These are the glory days for the sons and daughters of the Gopher State.
It's mid-May, and the rhubarb is finally ready (albeit Bluestem's acre was a bit stiff from last night's hard freeze but nothing that a little stewing didn't solved), the walleye gods were good to the governor, and the Minnesota Legislature will not only adjourn on time, but the Senate's going to pass the Dibble freedom to marry bill.
Views
on gay marriage are evolving, [Former Minnesota House Speaker Steve] Sviggum said, and "I don't think it's good
for Republicans necessarily to stand in the way of the evolution of an
issue."
Democrats were out front on the issue. From Obama to the mayors
of the Twin Cities, many spoke out in favor of legalizing gay marriage.
Some Republicans are pushing their party to change.
The public affairs firm of Carl Kuhl -- once an aide to former
U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman and gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer, both
Republicans -- started working with Minnesotans United for All Families
last year to craft their message against the amendment.
Polls and surveys found that about 80 percent of 18- to
29-year-olds supported marriage equality, Kuhl said. The numbers were
similar for suburban women regardless of age. And, he said, many of the
younger voters aligned with Republicans on other issues but voted DFL
because they saw the GOP as the opposition party to same-sex marriage.
"They could not move beyond that to vote for Republicans," Kuhl
said. "And if we can't be a more inclusive party, we become irrelevant."
On Monday, the Minnesota House passed an anti-bullying bill on a 72-57 vote. Post Bulletin political reporter Heather Carlson wrote in House passes sweeping anti-bullying bill:
“We should have a bill that develop resiliency in kids and makes them
strong,” said Rep. Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa. "But this one goes the other direction. Instead of
making kids stronger, it encourages them into a path of victimhood."
Rep. Steve Drazkowski has said some strident
things during his nearly six years in the Legislature, but his
repudiation of the anti-bullying bill passed by the Minnesota House
might be his harshest rhetoric yet. . . .
Drazkowski, a Republican from Mazeppa, sent a disturbing message with
his criticism of the Safe Schools and Supportive Minnesota Schools Act.
By using the words "resiliency" and "path to victimhood," Drazkowski
essentially told bullied students to toughen up because it builds
character and makes you stronger.
Tell that to Ann Gettis, a Kenyon woman whose
21-year-old son took his own life in 2006. Gettis appeared before the
House Education Policy Committee, testifying that "I really believe that
the years of being bullied darkened his perspective." Tell that to the
families of two Rochester-area teenagers who committed suicide in 2012,
with bullying being a likely factor in their tragic decisions. . . .
Read the rest at the PB. The board concludes:
We've had occasion in the past to commend Drazkowski for his candor and
his willingness to take unpopular stands. On this particular topic,
however, he sounds a bit like a bully.
Today, Draz is stilling making heads shake. While the House was considering a bill for a legislative water commission, the Mazeppa lawmaker got a bit off topic. Representative Danny Schoen tweeted:
Rep. Drazkowski brings up gay marriage while debating a water quality issue bill.#mnleg
Today the Star Tribune newspaper ran an editorial in support of strong regulation of the frac sand industry. The editorial, entitled "Minnesota Legislature must protect trout streams," says in part:
“Schmit’s common-sense legislation, which
will likely face a critical Senate floor vote today, proposes a
reasonable 5,000-foot-setback for sand mines from trout streams and the
springs that feed them. Mining also couldn’t occur within 25 feet of the
water table. The aim is straightforward: to protect the flow of the
cold, clear waters that are the lifeblood of the region’s renowned trout
fishery and, by extension, the jobs dependent on angling tourism.
Cutting off springs or groundwater flow through careless excavation
could reduce stream flows and increase water temperature to levels
lethal to trout...The setbacks called for in the legislation are based
on the best available research and would significantly reduce the risk
of environmental damage. Waiting years to gather data for a more
tailored approach isn’t practical. The damage to critical trout habitat
may already have been done by then."
This vote is happening today on the Senate floor as early as
mid-morning. Sen. Matt Schmit of Red Wing will offer his amendment on
the Senate floor to the Omnibus Game and Fish Bill (Senate File 796) to
protect southeast Minnesota trout streams from frac sand mining and
processing.
Take Action. Contact your Senator immediately and
urge them to support Sen. Schmit’s amendment. You can find your state
Senator's name and contact information onlinehere, or by calling 651-296-0504 or 888-234-1112.
Suggested message: “Today Sen. Matt Schmit will
offer an amendment on the Senate floor to protect southeast Minnesota
trout streams from frac sand mining. I strongly encourage you to support
this amendment, which will include a setback from trout streams for
frac sand mines. The Star Tribune editorial had it right today
when it said that these setbacks "are based on the best available
research and would significantly reduce the rise of environmental
damage." I will check back in tomorrow to see how you voted on this
amendment."
You can watch the debate on the Senate floor online here.
The Minnesota House just voted to extend the freedom to marry to all loving couples by a 75-59 vote.
The Minnesota state DFL party has released this statement:
“Minnesota has been a national leader on issues of human rights and equality over the years. Today, the Minnesota House of Representatives carried on that tradition with its vote for Minnesota to recognize the marriages of all loving people.
“We applaud legislators for recognizing the freedom to marry for same-sex couples in Minnesota. This historic vote puts Minnesota on a path to ensuring that committed, loving same-sex couples throughout the state will be able to enjoy the same freedoms and rights as others in our community.
“In any social movement, there comes a seminal moment when people can choose to either be on the right side or wrong side of history. Today, the Minnesota House of Representatives chose to be on the right side of history.”
Growing up on a farm near Stewartville, Clara Dux felt rich. "We grew our own food, we had fresh milk in the cooler," she said. Her family and church community were loving, and the local community looked out for its own.
What the 24-year-old Winona resident and active LGBT ally didn't have growing up was exposure to openly gay and lesbian people. "Although I was raised in a conservative family that belongs to a Missouri Synod Church, I didn't hate LGBT people. I just hadn't had much exposure," she said.
Then she was admitted to the University of Minnesota in Morris, which welcomes all its members. "It was a transformation for me," Dux said, "being around beautiful people,
loving the people they wanted to
love, while being accepted for who they are."
"My values changed dramatically," she noted, from when she was growing up, although her deep appreciation of community did not. Dux loved the small town college and its connection with the surrounding counties (Bluestem learned during the interview that we share many friends in The Bump, although a friend in Winona County suggested the contact).
At Morris, Dux joined many of her generation in supporting marriage equality. "By and large, my generation not only has no problem with the freedom to marry, we think it's the right thing," Dux said. "My friends from college are getting jobs, marrying--and if they're not in committed relationships, they're looking for someone, they want to have kids."
The upbeat young woman didn't sort out straight and LGBT friends in that statement. She went on to mention one friend, a young gay man who loves children, as the emblem for why she and her generation has a whole support marriage equality.
