Forecast for our region in a few minutes standing by at the Capitol in st. Paul right now is Bob Potter with a special guest from the Minnesota house and Bob earlier talked with the dfl caucus leader from the Minnesota Senate Nick Coleman and Bob will pass it back to you now for your house guests. Thank you Dan as you know a week ago today. I got delivered his State of the State address to a joint session of the legislature and today the dfl leaders of the legislature have issued their response to that message earlier Center to Nick Coleman from the Senate gave his remarks, and now we're going to hear from Representatives herb Anderson from International Falls the UDF a leader in the House of Representatives represent of Addison. The microphone is yours. Thank you.Good morning. I would like to thank you for providing Center for Coleman and me this opportunity to present a dfl perspective and a legislative perspective on Governors State of the State address. My comments are intended as constructive criticism and suggested improvements to what the governor has presented since he's only had one year of experience and State office to learn the problems and potential state government. I like these words to be helpful rather than critical if I can characterize the governor's message it conveyed good news bad news. No news and Troublesome oversight. The good news is that the governor has seen the light or the real risk that we may have no lights and has made energy his top priority since the dfl has been urging him to do this. We welcome him to the cause. Energy is not and should not be a partisan issue. We feel the age of every citizen every corporation every legislator to meet the challenge of the next decade to reduce. Our state's excessive dependence on non-renewable energy sources, especially important expensive oil. The bad news is that our governor who was elected on a platform of cutting taxes now wants to raise them. The Qui 4% sales tax on gasoline has received the most attention equally disturbing is the likelihood of major property tax increases in 1981. If we adopt the governor's proposals, finally the governor has apparently decided to force the Metro Transit Commission to meet is 23.5 million-dollar operating deficit through a 20 to 25% increase for bus riders and an increase in the Metro Wide property tax. Levy for Transit. The no news is that the governor favors for constitutional amendments to limit the traditional and constitutional authority of the legislature to pass laws raise and spend money and reapportionment self. The Troublesome oversight is the almost total absence of any people-oriented proposals other than fuel assistance in the governor's message energy highways environment constitutional amendments are important issues, but they are physical or structural things the governor's message offers little to senior citizens struggling to stretch their fixed incomes to cover higher cost for food shelter and energy and if the governor has his way transportation, His message offers almost nothing to students such as our newest residents from Indochina and others who need help to learn English before they can perform up to the real ability in school the messages silent as to whether the governor will approve opposed efforts to raise interest rates on consumer credit a proposal that if passed will only add to your inflation and it decided about the looming crisis and housing for young families who are being priced out of the housing market and forced out of the rental market because of restrictions against children in the time remaining. I'd like to expand a bit on these points within the governor's energy proposals. Many of them are dfl proposals from last session or were contained in the Nelson Humphrey energy proposal announced two weeks ago. I'm pleased to see the governor's interest and concern for energy. It means we may be able to make genuine progress this session. However, I believe we will need to build upon the governor's proposal first. Minnesota must have a clear and coherent energy policy for the 1980s. That isn't based solely on whatever funds federal funds are available. Second conservation must be our first priority not forth as it appears in the energy section of the governor's message last year the governor initially refused to enforce the federal thermostat limits in commercial buildings in response to a plea by the president for greater conservation efforts, the governor indicated that minnesotans had already done enough. These kinds of actions are not the good example. The governor says we must said they create serious doubts about his commitment to conservation. It's good that he has promised to push for completion of two new oil pipelines in Minnesota. I only wish that he would realize that the quickest and cheapest source of additional energy is conservation. 3rd, we must expand the fuel assistance program to include households above 225% poverty level at higher levels of assistance are citizens cost of living and heating costs are higher than the national average. We should not limit our heating assistance efforts this year or in the future to Federal programs designed to meet National averages. I heard the governor to honor his pledge of last fall to raise the grant levels on the federal fuel assistance program. He could do this today without any action on the part of the legislature fourth. We must Place greater emphasis on the development of alternative energy sources and greater use of incentive grants loans and tax credits to encourage businesses in utilities as well as homeowners to conserve energy and convert to alternative energy sources We need to move Ian experiments to call to implement cost efficient methods of generating renewable energy V. We must enlist the aid of local governments and citizens in developing and energy policy for the 80s Saint Paul Moorehead and other communities have begun to lead the way many more interested. But if we tell them as the governor has to raise property taxes to pay for it. I doubt that very many will follow sixth. We must re-examine the contribution mass transit can make to reduce our dependence on oil at a time when roughly half our oil is used to run cars. It makes no sense to impose a major increase in bus fares that will only reverse ridership games of the last few years and create hardship for many who have no alternative the governor can find money in his budget to fund the monorail at the zoo and commuter van for large corporations, but can't come to the aid of us writers. If we had a well-defined state energy policy. We wouldn't find ourselves with such misplaced priorities. The bad news in the governor's message means more taxes for all minnesotans a 4% sales tax on gas higher property taxes on homes and farms and a higher use tax to ride the bus just one year ago. The governor told us the state was in such good shape. We could provide our taxpayers with over $700 in income and property tax relief and all the governor's asking us to impose a new tax that would create an additional tax burden of over a hundred million. 