After the shutdown

As families and friends gathered to see skies lit with Fourth of July sparklers, political fireworks filled the Capitol as Minnesota imploded in an historic partial government shutdown. While legislators commuted from all over the state to St. Paul for fruitless dialogue, the first-ever shutdown pushed an estimated 9,000 state employees into limited interruption, forcing them to either take vacation time or lose wages.

After more than a week of talks and offers, the shutdown ended with significant and laudable achievements, particularly given the hostile and divided climate. Legislators agreed on a higher than expected 4 percent increase in education funding, a minimum wage increase passed, and those on the MinnesotaCare program will see the $5,000 yearly benefit cap repealed, and they will not lose benefits.

DFL Senator Linda Berglin feels this is a “big victory,” although it was hard for her to understand why health care issues played such a large role in the impasse: “The Governor said there was no need for eligibility cuts, but, whenever we asked for [funding for the MinnesotaCare program], he didn’t want to do that. It was so difficult to get a commitment.”

In the rubble of the shutdown, Minnesotans are pointing fingers at political leaders.

Mike Buesing, MN/DOT employee and President of AFSCME Council 5 (American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees), says that he lost trust in the elected political leadership, “the governor in particular.”

“As the governor, he’s the ‘boss,’ and I believe [the shutdown was] irresponsible to the citizens and the state employees,” Buesing said. He and other employees who suffered under governmental lockdown are now returning to work with low morale, seeing themselves as “hostages” that got caught in the crossfire of the fighting political parties. In the fallout, Buesing said, public employees are “just plain angry and disappointed.”

Many legislators have also been left disappointed.

“It should not have happened and there’s no way to justify it,” said Michael Paymar, a DFL member of the House of Representatives, “I think we’re all still recovering.”

Paymar said legislators knew that the budget impasse would be particularly problematic because of Governor Pawlenty’s no-new-taxes pledge, but no one anticipated the impasse would result in a partial government shutdown. There have been nine special sessions in the past 11 years, Paymar said, and they have never been considered a cause for concern. They have also not been as costly as a shutdown.

Cal Ludeman, Commissioner of the Department of Employee Relations, estimated the cost of the shutdown at $2 million per day and lost public services. However, Paymar said, “underlying the special sessions that keep happening and the shutdown is an ideological gulf that we have between the two parties that is very, very strong.”

The stage was set for a particularly contentious legislative session after the last election cycle. Democrats gained 13 seats in the House, significantly narrowing the Republican House majority; moreover, they gained the confidence to assert their political voices. DFL members, tired of “caving in” to GOP hardball politics as they felt they had in the previous legislative sessions, resolved to stand firm for the sake of their political consciences and for constituents who expected no less of them. However, Paymar claimed that it is within the boundaries of a legislator’s role to be relatively unbending; constituents demand that their representatives voice their ideological passions. Conversely, the governor, as “CEO of the state,” must demonstrate leadership by recognizing the political body he’s working with and reconciling the competing interests of the state so that our governmental system does not fold on itself.

Governor Pawlenty may have proposed a cigarette “user fee” as a compromise, but this offer was presented to the legislature three days before session adjourned, which doesn’t allow much time for consideration and discussion. Paymar explained, “It’s something new for us to have a governor who is so far to the right and so beholden to right-wing ideology that he was willing to shut the government down for this no-new-taxes pledge. That’s pretty serious stuff. That’s where governing becomes a problem—when you’re so fixated on your ideology and your beliefs and what pledges you made to one group or another that you can’t bend or can’t get out of it. Then you’re setting yourself up for gridlock. And a governor can’t do that—it’s really inappropriate.”

In addition, Senator Berglin stated that the shutdown was the “result of a lot of miscommunication, and once it happened, the Governor was angry and was going to make sure none of the bills were going to get as much money as they were previously going to get.”

The ideological stalemate and political posturing in themselves were fuel for the government shutdown, but according to Paymar, the attempt by the governor to work policy reform into the budget discussion caused ultimate collapse.

“When you put policy that is fundamentally in opposition to what your principles are, how do you go back to your constituency and say, ‘Well, this is the only deal we could get, so now we have vouchers in Minneapolis and St. Paul,’” he said. “I couldn’t look public school teachers in the eye and say I supported that because we were in special session and facing government shutdown.”

Minnesota was “founded on divisiveness,” said Paymar. “Back in 1857, when we were forming our constitution, the Democrats and Republicans were so angry with each other they wouldn’t even sit in the same room.” He says they even signed the state’s constitution on different pieces of paper. However, political differences should not, everyone agrees, end in a government shutdown.

Paymar articulated two possible solutions to avoid such an outcome. One would be for Minnesota to adopt a system similar to other states in which the current budget continues if a new budget isn’t agreed upon. Another solution would be to resolve fiscal matters before addressing policy issues. He hopes to see a committee formed to address such issues immediately to ensure that what happened this July is not repeated.

The impasse in the current legislature is not limited to the walls of the Capitol building; it’s a reflection of the current political climate in Minnesota—and in the country. Political parties are fighting with more passion and insistence about the issues that define them, which, in itself, is the mark of a vibrant, engaged society.
However, when political divisiveness creates a schism from which no one budges, our forum for discussion and change is rendered useless. This is what DFL state senator John Marty said was Pawlenty’s goal.

Marty said that Pawlenty’s attempts to work policy reform into budget negotiations, particularly when the policy embedded into new offers was not discussed during the entire legislative session, reflect that the governor was not earnestly working to find a solution to the impasse. Marty is concerned that the governor’s actions suggest a larger political crisis. A shutdown may be one way to raise public doubts and ultimately send the message that government is incompetent—that government is not a tool that works for the people, but rather, against them.

Governor Pawlenty has suggested the possibility of another special session this fall, which will potentially include discussion about funding for the state to follow the provisions of the Clean Water Act, and such highly charged issues as a stadium for the Twins and the Gophers and transit (the governor did veto a bipartisan transit bill during this last session).

In looking at the challenges ahead, Michael Paymar said, “There’s already a feeling in the state that we didn’t get our job done, and I guess the governor will have to weigh that out.”