First, at left.mn Steve Timmer writes of multiple legislative considerations, including:
Copper-sulfide mining ‘Prove it First’ – This is another can’t get no respect from leadership bill. It didn’t get any respect last year either. There was a hearing scheduled — but not published — in the Senate, but it was scotched by DFL leadership. This is another bill authored by Sen. McEwan, and she expressed frustration over that:
“There’s a lot of anger and frustration amongst clean water activists in Minnesota with DFL leadership in general and there’s good reason for that,” McEwen said.
Here’s a little bit about what the anger and frustration is about:
That anger stems from the lack of a hearing in the Senate on SF 1416, known as the “Prove It First” bill, which states that before a copper-sulfide mine in Minnesota can be permitted, there must be independent scientific proof that a copper-sulfide mine has operated elsewhere in the United States for at least 10 years without causing pollution and that a mine has been closed for at least 10 years without causing pollution. (The House version of the bill is HF 1618.)
You know, you would almost think that Tom Bakk was still in leadership in the Minnesota Senate. He’s still around the halls of the Capitol of course. Present leadership had this to say:
In response to those accusations, Senate Majority Leader Erin Murphy, DFL-St. Paul, said she welcomed advocacy organizations to bring their issues to the Capitol.
“As of today, we have one month before our first committee deadlines for bills to advance,” she said. “In the second week of the legislative session, my colleagues are working in committees to advance the work of Minnesota.”
I think this is more in the nature of a non-response.
Maybe the time periods in the bill are wrong; maybe the limitation to a copper mine in the US as an example is too restrictive, but whatever, without a hearing, the issue won’t be aired and citizens will be less informed.
That's the story in a nutshell. Minnesota readers should follow that Timmer link because there are other pending matters Timmer writes of, while this post is more singular.
A few weeks ago, Feb. 23, Mark Wasson wrote of the issue, at Duluth News Tribune:
DFL senator calls lack of hearing for 'Prove It First' mining bill 'legislative malpractice'
'There's a lot of anger and frustration amongst clean water activists in Minnesota with DFL leadership in general and there's good reason for that,' Sen. Jennifer McEwen, DFL-Duluth, said
ST. PAUL — Advocates for legislation intended to help protect Minnesota's water from pollution from mining activity say they are frustrated with the lack of movement in the Legislature. A DFL senator shares their frustration.
Historically, the DFL has sought a balance on mining issues in the Iron Range but Sen. Jennifer McEwen says corporate interests have kept the issue of copper-sulfide mining off legislator's tables.
"There's a lot of anger and frustration amongst clean water activists in Minnesota with DFL leadership in general and there's good reason for that," McEwen said.
That anger stems from the lack of a hearing in the Senate on SF 1416, known as the "Prove It First" bill, which states that before a copper-sulfide mine in Minnesota can be permitted, there must be independent scientific proof that a copper-sulfide mine has operated elsewhere in the United States for at least 10 years without causing pollution and that a mine has been closed for at least 10 years without causing pollution. (The House version of the bill is HF 1618.)
McEwen, a co-author of the Senate bill, said the Legislature has not heard a bill regarding copper-sulfide mining in at least a decade, which she called "legislative malpractice."
"The fact that we have had the Democratic Party leadership in the administration, in the Senate, in the House now, for a number of years and we still haven't had that hearing has a lot of people very upset," McEwen said. She said the Legislature has a duty to at least hear these types of proposals.
Amen! You don't get a hearing, you hold a hearing. It's not official, but it is sincere, and puts a focus upon the issue and why it matters greatly, clean water against mega-corporation exploitation of a fragile environment. And yes, an official hearing would hear from both sides, environmental protection and profit seeking.
As Timmer wrote, "You know, you would almost think that Tom Bakk was still in leadership in the Minnesota Senate." True, but a simplification.
Senate Majority Leader Erin Murphy, DFL-St. Paul is a long tenured progessive DFL legislator, having earned respect over years of service, (Total Days Served: 5545 - and counting)! Sen. Murphy is one I backed leading up to Gov. Walz gaining the party nomination for governor, and I remain convinced she'd have done a bang-up job of moving the State progressively, from the Governor's Mansion.
For those wishing to express their respectful disappointment to her over the current fate of Prove it First bills this session, messages can be left at the official contact form she uses. (There are practical aspects to wanting to keep the third Senate trifecta leg intact, and Murphy now as Senate party leader has duties toward that end, however she likely enjoys constituent input, from inside and outside of her district). In leadership, it would be helpful for her to know how this bill and issue is viewed within the whole of the State of Minnesota. The more she learns of people and their concerns the better she will be able to lead, so go for it.
That noted, the Duluth item noted the unofficial bill hearing -
[...] held a public hearing at the Capitol on Thursday, Feb. 22. Retired State Representatives Connie Bernardy and Steve Sandell presided over the hearing. Testifiers included members of Minnesota's indigenous community, mining experts, retired state regulators and environmental advocates.
Sandell, a former DFL representative from Woodbury, said disagreements over mining in Minnesota are nothing new.
"The perspectives are so different from those of us who want to go up and preserve this place and those who believe their economic future depends on it," he said.
Addressing mining issues in a state with such diverse opinions can be tricky, according to Sandall.
"There are going to be people in the caucus that are very cautious about promoting an idea that their constituents may find too delicate to face," he said. "In a political body ... leadership doesn't want to lose its position as the majority. We can do great things as a majority but you don't want to die on our sword."
Highlighting the need for politicians to address the issue Thursday was Mike Maleska, a retired iron ore miner and local union president. He asked how much longer Minnesotans are expected to accommodate copper-sulfide mining.
"I don't want to see the answer to that question," he testified. "What I want to see is some courage from our legislators to make the mining companies do one simple thing: show proof that they won't pollute before they're allowed to put a shovel in the ground."
Caucuses have been held. Speaking from my precinct, a Prove It First proposal was the first Resolution item proposed and unanimously approved. People understand. The hope now is to see that resolution become a part of the party platform, the reminder being it does not forestall sulfide mining advocates having a chance to prove it can safely be done, instead it mandates they do so if wanting a permit, and honestly believing their own story.