Posted at 3:39 PM on March 10, 2006
by Bob Collins
(1 Comments)
I should probably leave this topic to Mike Mulcahy, who is way smarter than I'll ever be on matters of politics at the Capitol, but for someone who spends a lot of time trying to document the positions of lawmakers (since they'll run a campaign at some point in the future), I'm growing more frustrated by the lack of roll call votes in committee.
OK, it's a selfish thing since I take care of the MPR Votetracker program, which allows people to see how pieces of legislation are doing and -- and this is where the campaign part of this comes in -- allows people to look at a legislator's page and see, instantly, where they stand on the issues.
Easy enough, right? Wrong. Today, for example, I was working up a datasheet for a bill that probably is going nowhere -- HF 3099 -- which would allow online wagering. I was interested primarily because the bill died on a tie vote (which indicates something resembling a roll call) and then, the committee reconvened, a legislator moved for reconsideration, and then it passed on a voice vote.
OK? Who changed? And why? Who are the people who are for it? Who are the ones against it?
Rep. Duke Powell's committee did the same thing a few days ago on a pretty interesting bill -- the one allowing pharmacists to refuse to dispense drugs they find morally wrong. Good luck trying to find out how the members of the House Health Policy and Finance Committee feel about the bill in an instant. They threw it up for a voice vote too.
A big task force trying to figure out how to ungum the works at the Capitol came out with a report a few weeks ago. It mostly involved raising salaries and letting 'em all get a drink together sometime (alright, maybe it didn't include the last part).
But for all the laws being proposed around this state in the last few years, here's one I've never heard proposed: if you're an elected politician and you take part in a vote, your position is recorded, for all to see, and voters to evaluate.
I'm sure someone has a good reason why a legislator's position ought to be secret until a floor vote. I'm sure anxious to hear it.
Rep. Westerberg's sub-committee today was a joke. Everyone in attendance knew it was a party-line vote, and yet they took testimony as if a compelling argument could have swayed opinion.
If legislators want to understand why people are losing interest in politics, they need only watch tape of this meeting. When a bill dies because the tie breaking vote is out of the room, it apparently doesn't die. They just vote again when the right number of supporters are in the room. And none of the committee members were there to learn anything, or contemplate change to state policy. They were there to do what their caucus leaders told them to do. And Rep. Zellers even managed to screw that up by leaving the room at the wrong time.
Why do we need legislators? Lets just let Dean Johnson, Dick Day, Steve Sviggum and Matt Entenza decide what is best for us. They are doing it informally already, why not save a boatload of cash by selling the capitol, and paying these four guys to meet daily at the coffee shop to make all of our decisions?
| March 2006 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |