by T.W. Budig
ECM Capitol reporter
The Senate today (Tuesday, Feb. 9) passed a $1 billion bonding bill, the 52-14 vote reflecting bipartisan support. “Never, never vote against veterans,” said Sen. Paul Koering, R-Fort Ripley, of the affirmative vote he cast.
Koering, who explained his vote in terms of supporting projects at Ft. Ripley, was one of nine Republicans who voted for the bill — one that Gov. Tim Pawlenty suggested earlier in the day he might veto in its entirety.
Sen. Ray Vandeveer, R-Forest Lake, listens to the Senate bonding bill on the Senate floor today (Feb. 9). Vandeveer spoke against the $1 billion bill. (Photo by T.W. Budig, ECM Capitol Reporter)
Senate Capital Investment Chairman Keith Langseth, DFL-Glyndon, said he was satisfied with the vote — he got about half of the Senate Republicans, he said.
Indeed, the Senate Minority Leader David Senjem of Rochester voted for the bill.
But Langseth didn’t get all of the Democrats. Senators Satveer Chaudhary, DFL-Fridley, and John Doll, DFL-Burnsville, voted against the bill.
One reason Chaudhary did was because an amendment he authored that would have encouraged employers working on bonding bill projects to employ at least 90 percent state residents failed to pass.
Bonding bill is a jobs bill
The bonding bill is a jobs bill, explained Chaudhary. “We ought to be hiring Minnesotans as a result,” he said.
Chaudhary’s amendment was criticized on the Senate floor as unenforceable and invitation to neighboring states to impose similar measures — something the senator disputes.
The idea for the amendment came from a district resident, Chaudhary said.
Chaudhary, who chairs the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee, also believes the bonding bill was wrongly relying on outdoor heritage amendment funding to backfill some funding areas.
Sen. Lisa Fobbe, DFL-Zimmerman, knees to share a comment with Sen. Kathy Saltzman, DFL-Woodbury, during the floor session. (Photo by T.W. Budig, ECM Capitol Reporter)
Doll explained that his district residents have been telling him to keep funding focused and reasonable this session.
And the bonding bill went beyond this, he explained. “A lot farther than I was comfortable with,” said Doll.
Gov. Tim Pawlenty in a letter to House and Senate DFL legislative leaders said their bonding bills “are unaffordable, irresponsible, and filled with local projects.”
If DFLers sent a bonding bill to him in the forms they’re in, then he would veto the bill in its entirety, said Pawlenty this morning.
One item the governor wants in the bonding bill is funding for the expansion of the Minnesota Sex Offender Program facility at Moose Lake, Pawlenty slated $89 million for the expansion — DFLers had nothing.
In recent days, some Democrats indicated that the lack of funding reflects concerns they’ve had about state sex offender policy.
$1 million placer for expansion
But during debate on the Senate floor, Langseth, though negating a series of changes to the bonding bill proposed by Sen. Claire Robling, R-Jordan, placed a $1 million placer amount in the bill for the facility expansion.
Robling had proposed pulling funding from civic centers and other projects to cover the cost of Moose Lake. “Public safety is at risk if we don’t do that,” she said.
But Langseth indicated Senate DFLers are perfectly willing to discuss the sex offender facility expansion with the governor.
Although close to half of their caucus voted for the bonding bill, Senate Republicans also criticized it. “We are supposed to be in a very, very severe financial crisis here,” said Sen. Ray Vandeveer, R-Forest Lake,
But Vandeveer compared the bonding bill to a financially stressed homeowner deciding to put an addition onto their home.
People are huting, says Sen. Koch
People are hurting, said Sen. Amy Koch, R-Buffalo, and we’re going to spend a $1 billion, she asked.
Sen. Julianne Ortman, R-Chanhassen, argued that the bonding bill was bonding for $173 million in projects that could be paid for with outdoor heritage amendment funding.
But Democrats argued Ortman’s proposal was against the purpose of amendment funding.
“There’s a lot of good things in this bill, and a lot of bad things,” said Sen. Michael Jungbauer, R-East Bethel, one of the Republicans who voted for the bill.
Area lawmakers voting for the bill are: Betzold, Carlson, Clark, Erickson Ropes, Fobbe, Foley, Jungbauer, Koering, Metzen, Olseen, Pariseau, Rummel, and Wiger.
Opposed: Chaudhary, Doll, Gerlach, Johnson, Koch, Limmer, Robling, and Vandeveer.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
