The Free Press of Mankato, Jan. 31
Primary: Give voters privacy in voting booth
Why it matters: For the first time in 30 years, political parties will be able to tell which party voters choose in the presidential primary.
People were interested in these podcasts
The secret ballot has long been the pillar of representative democracy, but that pillar is eroding in Minnesota with the upcoming presidential primary election.
Minnesota’s primary election law strikes a blow to voter privacy and must be challenged.
In the two years since Minnesota’s political parties and their leaders decided to go to a primary election for selecting presidential nominees, the law has been misinterpreted and misunderstood. And when it was finally understood, voters weren’t happy.
The law requires voters to pick either a Democratic or Republican ballot, and that information will be provided to each party. The parties will be able to see the party preference of the voter, although not the candidate the voter selected. But that’s no consolation.
The government has no business knowing how people vote in a democratic election.
Some voters want that information to be kept private for a variety of reasons. They may have sensitive jobs in government, for example, where they must work with both parties. Having their employer know their party preference could be detrimental. Local elected officials who are not required to affiliate with a party say they don’t like having to choose a party either.
The law allows the party leaders to do whatever they want with the list of names and party affiliations. One can imagine a list of voters going online for all the world to see. Forever. Objective journalists would certainly not want their choice seen by those who would be out to prove “enemy of the people” tags.
Party leaders say they will only use the information for help in recruiting volunteers or to know how their party appeal might be changing with different groups.
Those reasons don’t outweigh voter privacy.
Secretary of State Steve Simon has heard these concerns and he’s trying to get the laws changed. His proposal would allow the parties to provide the information only to their national organizations. Simon’s proposal would also allow voters to opt out of providing their information.
A Republican proposal by Rep. Peggy Scott is even better. It bans election officials from collecting the party information and calls for purging it from ballots already cast.
DFL party leader Ken Martin was willing to back Simon’s bill but Republican Party leader Jennifer Carnahan would not even meet to discuss it, according to a report in MinnPost. In a double whammy to voter privacy, GOP Sen. Mary Kiffmeyer, chair of the Senate elections committee, also has vowed to reject any changes to the law.
We urge legislators to quickly pass legislation that protects voter privacy.
___
Minneapolis Star Tribune, Jan. 31
CBD doesn’t belong in Minnesota schools
Research on safety, dosing and efficacy is lacking. Use is a family decision, not one for schools.
Amid the proliferation of outlets selling cannabidiol (CBD) products, it can be difficult to remember that just two months ago federal health officials issued a strong warning about the risks of taking this hemp-derived product.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s bulletin boiled down to this: Taking CBD can harm you, and far too little is known about how the active ingredients interact with other drugs, how it affects children, adolescents, the elderly and pregnant women, and what happens with long-term use. While recent regulatory changes opened the door for broader use of hemp-derived products like CBD, the FDA also underscored that it has approved just one drug containing it - a prescription medication for two rare forms of epilepsy. Unapproved CBD products have not been evaluated for proper dosages, effectiveness or purity and may not even be legal.
It is against that backdrop that a new controversy in Minnesota should be weighed. According to a Jan. 25 Star Tribune story, parents who give their children CBD to ease various medical conditions want them to have access to it at school. But most Minnesota schools ban it, and nurses are sounding the alarm about potential risks.
Schools and nurses are right to err on the side of caution. Parents whose children have found relief from CBD merit sympathy. But concerns about safety, dosing and sometimes fly-by-night manufacturing, as well as the legal gray area that hemp-derived products still fall into, are all valid reasons to restrict CBD use in schools.
Minnesota law is clear on medical marijuana, which the state legalized in 2014 but barred from school grounds. Much more fuzzy is the legality of over-the-counter CBD products, which contain a different active ingredient found in the hemp plant and contain less than 0.3% THC, the compound that makes marijuana users feel high. CBD products can include oils, skin creams and edibles.
In 2019, Minnesota lawmakers passed a bill that makes the sale of CBD products that meet certain labeling and testing requirements legal as of this year, although not in food products. An important caveat: Even the CBD products made legal under state law may remain illegal under federal law, according to Cody Wiberg, executive director of the Minnesota Board of Pharmacy, which has not taken a position on CBD in schools.
