Why Governor Dayton vetoed the bill that included broadband grants

Here’s the letter from Governor Dayton on why he vetoed the supplemental bill, which meant not funding the Border to Border Broadband Grants. Broadband isn’t mentioned in the letter; the broadband funding is unfortunate collateral damage of a larger decision. I suspect we will hear many theories about the approach of/from both the Legislature and the Governor. It will be interesting – but in the end, the broadband funding was not passed and the reason doesn’t seem to relate to broadband.

The Office of Broadband Development continues to receive praise from all sides. Other states are looking to replicate their work. I think it’s important for proponents in and out of Minnesota to know that this move does not reflect on the Minnesota’s program – nor does it reflect the views of the Governor or Legislature on broadband – both have been vocal in their approval of the idea and funding in the past.

Dear Madame President:
May 23, 2018
I have vetoed and am returning Chapter 201, SF 3656, the omnibus supplemental budget bill.
Repeatedly over the past several months, I implored the Legislature to send separate bills on Minnesotans’ most urgent priorities. We agreed that we must reform elder care, address the opioid epidemic, and ensure safe schools for our children. Yet instead of coming together to find shared solutions to these critical issues, you have deposited them into a 989 page budget bill, with 51 policy provisions, which I oppose. This legislative gamesmanship was terrible, and I will not sign the result.
Despite efforts over the past several months to strengthen existing elder abuse laws, this bill fails to meet the expectations of a large number of lawmakers and of the
coalition of nearly every consumer advocacy organization in the state working to stop elder abuse. This legislation does not ensure that there will ever be licensure or
protections for assisted living or dementia care. It provides no private rights of enforcement for elderly and vulnerable adults who suffer preventable hmm or even death at a long-term care facility. It fails to provide even the basic public right of action protections for elderly people being evicted from their care setting and residence. In fact, advocacy groups believe changes made in this bill would actually make current law less protective. This failure is unacceptable.
The bill also does far too little to combat the opioid epidemic plaguing our State. Several months ago, I proposed investing over $12 million annually in high impact strategies to treat and prevent opioid abuse, funded through an Opioid Stewardship Fee that would hold partially accountable the pharmaceutical companies, who created this deadly epidemic. Instead, this bill spends only $7 million in FY 2019 and about $10 million in FY20/21, entirely from the General Fund. Not one penny is ascribed to the drug companies, through either a “penny-a-pill” or a licensing fee. Evidently, the industry’s 32 lobbyists and whatever promises they made outweighed the interests of the people of Minnesota.

The bill does not support a comprehensive approach and instead provides onetime grants and a small rate increase to providers. There is no funding targeted to communities of color or tribal communities that have been devastated by this crisis. The disparities between tribal communities and communities of color and white residents are the highest in the United States. You could have and should have done more.
Included in this enormous bill are workable responses to problems that I sincerely hoped would become law: school safety and HAVA funds. I was sincere in my oft-stated
desire to work with you and make these provisions become law. However, you knowingly prevented their enactment by inserting them into a bill, containing policies and agency budget cuts that I had said I would not sign.

I made my objections to this bill very clear throughout the Session. My Administration sent you over 100 detailed letters  throughout the session, carefully explaining my concerns with each of the proposals.
This terrible bill and the resulting veto are your creations. Never have I seen a legislative session so badly mismanaged, less transparent, and more beholden to monied special interests.
For the above reasons, I have vetoed this bill.
Mark Dayton

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s