"Travis loves children; he wants to have his own someday," she said. "But without their parents' ability to marry even though they're in a loving relationship, those children are vulnerable if something happens to one parent or there's a split."
"The children of same-sex couples deserve the protections marriage offers children," she asserted. "I think we can create a better world, where all my friends can get married--where my children will be able to marry who they want."
Should the legislature approve the Dibble-Clark bills, as is likely, Dux thinks that Minnesota will cement its reputation as a great place to live and work. "Minnesota is a wonderful place," she said, "but people my age want to live in places that are open and supportive communities for everyone."
Dux thinks her state representative, Gene Pelowski (DFL-Winona) should vote yes on HF1054, the Clark marriage equality bill, because by doing so, he can secure his hard-earned reputation as a champion for students.
"He's been at this a long time," she said. "He's on the side of students and education. Students don't have a problem with this--pass it. Engage with us on this issue and strength your connection with young people."
"Get on this train, Gene," she said, laughing.
Photo: Claire Dux wants Gene Pelowski to vote yes today. Submitted photo.
This original story is underwritten by a sponsorship by Minnesotans United for All Families.
The DFL legislature is prepared to sell out Southeastern Minnesota to industrial sand mining interests, despite widespread grassroots appeals for relief.
Environmental activists who pushed ambitious legislation to slow the advance of frac sand mining in Minnesota have been soundly defeated on their central proposals and, with less than two weeks left in the 2013 legislative session, are clinging to a fragile game and fish amendment as their last hope for a substantial breakthrough.
The amendment, which would block excavation within a mile of any trout stream in southeastern Minnesota, is strongly backed by Gov. Mark Dayton as a way to prevent an explosion of sand mining in a region where the state has invested millions of dollars over decades to nurture a blue-ribbon fishery.
But as the session winds down, even that idea is meeting resistance in a Legislature that has been largely receptive to the industry’s message that more regulation is unnecessary and will only kill jobs and economic growth.
“It’s the only substantial [frac sand] standard left this session,’’ said John Lenczewski, executive director of Minnesota Trout Unlimited.
“Everything else is just fluff,’’ said Amy Nelson, a frac sand opponent from the Red Wing area. The trout stream language, which could face a critical vote on the Senate floor as early as Thursday, has been painted by opponents as a de-facto mining ban in southeastern Minnesota. Industry supporters also say the measure is a “slippery slope’’ that could potentially hurt taconite mining on the Iron Range and even the construction aggregate business.
Another factor that the article doesn't take up is that few of the state's major environmental groups issued public
policy statements or provided testimony on the proposed legislation.
With the exception of Trout Unlimited and Land Stewardship Project, the
citizens were largely on their own. (It will be curious to see which groups that stood silent will use this issue for fundraising--we'll let you know).
Kennedy reports that the governor will meet with industry reps today to push for the pro-trout legislation:
But Dayton told reporters Wednesday that he is cautiously optimistic the legislation will move forward.
“I strongly support that position and will do everything I can in conference committee to get it enacted,’’ he said.
Meanwhile, the governor scheduled a private meeting for Thursday with industry representatives, labor leaders and the commissioners of the Department of Natural Resources, Pollution Control Agency and Department of Health.
Bluestem hopes that he'll succeed in swaying the legislature where thousands of concerned citizens have failed. Praise goes to freshman senator Matt Schmit for listening to his constituents, unlike Winona area senator Jeremy Miller, who cast a deciding committee vote to kill Schmit's trout stream protection.
Photo: On Tuesday, St. Mary's prof Jane Cowgill, who favors Schmit's bill, held up a "fishstick." The legislature favors Mrs. Paul's over Southeastern Minnesota's trout. Photo by John Kaul.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
Once upon a time--in mid-April--Minnesota state senator Scott Newman (R-Hutchinson) stood in the presence of his district's representatives at a town hall and declared to voters in the small-town cafe:
Sen. Scott Newman thinks it will be a long shot for either a bill
legalizing same-sex marriage or civil unions to come to the Senate floor
for a vote this year.
Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk, he said,
may be a DFLer but he’s an Iron Ranger who hails from a fiscally liberal
yet socially conservative district. “In the Senate, they’d have to get
past (Bakk) and I doubt they can do it.”
Today, Wednesday, May 8, 2103, Senate comm staffer Amos Briggs sent an email with this subject head: "Advisory: Senate Vote on Marriage Equality Bill." Contents:
Should the Minnesota House of Representatives vote to pass HF 1054, the marriage equality bill, on Thursday, May 9th, the Minnesota Senate will plan to schedule the bill for a floor vote on Monday, May 13th, with session likely to convene at 11:00 a.m.
The Senate will not be in session on Saturday, May 11th, as several members will be attending a funeral for Sen. Ruud's mother. . . .
At least one Twin Cities blogger called Minnesota For Marriage (M4M) divisive rural-vs-metro a sound strategy based on Newman's remarks. Guess both of them forgot to ask Bakk about it.
Nor did the M4M tour appear to have achieved its end--instead, rural DFL legislators began to declare their intentions to vote yes.
FitzSimmons' amendment: clarification, not compromise
Conservative Wright County Republican freshman representative David FitzSimmons (Albertville) has offered an elegant amendment that clarifies the Clark bill, removing the muddle of debate over civil unions and marriage. It may possibly also banish fears that religious groups that acknowledge only straight marriage will at some point be forced to marry queer folk within their walls.
A13-0619 inserts "civil marriage" where "marriage" is now in state law and the Clark bill.
Simple. Respectful. A clarification that supports religious freedom, but not a compromise of the essential equality of the claim to marriage of all committed couples.
Reporters are tweeting that Minnesotans United for All Families executive director Richard Carlbom agrees with the amendment:
Richard Carlbom of MNU supports GOP's Fitzsimmons amendment to use "civil marriage" in all MN law. Could net GOP votes? #gaymarriage
In advance of the historic vote in the Minnesota House of
Representatives on extending the freedom to marry to same-sex couples,
Representative David FitzSimmons, (R – Albertville) today introduced an
amendment to House File 1054 that would insert the word “civil” in front
of marriage in Minnesota state statute.
Minnesotans United Campaign Manager Richard Carlbom released the following statement in response to this development:
“Minnesotans United supports this amendment, and we will encourage
the members of the Minnesota House of Representatives to support it as
well. Representative FitzSimmons’ amendment affirms the fact that
Minnesotans want same-sex couples to have the freedom to marry in our
state while also ensuring that clergy members and religious institutions
are free to practice their beliefs free from government intrusion. We
applaud Representative FitzSimmons for introducing this amendment, and
we are hopeful that it will bring even more bipartisan support to House
File 1054.”
It's unfortunate that while FitzSimmons can see the merit making the amendment but not declare support the bill as a whole. Update: Along with fellow Republicans Pat Garofalo, Andrea Kieffer and Jenifer Loon, FitzSimmons voted yes.