In general, federal law has lagged state efforts to legalize marijuana or loosen regulations for CBD and other hemp-derived products. The Minnesota School Boards Association has cited this federal uncertainty in its opposition to CBD on school grounds. Concerns about manufacturing integrity in particular make it possible for a product to contain more than 0.3% THC. Terry Morrow, a spokesman for the association, contends that such products could put schools in violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act and at risk of losing federal funding.
The School Nurse Organization of Minnesota (SNOM) raises other valid concerns. Many schools do not have licensed school nurses on staff. The organization is concerned about unlicensed staff’s ability to recognize adverse CBD effects if they occur. SNOM spokeswoman Molly Forrest also said members are alarmed by the lack of research and FDA approval. “We want to be able to support students and families in their preferred treatments, and we want to be able to administer these products, but only if the evidence is there to prove their efficacy and safety,” Forrest said.
A state task force report recently called for legislators to provide clarity on CBD’s use in institutional settings. The reality: It’s really up to Congress or federal regulators to provide a federal framework, an action supported by the Minnesota Hemp Association. A level playing field is needed nationally for manufacturing standards, marketing and testing. That in turn will reward firms with integrity in this fast-growing industry and assuage concerns in Minnesota and elsewhere about CBD’s use.
___
St. Cloud Times, Jan. 31
New sales tax rules make strides for more local control
Waite Park and St. Cloud are just two of many Minnesota cities seeking to gain more local control of fiscal matters when this 2020 legislative session convenes Feb. 11.
Both cities plan to ask legislators to allow them to ask local voters whether they are willing to fund up to five local projects by raising their respective local sales taxes another half cent.
Good for them! And kudos to legislators in recent sessions who supported changing the state’s rules to give more control to cities - and their voters - in addressing local fiscal issues through optional increases (and, theoretically, decreases) to a city’s local sales tax rate.
New process
For decades, the Legislature had essentially frozen cities’ local-option sales tax rates by not allowing them or making them jump through legislative hoops when seeking changes. Recently, though, rules were changed to the following:
- A city must pass a resolution proposing the local-option sales tax increase and including: the proposed tax rate; a detailed description of no more than five capital projects to be funded by the tax; proof of the regional significance of each project; the amount of revenue to be raised for each project; the estimated time to raise that amount; and the total revenue to be raised and anticipated expiration date for the tax.
- That information must be presented to the state, and the Legislature must approve each project go before the city’s voters for individual approval during a general election held within two years of the Legislature’s approval.
- The local-options sales tax increase is applied only to those projects voters approve. The tax amount and length of tax are reduced based on any projects voters reject.
Please note, this process applies to new projects and requests only.
Any increase will be in addition to the local-option half-cent sales the six metro cities - St. Cloud, St. Joseph, Sartell, Sauk Rapids, Waite Park and St. Augusta - adopted in 2002 and agreed in 2014 to extend until 2038 to pay for building the St. Cloud Area Family YMCA, improving St. Cloud Regional Airport, expanding regional trails and other regionally significant capital projects as determined by each city.
New requests
Under the new process, Waite Park and St. Cloud now want their respective voters to add another half-cent increase to their local-option sales tax rates.
Waite Park’s four projects include improving 10th Avenue at no more than $15 million, adding trail connections up to $10 million, and building a new park ($10 million) and new public safety facility ($12 million). Total cost is $47 million with the tax increase in place for 25 years if all pass.
St. Cloud is targeting four road projects across the city plus improvements at the Municipal Athletic Complex worth about $89 million total. The tax increase would last at least 15 years, depending on what voters approve.
Stay tuned
This board is not taking a stand on any of these projects at this time. Rather, we are urging the Legislature to approve these respective proposals so Waite Park and St. Cloud voters can make their own final decisions on each project.
To be sure, this change in approach is bound to have ripple effects locally and statewide.
For example, will higher sales tax rates in St. Cloud and Waite Park be good or bad for business, especially paired against lower rates in four neighboring cities?
Or, at the state level, how will this new way to increase a local government’s revenue impact its eligibility for the statewide Local Government Aid funds? After all, if a city can find funds to build new amenities - some of which are clearly more want than need - does it really need state aid to provide basic services?
In the long term, answers to such questions must be examined across all levels of government in this state. For now, though, this new approach is worth trying. After all, local control is always more desirable than remote control.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.