The integrity of Minnesota’s legislative process has been waning, and a report last year put an exclamation point on that fact by giving the state a grade of D- in transparency.

The report from the nonprofit watchdog group Center for Public Integrity said the activity surrounding the end of the session last year more or less shrouded lawmaking and important budget decisions from the public. House DFL Minority Leader Paul Thissen said there was a $100 million spending bill last year that neither legislators nor the public had a chance to read.

There were too many backroom negotiations, the group said. But the ramming through of legislation was most troubling. In one video clip from the end of last year’s session, the chaos, shouting and yelling resembled something out of the British House of Commons. The House GOP majority moved to approve the spending bill while others shouted no one had been able to read it.

It was a scene unbecoming of Minnesota’s reputation for open and transparent government.

Thissen is introducing a number of reforms, both in House rules and in statute, that would require legislators and the public to be able to read bills before they are passed. It opens up the conference committee process to the public and even calls for testimony as legislative committees reach final compromises on competing bills.

Thissen proposed a 24-hour waiting period for a final vote after the conference committee agrees on a final bill. That would give the public and legislators a chance to read the final bill before it is voted on. It would also require a similar waiting period for House votes on Senate measures.

His plan would go even further and require a 12-hour notice of a vote before a conference committee actually votes on a final conference report.

These initial waiting periods would give the public and legislators more time to digest complex legislation and weigh in on its merits.

In other areas, Thissen proposes more restrictions on the lobbyist work of former legislators, requiring a one-year waiting period for a former legislator to take a job lobbying their colleagues.

The proposal also calls for more transparency when the Legislature sets budget targets. Those final numbers often come out with little time to debate. Thissen’s plan would call for those numbers to be provided no later than 14 days prior to the end of the session. Even that seems too late, but it is an improvement on the current system. The plan would also allow testimony on the budget target bills.

The proposal also prohibits the rules being suspended to work past midnight in the last two weeks of the legislative session, thereby preventing bills from passing in the “dark of the night.”

The plan would also curtail so-called “garbage bills,” where seemingly unrelated topics are attached to larger bills because they would not stand a chance on their own. This has long been an abhorrent and publicly despised process and should be done away with even if nothing else in Thissen’s plan passes.

Finally, Thissen’s plan would subject the Legislature to the same Data Practices law state agencies must follow. It would also provide more immediate and practical disclosure of legislators per diem pay and expenses including mileage and housing allowances on a monthly basis.

Thissen’s spokesman says the minority leader is pursuing bipartisan support for his plan. We urge Republicans and Democrats to support these changes. They may make it more difficult to pass laws and they may slow down an already cumbersome process, but the public will have more confidence they are being heard.

Public confidence in the legislative process should not be a partisan issue.

 

 — Mankato Free Press, Jan. 29