minnesota legislative report card - race forward...(1) to function as an annual tool for holding...

Organizing apprenticeship prOject | �

minnesota legislative report card

on racial equity

2005–2006

jermaine toney

organizing apprenticeship project

� | 2005–2006 legislative repOrt card On racial equity

the Org�nizing apprenticeship project works to �dv�nce r�ci�l, cultur�l, soci�l �nd economic justice in Minnesot� through org�nizer �nd le�dership tr�ining, policy rese�rch �nd str�tegic convening work.


table of contents

IntroductIon—r�ce M�tters in Minnesot� ........................................................ 1

2005–2006 racIal equIty legIslatIon................................................. 10

BIlls

educ�tion equity ................................................................................................... 12

civil rights equity �nd crimin�l justice ................................................................... 17

economic equity ................................................................................................... 20

he�lth equity ........................................................................................................ 25

institution�l r�cism ............................................................................................... 28

americ�n indi�n tri��l sovereignty .......................................................................... 33

reportIng on the governor ................................................................. 36

legIslatIve report card

summ�ry of the report c�rd: unfinished Business ................................................... 38

house report c�rd ................................................................................................ 42

sen�te report c�rd ............................................................................................... 50

references ................................................................................................... 54

Organizing apprenticeship prOject | 1

Race in Minnesota

The Minnesota Legislative Report Card on Racial Equity assesses the performance of the Minnesota Legislature and the governor during the 2005–2006 biennium on policies that address and strengthen racial equity and opportunity in the state. It also assesses legislative efforts that strengthen American Indian tribal sovereignty.

RACE MATTERS in Minnesota. In a state long proud of its progressive tradition, a state once seen as a leader in work for equity and inclusion, a state where most of us strongly value equality of opportunity and want a community that is just and fair … race matters.

2 | 2005–2006 legislative repOrt card On racial equity

Minnesota leads the nation in commonly accepted quality-of-life indicators such as educational achievement, health, wealth and homeownership. Meanwhile, those and other indicators show a distinct racial bias that contradicts our most deeply held values. Minnesota’s communities of color and American Indian communities are not benefiting from the abundant opportunities documented in Minnesota:

• Nearly 93 percent of white high school students graduate, while only 63 percent of Blacks, 55 percent of Latinos and 64 percent of American Indians graduate.1 While overall 86 percent of Asian-Pacific Islanders graduate, only 45 percent of Hmong adults in the Twin Cities’ area posses a high school diploma.2

• Only 5.9 percent of whites lack health insurance, while 12.8 percent of Blacks, 34.2 percent of Latinos, 21 percent of American Indians and 9.8 percent of Asian-Pacific Islanders lack health insurance.3

• The unemployment rate among whites is 4.3 percent. Blacks have an unemploy-ment rate that is three times higher (12.9 percent), Latinos have an unemploy-ment rate of 6.4 percent, and the rate among Asian-Pacific Islanders is 5 percent.4

• Most of Minnesota’s 11 tribal reservations have poverty rates double that of the statewide population.5

• While over three-quarters (77 percent) of whites own homes, only one-third (32 percent) of Blacks, 43 percent of Latinos, 49 percent of American Indians and 52 percent of Asian-Pacific Islanders own homes.6

• And, in a disparity so particular to communities of color that it is not even noted as a quality-of-life indicator for whites—people of color are stopped and searched by police at greater rates, despite the data which shows that people of color are less likely to be found with contraband when searched than white drivers.7

Race-based disparities in opportunity, access and outcomes between white Minnesotans and Minnesotans of color are stark—in some cases, they are among the worst in the nation. The hard truth is that in Minnesota, one’s real access to opportunity, one’s real ability to build a strong and healthy family and community, is strongly limited by the color of one’s skin and the homeland of one’s ancestors. No matter how hard you work. No matter what your dreams. (And no matter what most of us would like to believe.)

Disparities such as these are not accidents of individual behavior. Rather, they are rooted in and grow from systems, institutions and policies that shape our public life. These disparities are also not a permanent feature of our social landscape. Policies that perpetuate disparities based on race can be challenged and changed. We can advance race-conscious policies that strengthen racial equity in Minnesota. Our values—and our changing population—demand it.

race matters In mInnesota


an equitable multi-racial minnesotaOver the last 15 years, Minnesota has become strikingly more racially and ethnically diverse.8 By 2030, at least 16 percent of Minnesota’s population will be people of color, nearly doubling from 9 percent in 2000.9

Contrary to popular myth, that growth will not center in the urban areas of Minneapolis and St. Paul. In fact, over the past five years, the strongest percentage of growth in communities of color has been in suburban communities, while the fastest growth of public school students of color is in greater Minnesota.10

By 2030, the percentage of people of color in Minnesota will surpass the percentage of registered voters who voted in our last primary election.11 There will be more people of color in the state than the total number of Minnesotans who voted for either Governor Tim Pawlenty or Senator Norm Coleman in 2002.12 Further, there will be more Minnesotans of color than the current number of women in the states’ workforce, more than the current number of managers, farmers, construction workers, repairmen, lawyers and doctors combined.13

These statistics are important—but the question of who we are and what we are going to be is deeper and more fundamental than demographics alone. It is a question of values, a question of what we choose to stand for, as a community and as a society. It is also a question of survival—people of color will be a quarter of the state’s labor force by 2030, and absolutely essential leaders in our state’s overall economy.

Clearly, Minnesota is already a multi-racial state. The question is whether we are on the path to become a strong, thriving and equitable multi-racial community, a community that values and stands for fairness, justice, and opportunity for all. To realize that vision, work towards true racial equity needs to be at our core. We need to challenge ourselves to live our values—and we need to challenge our leaders at every level to step up, to act and to be accountable for public policies that advance racial equity and end race-based disparities in our state.

Race-based disparities in opportunity, access and outcomes between white Minnesotans and Minnesotans of color are stark—in some cases, they are among the worst in the nation.


report finDings

The Legislature received an F Seven of 22 bills that were considered for this report became law; this gives the Legislature an overall grade of F (32 percent). Economic equity bills had greatest success with an 80 percent (4/5) pass rate. Contrarily, none of the civil rights/criminal justice bills passed (0/5). American Indian tribal sovereignty bills had a 33 percent (1/3) pass rate.

Five champions for racial equity billsThere were five individual point leaders for racial equity bills. Top point scorers were House Rep. Keith Ellison (D-58B) with 135, House Rep. Karen Clark (D-61A) with 90, House Rep. Neva Walker (D-61B) with 75, House Rep. Jim Davnie (D-62A) with 70 and Senator Linda Higgins (D-58) with 50.

The governor received a grade of C- Gov. Tim Pawlenty received a C- overall for his support for racial equity bills. This grade reflects his support for seven of ten bills that reached his desk. The governor received an F (50 percent) in the education section, a B- (80 percent) in economic section and full support for the one health bill and one American Indian bill that reached his desk that was considered for this report.

Districts with highest percent of POC scored high in support of racial equity billsTop scorers in districts with more than 50 percent of people of color were House Rep. Keith Ellison (D-58B), House Rep. Joe Mullery (D-58A), House Rep. Karen Clark (D-61A), House Rep. Neva Walker (D-61B), Senator Sandy Pappas (D-65), Senator Linda Higgins (D-58) and Senator Linda Berglin (D-61).

Districts with lowest percent of POC scored lower but show support for racial equity billsTop scorers in districts with less than 10 percent of people of color were House Rep. Dan Dorman(R-27A), House Rep. Ray Cox (R-25B), House Rep. Mary-Liz Holberg (R-36A), House Rep. Frank Hornstein (D-60B), House Rep. Thomas Huntley (D-07A) and Senator Don Betzold (D-51).

Districts with explosive growth in POC have legislators that show limited support for racial equityThere were several authors and co-authors in the House and Senate who supported legislation that, if passed, would have exacerbated racial disparities.

Districts with explosive growth in people of color have legislators that showed limited support for racial equity bills in economic, civil rights and criminal justice issue areas.


kittson roseau

marshall

polk pennington

red lake

norman mahnomen

clearwater

clay becker

hubbard

otter tailwilkin

cass

wadena crow wing

itasca

todd

douglasgrant

traverse

big stone

stevens pope stearnsbenton

swift kandiyohi

chippewa

lac qui parle

yellow medicine

renville

lincoln lyon

redwood

pipestone murray

cottonwood

rock nobles jackson

watonwan

martin

brown

blue earth

freeborn

waseca

mower fillmore

nicolletle sueur

scott dakota

ricegoodhue

steele dodge olmsted

wabasha

houston

winona

mcleod

meekerwright

sherburne

mille lacs

aitkin

carlton

st. louis

lake

cook

pine

kanabec

isanti

chisago

anoka

hennepin

carver

ramsey

was

hing

ton

sibley

morrison

beltrami

lake of the woods

koochiching

faribault

114.9%

65.6%

113%

75.1%

73.8%

60.2%

90.2%

48.9%

65.4%

13.7%

19.8%

23.9%

38.4%

23.7%

26.9%

20.1%

69.1%

explosIve growth In people of color Is outsIde of mInneapolIs and st. paul, 2000–2005

total population in 2005: 5,132,799

total number of people of color: 701,811

percent of people of color of population: 13.7%

largest concentrationcounties with proportions of people of color l�rger th�n th�t of the over�ll st�te, 2005.

largest changecounties with l�rgest percent ch�nge in people of color, 2000–2005.

source: u.s. census Bure�u, 2005.


goals of the reportThe Minnesota Legislative Report Card on Racial Equity 2005-2006 has three goals. (1) To function as an annual tool for holding state leadership accountable for forwarding and passing substantive public policy that has clear positive outcomes for communities of color; (2) To spur legislative action to address institutional racism and to make racial inequity visible in the policy-making arena; and (3) to be a springboard for action in the larger community. We will work with leaders in every sector to make clear the impact of their work on communities of color, and to hold them accountable to outcomes.

methoDologyTo track the current performance on supporting racial equity, 22 bills were selected

that, if passed, would advance racial equity and eliminate racial disparities. Ten of these bills reached the governor’s desk. An additional 12 bills that failed to pass through the Legislature are labeled missed opportunities.

