“No. No special session. Next question.”
So said Gov. Tim Walz on May 20 during a news conference just hours after the 2024 Minnesota Legislature ended in chaotic fashion.
On the final day of the session, DFLers pushed through a 2,800-page omnibus bill despite literal howls of protest from Republicans. While that package accomplished some DFL priorities, including legislation on payments to rideshare drivers, updates to the paid family and medical leave law and tougher penalties for “tragic” gun purchases, lawmakers abandoned St .Paul without voting on a capital investment package that would have totaled nearly $1 billion for projects across the state.
We are not surprised by this result. A bond bill requires a “supermajority” of 60% of the votes in the House and Senate, meaning it needed Republican support. We suspect the GOP was never going to give up this trump card as long as controversial bills like the proposed Equal Rights Amendment remained in play, and the arrest of DFL Sen. Nicole Mitchell on felony theft charges (and her continuation of the vote despite the arrest) only added fuel to the already burning partisan flames of an election year.
Therefore, we can understand why Walz would immediately dismiss any call for a special session, and why lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle seem perfectly content to return home, claim whatever victories they can, and focus all their efforts on the upcoming elections.
That’s the easiest course of action. But that doesn’t mean it’s right.
The correct course of action would be a single-issue, single-day special session of the Legislature, for the sole purpose of passing a capital investment bill. To that end, we urge Governor Walz to invite the majority and minority leaders of the House and Senate to meet with him (or without him, if that’s what they prefer) to reach consensus on a package of bonds.
Minnesota Opinion Editorial
West Central Tribune graphic
If such an agreement could be reached, Walz could call a special session with the understanding by leaders of both sides that the only action would be an up or down vote. No amendments. No new legislation. No filibusters. Vote and go home. Without messing up without problems. Everyone wins.
That’s right: everyone can win.
The capital investment bill is the most apolitical thing the Minnesota Legislature has done. For example, the $980 million package that came out of this session’s bond committee included $302.7 million for projects under the heading “Library Construction Grants.” About half of that money would have been spent on projects proposed by Republicans.
Also included in the proposed package is $114 million for the Department of Corrections. Are unsafe, dilapidated prisons good for the DFL or the GOP? We think not. Inmates held in substandard conditions pose a greater danger to others and to the people who work in these facilities.
Then there is the quality of the water. The bond proposal would dedicate $39 million for drinking water purposes and, in doing so, generate a federal match of $39 million. Given what we now know about the presence of so-called “forever chemicals,” known as PFAs, in some of our state’s water sources, can we really afford to sit idly for another year?
And finally, there is higher education. The University of Minnesota and the Minnesota State system would each receive $64 million for “asset preservation,” money that would be spent on campuses across the state to upgrade plumbing, remove/reduce asbestos, fix leaky windows and roofs and ensuring that an entire campus — the University of Minnesota Crookston — doesn’t lose heat in January because its 113-year-old heating plant has failed.
Are there any projects in the bond proposal that could wait another year or two? Absolutely. If you look hard enough for “fat,” you will probably find it.
But if the DFL and the GOP are willing to put aside their differences for a few hours, we’re sure they could agree to at least $600 million in projects that can’t wait and will only get more expensive next year, or the year after.
Perhaps we are wrong to think that this type of agreement is plausible. Perhaps our political climate is so polarized that neither side would even consider working together so close to what is likely the ugliest election campaign in Minnesota history. Both parties may prefer to blame the other for what was not done rather than share the credit for what was done.
We want to believe we are better than this. We want to believe that our elected leaders can still sit together, treat each other with civility, and unite behind legislation that is best for all Minnesota taxpayers, regardless of political affiliation.
Is that belief wrong? We won’t know unless Governor Walz reopens the door to a possible special session.
This Minnesota Opinion editorial is the view of the Rochester Post Bulletin. Send your comments to: opinion@wctrib.com.
Keynote USA
For the Latest Local News, Follow Keynote USA Local on Twitter.