Minnesota House and Senate Votes on Fair and Clean Elections

Records 1-10 of 44

page

Votes

Fair and clean elections
BillsandVotes.com Germaness Ruling Consistency Panel Concurs

Body: Minnesota House | Journal Page: 10145 (Click to view vote.)
Scored? Yes | Right Vote: Y
Author: Buesgens
Acting on: SF2519 Date: 04/13/2010
Result: Decision Sustained 80 - 47

Rep. Buesgens moved to appeal the decision of Speaker Pro Tempore Hortman that the Falk amendment is germane. At the risk of being foolishly consistent in germaness rulings, the BillsandVotes.com Germaness Ruling Consistency Panel concurred with the Hortman decision. (See Anderson, S. amendment.) Vote green to uphold the ruling.

Fair and clean elections
One Counts, the Other One Doesn't

Body: Minnesota House | Journal Page: 10149 (Click to view vote.)
Scored? No |
Author: Sertich
Acting on: SF2519 Date: 04/13/2010
Result: Decision Sustained 82 - 43

The Dean RA10-299 amendment was ruled not germane by Speaker pro tempore Hortman. Her ruling was upheld on a vote of 82-43. BillsandVotes.com normally keeps an electronic copy of banned amendments, but we missed this one, and so it is vanished from the public record.

Listening to Rep. Dean's explanation of his amendment, it sounds very similar to the Falk amendment, except that instead of gagging utilities from expressing their opinions, it would stop government worker unions from using taxpayer dollars to spread their lies and propaganda during campaign season. Or something to that effect.

As she often does, Rep. Anderson, S. called the Democrats out for this obvious abuse of germaness: "Here you have two amendments dealing with Section 216B.16. You're saying one counts and the other one doesn't. Funny thing - one was offered by a Republican and one was offered by a Democrat. Guess who's one didn't count."

Respect. However - since we have no copy of the amendment (as of 7/14/2010) we cannot score this vote.

Fair and clean elections
Free Speech Equivalent Retaliation (Tit for Tat)

Body: Minnesota House | Journal Page: 10150 (Click to view vote.)
Scored? Yes | Right Vote: Y
Author: Kohls
Acting on: SF2519 Date: 04/13/2010
Result: Amendment Defeated 44 - 79

This one got past the Sertich/Hortman/germaness amendment shredder and received a fair up and down vote. The Kohls amendment would prohibit passing onto ratepayers "the amount equal to the dues paid by its employees to those employees' bargaining units to promote or defeat a candidate for public office or to advocate approval or defeat of a ballot question." What's fair is fair. Vote green.

Fair and clean elections
Motion to Reconsider Falk Free Speech Ban

Body: Minnesota House | Journal Page: 10153 (Click to view vote.)
Scored? No |
Author: Hamilton
Acting on: SF2519 Date: 04/13/2010
Result: Motion Prevailed 65 - 54

See: On Second Thought: PUC Public Utility Free Speech Ban Reconsidered. This is the vote to allow a reconsideration of the Falk amendment. Not scored.

Fair and clean elections
On Second Thought: PUC Public Utility Free Speech Ban Reconsidered

Body: Minnesota House | Journal Page: 10154 (Click to view vote.)
Scored? Yes | Right Vote: N
Author: Falk
Acting on: SF2519 Date: 04/13/2010
Result: Amendment Adopted 73 - 49

Having learned in 2008 that some votes weigh heavily around the neck, Rep. Hamilton moved to reconsider the Falk amendment, stating, "I voted on the prevailing side and I'm wishing like hell I hadn't." Apparently the Representative's remorse was shared by others in the Chamber, as support on reconsideration dropped from 108 Yeas to just 73, a loss of 35 votes. Those who shared Rep. Hamilton's concerns included DFLers Dittrich, Juhnke, Laine, Comrade Lenczewski, Lesch, Marquart, Masin, Newton, Norton, Olin, Paymar, Peterson, Reinert, Rosenthal, Ruud and Scalze. Vote Red.

Fair and clean elections
BillsandVotes.com Germaness Ruling Consistency Panel Does NOT Concur

Body: Minnesota House | Journal Page: 10148 (Click to view vote.)
Scored? Yes | Right Vote: N
Author: Sertich
Acting on: SF2519 Date: 04/13/2010
Result: Decision Sustained 82 - 45

The Anderson, S. amendment was ruled not germane by Speaker pro tempore Hortman. Her ruling was upheld on a vote of 82-45. BillsandVotes.com normally keeps an electronic copy of banned amendments, but we missed this one, and so it is vanished from the public record. We think the language may have been very similar to this Buesgens amendment to prohibit tribal casino financing of DFL campaigns. The Buesgens amendment was also ruled not germane under House Rule 3.21, on April 7, 2010, Journal Page 9812. In light of the previous Falk amendment, the BillsandVotes.com Germaness Ruling Consistency Panel, on a voice vote, did not concur with the Hortman decision. Vote Red and allow a straight up or down vote on the Anderson, S. amendment.