Three methods were developed to select and analyze legislation: (1) Interviews were conducted with leaders and organizations that promote racial and economic equity to understand their experience and gain input on selecting legislation; (2) Criteria for select-ing legislation were developed. The legislation had to meet one or more of the following criteria:

• Focuses on reducing racial disparities;

• Expands access to institutions and public benefits for communities of color;

• Advances enfranchisement for communities of color;

• Protects against discrimination, racial violence and racial profiling;

• Preserves and strengthens American Indian tribal sovereignty;

• Is adequately funded; and

• Is enforceable with mechanisms in place to monitor racial justice outcomes.

(3) The potential impact on racial equity outcomes was estimated by reviewing and analyzing quantitative and qualitative data. Major data sources were testimonies from interviews, fiscal notes on bills prepared by Minnesota Department of Finance and public policy analysts of governmental and nonprofit organizations.

Leadership and accountability matters for confronting racial disparities with public policy.


What is race-conscious public policy?

pro�ctive r�ci�lly conscious policies or pr�ctices t�rget institution�l �nd structur�l inequities, seeking to elimin�te r�ci�l disp�rities �nd �dv�nce equit��le outcomes. r�ce-neutr�l or color�lind policies or pr�ctices, whether inten-tion�lly or not, c�n ex�cer��te r�ci�l inequities.

© 2005 applied rese�rch center

graDing methoDologyThe governor was given a grade based on whether he signed or vetoed racial equity legislation. The grade system for the governor includes: 90–100 percent equals an A, 80–89 equals a B, 70–79 equals a C, 60–69 equals a D. Below that equates to an F. A plus or minus symbol attached to a grade indicates that the governor scored at the high or low end of a given range. The Legislature as a whole were graded based on the number of bills that became law over the total number of bills that were considered for this report.

Each legislator was given points based on leadership as author or co-author of a racial equity bill in the 2005–2006 session. Chief authors of proactive racial equity policies were awarded 20 points and co-authors were awarded five points. Chief authors of bills that would adversely impact communities of color were penalized by 20 points and their co-authors were penalized by five points. The total score for each legislator reflects his or her leadership in either advancing racial equity or exacerbating racial disparities and discrimination.

There are three rationales for this grading system: (1) Folding many provisions into an omnibus bill is a widespread practice at the Minnesota State Legislature. Legislators end up voting on the package of provisions. This process limits an observers’ ability to judge whether a legislator voted for racial equity bills that were considered for this report; (2) Sometimes legislators who initiated strong racial equity bills voted against their own provision (against the omnibus) because it was laid next to anti-racial equity provisions; and (3) leadership and accountability matters for confronting racial disparities. The above concerns pointed to the need for legislators to take leadership and to allow the public to see where legislators stand on equity outcomes. It follows that the grading system gives more weight to authorship in support of racial equity.

There is one major limitation of using this methodology. We have chosen to focus this report on proactive authorship of policies. We believe this is a bar in which the Legislature must meet. At the same time, we recognize that some legislative leaders focused their lead-ership on defeating legislation that would have adversely impacted communities of color. This work is valuable, but it is not reflected in this report.


the changIng face of mInnesota

latinoscurrently, l�tinos represent 3.6 percent (186,912) of the popul�tion. By 2015 l�ti-nos will incre�se �y 57 percent (293,200). Between 2005 �nd 2030 l�tinos will incre�se �y 118 percent (406,700).

blackscurrently, Bl�cks represent 4.3 percent (218,455) of the popul�tion. By 2015, Bl�cks will incre�se �y 35 percent (295,100). By 2030 they will incre�se �y 77 percent (386,600).

asian-pacific islanders currently, asi�n-p�cific isl�nders represent 3.5 percent of the popul�tion (179,344). By 2015, asi�n-p�cific isl�nders will incre�se �y 39 percent (249,300). Between 2005 �nd 2030 asi�n-p�cific isl�nders will incre�se �y 82 percent (326,800).

multi-racial currently, Multi-r�ci�l popul�tion represents 1.4 percent (74,239) of the popul�tion. By 2015, multi-r�ci�l people will incre�se �y 63 percent (121,300). By 2030 they will incre�se �y 183 percent (210,200).

american indians currently, americ�n indi�ns represent 1.2 percent (59,987) of the popul�tion. By 2015, americ�n indi�ns will incre�se �y 23 percent (73,900). By 2030, americ�n indi�ns will incre�se ne�rly 49 percent (89,300).

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

2005

2015

2030

2005

2015

2030

2005

2015

2030

2005

2015

2030

2005

2015 2030

LATINOS BLACKS ASIAN PACIFIC ISLANDERS MULTI-RACIAL AMERICAN INDIANS

49%23%

183%63%

82%39%

77%35%

57%118%

3.6% current

population

4.3% current

population

3.5% current

population

1.4% current

population

1.2% current

population

source: Minnesot� st�te demogr�phic center, “Minnesot� popul�tion projections �y r�ce �nd hisp�nic Origin, 2000–2030,” j�nu�ry 2005. the 2005 estim�te comes from the u.s. census Bure�u, 2005.


principles for racial equityOAP has adopted these principles which guide their work to reduce racial disparities in income, wealth, employment, health, education, criminal justice. Here are the elements:

Focus on racial equity outcomesAs the population of people of color continues to increase, Minnesota has to adopt a proactive racial equity agenda to match the growing concerns of residents of color. To uphold this agenda, public policy must be formulated and enforced to ensure that racial inequities are eliminated.

Uphold equity, enfranchisement and economic justiceMinnesotans of color must have rights to civic enfranchisement, access to institutions and public benefits such as education, employment, housing, health care and voting rights to advance justice. Attributes of people of color such as culture, language, immigration status and income should not be grounds for discrimination.

Invest in opportunity and advancementPublic, nonprofit, and private institutions in Minnesota have to invest in improving education, expanding access to public services, strengthening the workforce, and spurring community development to build stronger social and economic returns for Minnesotans of color and Minnesota in general.

Strengthen protections against discrimination, racial violence and racial profilingLong before and after Sept. 11 communities of color have been subject to hate crimes and public policies that widen racial disparities in the criminal justice system (i.e. racial profiling), and K-12 education (i.e. diverted resources from public education). Minnesota has to build on and enforce policies to end discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or immigration status.


2005–2006 racIal equIty legIslatIon that reached the governor’s desk

eDucation equity

hf 1192/Davnie/2005, quality rating for early learning centers: HF 1192 would have facilitated the development of early learning standards for pre- kindergarten children and established a Quality Rating System for child care providers.

8 Vetoed by the Governor

hf 1180/Davnie/2005, removing a barrier to maintain a Diverse teacher force: HF 1180 provides negotiation flexibility around layoff policies for unions and school board districts in Duluth, Minneapolis and St. Paul.

4 Signed by the Governor

civil rights equity/criminal justice

hf 3464/Walker/2006, removing employment barriers for inDiviDuals With a criminal recorD: HF 3464 would have allowed an applicant with a felony conviction to become licensed in cosmetology at race tracks.


economic equity

sf 1984/anDerson/2005, paying DischargeD latino migrant Workers: SF 1984 strengthens the penalty rate on employers for failure to compensate a discontinued employee within twenty four hours or complying with the written contracts between parties.


hf 2289/mullery/2005, sf 1891/ranum/2005, benefit access for veterans of color: HF 2289 authorizes the department of veteran affairs to extend part time staff to full time status to increase benefit access for veterans of color.



sf 3/anDerson/2005, increase minimum Wage: SF 3 authorizes employers with gross sales of $625,000 or more to boost the wage from $5.15 to $6.15 per hour and for employers with less than $625,000 to increase the wage from $4.90 to $5.25 per hour.


hf 2461/holberg/2005, transportation equity for people of color: HF 2461 would have increased the revenue for transit projects, stipulating that no more than 60 percent of income can be earmarked for roads and no less than 40 percent for public transit.


hf 2959/Dorman/2006, transitional anD supportive housing: HF 2959 appropriates $19.5 million in the 2006 bonding bill with $2 million to transitional hous-ing and $17.5 million for permanent supportive housing.


health equity

hf 3578/clark/2006, licensure of foreign traineD health care professionals: HF 3578 requires department of employment and economic development to run a pilot project from July 2006 to June 2007 to encourage licensure.


american inDian tribal sovereignty

sf 1719/lourey/2005, aDvisory council on chilD Welfare: SF 1719 updates the expiration date for Indian Child Welfare Advisory Council to June 2008; the Advisory Council will continue to develop policies in coordination with tribal governments.



EDuCATION EQuITyRacial disparities in education are widespread as Minnesota’s student population becomes increas-ingly diverse. Students of color represent 21 percent of the K-12 population, up from nine percent in 1989–1990.14 The strongest growth has and will occur in greater Minnesota. Racial disparities in education are rooted in complex systems that create barriers to success for students of color and undermine our social and economic health. Through policy decisions the state legislature can act to create an equitable education system that works for all Minnesota students.

Low Access to Early Childhood Education • Kindergarteners of color were rated “not yet” prepared in language/literacy by

four percentage points more and by seven percentage points more in mathematical thinking than white children.15

• By eighth grade, Black and Latino children are three full grade levels behind white children in reading. Similarly for math, by eighth grade Black children are four-and-a-half grade levels behind white children, while Latino children are three grade levels behind.16

Low Graduation Rates• Over 90 percent of whites graduate from high school, yet only two-thirds of

American Indians and Blacks and a little over half of Latinos graduate.17 While Asian-Pacific Islanders generally graduate at a rate of over 80 percent, barely half of Hmong adults possess a high school diploma in the Twin Cities’ area.18

Lack of Teacher Diversity • Nearly 20 percent of students are people of color while only 3 percent of

teachers are people of color in Minnesota’s K–12 system.19

Limited English Proficiency• Children proficient in English score more than twice as high as students still

learning the language on Minnesota Basic Skills Test.20


“I want to remove a barrier so these students can continue their education and get training to become productive citizens and taxpayers.”