Representative tweets from the media:
Fitzsimmons wouldn't comment as to whether he'll vote for the final bill if his amendment isn't included.
Anne
Morse and Jon Nicholson of Dakota, Winona County, Minnesota, who have been married since Trix was a pup, saw their own son marry last year. They can't entertain denying the happiness that they and their child have found in marriage to any other committed couple.
"My son was married last summer, and it was a wonderful event for our
family, and for the new, extended family that we now are," Morse said. "His happiness
with this life-changing event is obvious to all who know him, and I
just can't imagine trying to prevent others from such an experience. To
stand in the way of others who want to do the same would be cruel
indeed."
The couple hopes that their state representative, Gene Pelowski
(DFL-Winona) and state senator, Jeremy Miller (R-Winona) will vote yes
in the pending votes on the Clark/Dibble bills extending the freedom to
marry to gay and lesbian couples.
The Morse--Nicholson match paired a life-long state resident with a chosen Minnesota.
Morse is a member of a politically-active Minnesota family that's
produced both environmental advocate and former Winona-area state
senator Steve Morse and conservative activist Julie Morse Quist, spouse
of perennial Republican candidate Allen Quist. Nicholson, on the other
hand, is a "military brat" who picked Minnesota because of its tradition
of progressive leadership.
"I grew up in a Navy family and moved all around, but lived mostly in
NW Florida -- a very conservative area politically, more openly racist
at the time I was a kid, with a culture strongly influenced by religious
intolerance," Nicholson told Bluestem Prairie.
"After college, I spent some time trying to decide where I would like
to live," he continued. "A number of factors lead me to Minnesota, but
two prominent factors were the reputation that Minnesota had for a high
level of education, and the moderate-to-liberal politics."
Morse, works as Winona County's Sustainability Coordinator,
believes marriage equality will strengthen rural communities. "I was
raised on an apple orchard, and great pride was taken in working hard
and playing (though not quite enough). But I came to know that our
small communities were pretty homogeneous too, and that's where we fell
short," she said.
"Growing up with the same folks through grade school, middle school
and then high school, it was clear that being gay or straight was not a
choice," Morse recalled. "It was just who we were; some of us were
straight and some of us were gay. It was obvious. But there was
pressure for conformity too, and most gay friends who were honest with
themselves moved away as soon as they were able. Over the years, too
many friends have felt they had to leave, and I have missed have them."
"Passage of the Freedom to Marry bill will be great for Minnesota as a
whole, and just fine for rural Minnesota too," she concluded. " It will keep some of our
best and brightest here. It will not affect my marriage, nor that of my
neighbors. Most opposition to marriage equality is based in fear,
which is generally never a good basis for any decision-making. Our fears
are often far worse than the reality ever is, once we confront it."
Nicholson is more laconic in stating his conclusion about the impact of marriage equality. "Minnesota will lose one more reason for people to become agitated about
pointless divisions between the people," he said. "Minnesota can focus more on
issues that affect the lives of the majority of people, rather than
obsessing about the legal status of two people who love each other."
Her own marriage matters to Morse. "The commitment of marriage has been important to me personally, she said. "It is
a tie and a connection between my husband and myself that is also
acknowledged within the larger community. No explanations necessary.
Our relationship was simply accepted. For others not to be able to
experience this, well it's just not fair."
Her husband, a chemical engineer who runs his own small business, considers the legal benefits of marriage as an important factor in extending the freedom to marry to gay and lesbian couples. "Marriage is a legal contract, recognized by
the state," Nicholson said. "This contract extends important rights and privileges, and
and allows for the sharing of assets and provision of access. To
withhold this opportunity from any adult is unreasonable."
Nicholson's pro-equality views also have roots in friendships with colleagues and neighbors. "Like everybody else, I've worked with gay people, and had gay people
as friends and neighbor," he said. "Because I wasn't judgmental about their sexual
orientation, I don't think that most gay guys or lesbians that I've
known have bothered to hide it from me."
He rejects the notion that gay men and lesbians can find happiness in straight unions. "Gay men and lesbians have married members of the opposite sex
because society (and families) expected them to, but what I've seen and
heard about from these marriages has been that it just created misery
for all of the people involved," he observed.
"Misery is not good for anyone, and does
not help build a society or state where people can reach their personal
best or contribute their best to our country's welfare," Nicholson believes. "Let people
marry whom they choose -- and let the legal benefits of marriage
(including such benefits as health insurance, survivor benefits, etc.)
be available fairly, to everyone who commits to a married life."
Echoing a viral video meme, Nicholson sees another bonus for Minnesota with the passage of the marriage equality bills.
"I look forward to the day when heterosexual guys can compete only against each other for heterosexual women to marry," he said, "and not have to compete against guys (better-dressed guys!) who secretly would rather be with men."
Photo: The wedding of Morse and Nicholson's son Ian's to Caitlin last summer.
This original story is underwritten by a sponsorship by Minnesotans United for All Families.
Given the trend of rural Democratic house members announcing their support (or leaning toward support) of state representative Karen Clark's freedom to marry legislation, Bluestem was overjoyed but not surprised to receive statements from the Minnesota House and Minnesotans United for All Families that HF1054 would be scheduled for a floor vote on Thursday.
The note from the House was straightforward:
This morning the Minnesota House Rules committee will meet to calendar HF 1054, the marriage equality bill, for a House floor vote on Thursday, May 9th.
The House floor session will begin today at 9:00 a.m. and is expected to recess shortly after. The House Rules committee will begin 5 to 10 minutes after the recess, at approximately 9:30 a.m in State Capitol Room 118.
Minnesotans United for All Families was more exuberant:
Today, the Minnesota House of Representatives announced that HF1054, a bill to extend civil marriage to same-sex couples while strongly protecting religious freedoms in our state, will receive a vote on the House floor on Thursday, May 9.
House leadership has repeatedly said that HF1054 would not come before the House floor until the necessary 68 votes to pass it were secured. Today’s announcement signals that those votes have been secured and that the freedom to marry legislation will pass and move to the Senate floor for a final vote.
“Thursday’s vote in the Minnesota House of Representatives will be a historic victory for thousands of same-sex couples and families in our state,” said Minnesotans United Campaign Manager Richard Carlbom. “We are confident that the necessary votes to extend the freedom to marry for same-sex couples have been secured and that HF1054 will pass the House floor. The Minnesota House of Representatives is now poised to make Minnesota the next state to grant civil marriage to same-sex couples and their families by affirming what we already know to be true: Marriage is about the love, commitment, and responsibility that two people share, and it is a basic freedom that should no longer be denied to some simply because of who they are.”(emphasis added)
The Minnesota House has scheduled a Thursday debate and floor vote on the bill to legalize same-sex marriage in the state.
