By Rep. Paul Anderson
Social issues have made their way into the committee process in the Minnesota Legislature.
A bill calling for a unionization vote among day care providers passed out of the Early Childhood Education Committee in the House last Friday on a 6-5 straight-party line vote. Although current law requires at least 30 percent of employees to request an election for union certification, this bill triggers an automatic election. Any licensed or UNLICENSED provider who has cared for children who receive a state subsidy in the past year would be eligible to vote on the collective bargaining unit. It’s estimated about 9,000 providers are eligible under that criteria.
If this vote were to pass, childcare providers serving low income families would be required to pay union dues or “fair share” fees, potentially driving up costs for parents and the state. When unionized, Minnesota would become the “employer of record,” putting the state in the middle of a relationship between parents and their providers.
This push doesn’t make any sense to me. After all, those who provide this service are independent businesses, in that they set their own hours and rate of compensation. A recent letter from day care providers in Pope County indicated that group’s unanimous vote against unionization. In the year or so that this issue has been in the spotlight, I don’t recall visiting with one day care provider who was in favor of belonging to a union.
Another social issue, same-sex marriage, will have a hearing this week (Tuesday) in the Civil Law Committee. HF 1054 is the bill that would legalize that practice in Minnesota. Despite the marriage amendment being defeated in last fall’s election, polls still indicate most Minnesotans are not in favor of changing current law which does not allow same-sex marriage. One of the reasons given for voting against the amendment was to keep things the same and not add the ban to our Constitution. Now, less than a year later, legislation has been introduced that would make the change and allow for same-sex marriage in Minnesota.
***
A “dust-up” occurred in the usually non-partisan Agriculture Policy Committee last week when we heard testimony and voted on Governor Dayton’s budget for the Ag. Department. Rep. Rod Hamilton and I tried to offer amendments to the bill that would have re-directed some of the spending called for in the bill. Rep. Hamilton’s amendment was ruled “out of order,” and I eventually withdrew mine because we were told that it was not proper procedure to offer amendments dealing with spending in a committee that dealt with policy. We both questioned how funding can be separated from actual policy, especially when funding dictates which policy items can be carried out.
When that question was finally settled (although we still think any amendment can be offered in committee), a motion was made to adjourn the meeting before voting on the actual bill. That procedural motion was defeated on an 8-8 tie vote, with the DFL vice-chair of the committee voting with us Republicans. Then, on the final vote to pass the bill out of our committee, the vote again was an 8-8 tie, which in effect killed the measure.
I called it a “sad day for agriculture” when our committee, usually the most non-partisan in the House, wouldn’t allow our amendments to be heard.
—30—