—hOuse rep. ray cOx (r-25B)28

hf 1192/Davnie/2005, quality rating for early learning centers: HF 1192 would have empowered an estimated 4,735 families of color with knowledge to choose high-quality, early-learning settings.21 HF 1192 facilitates the development of early learning standards for pre-kindergarten children. In addition, the bill establishes a Quality Rating System, which determines the extent to which the learning center is in alignment with standards set by Head Start and the K-12 system on learning quality, staff qualifica-tions and program strength. The governor vetoed the legislation, claiming that a “rating system is not the best way to provide parents with meaningful results,”22 and strongly advocating for testing pre-kindergarten students.23 Education advocates disagree, asserting that Head Start has proven effective without testing children. National experts warn that “standardized tests must be used carefully and appropriately and not create educational problems.”24


hf 1180/Davnie/2005, sf 1074/kelley/2005: removing a barrier to maintain a Diverse teacher force: HF 1180 provides negotiation flexibility around layoff policies for unions and school board districts in Minneapolis, St. Paul and Duluth to address the loss of teachers of color. On average “students of color score higher on exams when taught by teachers of their race, scoring three to four percentile points higher on standardized reading and math tests.”25 Recent layoffs in these school districts had a disproportionate impact on teachers of color. Between 2000 and 2005 the number of teachers of color were scaled down by 32 percent, while whites were reduced by only 24 percent.26 Advocates claim that efforts to recruit and keep qualified teachers of color will fail if layoff policies and education funding cuts combine to target the next generation of teachers of color.


hf 566/cox/2005, sf 0627/pappas/2005, eDucation access for

immigrant chilDren: HF 566 would have allowed up to 500 undocumented high school graduates annually to be eligible for in-state tuition.27 This bill extends eligibility to undocumented high school graduates for in-state tuition if they attended a Minnesota high school for a minimum of two years, graduated or attained equivalent high school credentials. This provision gained bi-partisan support, however it was removed from an omnibus bill due to fear of the governor’s veto. Minnesota would have joined eight other states—Midwestern states include Kansas and Illinois—that grant undocumented high school graduates in-state tuition. Eighteen other states are considering it.

8 Failed to reach Conference Committee Omnibus Higher Education Bill

eDucation equity legislation

misseD opportunities


hf 3685/Davnie/2006, sf 357/skoglunD/2005, lifting limiteD english proficiency (lep) time limit: This bill would have increased the eligibility for LEP funding by 15,225 students per year for 2008 and 2009.29 SF 357 lifts the five-year time limit for LEP funding. Currently, the five-year limit on students’ eligibility for LEP restricts the path to English proficiency. Not only is the LEP population increasing, there is growing demand for extended services. Between 2000 and 2005, the non-English speaking population of color increased by 53 percent. The formula for LEP is $700 per pupil, which allows for only five years of use.30 However, students are still facing challeng-es and this formula acts as a barrier. Experts studying the issue maintain that the formula needs to be adjusted for at least seven years for recipients to become “English users.”

8 Failed in House Committee on Education Finance; failed in Senate Committee on Education

low expectatIons for students of color

are students of color diverted from s�ving

up to $20,000 in costs for two ye�rs �t �

university?31 Minnesot� w�s the first st�te

to develop � post second�ry enrollment

options (pseO) progr�m. this progr�m

�llows high school juniors �nd seniors to

t�ke cost-free college-level cl�sses, which

c�n count tow�rds coursework or � degree.

in 2004—2005, students of color were

20 percent of the pu�lic school popul�tion

�ut only 14 percent of pseO enrollees.

While the proportions �re ne�rly equ�l, the

disp�rity is pronounced when looking �t

differences �cross r�ci�l groups.

Bl�ck, americ�n indi�ns �nd l�tinos

m�ke up 14 percent of the tot�l student

popul�tion, �ut only seven percent of those

enrolled in pseO. the result is th�t students

of color �re denied �ccess to � low-cost

p�thw�y to higher educ�tion opportunities.

While Minnesot�’s pseO progr�m is forw�rd

thinking, the progr�m ��rely re�ches or

�enefits students of color.

source: joe n�th�n, et �l, “stretching Minds �nd resources: 20 ye�rs of post second�ry enrollment Options in Minnesot�,” center for school ch�nge, hu�ert h. humphrey institute of pu�lic aff�irs, university of Min-nesot�, decem�er 2005.

-4%

-3%

-2%

-1%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

BLACK

AMER.

INDIAN

LATINO

ASIANWHITE

dIfference In percent Between students In puBlIc school and pseo

race/ ethnicity

11–12 graDe public school

stuDents

11-12 graDe public school

stuDents in pseo

statewide totals 149734 (100%) 5,990 (4%)

Black 12,443 (8%) 229 (4%)

american Indian 3,352 (2%) 59 (1%)

latino 5,713 (4%) 92 (2%)

asian-pacific 8,206 (6%) 402 (7%)

white 121,010 (81%) 5,210 (87%)



CIvIL RIGHTS EQuITy AND CRIMINAL JuSTICEPeople of color comprise 14 percent of the popula-tion yet over 35 percent of the adult male prison population in Minnesota.32 Similarly, juveniles of color represent 11 percent of the juvenile population yet 25 percent of the juvenile apprehensions.33 Current policy has reinforced disparities: people of color are profiled, arrested, and hit with staggering impacts on family and community life at higher rates than whites. We value a strong civic life, but the disparities have led people of color to distrust the criminal justice and policing systems.

Racial Profiling and Confinement• Blacks are 10 times more likely, Latinos are four times, and American Indians

are three times more likely to be arrested than whites in 2005.34

• When searched, however, whites are more likely to be found with contraband. The hit rate, as a result of automobile searches, is 24 percent for whites, 11 percent for Blacks and nine percent for Latinos.35

• Blacks are arrested for low-level offenses at significantly higher rates than whites (15:1), but with few of the arrest cases resulting in conviction (7:1).36

• Drug use could not fully account for the differences in arrests: Blacks were arrested at a rate of 817 percent higher but reported a drug use rate of only 66 percent higher than whites. Most of the difference is in marijuana use.37

• Asian-Pacific Islanders are nearly two times (1.48) more likely to be confined to a juvenile correctional facility than whites, highest rate for juveniles of color.38

Barriers to Reentry • Fathers of color report that lack of work and housing opportunities contributed

to their need to make money illegally to support their families. They expected their lives would change upon being released from prison, only to find numerous blocks to employment.39

• In 2004, disenfranchised felons were 1.6 percent (57,971) of Minnesota’s voting age population, but more than 13 percent of the Black population of voting age was disenfranchised.40


civil rights equity legislation hf 3464/Walker/2006, sf 3079/higgins/2006, removing employment barriers for inDiviDuals With a criminal recorD: HF 3464 would have opened an employment opportunity for nearly 13,282 convicted felons of color each year.41 HF 3464 allows an applicant with a felony conviction to become licensed in cosmetology at the race tracks. The intent was to grant licenses in work that is outside of gaming or security industries. Overwhelmingly, the Republican-dominated House

recognized and supported this with 99 yeas to 31 nays. Governor Pawlenty, however, vetoed it saying that the bill’s language failed to mirror sentencing guidelines for Minnesota. He stated that “the licensing standards for the race track must remain rigorous to ensure the integrity of horse racing and pari-mutual gaming in Minnesota.” 42 This employment opportunity would have been available to a handful of felons. Still, advocates claim that this veto is symbolic of other employment doors that are closed on individuals attempting to overcome prior incarceration.


hf 607/ellison/2006, sf 1752/hottinger/2006, voting enfranchisement for non-incarcerateD: This bill would have restored vot-ing rights for over 8,000 Blacks, reducing the disenfranchised Black population of voter age from nearly 13 percent to four percent.43 HF 607 gives formerly incarcerated, persons on probation or parole, the right to vote. It authorizes the commissioner of corrections to provide the person with written notice that his or her eligibility to vote has been restored.

8 Failed in House Committee on Civil Law and Elections; failed in Senate Committee on Crime Prevention and Public Safety

hf 1715/ellison/2005, sf 545/betzolD/2005, expungement eligibility expanDeD: Tens of thousands of people of color who were arrested but cases were dismissed would have had their records cleaned.44 HF 1715 allows petitioners to expunge their arrest records if the proceeding was not resolved in their favor. An unintended consequence of being arrested but not convicted is that the record continues to shadow the person and creates a barrier to economic opportunities. This data reveals that racial disparity is present in arrest and conviction proceedings. HF 1715 attempts to correct the disparities and provide a passport to economic opportunities for people of color.

8 Failed in Senate Committee on Crime Prevention and Public Safety; failed in House Committee on Public Safety Policy and Finance

“The baseline for our justice system must be that all people, including persons of color, receive equal justice. This is not happening.”