House
DFL leadership announced the plans Tuesday. House Speaker Paul Thissen
has previously said that scheduling the vote would be a signal that DFL
leaders secured the 68 votes needed to pass the bill.
The Dibble bill to legalize gay marriage in Minnesota faces one more step before the full Senate can vote on it. The Senate Finance Committee this morning considers a whether it will be worth $678,000 a year in addtional costs to the state.
Watch the Senate Finance Committee archival footage here at The Uptake:
Contact your representative and senator to ask them to vote yes on extending the right to marry to loving same-sex couples.
Image: The happy new image from MN United for All Families.
If you enjoy reading posts like this on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
The Minnesota House Ways and Mean Committee passed HF1540, the marriage equality bill, on a voice vote after a brief discussion of the cost of benefits for 114 same-sex spouses of public employees.
Before the full Minnesota House of Representatives can vote on same-sex marriage, the House Ways and Means Committee had to approve the estimated $678,000 annual cost to the state. The bill passed on a voice vote.
The Senate Finance Committee will take up a similar measure on Tuesday. If passed, both the Senate and the House appear to have no more hurdles for a floor vote other than leadership allowing a vote to happen.
Image: Minnesotans United for All Families countdown: Day 14.
If you enjoy reading posts like this on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
Journalists are tweeting about the potential Ways and Means Committee action that state representatives Jeanne Poppe (DFL-Austin) and Gene Pelowski (DFL-Winona) favor when the committee reconvenes and takes up HF1504, representative Karen Clark's marriage equality bill.
Rochester Post Bulletin political reporter Heather Carlson tweeted:
DFL Rep. Jeanne Poppe to vote yes on gay marriage in Ways & Means, leaning toward yes vote on House floor.
Among the benefits of the freedom to marry, the ability to see a loved one though sickness and health, until death do you part--as wedding vows put it--is one of the more emotionally difficult and expensive propositions facing gay men and lesbians seeking to marry the people they love.
Jim Lilya, a 50-year-old Detroit Lakes area man, and his partner John Rusch spent a small fortune in legal fees to secure their rights in the nearly 25-year-long relationship they shared. Rusch passed away nearly two years ago.
Rusch's memory stays strong for Lilya, as does his passion for making sure that other loving couples will be able to enjoy the simple equal protection that he and John were never quite able to obtain.
"We always wanted to be married," Lilya said in an email to Bluestem. "We thought of ourselves as married, we
lived together as a married couple. We had our family with two dogs, our
house that we fixed up for most of those years, our yard and gardens
that we tended together.
Lilya regrets that he and Rusch were never able to marry. "We were a couple but in reality we weren't
married," he recalls. "We never had a ceremony inviting all of our friends and
relatives to share in our love and our commitment to one another. We
never were able to stand up and say 'I take this man, to have and to
hold, to love and to honor, to cherish. . .Til death do us part.'
When Rusch died, Lilya was devastated emotionally, but was able to retain the home the couple made together. "I'm glad we had the forethought to have wills because I don't believe I would have been able to
keep all that we had together," Lilya said. "I was on great terms with his family... but when it came down to it, I think they would have taken his half. I
would have had to sell my home. Give them a vehicle. Probably half the
money in our accounts."
While Lilya and Rusch were able to able to afford to hire a lawyer to write their wills, he worries about that many same-sex couples can't afford the expensive process of creating wills that won't be easily disregarded or challenged.
"The cost of the wills was a financial burden
on us," he said. "I can't imagine what same sex couple go through without wills,
because they can't afford them or don't think to get them. Married
[straight] couples don't have these issues."
"Even with the wills, I had to spend
even more money that I didn't have because there was some ambiguity
about ownership," he added.
For the widowed Lilya, the freedom to marry comes down to basic Minnesota Nice fair play.
"It is not fair that tax paying citizens are not given equal rights
in this state or this country for that matter," he said. "It is not fair that
loving same-sex couples relationships are not given the same respect and
dignity as heterosexuals."
Regardless of how his state representative Paul Marquart (DFL-Dilworth) votes in this afternoon's consideration of HF 1054 by the House Ways and Means Committee or when the bill is brought to the floor, Lilya's experience as a widowed gay man in Minnesota has created the political will to keep up the fight for freedom and equality.
"We are not second class, and we won't be
treated as such," he wrote. "We now know our value and we are not
going to stop until we have equal rights and treatment."
Marquart, who has remained uncommitted about how he stands on the bill, may have to vote today to move or table the bill (one supposes that he could also abstain, though that seems cowardly, indeed). He's not the only undeclared DFLer on the committee--there are also Jeanne Poppe (DFL-Austin) and Gene Pelowski (DFL-Winona). Like Marquart, Poppe represents a district where citizens voted for the amendment to restrict the right to marriage to heterosexual couples.
Bluestem hopes Pelowski will remember that vote, while listening to more recent voices being raised in support for the freedom to marry.
Two op-ed piece in the Winona Daily News suggest that that support is wide and deep. In a group column in Monday's Winona Daily News, WSU students call for Freedom to Marry, addressing both Pelowski and Senator Jeremy Miller (R-Winona). They write in part:
. . .Last year, we gained firsthand experience and saw the impact of our
collective efforts materialize in the defeat of the "marriage"
amendment. We turned out to vote in record numbers, because an issue
important to our generation was at stake. According to a recent ABC
News/Washington Post poll, while 58 percent of Americans support
same-sex marriage, 81 percent of people under 30 support it. Young
people propelled the victory. We helped defeat the amendment.
This
year, we ask our legislature to pass the freedom to marry for all
families. It's the right thing to do. It's also the best thing to do for
our campus and our community.
As student leaders, we work hard to
represent all students and help every student succeed. Students
entering college need to feel like they have a place in our community.
When we restrict the freedom to marry from every student, it damages our
collective community and our learning environment.
As students,
we entrust the school to find the best teachers, professors, mentors,
and staff. As ten other states now have the freedom to marry, we must
join them to ensure that no applicant overlooks WSU for another location
because of a law on our books.
Lastly, as we ourselves graduate
and look for jobs, we want to live and work in states that have the
freedom to marry for everyone. If Iowa has this and Illinois is expected
to pass the freedom to marry soon, Minnesota must not fall behind.
Senator
Miller and Representative Pelowski, thank you for your hard work,
dedication, and support of Winona State University. We ask you to keep
it up and support the freedom to marry this year.
The column is signed by 30 student leaders, including the president, vice-president, vice president-elect, treasurer and treasurer-elect of the student senate.
