 and will vote against it at every opportunity.
Thank you for following my legislative work. If you would like to meet with me for coffee to discuss your questions or concerns, please make an appointment by contacting my legislative assistant, Allie Ryan at (651) 296-9710.
Sincerely yours,
Pam