—tOM jOhnsOn, president, cOuncil On criMe and justice

misseD opportuntities


misseD opportunitieshf 716/ellison/2005, sf 1616/moua/2005, halting racial profiling: HF 716 may have resulted in 23,800 fewer Black and Latino drivers being stopped per year.45 HF 716 authorizes the set up of a grant to install cameras in police vehicles, analyze traffic stop data and sets penalties for officers who profile by race. Penalties include imprisonment and fines. Law enforcement agencies that receive grants must store the videotapes for no less than sixty days and make the tape available to driver’s who were stopped. Data analysis suggests that a bill like this could lead 22,500 more whites being stopped each year.46

8 Failed in House Committee on Public Safety Policy and Finance; failed in Senate Committee on Crime Prevention and Public Safety

hf1039/ellison/2006, sf 1232/betzolD/2005, seconD chance for Drug offenDers: This bill would have allowed over 2,857 juveniles of color each year to get a chance to postpone prosecution and participate in a diversion program.47 HF 1039 allows people with a first time drug conviction48 to join a drug or alcohol program while under probation. Once probation is complete the proceedings are dismissed and the public is blocked from reviewing the record. This bill attempts to provide all juveniles with a second chance and support they need to stay out of the criminal justice system.49

8 Failed in House Committee on Public Safety and Finance; failed in Senate Committee on Finance

Minnesot�’s som�li popul�tion h�s re�ched 35,000, more th�n 70 percent of whom

entered the country through the united st�tes refugee resettlement progr�m.

immedi�tely �fter sept. 11, attorney gener�l john ashcroft’s justice dep�rtment

l�unched � series of �ggressive c�mp�igns �g�inst immigr�nts. in Minnesot�, the so-

m�li community �eg�n to he�r of �rrests. “i spent three d�ys moving �round [from j�il

to j�il] with no food, w�ter, �l�nket, nothing. not even in refugee c�mps did i go th�t

long without food” s�id one det�inee.

tow�rds the end of 2004, 3,568 som�lis h�d deport�tion orders. a�out 4,000

more som�lis h�d deport�tion c�ses pending in the courts, �ringing the num�er of

people �ffected �y the supreme court ruling up to 8,000.

source: extr�cted from tr�m nguyen, “ch�pter 2: sep�r�ted �y deport�tion: Minne�polis,” in We Are All Suspects Now: Untold Stories from Immigrant Communities After 9/11, 2005.

ImmIgrants of color are resettled, profIled and deported


ECONOMIC EQuITyMinnesotans of color represent 14 percent of the population, yet over 30 percent of the population living in poverty.50 Families of color with children under 18 are eight percent of the population but hold 34 percent of the children in poverty.51 Only nine percent of adults are people of color yet 57 percent of homeless adults are people of color. Further, 15 percent of youth are people of color and 65 percent of homeless youth are people of color.52 Race-conscious legislation is needed to get families of color off the streets and out of poverty, to increase their access to public transit and to other benefits and assets. We need a state where the economic system supports equal economic opportunities for all.

Income Inequality• Nearly a quarter of Blacks, American Indians, Latinos and Asian-Pacific Island-

ers live below the federal poverty line, compared to six percent of whites.53

• Median household income per year is $9,355 less for Latinos, $16,362 less for American Indians, $19,362 less for Blacks, $11,061 less for Multi-racial people, $2,768 less for Asian-Pacific Islanders, compared to $48,288 for whites.54

• Latino migrant farm worker survey participants reported that crew leaders frequently pay workers late, and take substantial cuts of workers’ pay.55

Wealth Divide• Over two-thirds (77 percent) of whites are homeowners yet only one-third (32

percent) of Blacks are homeowners, less than half (43 percent) of Latinos, nearly half (46 percent) of Multi-racial people, nearly half (49 percent) of American Indians, and over half (52 percent) of Asian-Pacific Islanders.56

• Minnesota veterans Affairs Survey in 2003 found that minority veterans received half the benefits paid to white male veterans.57


sf 1984/anDerson/2005, paying DischargeD latino migrant Workers: up to 32,000 migrant workers per year, employed by crew leaders have new added protections against payment abuse.58 SF 1984 strengthens the penalty on employ-ers who fail to compensate a discontinued employee within twenty-four hours, or for failing to comply with the written employment contracts. This bill may help to change the behavior of managers who illegally take income from Latino migrant workers.


hf 2289/mullery/2005, sf 1891/ranum/2005, benefit access for veterans of color: This bill assists 388 more veterans of color per year to receive services such as dental and mental health services.60 HF 2289 authorizes the department of veteran affairs to increase part time staff hours to full time in order to increase access to benefits for veterans. This legislation was supported with a $250,000 appropriation, which will become a sustainable funding source for the Department of veteran Affairs’ budget. veterans of color who are less likely to secure benefits will gain access to services to boost their standard of living.


sf 3/anDerson/2005, increase minimum Wage: Nearly 35,340 workers of color will receive a significant pay raise.61 Passed in August 2005, SF 3 authorizes employ-ers with gross sales of $625,000 or more to boost the wage from $5.15 to $6.15 per hour and for employers with less than $625,000 to increase the wage from $4.90 to $5.25 per hour.62 Workers of color comprise a disproportionate segment of minimum-wage earn-ers.63 Minnesota joins fifteen other states and District of Columbia with minimum wages higher than the federal government’s.64 However, the $16,500 earned by minimum wage earner working full time is below standards for meeting basic needs in Minnesota and federal poverty level.65


hf 2959/Dorman/2006, sf 3475/langseth/2006, transitional anD supportive housing for homeless: Eighty-one families of color will have access to 58 percent of the 140 units 66 that will be developed in fiscal year 2007 and 2008. HF 2959 appropriates $19.5 million in the 2006 bonding bill with $2 million to transitional housing and $17.5 million for permanent supportive housing to increase housing opportunities for the long term homeless population. This bill removes a barrier to economic advancement for families who are among the homeless population.67 However, this funding amount is far below the original request by advocates of $33 million for permanent supportive housing and $10 million for transitional housing.


economic equity legislation

“Most Minnesotans want us to strive for high quality jobs with high wages. This is an issue of basic fairness.”

—senatOr ellen andersOn (d-66) 59


hf 2461/holberg/2005, transportation equity for people of color: This legislation would have affected more than 141,047 households of color per year that depend on public transit.68 People of color make up a disproportionate segment of public transit users. HF 2461 increases the revenue for transit projects. It stipulates that no more than 60 percent of income can be earmarked for roads, and no less than 40 percent for public transit. HF 2461 passed the House and Senate by slim margins. The governor vetoed the legislation claiming that “the bill provides disproportionate increases to transit which are not properly balanced against funding needs for roads.” 69 While advocates sup-port the legislation’s funding formula, they express different concerns than the governor. Will transportation funding be used to increase access to opportunities and to curtail harm by recent fare increases and cuts in local service?


economic equity legislation

race/ ethnicity

% caseloaD % sanctioneD

hmong 6% 11%

Black 27% 35%

asian-pacific Islander 8% 19%

american Indian 9% 30%

somali 6% 14%

white 44% 26%

sanctIon dIscrImInatIon wIthIn mInnesota famIly Investment program

recipients of color �re much more likely

to �e s�nctioned th�n whites. s�nction

occurs when recipients do not comply

with progr�m requirements. the c�sh

gr�nt c�n �e reduced �y 10 percent for

the first month �nd �y 30 percent for

�ddition�l months. in � recent survey of

recipients of color who h�ve �een s�nc-

tioned, they were prim�rily s�nctioned for

refusing to t�ke � jo� when they h�d no

child c�re �rr�ngements.

sources: d hir�sun�, “report on s�nc-tion,” Minnesot� house rese�rch, 2003; Wilder rese�rch center, “the issues Behind the Outcomes,” april 2003; Min-nesot� council of nonprofits, “Minnesot� Budget Bites,” j�nu�ry 2003. percent of c�selo�d st�nds for the percent of tot�l c�selo�d of MFip recipients. percent of s�nctions st�nds for those in � r�ci�l c�tegory th�t �re s�nctioned.

Difference in percent betWeen caseloaD anD sanctioneD

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

BLACKASIAN-

PACIFIC AMER-

INDIAN SOMALIHMONG

WHITE


HEALTH EQuITyPeople of color face enormous barriers to health access and quality care. Blacks, American Indians, Latinos all lack health insurance well over the rate for those without insurance in the total population. Infants of color are only 20 percent of the popula-tion yet have mortality rates that are twice that of whites.70 People of color and immigrants are under-represented in health care professions. Public policy determines who has access as well as who is sick in Minnesota.

Unequal Health Access • Only 5.9 percent of whites lack health insurance, while 12.8 percent of Blacks,

34.2 percent of Latinos, 21 percent of American Indians and 9.8 percent of Asian-Pacific Islanders lack health insurance.71 People of color without health insurance are disproportionately left without access to preventative or regular care.

Environmental Inequities• Chipped and peeled lead-based paint is the leading source of poisoning for

children.72 In 2003, the rate of elevated blood lead levels was highest among Blacks (5 percent), Asian-Pacific Islanders (4 percent), Latinos (5 percent) and American Indians (4.3 percent) while lower rates were found in whites (2.4 percent).73

• The asthma rate for Black and American Indian adults in Hennepin County is more than 25 percent higher than that of whites.74

• The nation’s 2.5 million largely Latino farm workers face a greater risk of pesticide exposure than any other segment of the population.75 Pesticide exposure is the cause of lost-work time injuries and respiratory illnesses.76


“Universal access to the medical system is the civil rights issue of our time.”—hOuse rep. Keith ellisOn (d-58B)78

hf 3578/clark/2006, sf 3688/berglin/2006, licensure of foreign traineD health care professionals: Nearly 20 foreign trained health profes-sionals of color will gain licensure assistance through subsidies for preparatory courses and examinations.77 HF 3578 requires the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) to run a pilot project from July 2006 to June 2007 to encourage licensure. Toward this end, $450,000 was appropriated with intent that it can become a long-term source if the program is successful. Due by October 2007, commissioner of DEED is to submit a report to the legislature that details the effectiveness of the program. This bill opens access to foreign-born trained health care professionals who face financial hurdles to become licensed while patient enrollment becomes increasingly diverse.


hf 2140/ellison/2005, sf 2055/higgens/2005, meDical assistance for blooD leaD investigations: If passed, this bill would have ensured that 33,550 families of color with children under the age of six would be eligible for environmental investigations for blood poisoning.79 HF 2140 allows medical assistance dollars to be used for environmental investigations for children with high blood lead concentration (greater than or equal to 10 micrograms of lead per deciliter). This bill brings good news to advocates who claim that children of color bear the brunt of high blood lead levels. While testing rates for people of color in the Medicaid program are increasing, there is a lack of investigative follow up. Advocates maintain that lead poisoning has far reaching impacts beyond traditional public health. “This lead crisis is deeply impacting the academic gaps in public schools and juvenile courts. Many of these kids have lead poisoning!” said Rep. Keith Ellison.80

8 Failed in House Committee on Health Policy and Finance

hf 2440/ellison/2006, sf 2238/hottinger/2005, pesticiDe stuDy for latino migrant farmWorkers: up to 35,000 migrant agricultural workers would have benefited from identifying the impacts of pesticides and by corrective actions being taken by the public health system.81 HF 2440 charges the commissioner of the health department to investigate the impacts of pesticides on migrant agricultural workers. It requires that a long range study be completed—minimum of 10 years, so that chemicals are identified and remedies are created to reduce the impact of pesticides on farm workers. The goal is to curtail the exposure to pesticides on Latino migrant agricultural workers, many of whom are losing ground on health and wealth issues.