The students aren't alone in their call for support for the Dibble/Clark bills in the Senate and House. In Local businesses back Freedom to Marry, ten business owners outlined the pro-business case for marriage equality:
n
Discrimination is bad for business. A welcoming state is essential to
recruiting and retaining the best young talent. Minnesota employers have
known this for years. Minnesota's largest and most successful companies
have been the nation's leaders in creating diverse workplaces and
extending family benefits to domestic partners. This leadership has made
our community a strong magnet for attracting and retaining the nation's
top talent - not just gay and lesbian professionals, but today's
educated young workers who increasingly say that living in welcoming
communities is important.
n Uncertainty undermines business
planning. Uncertainty is inefficient and expensive. Consider the
challenges of our multi-state and multi-national employers who
increasingly will have to sort out a patchwork of state and federal laws
affecting marriage. Yes, even if the Minnesota Legislature grants
marriage equality this year, laws won't be uniform across the country.
But action this year gives Minnesota businesses the opportunity to start
planning for the equality that is certain to come.
n Marriage
inequality makes some of our employees second-class citizens. Turnover
and a loss of productivity are two of the consequences that come when
some employees are denied rights that most of us take for granted,
including family issues and end-of-life decisions among many others.
Workplace policies aren't a replacement for equal rights under the law.
Marriage
equality is not on the legislative agenda simply because Minnesota
voters soundly defeated the constitutional amendment which sought to
limit the definition of marriage in November. That vote may have
accelerated legislative consideration of the issue, but it would have
arrived at the Capitol sooner rather than later with or without last
fall's vote. This choice is before you now because it is the right thing
to do, for our employees and their families, for our companies'
business success and for the economic prosperity of all Minnesotans.
We
urge the legislature to reaffirm Minnesota's leadership in equality and
economic opportunity by passing legislation in 2013 that ensures gay
and lesbian Minnesotans, at long last, have the freedom to marry the
person they love.
What case are opponents to the freedom to marry making? On today's op-ed page, Monday, May 6, there's one letter opposing marriage equality, Shameful lusts. Bluestem is saddened that the writer is unable to understand how love is love. We know our own circles would be improvished if the loving partnerships of our gay and lesbian friends were to vanish from our life.
Photo: 28A Representative Gene Pelowski (DFL-Winona). Is he listening to and reading what his constituents are saying about the freedom to marry? His constituents who want to contact him about the bill before the Ways and Means committee reconvenes can find contact information here: Gene Pelowski Jr. 28A
If you enjoy reading posts like this on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
Growing up in the suburbs of Chicago, Caitlin Pawlowski came to Detroit Lakes to vacation at Fair Hills Resort every summer. After graduating from Ohio State University in 2007 with a degree in finance, Pawlowski spent a year working in New Jersey.
Then, in 2009, she was offered a job at Fair Hills.
"I jumped at the chance to move to Minnesota," Pawlowski, the resort'sHuman Resources/Front Desk Manager, wrote in an email interview. "I love the lakes country and
moving here was a dream come true. The life we have built in Detroit
Lakes is a dream come true."
"Minnesota is my home," she added, noting that she appreciates Minnesota values like "family, love, acceptance and freedom."
She lives with her fiance and two dogs in Detroit Lakes. In many ways, the couple represents the "talented individuals who will be coming here and sharing their gifts in the workforce," that Norwegian bachelor farmer and fellow House District 4B voter Daniel Anderson believes will find marriage equality a draw for the state.
One cloud darkens the sunny skies of her good life in Minnesota: the inability to marry the love of her life, her fiance. "Why can I not commit my life to another woman and enjoy the same
marriage benefits that my fellow heterosexual citizens enjoy?" she asks. "I didn't
choose to love my fiancé, my love for her developed without a choice."
Pawlowski believes that the freedom to marry the person she loves is a basic human right. "Marriage and the benefits of marriage is a basic human right that should
not be denied to anyone. Marriage is a commitment that should be not
withheld from anyone. Love and commitment between any two people at its
basis is the same among all couples regardless of gender," she said. "Marriage equality is important because love is blind and cannot be stopped."
The 27-year-old transplant thinks that her state representative, Paul Marquart (DFL-Dilworth) should vote to move HF1054,the Clark marriage equality bill, forward when it is heard in the House Ways and Means Committee today, and to vote yes when the bill is brought to the floor of the Minnesota House.
"Passing this bill will strengthen Minnesota's right to be called a great
state," she wrote. "It will show the nation that Minnesota is on the front line of
changing history. It will show that Minnesota is not afraid to do the
right thing. Minnesota will be a state filled with free, happy and
open-minded citizens."
"Our nation was built upon freedom for all," she added. "By not passing the bill,
only some have marriage freedom while others do not. To vote no is to
deny freedom for all. Why not? I cannot come up with a negative
outcome to passing this bill."
If Pawlowski had a chance to sit down with opponents of the bill, she'd start by listening to their explanations for their resistance to allowing her to marry the woman she loves. "I would be respectful and listen," she wrote. "I would share my story. I would
ask how love between two people can be discriminated against. I would
ask how marriage equality could be threatening."
"We lead a normal, common, boring, non-threatening life," she notes. "Why can I not
legally marry her and call her my wife and share all the benefits?"
Photo: Caitlin Pawlowski, her fiance G., and one of their two dogs, enjoying the good life in Minnesota's lake country.
This original story is underwritten by a sponsorship by Minnesotans United for All Families.
Few Minnesotans would be surprised to learn that there's a Norwegian bachelor living on his family's farm near tiny Rollag, an uncorporated community in Clay County, or that said bachelor farmer is an active Lutheran.
A few more might be surprised to learn that Daniel Anderson, a teacher and principal who retired and returned to run the family place, is a gay man. But as Republican Sarah Janecek explained last fall in The bachelor farmer and the marriage vote, gay bachelor farmers have always lived quiet lives on the edge of the prairie, tending to their fields and families.
Anderson's hoping that the Minnesota legislature will allow families led by loving same-sex couples to enjoy the same protections of the law that other Minnesota families now enjoy.
"I believe the freedom to marry the person you love is a civil right," Anderson said, adding, "I believe love is
love. I believe everyone should have the same rights. For me it’s a civil right."
His notions of human dignity spring from his strong Lutheran faith. "I was raised
in the church and I a person of the church," Anderson said. "As a lifelong Minnesotan and a person of the church, my ideas about human rights and based in the teachings of Jesus Christ about love and acceptance."
Anderson came to believe that marriage equality is important when, as an educator and school administrator, he witnessed the experience of families led by same-sex couples.
"I know a
number of gay and lesbian friends in commited relationships, and I have known children attended my
schools, from families headed by same sex couples," Anderson said. "I
have seen the children of same sex couples be loved, provided for, nurtured--and protected from the bullying by other children and adults."
"These same-sex moms and dads had have to take
expensive legal steps to protect their assets and their children’s futures," he recalled. "To me, that’s unjust, unfair and unforgiveable
that our society doesn't recognize these
families. The law should be changed."
Anderson shared a heart-breaking tale of two friends whose inability to marry heightened the tragedy of one partner's death. "This couple was together for thirteen years. They took
all the legal steps that they could to protect their rights and property," Anderson said, his voice breaking in the phone interview. "One man diagnosed with cancer, and when he died, his partner wasn't allowed to witness the
death certificate, despite all of the money they had spent on trying to secure their rights as a family."
