The Minnesota House of Representatives conducted its annual poll of legislative issues at the Minnesota State Fair this year, and among the questions was how fair-goers would vote on an amendment to the state constitution limiting marriage to one man and one woman and barring same-sex marriage for future generations. Poll respondents rejected the amendment with 29.8 percent voting “yes” and 66.5 percent voting “no.”

According to the House, the poll “is an informal, unscientific survey of issues discussed in prior legislative sessions.”

Both sides of the debate over the amendment rallied their troops to the fair to vote in the poll. Minnesota for Marriage, which supports a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, and Minnesotans United for All Families, which opposes the amendment, sent email alerts to activists during the fair urging them to take the poll.

The poll had by far the highest turnout ever: 12,549 people took the poll compared to 9,926 last year.

Other controversial issues were on the poll this year as well. A slight majority favored requiring showing a photo identification in order to vote (50.8 to 46.4 percent), a majority objected to allowing the Legislature to call a special session (25.4 to 64.2 percent), and a slight majority approved of gambling expansion to generate new government revenue (51.6 to 40.1 percent).

Photo by manyhighways via Flickr

The House debated the bill for five hours before passage. The rhetoric was often testy. Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Delano) took issue with the way the bill was drafted. “My point is it was all done in a backroom,” he said. “The public was not given a chance to weigh in on it. And guess what? It was done in the middle of the night.”

Rep. Nora Slawik (DFL-Maplewood) countered that the Republicans had offered no credible alternative plan for closing the state’s $6.4 billion budget deficit. “The minority is offering nothing to the people of Minnesota,” Slawik said. “What we’re trying to do is get this session done.”

The measure will now be taken up by the DFL-controlled Senate, where it is expected to pass easily. Gov. Tim Pawlenty has vowed to veto the bill.

Democrats have hinted that they might be able to summon enough votes for an override. But today’s House debate suggested that Republicans are united on holding the line on taxes. Reps. Rod Hamilton and Jim Abeler — who broke with their party to override Pawlenty’s veto of the transportation funding bill during the last legislative session — both spoke out against the tax bill.

Among other issues voiced at the meeting, reporters objected to a new requirement that media carry credentials for covering House committee hearings. (“What the hell are ‘committee credentials’?” DFL Caucus communications chief Andrew Wittenborg was asked.) That was apparently the problem at a committee meeting Monday evening.

Don Davis, Capitol bureau chief for Forum Communications, tells his story at the Capitol Chatter blog:

Two hours after Wittenborg’s meeting, I was trying to take a photo of Rep. Paul Marquart of Dilworth presenting a bill to a House committee. A page approached and asked to see my credentials before she would allow me to take photos. Recalling Wittenborg’s assurances that no credentials were needed, I told her that I had just been told I did not need to present credentials (which, by the way, hung in plain sight from a lanyard around my neck) and I continued to photograph Marquart.

Soon after I returned to my seat in the back of the room, two state troopers approached me after the page had called them, apparently to kick out this photographer. Both had seen me plenty of times and knew I was legitimate, so gave me little hassle.

Not long after I returned to the office to write my story, House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher called to apologize for the incident and promised it would be investigated. And Marquart called to apologize, even though he did not even know the troopers were talking to me at the time and had no knowledge of the proposed rule changes until I told him.

Davis’ account recalls an incident last week, when a House page admonished The UpTake’s Tom Elko for using a video camera in a House subcommittee meeting. Elko, who carried state Senate but not House credentials, told the Minnesota Independent he went willingly with the page to the Sergeant-at-Arms’ office to discuss the matter.

Erhardt was subsequently spotted at the the 3rd Congressional District Democratic endorsing convention last month. But if the “override six” member intends to undergo a political conversion, he’s unlikely to receive a warm reception from the DFL. Kevin Staunton, a former assistant attorney general and member of the Edina Planning Commission, has been endorsed by the Democrats.