8 Failed in House Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

health equity legislation



hf 2599/mullery/2006, aDopt an environmental justice act: Communities of color are disproportionately affected by toxic pollution.82 HF 2599 establishes an act that ensures that communities of color are given just treatment, and are substantially involved, in environmental decision making. This legislation establishes an Advisory Council to provide guidance to the Environmental Justice Task Force. The task force would also be developed, but for the purpose of providing recommendations to state agencies. Both agencies would use public heath information to identify proposed or exist-ing pollution sites near communities of color. And to respond to petitions that are filed by communities of color by developing intervention plans.

8 Failed in House Committee on Environment and Natural Resources

hf 784/Walker/2005, sf 723/marty/2005, quality health care for all: up to 101,446 uninsured people of color would have gained access to quality health care coverage with the passage of this bill.83 HF 784 charges the commissioner of health to establish a working group to design a universal health care system that would start in 2010 to ensure that all Minnesotans have access to high quality health care. The group includes patients, medical providers and employer representatives. Key goals of this program would include: patients being able to choose their provider, emphasizing early intervention and preventive assistance, and patients having access to mental health, chemical dependency and dental services.84

8 Failed in Senate Committee on Health and Family Security; failed in House Committee on Health Policy and Finance


chIldren and adults of color are more lIkely to Be unInsured

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

ADULTS

CHILDREN

WHITEASIAN-PACIFIC ISLANDER

MULTI-RACIAL

BLACKAMERICAN INDIAN

LATINO

19.5%

45%

13.14%

16.9%

10.3% 10.3%

14.4%

7.73%5.96%

12.1%

10.67% 11.02%

source: u.s. census Bure�u, current popul�tion survey, annu�l soci�l �nd economic supplement for Minnesot�, 2005.


INSTITuTIONAL RACISMInstitutional racism includes policies of public or private institutions that generate negative outcomes for communities of color. Numerous policies were introduced between 2005 and 2006 by the Minnesota State Legislature that had intentional or unintentional impact on racial disparity outcomes. Many of these bills targeted low income families of color and immigrants. None became law, but they do represent attempts to degrade the reputation of Minnesota as the state of equal opportunity.

Types of Racism/Defining Racial Justice

Racial Justice works to eliminate racial disparities resulting from interpersonal, institutional and structural racism. Equitable outcomes for all are central to racial justice efforts.

Interpersonal Racism is the public expressions of racial prejudice, hate, bias and bigotry between individuals. Hate crimes are an example of interpersonal racism.

Institutional Racism is when racial disparities are created and/or exacerbated by key societal institutions such as hospitals, public schools and private corporations. Disparate outcomes are the measure of institutional racism—regardless of whether there is racist intent by the institution or the individuals acting on behalf of the institution. Racial profiling, predatory lending, and disparities in health treatment are examples of institutional racism.

Structural Racism is the normalization and legitimization of an array of dynam-ics—historical, cultural, institutional, and interpersonal—that routinely advantage whites while producing cumulative and chronic adverse outcomes for people of color. Structural racism is the interaction of disparate outcomes across institutions. Separate and unequal schools, for instance, are a product of the interplay of numerous factors such as historic employment discrimination, housing segregation, and racialized poverty. Structural racism is the most profound and pervasive form of racism that is deeply embedded in all aspects of society.85


institutional racism sf 3117/Wergin/2006, no license for unDocumenteD latino Workers: This bill would have further blocked access to a drivers’ license for more than 6,472 Latinos a year who drive without a license.86 SF 3117 specifies that to obtain a driver’s license a person must be a resident and legal immigrant. Currently, Minnesota provides no pathway for undocumented immigrants to drive legally. Despite being ineligible for a license, undocumented Latinos drive without one—thus drive without drivers training or insurance. Advocates state that criminalizing undocumented workers, by offering this legislation, does not offer a real solution, i.e. access to drivers’ license, to connect Latino workers to employers and other opportunities.

8 Failed in Senate Committee on Crime Prevention and Public Safety

hf 1976/gunther/2005, housing penalty for Welfare recipients: This bill would have affected 4,275 MFIP families of color who can least afford penalties for living in poverty.88 HF 1976 authorizes county agencies to take $200 of rental assistance provided by Department of Housing and urban Development (HuD) from the cash amount of the recipients’ MFIP grant. While in the past the Legislature has tried to terminate the $50 per month deduction, this bill attempts to raise the penalty to $200 per month. As a counter, the Senate proposed to eliminate the housing penalty. In the end, the governor did not support either plan, but instead kept the housing penalty at a $50 reduction per month.89 Still, advocates seek to eliminate the penalty because one study found that “Minnesota housing subsidies advance welfare reform goals. Those who received housing assistance had a 12 percent higher employment rate than those without housing assistance.”90

8 Failed in House Conference Committee

hf 1443/emmer/2006, sf 923/bachman/2005, attempts to Disenfran-chise voters of color: This legislation would have disenfranchised 364,632 (or seven percent of the population) eligible voters of color.91 SF 923 requires all voters to present proof of residence or citizenship when registering to vote and for elections. Numerous states, most noticeably California and Georgia, have introduced this type of legislation but only Arizona has adopted such a measure. Arizona’s Proposition 200 requires that individuals not only show proof of resident status but goes a step further to include showing proof to obtain public benefits. Georgia’s law requiring proof of citizen-ship for public benefits was struck down by courts as unconstitutional. Minnesota’s Legislature is not alone in introducing a barrier to voter participation that disproportion-ately affects people of color.

8 Failed in House Committee on Ways and Means; failed in Senate Committee on Elections

“There is blatant racism in policies that permeates the Minnesota State Legislature.”

—state senatOr Mee MOua (dFl-67) 87


hf 2576/knoblach/2006, sf 2771/Wergin/2006, promoting racial pro-filing of immigrants: under this bill, 245,374 (or five percent of the population) immigrants of color would have been subject to random inquiry.92 This bill allows state and local governmental agencies to conduct inquiries on immigration status of immigrants. In addition, agencies are allowed to send, maintain and receive immigration status information to and from federal level immigration workers. Information can be gathered whether the individual has committed a crime or not. The bill also encourages local governmental authorities to enforce policies that eliminate racial profiling. To counter this type of legislation, Maine, Oregon and Alaska have passed policies that protect immigrants from random inquiry by state or local law enforcement.93

8 Passed in House; failed in Senate Committee on State and Local Government Operations

From a memo issued by Mille Lacs County

Attorney Jan Kolb, June 2006. The memo

reveals the assumptions used to inform

public policy that may threaten the tribal

sovereignty of the Mille Lacs

Band of Ojibwe.

to: all dep�rtment he�ds

From: j�n Kol�, county attorney

this is just � reminder to m�ke sure �ll

of your st�ff know th�t there is no longer

� reserv�tion in Mille l�cs county. the

reserv�tion w�s long �go disest��lished,

�nd wh�t exists now �re l�nds held in trust

for the Mille l�cs B�nd of Oji�we.

ple�se m�ke sure th�t none of your lit-

er�ture, contr�cts, we� sites, or �ny other

documents in your dep�rtment refer to

“reserv�tion” in �ny w�y. the county h�s

to �e consistent in their references to the

trust l�nds in the county. this is even more

import�nt now �s we h�ve h�d sever�l

ch�llenges to the county’s jurisdiction in

�oth crimin�l m�tters �nd zoning m�tters.

if you h�ve �ny questions ��out this

or w�nt my office to review �ny of your

dep�rtment’s documents, ple�se feel free

to cont�ct me or send �nything your need

reviewed.

all contr�cts should �e going through

the county attorney’s office for review

�nyw�y per Bo�rd’s request.

th�nk you.

source: reprinted from Star Tribune, “reserv�tion B�ttle Fuels hostility around Mille l�cs,” septem�er 4, 2006.

From mille lacs Band website:

What is the history behind the tension between Mille Lacs County and the Mille Lacs Band?

this tension stems m�inly from two tre�-

ties. the first is the tre�ty of 1837, which

g�ve B�nd mem�ers the right to hunt

�nd fish in the territory ceded to the u.s.

government. the second is the tre�ty of

1855, which est��lished the Mille l�cs

reserv�tion. Mille l�cs county disputes

the existence of this reserv�tion.

source: reprinted from the Mille l�cs B�nd of Oji�we we�site, www.millel�csoji�we.org/f�cts9.�sp

mIlle lacs government attacks trIBal sovereIgnty


AMERICAN INDIAN TRIBAL SOvEREIGNTyAmerican Indian tribes have a government-to- government relationship with the united States federal government, one forged and documented in international treaties.94 American Indian tribes are recognized by both the united States and other governments as sovereign governments.