"The surviving partner was there when the man he loved died, but instead, his sister five states away--she wasn’t there--was the one to witness the death certificate."
The bachelor farmer believes that extending the freedom to marry for all couples will benefit the state as a whole. "It will make our state stable and attract all types
of individuals who respect and support diversity. Our economy will be boosted by talented individuals who will be coming here and sharing their gifts in the workforce," Anderson said, citing a study that found that same-sex marriage could boost the economy by $45 million.
"It will also protect the children and families of
same sex couples by giving the rights as other families in the state of
Minnesota," he added.
As a constituent of state representative Paul Marquart (DFL-Dilworth), Anderson thinks that his legislator should vote to extend the freedom of marry the one you love to all couples.
"State legislators need to protect
all their constituents," Anderson said. "If they vote
no, there will be people who are not afforded equal protection--second class citizens."
"Nobody is a second class citizens in Minnesota," he says.
"Everybody is a first class citizen. Everyone should have the same rights."
Photo: Rollag gay Norwegian Lutheran bachelor farmer Daniel Anderson shows off some home canning. It's pure, mostly. Photo via Facebook.
This original story is underwritten by a sponsorship by Minnesotans United for All Families.
Late yesterday afternoon, the Minnesota House Majority comm department notified media that HF1054, state representative Karen Clark's marriage equality bill, would be heard Monday, May 6, by the Ways and Means Committee.
The Minnesota House has scheduled another committee hearing for a bill that would legalize same-sex marriage in Minnesota.
The House Ways and Means Committee has scheduled a Monday hearing for
the bill after a fiscal analysis found legalizing same-sex marriage
would cost the state money.
Minnesota Management and Budget predicts that legalizing same-sex
marriage would result in 114 more people enrolling for state benefits
for their married partners. Fiscal agents estimate the added benefits
would cost $688,378 a year.
The fiscal note also projected that 5,186 same-sex couples would get
married over the next two years if same-sex marriage were legalized in
Minnesota on August 1. The estimate found that couples paying the $90
marriage licenses would generate roughly $190,135 to the state's general
fund and another $146,930 to other special revenue funds.
Although there's little time to contact these committee members, their contact information is at the links below (be polite in email and phone calls; we'd recommend polite emails sent today, since no one is working today to answer the phones at the Capitol):
Several suburban Republicans whose districts voted against the amendment serve on the Ways and Means Committee as well. Although no member of the minority caucus in the Minnesota House has come out to support marriage equality, those from districts that turned down the amendment might be reminded of the choice voters made in November.
Again, time is short, but those who wish to contact them can find info at the link under each member's name; be polite in emails and phone calls.
McNamara (Hastings) is a co-author of HF1687, the first civil unions bill submitted by Rep. Tim Kelly (R-Red Wing). Unlike Kim Norton--whose name is stricken on the first iteration and a co-author of HF1805--McNamara didn't sign on Kelly's replacement "civil unions for everybody" bill that was offered days after the first bill reserved marriage for straight couples, while allowing both straight and gay/lesbians to enter into legally recognized civil unions.
The first bill was criticized for creating "separate but equal" arrangments for gay or lesbian couples who want to marry. Kelly responded with a bill that would "take government out of marriage."
Photo: Will the gay heirs of Paul Bunyan's legacy be able to marry in Minnesota soon?
56-year old Larry Duncan and 48-year old Randy Shepherd receive their marriage license in Washington State in December.
Photograph by Meryl Shenker.
If you enjoy reading posts like these on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
While yesterday's news of Representative Joe Radinovich's decision to vote yes on Clark bill to extend the freedom to marry to all couples rocked the headlines across the state, a glance at Greater Minnesota papers online reveals it's not the only story.
Seven members of First Congregational worked meticulously, well into the
afternoon Friday as they hung 100 intricate, ministerial stoles. Their
work was for more than just an art project, though.
Shower of Stoles is a traveling exhibit of more than 1,000 religious
garments donated by LGBT individuals who serve or have served in
ministry but have been defrocked by the church for their sexual
orientations. Martha Juillerat started the project when she stepped down
from the Presbyterian Church in 1995 and came out, according to the
project’s website, www.welcomingresources.org. She asked for other LGBT to send in their
stoles to display and received 80 within the first day. The next
spring, she had 200, so the first display was held in 1996 in
Albuquerque, N.M.
Over the years, clearly, the exhibit has grown. Now it is split up
into pieces, and First Congregational is hosting the exhibit for the
first time from May 3 to May 15. Member Vickie Spyhalski is one of the
seven who helped hang the stoles, which took several hours.
“The purpose is really to show the role that LGBT people play in the church and their role in the ministry,” Spyhalski said.
First Congregational has 100 of the stoles on display. Many of them
are coupled with the stories of the people who wore them and the
struggles they faced by coming out. Those stories, Spyhalski said, are
powerful. . . .
The Red Wing Human Rights Commission along with Red Wing PFLAG —
Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays — invites the public
to a free performance presented by The Project 515 players.
The
performance will be at 7 p.m. Tuesday May 7 at Hobgoblin Stoney End, 920
Highway 19, Red Wing. Based in Minneapolis, “Project 515 - The Tour!”
has traveled all around the state, as far north as Bemidji, as far south
as Albert Lea and points in between.
Project 515 Education
Campaign is a non-profit organization working to teach Minnesotans about
the 515 current state laws that provide rights, benefits and
responsibilities based on marriage that are unavailable to same-gender
couples. The show is presented by a cast of six, each of whom plays
several roles in the performance. . . .
A next-door neighbor assumes that her lesbian neighbor can now
marry because the marriage amendment posed to voters last November
failed.
A man loses everything when his partner, a police officer, is
killed in the line of duty. His partner’s family — most of whom stopped
talking to him years ago — made all the decisions while he was left with
an empty house.
A young girl can’t sleep because she thinks
she’ll be taken away from her parents — two women who have been together
for years but can’t marry.
It was those moving snippets portraying the daily
struggles a same-sex couple experiences in Minnesota that moved
audience members like Joyce Atchison to tears. A self-proclaimed ally to
the LGBT community, Atchison was one of about 20 people who braved the
May Day blizzard for a performance of “515-The Tour!” at the
Congregational United Church of Christ in Faribault. . . .
Read the rest in the Daily News.
Grand Forks: Lake Park mayor Aaron L. Wittnebel's column
Clear across the state in the Grand Forks Herald,Lake Park mayor Aaron Wittnebel's column, Support the freedom to marry in Minnesota, has been published in the op-ed section. In the commentary, first published in MinnPost, Minnesota's only currently out gay mayor writes:
As the only openly gay mayor in Minnesota -- and having been born and
raised in the town I represent in Greater Minnesota -- marriage is
something that is important for me as a friend, a leader and a
Minnesotan.