180 million dollars. I cannot in good conscience vote for a 4% sales tax on gasoline. I doubt that there is another legislator who drives are highways more than I do. I know we have problems a number of them are in my district, but I don't believe new taxes are the way to solve them. I believe the legislature must examine the governor's proposal when damp and examine every possible alternative including a $0.02 increase in the gas tax itself. I personally believe that the Department of Public Safety should not be funded by the gas tax. I continue to support that change in addition. I support the governor's phase transfer the motor vehicle excise tax to the highway fund but it should begin in fiscal year 1981. Fiscal year 1982 as the governor has proposed these two measures would provide some 55 to 60 million dollars in fiscal year 1981 for Highway financing without new tax increases in the meantime. The legislature should take it into app looked at the whole process or project selection and the distribution formula for Highway funds too many projects seem to be more cosmetic than safety oriented. As for property taxes, the governor has once again shown he either doesn't understand them or doesn't particularly care if they rise we have already had testimony from the Minneapolis City Assessor that net property taxes on a $50,000 home in Minneapolis. Will rise 28% in 1981 preliminary indications from Saint Paul are that the increases there will be even worse and while we don't know yet for sure. I am fearful that when the Department of Revenue completes its analysis and another two or three weeks. We will learn that much of our Farmland will face it major property tax increase in 1981. There are three basic reasons for this. The first is the rapid inflation and property value. The second is the taxable value for our homes and all homes and Farms will be raised in 1981 to reflect full market value for the first time the 30 is that in 1979 Republican house members at the urging of the governor defeated on a Party line vote adfl property tax bill that would have made further relief unnecessary this session to compound the problem. The governor is proposing to let local governments. Let me even more property taxes for energy conservation in transit because of the governor's refusal once again to place a priority on stable property taxes most of your face much higher property taxes in 1981, unless the legislature act prevented the session but no no loses the governor supportive for Constitutional Amendments, which he says would improve state government and bring it closer to the people. All of them would limit the power of the legislature but leave untouched the other two branches of state government despite the governor's efforts and his trips around the state to make these issues partisan by threatening to campaign against legislators who proposes amendments. The fact is that none of them are partisan issues one of his proposal the reapportionment commission has already passed both house. the legislature with strong bipartisan support the proposed amendments are far-reaching changes in the basic structure of state government. They deserve to be widely debated and carefully studied this session and I'm sure that they will the real issue before legislators is whether they agree with the governor's negative opinion of their performance in recent years. And that in my opinion is not a partisan judgment, but one which we as legislators will have to honestly decide for ourselves might be worthy of consideration for it to would bring government closer to the people and perhaps make some of these other amendments unnecessary. I like to see consideration of a limited recall whereby citizens could vote once in each term to remove elected official serving longer than a two-year term if the governor honestly believes that the elected officials have lost touch with the public in between elections the threat of a recall would almost certainly change that One aspect of the governor's remarks was disturbing he failed to even make a serious effort to persuade the legislature of the wisdom of his proposed amendments the appear in his speech is almost an afterthought with no explanation of rational. I'm afraid this may mean that he is real audience is the voters not legislators who in the first instance must decide and that is real goal is to create an election issue and not amend the Constitution. If so, I believe he will fail because there are many good experience Republican legislators who questioned the wisdom of his initiative and referendum proposals by now. You're no doubt wondering how we can achieve all these things within the budget constraints Outline by the governor. I'm not a magician and I gave up using mirrors to count last week. The truth is weak and the fact which has the governor didn't tell you is that your state government is in a financial bind. There are more problems. Which there was great urgency. Then there is money to meet them the reenactment of Revenue sharing by Congress. This year should give us 34 million dollars not counted by the governor, but we will still need more what are the basic problems in giving either a State of the State address or response to the State of the State address is that they are given prior to the actual work of the legislative session before all the hard facts are known they attempt to set an agenda before the full scope and magnitude of the various issues are well understood. It makes it easier for someone later in hindsight to say that particular problem areas are not addressed on purpose, even when they're full gravity is realized property taxes is a case in point at some point. It is most likely that a hard decision must be made by the legislature to provide some 20 to 30 million dollars to ensure stable property taxes, but this problem has not been discussed in depth because of other important issues. I consider it of utmost importance in this date of the state response to note the problem and indicate my feelings that this is an area which we must consider a dressing before it escalates into an insurmountable problem. Give our preliminary investigation proves correct and that we will need 20 to 30 million dollars just to hold the line in property taxes. Then we have a serious problem that amount along with perhaps 100 million needed for highways along with large amounts for energy and mass transit May mean we need to re-examine the 1979 tax bill to need to be sure that the wealthier in our society were not given really at the expense of the working class and poor. It seems to make little sense to approve a half-billion-dollar butt reduction in the income tax a progressive tax based on ability to pay only to find ourselves a year later are proving or allowing regressive tax increases in sales gasoline and property taxes. I'm optimistic. We can have a short session and be on our way home by the first week in April and I'm hopeful that with a load cooperation and compromise from all parties including the governor. We can have a productive session. Thank you. And thank you representative herb Anderson the dfl leader in the Minnesota House of Representatives with a dfl response to Governor quiz State of the State message earlier in this house. Are you heard from the Senate Majority Leader Nick Coleman getting his views on the governor's message. So the issues for the legislature Energy Highway funding property taxes Constitutional Amendments and others will be the focus of our coverage in Lee weeks ahead. This is Bob Potter reporting from the Minnesota state capitol.