From this sovereign authority, American Indian tribes in Minnesota work to promote social, cultural and economic well being for their membership. They demand that historical agreements between tribes and the united States government be honored including the recovery of tribal lands, the right to exercise traditional hunting and gathering practices and the revitalization of culture, language and spiritual traditions.

It is incumbent on all of us to respect this political relationship between tribal govern-ments and u.S. government and to understand that tribes alone, among all groups, have the rights and responsibilities of tribal sovereignty.

While tribal efforts are steady, disparities remain. Out of home placement for American Indian children remain very high. There are few Native fluent speakers. And American Indian traditions and foods are targeted for genetic alteration.


hf 2027/Walker/2005, sf 1719/lourey/2005, aDvisory council on chilD Welfare: Through this legislation, 1,764 American Indian children could return home as a result of extending the council. American Indian children are less than two percent of the population but are 12 percent of the children in the out-of-home placement population.95 SF 1719 updates the expiration date to June 2008 for Indian Child Welfare Advisory Council. The Advisory Council will continue to develop policies to support family preservation, in coordination with tribal governments, to better serve and manage child welfare programs and outcomes.


hf 2065/clark/2005, sf 1874/hottinger/2005, native language of american inDians: This bill would have helped 4,142 American Indian children enhance their group identity, self worth, and academic achievement.96 Minnesota is the home to the Dakota and Ojibwe languages, where there is a serious decline of fluent speakers. SF 1874 re-establishes the Native Language Eminence Credentialing Task Force. The Task Force is charged with making recommendations to the eminent credential-ing program to increase the number of fluent speakers and teachers. The Task Force will help to eliminate barriers for elders and fluent speakers so they can be a base as language teachers. Many American Indians state that “without our languages we could lose our sovereignty.”

8 Failed in K-12 Education Conference Committee Bill

sf 1566/lourey/2005, hf 1382/clark/2006, blocking genetically-en-gineereD WilD rice proDuction: Wild Rice is a central part of Anishinaabe spiritual and cultural tradition. The Ojibwe name for wild rice is manoomin, it is part of the Anishinaabe migration story and identity. However, institutions and corporations have successfully cultivated and sold most of the wild rice in Minnesota.98 Current laws allow corporations to patent the genetically changed crop, essentially gaining ownership of Anishinaabe culture and economic health. SF 1566 prohibits persons from the cultiva-tion or sale of genetically engineered wild rice. The bill also allows the commissioner of agriculture to make exemptions if environmental assessments show that it will not harm the environment or humans.

8 Failed in Senate Committee on Agriculture, Veterans and Gaming; failed in House Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

tribal sovereignty


“Sovereignty forms the basis for tribes as self-governed nations to deal with other political entities and activities within their own borders.”

—dr. vine delOria, sOvereignty FOruM, May 1995 97


demographIcs of amerIcan IndIans In mInnesota

Minnesot� h�s the 13th l�rgest americ�n indi�n

popul�tion in the n�tion. the popul�tion is

spre�d throughout the 11 reserv�tions in the

st�te. seven of the reserv�tions �re m�de up of

the Oji�we tri�e. the other four �re of the d�kot�

tri�e. thirty-one percent of the americ�n indi�n

popul�tion lives on these reserv�tions �nd 37

percent of the popul�tion lives in the Metropoli-

t�n counties.

OJIBWE—Percent of Reservation Population

BOI FORTE

FOND DU LAC

GRAND PORTAGE

LEECH LAKEMILLE LACS

RED LAKE

WHITE EARTH

DAKOTA—Percent of Reservation Population

LOWER SIOUX

PRAIRIE ISLAND

SHAKOPEE

UPPER SIOUX0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

OJI

BW

E: 4

64

OJI

BW

E: 1

,353

OJI

BW

E: 3

22

OJI

BW

E: 4

,561

OJI

BW

E: 5

,071

OJI

BW

E: 3

,37

8

DAKO

TA:

294

DAKO

TA:

166

DAKO

TA:

214

DAKO

TA:

47

OJI

BW

E: 1

,237

OJIBWE—Percent of Reservation Population

BOI FORTE

FOND DU LAC

GRAND PORTAGE

LEECH LAKEMILLE LACS

RED LAKE

WHITE EARTH

DAKOTA—Percent of Reservation Population

LOWER SIOUX

PRAIRIE ISLAND

SHAKOPEE

UPPER SIOUX0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

OJI

BW

E: 4

64

OJI

BW

E: 1

,35

3

OJI

BW

E: 3

22

OJI

BW

E: 4

,56

1

OJI

BW

E: 5

,07

1

OJI

BW

E: 3

,37

8

DA

KOTA

: 2

94

DA

KOTA

: 1

66

DA

KOTA

: 2

14

DA

KOTA

: 4

7

OJI

BW

E: 1

,23

7

source: americ�n indi�n policy center, “introductory d�t� on americ�n indi�ns,” 2002.

percent of oJIBwe and dakota populatIons on reservatIons In mInnesota

31% ON RESERVATIONS

28% NON-METRO/ NOT ON

RESERVATION

37% METRO COUNTIES

dIstrIButIon of amerIcan IndIan populatIon


reportIng on the governorHas Gov. Tim Pawlenty met the goals and statements listed in his recent 2006 State of the State address? Supporting only seven out of ten racial equity bills equates to a seventy percent support, a grade of C-, suggest no.

In essence, the governor has failed to address the widespread racial disparities, which prevent Minnesota from being the state of equal opportunity for all. Here is a review of his resistance to enacting legislation that is critical to people of color.

• vetoed employment opportunity for convicted felons of color. HF 3464 allows an applicant with a felony conviction to become licensed in cosmetology for work at race tracks, work that is not in the gaming or security industries. This bill gained overwhelming support in the Republican-based House. However, Gov. Tim Pawlenty vetoed it. vetoing HF 3464 is symbolic of other employ-ment doors that are shut on former felons of color.

• vetoed funding for transportation equity for people of color. HF 2461 increases the revenue for transportation projects, stipulating that no more than 60 percent of income for roads and no less than 40 percent for public transit. vetoing HF 2461 ignores the transportation needs of people of color. Most of the funding for transportation already goes to roads.99

• Planned to veto education opportunities for undocumented immigrants. HF 566 (Dream Act) extends eligibility to undocumented high school graduates per year for in-state tuition. This provision gained bi-partisan support, however it was removed from omnibus due to fear of a governor veto. This intention to veto is matched by language in 2006 State of the State address of “not looking the other way on immigration that’s illegal.” This language is also expressive of using the report called “The Impact of Illegal Immigration on Minnesota”100 as a springboard to block the Dream Act. To base policy on this report is inadequate for two reasons: (1) the report failed to consider other leading research on im-migration and (2) it will reinforce racial disparities not only in education but also in income and homeownership. National Research Council (NRC) finds that long range estimates best reflect immigrants’ fiscal impacts, where revenues out pace the costs to state governments. NRC also finds positive long-term fiscal impacts for states when undocumented immigrants have access to more than high school attainment.101

Judging by the performance described above, it seems that Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s vision for the state does not match the vision or values for the state or for people of color in Minnesota. “Our future success depends on our ability to innovate. That’s great news, because innovation is what Minnesota does best” said the governor. Leadership to create innovative race-conscious legislation is needed to reduce racial disparities and meet our value of extending equal opportunity for all Minnesotans.

“Minnesota has always been the land of great opportunity…Today, the state of our state is strong, hopeful, and prosperous. Our people are working, our students are learning. My goals as governor is the make Minnesota the best state in which to live, work, and raise a family.”

—gOv. tiM paWlenty, state OF the

state address, 2006


legIslatIve report card


summary of the 2005–2006 racial equity report carD

unfInIshed BusInessThe Minnesota State Legislative Report Card on Racial Equity for the 2005–2006 biennium tracked 22 bills that were important to communities of color. Only 10 made it to the governor’s desk. Overall, the bills set out to increase access, close racial disparities and strengthen enforcement against racial discrimination. Following is a summary of key findings.

poor performance of legislature anD governor Legislature received an F overall. Seven of 22 bills that were considered for this report became law; this gives the Legislature an overall grade of F (32 percent). Economic equity bills had greatest success with an 80 percent (4/5) pass rate. Contrarily, none of the civil rights/criminal justice bills passed (0/5). American Indian tribal sovereignty bills had a 33 percent (1/3) pass rate.

The governor received a C- overall for his support for racial equity bills. This grade reflects his support for seven of ten bills that reached his desk. The governor received an F (50 percent) in the education section, a B- (80 percent) in economic section and full support for the one health bill and one American Indian bill that reached his desk that was considered for this report.

four critical bills gaineD bi-partisan support HF 566 Dream Act had the backing of nine republican co-authors and one republi-can author in the House. In the Senate the Dream Act had the backing of four republican co-authors and one democratic author. However, this bill failed to make it into the Higher Education Conference Committee’s final bill (HF 1385).

HF 1180 Removing a Barrier to Maintain a Diverse Teacher Force passed the House and Senate, was crafted by the K-12 Education Conference Committee who wrapped HF 1180 language into he SS HF 141 Omnibus Education Finance Bill.

HF 3464 Removing Employment Barriers for Individuals with a Criminal Record received majority support in the House and Senate yet it was vetoed by the governor.

HF 2559 Supportive and Transitional Housing was passed by Capital Investment (Bonding) Conference Committee, which included legislators from the House and Senate. The bill went into Conference Committee because the bills of the House and Senate had different funding amounts for ending long term homelessness.

legislative Districts are majority White but groWing more DiverseNearly all districts that fall under jurisdiction of this report have majority of white population. Whites are a majority in 94 percent (83/88) of House districts and are a majority in 90 percent (30/33) of Senate districts that fell under the jurisdiction of this report.