Growing up in my small rural town in Greater
Minnesota and attending our local Lutheran Church, I learned the value
of commitment and family. Although I am not currently in a relationship,
I was for some time.
Michael and I had a great many plans for
the one day when we would have the freedom to get married in the state
we call home. We planned on getting married, raising a family and living
our lives together. . . .
Unfortunately,
Michael passed away from meningitis in 2006, a few short months after
his 30th birthday. Thanks to his upbringing in a small rural town as
well -- with those same shared values of love, commitment and family --
his family and I were able to make the arrangements together that
respected his wishes.
Sadly, this is not true for many same-sex
couples throughout Minnesota who, without equality under the law, end up
facing the nightmare of trying to honor their loved ones’ wishes on top
of the tragedy of losing them. And unfortunately, this is just one
example where our law stands in the way of love.
Not everyone is
fortunate to have a family such as Michael’s, and that’s one of many
reasons why marriage equality is so very important.
My friends,
family and neighbors all have come a long way in their recognition that
same-sex couples and LGBT Minnesotans like me have the same values,
hopes and aspirations as all other Minnesotans. We are Herald readers’
brothers, sisters, neighbors, co-workers and friends, and we believe in
families just like readers do.
Read the whole article in the GF Herald.
Happy to hitch 'em in Hackensack
Over in Hackensack, Pastor Michael Small looks forward to the day when he can legally marry couples like Aaron and Michael. He write in his letter to the Bemidji Pioneer, It’s time for Minnesota to take next step:
As a pastor for the past 25 years at Union Congregation Church United Church of Christ in Hackensack, I am proud to call myself a Minnesotan.
This past fall I was especially pleased to know that the people of Minnesota clearly affirmed the freedom for all persons in Minnesota to marry.
The voters of Minnesota have taken the first step in the freedom for everyone to marry. Now is the time to take the next step to secure the freedom for same-gendered couples to marry the one whom they love and cherish. It is time for us to set aside the last barrier for the freedom for everyone to marry by encouraging our legislators to act.
In Hackensack, same-gendered couples pay taxes, they vote, they run businesses. They work hard and contribute to the same system as everyone else. They should be treated fairly under the law, including the freedom to marry the person they love. When two people fall in love and decide to start a family and spend their lives together, marriage is the next step. There is nothing that compares or is as meaningful as marriage.
I look forward to the day when I can stand before a same-gendered couple and officiate at their wedding. Then I will be living out what I say every Sunday at Union, “No matter who you are or where you are on life’s journey, you are welcome here.”
Seven Minnesota House DFLers seen as swing votes
on gay marriage say they are supporting or leaning toward supporting it,
potentially key pickups for sponsors of the bill that may not get any
Republican support in the chamber.
If House DFLers wind up having to pass the bill on their own, the
members who declared their support in interviews Thursday, May 2, and
Friday, May 3, with the Pioneer Press will get them closer -- but not
all the way.
The seven are part of a group of 17 nonmetro
Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party representatives seen as swing voters
because their party favors legalizing gay marriage but they come from
districts that supported the unsuccessful effort last fall to place a
ban on gay marriage in the state constitution.
Another seven of the group wouldn't commit or comment. And one could not be reached. Two said they will oppose the bill. . . .
Here's the list of where the 17 stand:
Yes: Tom Anzelc of Balsam Township; Carly
Melin of Hibbing; Jason Metsa of Virginia; Joe Radinovich of Crosby;
Shannon Savick of Wells; Mike Sundin of Esko.
Leaning yes: Tim Faust of Hinckley.
No: Patti Fritz of Faribault; Mary Sawatzky of Willmar.
Undeclared: Roger Erickson of Baudette; Paul Marquart of
Dilworth; Jay McNamar of Elbow Lake; John Persell of Bemidji; Jeanne
Poppe of Austin.
No comment: Andrew Falk of Murdock; John Ward of Baxter.
Unavailable: David Dill of Crane Lake.
Bluestem is disappointed in the choices made by Fritz and Sawatzky--especially the latter representative's decision. A freshman, Sawatzky often seems too timid to serve, the Walter Mitty of her class. Would that some of young Joe Radinovich's courage--and that of his fellow, but elder, freshman Shannon Savick,who also won a close race--rubbed off on their Class of 2012 colleague.
Here's hoping that Jay McNamar takes his cue from Radinovich and Savick, rather than Milquetoast Mary. Students at the University of Morris and others, like Big Stone County resident Rebecca Terk, are willing to get his back on this. The PiPress reports:
"This is the hardest vote I've ever had," said Jay
McNamar of Elbow Lake. "This vote, it tears at your heart." Almost 64
percent of voters in McNamar's district voted in favor of the marriage
amendment.
And freshman Roger Erickson:
"There's a fairness issue that I believe in. There's a
separation of church and state that I'm worrying about. But I also
understand the deep-seated religious values of many people in my
district. It's just a hard vote. It's a tough decision to make," said
Roger Erickson of Baudette.
Take the courageous votes, Representatives McNamar and Erickson. In your heart, you know it's right.
Photo: Aleta Christopherson arranges stoles for the Shower of Stoles exhibit at
First Congregational Church. The exhibit, which supports the LGBT who
are of faith, starts today and goes through May 15. -- Eric Johnson, at the Austin Daily Herald (above). Big Stone County Resident Rebecca and her betrothed, John White, want Jay McNamar to vote "yes." Both will be McNamar's constituents in 2014 (below).
If you enjoy reading posts like these on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
A Democrat who was on the fence as to whether to support a bill that
would legalize same-sex marriage in Minnesota says he will vote for the
bill.
Rep. Joe Radinovich, DFL-Crosby, said today that if the bill comes up he's on board.
"To further deny equal rights to all people would be a black eye on this institution and certainly on my own career," he said. . . .
Radinovich acknowledged that his stance on the bill would upset some
of his constituents, including some of his family members. But he said
he believes that a majority of younger voters support same-sex marriage,
and that the trend is that same-sex marriage will be legal soon.
"I'd rather have the voters be upset with me right now than me to be
upset with myself for the rest of my life," Radinovich said.
Ironically, Radinovich is M4M's (Minnesota for Marriage) Legislator of the Day:
#MNleg LEGISLATOR OF THE DAY: Joe Radinovich (DFL-10B) undecided but constituents want #1m1w--tell him vote NO today! bit.ly/107rZKT
In November 2012, sixty-two percent of the voters in Radinovich's district in Aitkin and
Crow Wing County district voted to for the amendment to restrict the freedom to marry. The amendment lost statewide.
Radinovich is scheduled to appear on TPT's Almanac tonight, where the announcement is sure to come up.
Is the heart of rural Minnesota thawing on marriage equality?
