“Nope. 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 session's final day, DFLers pushed through a 2,800-page omnibus bill over literal howls of protest from Republicans. While that package did fulfill some DFL priorities – including rideshare driver pay legislation, updates to the paid family and medical leave act and stricter penalties for “straw” gun purchases – legislators left 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 outcome. A bonding bill requires a 60% “supermajority” of votes in the House and Senate, which means it needed Republican support. We suspect that the GOP was never going to surrender this trump card while controversial bills such as the proposed Equal Rights Amendment remained in play, and the arrest of DFL Sen. Nicole Mitchell on felony burglary charges (and her continued voting despite the arrest) only added more fuel to the already-raging partisan flames of an election year.
Therefore, we can understand why Walz would immediately dismiss any call for a special session, and why legislators on both sides of the political aisle appear perfectly content to return home, claim whatever victories they can and focus all of their efforts on the upcoming election.
That's the easiest course of action. But that doesn't mean it's right.
The right 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 Gov. Walz to invite the House and Senate majority and minority leaders to meet with him (or without him, if that's what they prefer) to reach consensus on a bonding package.
If such a deal could be reached, Walz could call a special session with the understanding from both sides' leadership that the only action would be an up-or-down vote. No amendments. No new legislation. No filibusters. Vote and go home. No muss, no fuss. Everybody wins.
That's right: Everybody could win.
The capital investment bill is the most apolitical thing the Minnesota Legislature does. For example, the $980 million package that came out of this session's bonding 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 crumbling, unsafe prisons good for either the DFL or the GOP? We think not. Prisoners held in substandard conditions pose a greater hazard to each other and to the people who work in these facilities.
Then there's water quality. The bonding proposal would dedicate $39 million for clean water purposes, and in so doing would net a federal match of $39 million. Given what we now know about the presence of so-called “forever chemicals” knows as PFAs in some of our state's water sources, can we really afford to sit on our collective hands for another year?
And finally, there's higher education. The University of Minnesota and the Minnesota State system each would get $64 million for “asset preservation,” money that would be spent on campuses across the state to update plumbing, remove/abate asbestos, fix leaky windows and roofs and ensure that an entire campus – the University of Minnesota Crookston – doesn't lose heat in January because its 113-year-old heating plant has failed.
ADVERTIsem*nT
Are there some projects in the bonding proposal that could wait another year or two? Absolutely. If you look hard enough for some “fat,” you'll probably find it.
But if the DFL and GOP are willing to set their differences aside for just a few hours, we're certain that they could agree on at least $600 million in projects that can't wait and will only get more expensive next year, or the year after.
Perhaps we're wrong to think this kind of deal is plausible. Perhaps our political climate is so polarized that neither side would even consider working together this close to what is likely to be the ugliest election campaign in Minnesota history. It's possible that both parties would rather blame the other for what didn't get done than share credit for what did.
We want to believe we're better than this. We want to believe that our elected leaders can still sit down together, treat each other with civility and unite behind legislation that is the best interests of all Minnesota taxpayers, regardless of political affiliation.
Is that belief misguided? We won't know unless Gov. Walz reopens the door on a possible special session.