There are few districts with majority of people of color. People of color are a majority in nearly six percent (5/88) of House districts and are majority in nine percent (3/33) of Senate districts as of 2000.

Ten legislative districts are rapidly growing more racially diverse: 35A (Scott 114.9%), 19B (Wright 113%), 17B (Chisago 90.2%), 16B (Sherburn 75.1%), 49A (Anoka 73.8%), 56A (Washington 69.1%), 34A (Carver 65.6%), 11B (Todd 65.4%), 17A (Isanti 60.2%), 14A (Benton 48.9%).102

limiteD support from legislators in Districts With explosive groWthThere were five legislators with the worst score, those who were penalized for showing lack of support for racial equity. Senator Betsy Wergin (R-16) with -40 points, Senator Steve Smith (R-33A) with -25 points, House Rep. Tom Emmer (R-19B), House Rep. Jim Knoblach (R-15A) and Senator Michelle Bachman (R-52) all with -20 points. The perfor-mance of these legislators suggests that institutional racism is alive and well in Minnesota. It also shows that while the policies these legislators initiated may not explicitly focus on race, there are racial impacts that have to be taken into account. These bills, if passed, would have exacerbated racial disparities.

leaDership is critical Leadership is critical to eliminating the widespread racial disparities. Taking the risk to introducing proactive public policies to result in the strongest positive impact on communities of color is what we need to expand equal opportunity for all groups in Minnesota. Leadership should be effective, strategic and accountable to outcomes.

honor rollThe following legislators scored at least 20 points (authored at least one racial equity bill). House: Karen Clark (D-61A), Ray Cox (R-25B), Jim Davnie (D-62A), Dan Dorman (R-27A), Keith Ellison (D-58B), Phyllis Kahn (D-59B), Margaret Kelliher (D-60A), Diane Loeffler (D-59A), Carlos Mariani (D-65B), Joe Mullery (D-58A), Tom Rukavina (D-05A), Neva Walker (D-61A). Senate: Ellen Anderson (D-66), Linda Berglin (D-61), Don Betzold (D-51), Linda Higgins (D-58), John Hottinger (D-23), Steve Kelley (D-44), Keith Langseth (D-9), Becky Lourey (D-8), John Marty (D-54), Mee Moua (D-67), Steve Murphy (D-28), Jane Ranum (D-63), Sandy Pappas (D-65) and Welsey Skoglund (D-62).

championsThe following legislators scored at least 50 points. House Rep. Keith Ellison (D-58B), House Rep. Karen Clark (D-61A), House Rep. Neva Walker (D-61B), House Rep. Jim Davnie (D-62A) and Senator Linda Higgins (D-58).


recommenDationRe-draft and strengthen the missed opportunity bills. The missed opportunity bills and the bills that were vetoed by Gov. Pawlenty should not be seen as lost opportunities. These bills were important to communities of color and crossed education, criminal justice and civil rights, economic, health, and American Indian tribal sovereignty areas. To ensure that they are viable options for reducing disparities, these bills should be redrafted and strengthened, while taking into consideration the concerns that were raised by advocates. And more bills should be developed to compliment these bills. Equally important, racism in legislation has to be eliminated to not destroy the efforts to reduce disparities.

Use criteria for selecting legislation. Criteria were developed to ensure that the policy met the concerns such as enfranchisement, ending discrimination and opening access to opportunities for communities of color. The Legislature, leaders, organizations should take liberty to use these criteria to ensure that policies will have the strongest positive impact on outcomes for people of color and strengthening American Indian tribal sovereignty.

toWarDs racial equity in minnesotaRace matters in Minnesota. The face of Minnesota is rapidly changing but racial disparities remain. Whether or not public policy explicitly focuses on race, the impact on communities of color has to be considered to ensure equitable outcomes. The 2005–2006 Minnesota Legislative Report Card on Racial Equity will serve as a tool for Minnesota’s communities of color and allies to determine whether policy makers are representing the concerns of people of color. We believe that Minnesota can stand up to its reputation as the state of equal opportunity for all through developing proactive policies to reduce racial disparities. Policies that perpetuate disparities based on race can be challenged and changed. Race-conscious policies that strengthen racial equity in Minnesota can be advanced. Our values—and our changing population—demand it.


Grade: FThe Legislature received an F overall. Seven of 22 bills that were considered for this report became law; this gives the Legislature an overall grade of F (32 percent). Economic equity bills had greatest success with an 80 percent (4/5) pass rate. Contrarily, none of the civil rights/criminal justice bills passed (0/5). American Indian tribal sovereignty bills had a 33 percent (1/3) pass rate.


Education Equity

civil Rights/ cRiminal justicE

Economic Equity

hEalth Equity

institutional Racism

amERican indian tRibal sovEREignty

PERcEnt PEoPlE of coloR

2005–2006PaRty/

distRicttotal

PointsRank

amERican indian

aPi black latino multi-Racial %Poc

Jim abeler r-48B 10 11 4 4 0.5 0.9 0.4 1.2 1.3 4.3

ron abrams r-43B l 0.4 2.2 2.6 1.3 1.2 7.5

Bruce anderson r-19a l 0.4 0.2 0.5 1.4 0.8 3.2

Irv anderson d-03a 10 11 4 4 1.6 0.2 0.2 0.5 1 3.6

Joe atkins d-39B l 0.5 1.5 1.9 4.2 2.1 9.7

michael Beard r-35a 5 12 4 1.5 1.7 1 3 1 8.2

connie Bernardy d-51B 10 11 4 4 1 2.6 2.1 2.6 2.2 10.3

greg Blaine r-12B l 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.5 1.9

fran Bradley r-29B -10 14 8 8 0.4 5.8 3 1.4 1.7 12.3

laura Brod r-25a -10 14 8 8 0.4 0.3 0.2 3.4 0.8 5

mark Buesgens r-35B 10 11 4 4 0.4 3.1 0.6 1.8 1.1 7

lyndon carlson d-45B 5 12 4 0.6 2.6 4.9 2.1 2.1 12.2

mike charron r-56a -10 14 8 8 0.7 2.6 2.8 2.1 1.9 9.5

karen clark d-61a 90 2 4 4 4 4+ 4 4 4+ 4+ 4 6.9 5.8 24.2 19.8 8.2 62.5

tony cornish r-24B -5 13 8 0.2 0.3 0.4 1.5 0.7 3.1

ray cox r-25B 20 9 4+ 0.6 1.4 0.5 3.3 1.1 6.5

lloyd cybart r-37a -5 13 8 0.3 2.9 2.2 2.1 1.8 9.1

gregory m. davids r-31B l 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.6 0.5 1.7

Jim davnie d-62a 70 4 4+ 4+ 4+ 4 4 2.4 3.5 8.8 8 4.4 26.3

matt dean r-52B -5 13 8 0.1 1.1 0.3 1 0.6 3

randy demmer r-29a -15 15 8 8 8 0.1 2.1 0.6 1.9 0.8 5.6

Jerry dempsey r-28a 5 12 4 1.6 0.5 0.7 1.2 0.5 4.3

chris delaforest r-49a l 0.5 0.9 0.4 1.2 1.3 4.3

david dill d-06a l 3 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.1 4.9

denise dittrich d-47a 5 12 4 0.6 1.5 2.4 1.1 1 6.9

dan dorman r-27a 20 9 4+ 0.1 0.3 0.3 6 0.8 7.2

John dorn d-23B l 0.3 2.3 2 1.7 1.2 7.4

rob eastlund r-17a 10 11 4 4 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.8 1 3

kent eken d-02a 10 11 4 4 9.9 0.5 0.1 1.2 3.3 14.8

keith ellison d-58B 135 1 4 4 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4 1.4 15.4 50.2 4.9 5.3 76.3

tom emmer r-19B -20 16 8– 0.2 0.1 0.4 1 0.8 2.4

matt entenza d-64a 5 12 4 0.6 2.8 7 2.9 3.6 16.4

ron erhardt r-41a l 0.4 1.7 0.9 1.2 1.3 5.5

sondra erickson r-16a -5 13 8 2.5 0.3 0.2 1.1 1 5

Brad finstad r-21B l 0.4 0.4 0.3 3.4 0.6 4.9

patti fritz d-26B 10 11 4 4 0.4 1.2 1.4 5.9 1.4 9.6

4+ = authored; 4= co-authored; 8– = penalized author; 8= penalized co-author; l = not applicable

house

hf 1180 hf 1192 hf 3685 hf 566 hf 3464 hf 607 hf 716 hf 1715 hf 1039 hf 0048 hf 2959 sf 1984 hf 2461 hf 2289 hf 3578 hf 2140 hf 2599 hf 3159 hf 784 sf 3117 hf 1976 hf 1443 hf 2576 hf 2065 hf 1382 hf 2027

sf 1074 sf 0357 sf 627 sf 3079 sf 1762 sf 1616 sf 545 sf 1232 sf 3 sf 3475 sf 1891 sf 3688 sf 2055 sf 2238 sf 723 sf 923 sf 2771 sf 1874 sf 1566 sf 1719