Recent developments suggest that the tide is changing for the bill. A new poll by KSTP/SurveyUSA revealed a Dramatic Shift On Gay Marriage Issue:
Votes to legalize gay marriage are likely to happen in the Minnesota
House and Senate next month. With those votes looming, our latest KSTP/SurveyUSA poll shows for the first time a majority of Minnesotans favor changing the law that bans same-sex marriage.
In our poll,
we asked 500 Minnesotans across the state if "the Minnesota state law
that defines marriage as between one man and one woman be changed to
allow same-sex couples to marry?"
The poll
indicates that 51% of Minnesotans favor the idea while 47% are opposed
to changing the law. Only two percent aren't sure. Just over two months
ago, in early February, only 42% of Minnesotans favored changing the
law and 54% were opposed.
Pausing over breakfast at Don's Cafe in Morris, 20-year-old University of Minnesota student Taylor Barker shares his passion for the spirit of rural community that the moderate independent student discovered while attending the liberal arts college in Stevens County.
"I like the small-town atmosphere and values here," Barker said, after noting that he'd grown up in Fridley. "My grandparents are from small towns in Renville and Isanti Counties. I feel like people can sit down and discuss issues over a cup of coffee at cafes like Don's. It's like the way my grandparents talk things over coffee at their kitchen tables with neighbors."
Barker's been drinking decaf while he talks about his development as a straight ally for the freedom to marry. Five years ago, Barker recalls, if he'd heard a news report about derogatory anti-gay slurs, he'd have said, "Attaboy!"
This changed when he got involved in high school theater productions and speech in his sophomore year of high school. "My high school theater program director and speech coach--and later mentor--was gay," he said. "I got to know him and his partner . . .and I realized how stupid homophobia is."
As Barker got to know more gay men and lesbians, he came to believe that all people should be enjoy the freedom to marry the person they love. This realization fit well with Barker's belief in individual liberty and limited government.
Indeed, Barker considered himself a Republican until the 2012 election, when he thought that political purity--"candidates competing to see who is 'more conservative'" -- and religious dogma became more important than the ability to consider individual rights and liberties. Like many young voters, he's turned off by the social conservatism of Republican platform positions that don't acknowledge the full citizenship of all Americans.
During the 2012 campaign season, Barker spoke out against the amendment to restrict the right to marry.
Although raised in the suburbs, Barker hopes to remain in Greater Minnesota and work in community-based radio. "Local people decide what the schedule and content are in community-based radio," he observed, pointing to the member stations in AMPERS.
Whether in politics or professional ambitions, Barker said he's drawn to a sense of community that values all people. "I keep coming back to this: we think getting to know people is important in Greater Minnesota," he said. "Our values of being a good citizen, part of a community--once you get beyond stereotypes, it's clear that same-sex couples are like their neighbors and only to marry the person they love."
Barker had to dash off to introduce students to the little campus on the prairie, in a town which banded together to help elected Jay McNamar while rejecting the amendment by 58.37 percent of the ballots cast.
Photo: Taylor Barker in the studios of KUMM-FM.
This original story is underwritten by a sponsorship by Minnesotans United for All Families. For earlier posts in the series, click on the related articles below.
In St. Paul, the state legislature's picking sand mining lobbyists over trout, while back in greater Minnesota, conflict continues to flare as citizens scrutinize the industry.
Despite a series of political defeats, a Red Wing lawmaker vows to keep fighting for legislation to protect trout streams from silica sand mining.
Sen. Matt Schmit, DFL-Red Wing, said he will keep pushing to prohibit silica sand mining within a mile of trout streams, springs and fens in southeastern Minnesota.
"Hopefully, people realize that we are not asking for the world here. All we're asking for is to be proactive and to give our agencies the tools they need to do their job and give our local decision makers the assurance that we are getting this right," he said.
But the first-term senator faces a tough fight. Republicans and Iron Range Democrats have teamed up to defeat the proposal. Last week, the measure was stripped out of the Senate's game and fish bill. On Tuesday, an attempt by Schmit put the regulations back into the bill failed by one vote in the Senate Finance Committee.
Sen. Jeremy Miller, R-Winona, was among those voting against the trout stream language. He said he wants to protect trout streams but believes other legislation will address the issue by helping set model standards and making agency experts available to help local governments. Local officials he talked to said Schmit's proposal goes too far and would amount to a de facto moratorium on mining in Fillmore and Houston counties.
"That would eliminate just about any opportunity for industrial sand mining in those two counties," he said. . . .
Twin Cities bicyclists will be among those gathering at an event tonight to raise concerns about frac sand mining.
Several silica sand mines close to
the Mississippi River in western Wisconsin are near areas where cyclists
like to ride and stay in bed-and-breakfasts. Some of the proposed mines
in southeastern Minnesota are also located in scenic areas where
cycling is popular. . .
"Bicyclists care about frac sand
mining for the same reasons that I've heard a lot of southeast Minnesota
residents testify at the State Capitol, and that's health, safety and
scenery," [Tracy] Sides said. "Degraded scenery undermines the cycling and
tourism. I've visited mining locations in Wisconsin, and industrial frac
sand mines look like open sores on the land."
Sides said increased truck traffic
from sand mining threatens a resource on both sides of the river. . . .
Can the pristine St. Croix River experience and the silica sand mining operations expected to proliferate near the riverway, co-exist? As industrial silica sand mining expands in this region, that’s ripe with geologic formations that support silica sand deposits; will local officials be prepared for this vastly more intensive form of mining?
Leaders from towns and counties all along the Wisconsin-Minnesota border and in the St. Croix watershed came together last weekend to learn about what’s being done to regulate silica or “frac sand” mining. Some who have been involved in this issue for several years came to share their personal experiences with this industry. The conference was hosted by the St. Croix River Scenic Byway, and River Coalition and was held in St. Croix Falls’ Public Library. Frac sand or silica sand mining is causing concerns for local zoning authorities, public health officials and for citizens suddenly finding their farms, homes or cabins on the edge of a sand mine. . .
Residents in Winona County have asked the Minnesota Court of Appeals
to reverse a decision that would allow a proposed frac sand mine to move
forward without an in-depth environmental review.
The Winona County board voted last
month that the proposed Nisbit frac sand mine in Saratoga Township does
not need to complete an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
But 12 residents backed by the Land Stewardship Project say the county
failed to address concerns about the mine's potential impact. They say
the county needs to take into account the potential cumulative effect of
several mines opening nearby. . . .
Here's the Land Stewardship Project press release:
All of the statements, opinions, and views expressed on this site by Sally Jo Sorensen are solely her own, save when she attributes them to other sources.
The opinions, statements, and views of contributing writers are their own.
Sorensen, editor and proprietor of Bluestem Prairie, served as a New Media training and strategy consultant for the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party from October 2009 through mid-April 2010. She now serves clients in the business and nonprofit sectors.
Recent Comments