Fair and clean elections
PUC Public Utility Free Speech Ban (with Limited Exceptions)

Body: Minnesota House | Journal Page: 10147 (Click to view vote.)
Scored? Yes | Right Vote: N
Author: Falk
Acting on: SF2519 Date: 04/13/2010
Result: Amendment Adopted 108 - 18

As Rep. Falk said by way of introducing his amendment, it dealt with an issue that many legislators "have felt uncomfortable with." That uncomfortable issue being the January Supreme Court ruling that took the gag out of the mouths of American businesses and allowed them to exercise their right to free speech. And the uncomfortable legislators being those whose party affiliation is DFL.

The Falk amendment puts the gag back into the mouths of Minnesota public utilities by banning them from using revenues "to promote or defeat a candidate for public office or to advocate approval or defeat of a ballot question."

It was pointed out during the debate that public utilities are being put at a disadvantage by the Falk amendment, while local boutique energy co-ops and investor-owned private utilities are exempt from the Falk ban. Rep. Falk, who lists his occupation as "Farmer/renewable energy developer," said he drafted his amendment to apply only to entities regulated by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), and left it at that. The BillsandVotes.com Subcommittee on Conflicts of Interest may take this issue up at it's next hearing.

Before the vote, an amendment to the amendment was offered by Rep. Anderson, S. that would tweak the free speech rights of utilities by allowing them to remove their gags long enough to speak about "a ballot question that results, if passed, in the increase of costs or utility rates to ratepayers." That helped a little, but not enough. Vote red on the Falk amendment. NOTE: A later Downey amendment to enforce the gag rule for all utilities, including the type Rep. Falk is involved with, was rejected on a voice vote (see HJP 10151).

Fair and clean elections
Tribal Casino Financing of DFL Campaigns

Body: Minnesota House | Journal Page: 9816 (Click to view vote.)
Scored? Yes | Right Vote: N
Author: Buesgens
Acting on: SF80 Date: 04/07/2010
Result: Point of Order Upheld 86 - 42

Rep. Buesgens did an excellent job of laying out the arguments as to why his amendment was germane to the bill. The Simon germaness motion was based on the premise that since MS 211B is not part of SF 80, the amendment is out of order. However, there have been many amendments offered and adopted through the years that have added a new section of law to a bill. Both chapters of law - 10A (Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure) and 211B (Fair Campaign Practices) - are about the financing of campaigns. Speaker pro tempore Hortman's ruling that the amendment was not germane was an easy way to avoid a direct vote on touchy subject of tribal contributions to the DFL, but it was also a disservice to the legislative process.

The Buesgens amendment (LINK) would have the effect of prohibiting Indian tribes from making political contributions. The amendment makes reference to tribes as entities "treated as States" for the purposes of the Internal Revenue Code, and includes them in the definition of "corporation" in MS 211B. Corporations are prohibited from making political contributions. Speaker pro tempore Hortman found the amendment not germane and her ruling was upheld by the House on a vote of 86-42. Vote Red to override the ruling and allow a straight up or down vote on who can and cannot make political contributions.

Fair and clean elections
First House Vote, Omnibus Campaign Finance Bill

Body: Minnesota House | Journal Page: 9823 (Click to view vote.)
Scored? No |
Author: Simon
Acting on: SF80 Date: 04/07/2010
Result: Bill Passed 127 - 1

SF 80 includes several campaign-related provisions brought forward by the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, which is the state's regulator of how money moves around in state politics. Provisions include a new requirement, effective 2012, that annual reports of political committees and candidates must be filed electronically. The Board intends to allow campaigns to opt out of this requirement for a variety of reasons, but the long-term goal is to build a database-driven record of the cashflows in Minnesota political campaigns. Hot damn! There is a provision that prevents the Board from making reports public until 8 a.m. on the day following the report deadline. So no "penalty" for filing early. Not scored, but many meaty amendments to view.

Fair and clean elections
Candidates Must Reside in the District

Body: Minnesota House | Journal Page: 9814 (Click to view vote.)
Scored? No |
Author: Kahn
Acting on: HF655 Date: 04/07/2010
Result: Bill Passed 121 - 7

Grudges can take many forms when you're a 70-something state rep with 19 elections under your belt. Phyllis Kahn, who pleaded guilty in 2004 to misdemeanor theft for taking campaign brochures of the GOP candidate in New Hope, has a long history of legal/legislative activity regarding elections. She took the City of Minneapolis to court over their redistricting process, accused former Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer of suppressing voter turnout over comments she made regarding residency requirements, and is now doing her best to make sure no more damn carpetbaggers can file to run against her in a primary. (In case you don't follow elections in Minnesota, the only possible way to beat a DFL incumbent in Minneapolis, St. Paul, the Iron Range or Duluth is to take them out in a primary. General elections are meaningless to Minnesota House and Senate members in those areas.)

The Kahn bill would allow "a registered voter in this state" to request filing officers to verify whether a given candidate actually lives in the area/district being represented. In the final version of the bill, candidates who do not meet the residency requirements are outta there, man: "If the filing officer determines that the address is not within the area represented by the office, the filing officer must immediately notify the candidate and the candidate's name must be removed from the ballot for that office." Take dat, Mr. Carpetbagger!

The bill appears to be silent regarding whether or not a candidate actually lives in the home they list on their affidavit of candidacy. HF 655 requires removal of a candidate's name from the ballot when the candidate's home is not "within the area represented by the office." As such, HF 655 does little to combat the all-too-frequent practice of incumbents living in one home while officially residing in another. This vote is not scored.