Session 2003 Budget and Taxes Business Environment Higher Education K-12 Education Health and Welfare Public Safety Stadium Transportation Audio New Senate rule could bottle up controversial bills (story audio) Your Voice News Forum: Would the proposed change strengthen Minnesota's democratic process or will it prevent action?

	E-mail this page			Print this page

New Senate rule could bottle up controversial bills
by Michael Khoo, Minnesota Public Radio
February 25, 2003

DFL leaders in the Senate are contemplating an obscure procedural change that critics say would present a roadblock to controversial social issues percolating in the Republican-led House. The change would make it much more difficult to dislodge a bill that's become ensnared in the committee process. Supporters of a wide array of conservative issues say it's a blatant attempt to stop certain bills from arriving for a vote in the full Senate. But DFL leaders say it's a common-sense way to ensure the committee process is respected.

St. Paul, Minn. — Under current Senate rules, a simple majority vote can liberate a bill stuck in the committee process, bringing it to the floor for consideration by the full body. The proposed change would require a super-majority of 60 percent to circumvent the normal committee process.

DFL Senate Majority Leader John Hottinger says the rationale is simple -- to make sure public input during committee testimony isn't short-circuited.

"We're going to try and change the way we do things, in order to make sure the public does have an opportunity to comment on important and divisive and controversial issues. We want to have that done in committee though, not just in a floor debate without public input," Hottinger says.

We're going to try and change the way we do things, in order to make sure the public does have an opportunity to comment on important and divisive and controversial issues. - DFL Senate Majority Leader John Hottinger

Critics, however, say the rule change is an attempt to reinforce the power of committee chairs, who can deny hearings on bills of which they disapprove. Hottinger says there's nothing to that claim.

"And did Senator Hottinger say that with a straight face?" responded Republican House Speaker Steve Sviggum.

He says the proposed rules change is a blatant attempt to bottle up controversial bills in the committee process, specifically: a 24-hour waiting period for abortions, a repeal of the Profile of Learning graduation standards, a loosening of gun-permitting guidelines.

"I see it as a direct assault upon the rights of the citizens of the state of Minnesota. I would also tell you it's also a way to keep the Senate from being accountable on straight up-and-down votes on those issues," Sviggum says.

The election last fall of Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty was accompanied by a strengthening of GOP control in the House. At the same time, DFLers in the Senate saw their majority shrink to few votes.

That has reduced the effectiveness of the Senate as protector of traditionally liberal constituencies, including abortion rights supporters and gun control advocates. In fact, the tide may have actually reversed in the Senate, since many outstate DFLers vote with their conservative Republican colleagues on social issues.

Did Senator Hottinger say that with a straight face? - Republican House Speaker Steve Sviggum

Tim Stanley, executive director of the Minnesota chapter of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, says, given the new dynamic, supporters of legal abortion should welcome the proposed rule change.

"Abortion issues are ones that are often considered to be called directly from committee, and without passing out of the committee," says Stanley. "Any controversial bills that can be kept, necessarily, in committee and that don't go through the committee process, is better for Minnesotans right now."

Conservative lawmakers say such comments demonstrate what they already believe -- that the rule change is a last-minute strategy to derail controversial legislation.

Sen. Pat Pariseau, R-Farmington, is the chief author of the so-called "Personal Protection Act" that would broaden the availability of handgun permits. Although DFL leaders have promised fair committee hearings for the bill, Pariseau is skeptical.

"We have done this for seven years. This has been brought up before us every year for seven years," says Pariseau. "I had a hearing once out of those seven years. Otherwise they wouldn't hear it. The House passes it overwhelmingly, and it never makes it through the Senate."

Pariseau says if the rule change passes, it could make it impossible for her to move her legislation through committee and onto the floor, where she says she has the votes to pass it. The House has routinely passed the act in previous years, and Gov. Pawlenty has said he would sign the measure.

News Headlines

Related Subjects