Erhardt fully intends to run for a 10th term this November, but he’s uncertain what political party (if any) will be attached to his name. “I’m going to win,” he says. “Simple as that. I expect to be attacked by both the left and the right. So what does that leave us?”

Erhardt’s political estrangement, coupled with strong challengers from both the DFL and the GOP, makes House District 41A one of the most intriguing races of the looming political season. The DFL currently controls the Senate 45-22, while holding an 85-49 advantage in House seats. The Democrats have made significant gains in the last two election cycles, picking up a staggering 33 House seats since 2002.

The 41A district historically leans Republican, but has trended slightly to the left in recent elections. Four years ago John Kerry narrowly won Edina in the presidential campaign, while Amy Klobuchar easily took the municipality in the 2006 Senate race. However, Pawlenty won the 41A district by a comfortable 10-point margin.

Erhardt argues that he’s a reflection of this evolving political philosophy. “It’s a very independent group that used to vote Republican,” he says. “But they don’t necessarily do that anymore because they’re fed up with the right-wing junk that the Republicans have been pushing for years.”

Continued: Click “Read More”Despite Erhardt’s lack of major-party backing, he still has the advantage of widespread name recognition and will likely garner some support from organized labor. The International Union of Operating Engineers Local 49, for instance, endorsed the incumbent two years ago and is almost certain to again be working on his behalf. Adam Duininck, the group’s political director, notes that the transportation bill was their number one legislative priority. “For the people that went out on a limb for us and were courageous for us we need to do the same for them,” he says.

But both challengers have already been raising money and knocking on doors for weeks. Staunton argues that the incumbent’s current political dilemma is proof that he’s no longer the right fit for the district. “Through no fault of his own, I think he’s in a position where it’s hard to be effective,” Staunton says. “It makes it hard for him to reflect the district and still be consistent with what his party is looking at.”

Downey, a partner at the Virchow Krause accounting firm and a board member of the Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce, says his candidacy is motivated by more than simply the transportation bill override. “It’s not about one vote,” Downey says, noting that he’s been running since August. “It’s not about somehow denigrating Rep. Erhardt’s 30 years of service. It is just saying it is time for some new leadership.”

Erhardt dismisses his GOP challenger as simply a pawn of right-wing interests. “He’s been working all the social issues, which I didn’t vote for,” he says, citing abortion, school vouchers, and gay rights. “I’m not an ideologue. The right and the left — especially the right — are so into their social issues, which has nothing to do with the running of government.”

But Downey says this is an unfair caricature of his campaign. “I think it’s fair to say that he’s been very interested in casting me as some kind of right-wing Neanderthal as part of his political strategy,” Downey notes. “He can say what he wants about me. People who know me and who know the campaign would say different.”

Whatever political path Erhardt ultimately chooses to take, the contest in 41A is certain to be as vigorously contested as any in the state. “This is so good for Edina,” argues Downey, noting that Erhardt has seldom faced formidable opposition during his 18 years in office. “The reality is there’s not really been a choice and this year there is.”
 

State Reps. John Lesch, DFL-St. Paul, and Mary Ellen Otremba, DFL-Long Prairie, opposed the bill, which would increase funding for transportation infrastructure and mass transit in Minnesota. Otremba had also opposed the transportation bill passed in 2007, which was also vetoed by Pawlenty.

The bill passed the house 89-44. Six Republicans voted in favor of the bill: state Reps. Jim Abeler, R-Anoka, Ron Erhardt, R-Edina, Rod Hamilton, R-Mountain Lake, Bud Heidgerken, R-Freeport, Neil Peterson, R-Bloomington, and Kathy Tinglestad, R-Andover.

The state Senate, which has a veto-proof DFL majority, passed the measure later on Thursday night by a lopsided 47-20 margin.

Pawlenty is expected to veto the bill. The conservative governor has consistently opposed any increase of taxes to pay for transportation, even in the face of the Interstate 35W Mississippi River Bridge disaster of last August.

Should Pawlenty veto the measure, it will set up another veto override battle. Last year, the House fell just a few votes short of overriding a veto in the session’s waning hours.