Education Equity


Economic Equity

hEalth Equity




2005–2006PaRty/

distRicttotal

PointsRank

amERican indian


Jim abeler r-48B 10 11 4 4 0.5 0.9 0.4 1.2 1.3 4.3

ron abrams r-43B l 0.4 2.2 2.6 1.3 1.2 7.5

Bruce anderson r-19a l 0.4 0.2 0.5 1.4 0.8 3.2

Irv anderson d-03a 10 11 4 4 1.6 0.2 0.2 0.5 1 3.6

Joe atkins d-39B l 0.5 1.5 1.9 4.2 2.1 9.7

michael Beard r-35a 5 12 4 1.5 1.7 1 3 1 8.2

connie Bernardy d-51B 10 11 4 4 1 2.6 2.1 2.6 2.2 10.3

greg Blaine r-12B l 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.5 1.9

fran Bradley r-29B -10 14 8 8 0.4 5.8 3 1.4 1.7 12.3

laura Brod r-25a -10 14 8 8 0.4 0.3 0.2 3.4 0.8 5

mark Buesgens r-35B 10 11 4 4 0.4 3.1 0.6 1.8 1.1 7

lyndon carlson d-45B 5 12 4 0.6 2.6 4.9 2.1 2.1 12.2

mike charron r-56a -10 14 8 8 0.7 2.6 2.8 2.1 1.9 9.5

karen clark d-61a 90 2 4 4 4 4+ 4 4 4+ 4+ 4 6.9 5.8 24.2 19.8 8.2 62.5

tony cornish r-24B -5 13 8 0.2 0.3 0.4 1.5 0.7 3.1

ray cox r-25B 20 9 4+ 0.6 1.4 0.5 3.3 1.1 6.5

lloyd cybart r-37a -5 13 8 0.3 2.9 2.2 2.1 1.8 9.1

gregory m. davids r-31B l 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.6 0.5 1.7

Jim davnie d-62a 70 4 4+ 4+ 4+ 4 4 2.4 3.5 8.8 8 4.4 26.3

matt dean r-52B -5 13 8 0.1 1.1 0.3 1 0.6 3

randy demmer r-29a -15 15 8 8 8 0.1 2.1 0.6 1.9 0.8 5.6

Jerry dempsey r-28a 5 12 4 1.6 0.5 0.7 1.2 0.5 4.3

chris delaforest r-49a l 0.5 0.9 0.4 1.2 1.3 4.3

david dill d-06a l 3 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.1 4.9

denise dittrich d-47a 5 12 4 0.6 1.5 2.4 1.1 1 6.9

dan dorman r-27a 20 9 4+ 0.1 0.3 0.3 6 0.8 7.2

John dorn d-23B l 0.3 2.3 2 1.7 1.2 7.4

rob eastlund r-17a 10 11 4 4 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.8 1 3

kent eken d-02a 10 11 4 4 9.9 0.5 0.1 1.2 3.3 14.8

keith ellison d-58B 135 1 4 4 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4 1.4 15.4 50.2 4.9 5.3 76.3

tom emmer r-19B -20 16 8– 0.2 0.1 0.4 1 0.8 2.4

matt entenza d-64a 5 12 4 0.6 2.8 7 2.9 3.6 16.4

ron erhardt r-41a l 0.4 1.7 0.9 1.2 1.3 5.5

sondra erickson r-16a -5 13 8 2.5 0.3 0.2 1.1 1 5

Brad finstad r-21B l 0.4 0.4 0.3 3.4 0.6 4.9

patti fritz d-26B 10 11 4 4 0.4 1.2 1.4 5.9 1.4 9.6


house





Education Equity


Economic Equity

hEalth Equity




2005–2006PaRty/

distRicttotal

PointsRank

amERican indian


pat garofalo r-36B -10 14 8 8 0.2 0.8 0.6 1.6 0.9 4

paul gazelka r-12a -5 13 8 0.9 0.5 0.1 0.8 0.8 3

Barbara goodwin d-50a 10 11 4 4 1.1 3.3 4.2 2.7 3.1 14.5

mindy greiling d-54a 10 11 4 4 0.6 5.2 2.2 2.1 1.5 11.5

Bob gunther r-24a -15 15 4 8– 0.5 0.6 0.3 4.9 0.6 6.5

tom hackbarth r-48a l 0.6 0.4 0.3 1 1.1 3.3

rod hamilton r-22B 5 12 4 0.4 3 0.9 7.1 1.2 11.8

rick hansen d-39a 5 12 4 0.3 2.5 1.8 6.9 2.1 12.7

alice hausman d-66B 15 10 4 4 4 1.2 6.6 7.4 3.8 2.7 21.1

larry haws d-15B l 0.9 2.8 2.4 1.3 1.9 9.3

Bud heidgerken r-13a l 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.3 0.3 1.9

debra hilstrom d-46B 5 12 4 0.4 10 12.7 3 3.4 29

Bill hilty d-08a 15 10 4 4 4 5.4 0.4 0.9 1 1.8 9.5

mary liz holberg r-36a 15 10 4+ 8 0.5 1.8 1 1.2 1.7 6.3

Joe hoppe r-34B l 0.2 2 0.8 3.9 1.1 7.8

frank hornstein d-60B 15 10 4 4 4 0.5 2.8 2.4 2.3 2 9.7

melissa hortman d-47B l 0.4 5.7 4.1 1.6 2.7 14.4

larry hosch d-14B l 0.1 0.7 0.3 1.1 0.5 2.7

larry howes r-04B 5 12 4 1.7 0.3 0.1 0.5 1 3.5

thomas huntley d-07a 15 10 4 4 4 1 1.5 1.3 0.8 1.5 6.2

mike Jaros d-07B 10 11 4 4 3.8 1.1 2.1 1.4 2.2 10.3

Jeff Johnson r-43a -5 13 8 0.4 4.2 2.7 1.8 1.3 10.3

ruth Johnson d-23a l 0.1 1.2 0.8 2.9 0.5 5.3

sheldon Johnson d-67B 10 11 4 4 1.4 12.9 13.5 8 4.7 39

al Juhnke d-13B l 0.2 0.3 0.8 1.3 1.3 10.5

phyllis kahn d-59B 25 8 4 4 4 4 4 0.9 10.2 12.8 4 4.7 32.1

margaret anderson d-60a 20 9 4 4 4 4 1.4 2.6 9.5 4.4 3.1 20.3kelliher

karen klingzing r-56B l 0.2 5 2.1 2.3 2 11.5

Jim knoblach r-15a -20 16 8– 0.5 2.4 0.8 1.4 1.5 6.4

kyle koenen d-20B l 1.2 0.2 0.2 3.5 0.8 5.6

paul kohls r-34a -5 13 8 0.2 0.9 0.3 2.5 0.8 4.6

philip krinkie r-53a l 0.5 2.2 0.6 1.4 1.4 6.2

morrie lanning r-09a 5 12 4 1.3 1 0.6 4 2.1 8.8

dan larson d-63B l 0.6 6.7 7 5.8 3.4 22.6

ron latz d-44B l 0.4 3.8 3.9 2.6 1.8 12.3

house





Education Equity


Economic Equity

hEalth Equity




2005–2006PaRty/

distRicttotal

PointsRank

amERican indian


John lesch d-66a 5 12 4 1.4 23.2 14.4 9.2 5.5 51.8

ann lenczewski d-40B 10 11 4 4 0.7 3.9 3.2 2 1.6 11.2

tina liebling d-30a 15 10 4 4 4 0.6 5.4 4.1 4.2 2.5 16.5

Bernard lieder d-01B 5 12 4 1 0.6 0.4 4.5 1.1 7.3

leon lillie d-55a 10 11 4 4 0.6 3.6 2.3 2.8 2.6 11.3

diane loeffler d-59a 20 9 4 4 4 4 2 3.2 7.8 7 3.7 23.1

doug magnus r-22a 10 11 4 4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.9 0.6 3.1

tim mahoney d-67a 10 11 4 4 1 18.2 8.7 9 3.6 39.4

carlos mariani d-65B 25 8 4 4 4 4 4 2 6.9 9.5 18.1 5.3 39.4

paul marquart d-09B l 2.1 0.2 0.2 1.6 1 5.1

denny mcnamara r-57B l 0.3 1 1 1.4 1.1 4.5

doug meslow r-53B l 0.1 2.1 1.2 1.3 0.7 5.3

frank moe d-04a 15 10 4 4 4 16.7 1.1 0.3 1.1 2.3 21.2

Joe mullery d-58a 45 6 4 4+ 4+ 1.2 12.7 29.8 3.6 5.6 52.7

mary murphey d-06B l 1 0.9 0.8 0.5 1 4.3

michael nelson d-46a 15 10 4 4 4 0.9 8.6 19.4 3.9 4.4 36.8

peter nelson r-17B -5 13 8 1 0.7 0.4 0.9 0.9 3.9

scott newman r-18a -10 14 8 8 0.2 0.6 0.2 3.1 0.5 4.4

Bud nornes r-10a 5 12 4 0.7 0.3 0.5 2.2 0.8 4.4

mark olson r-16B -5 13 8 0.3 0.5 0.1 1.2 0.5 2.6

mary ellen otremba d-11B 10 11 4 4 0.5 0.5 0.2 1.5 0.8 3.4

dennis ozment r-37B 5 12 4 0.4 1.8 2 2.2 2.9 9.1

erik paulsen r-42B l 0.2 5.8 2 2 1.3 11.2

michael paymar d-64B 15 10 4 4 4 0.5 2.7 2.7 4.2 2.2 11.8

gene pelowski, Jr. d-31a l 0.3 1.7 0.8 1.3 1.3 5

maxine penas r-01a l 1 1.2 0.3 0.7 0.7 3.8

Joyce peppin r-32a l 0.3 1.9 1 0.8 1.1 5

aaron peterson d-20a 5 12 4 0.2 0.9 0.7 1.2 1.3 4

neil w. peterson r-41B l 0.3 5.1 2 1.2 1.4 10

sandra peterson d-45a l 0.4 3.3 4.3 3.2 2.2 13.4

Jeanne poppe d-27B l 0.3 1.3 0.6 4.2 0.7 6.7

tom rukavina d-05a 25 8 4 4+ 1.5 0.3 0.3 0.7 1 3.8

connie ruth r-26a 5 12 4 0.4 0.7 1.9 4.1 1.4 8.4

maria ruud d-42a 5 12 4 0.4 2.7 1.7 1.1 1.2 7

Brita sailer d-02B 5 12 4 15.2 0.6 0.1 0.8 1.4 17.9

char samuelson r-50B 5 12 4 0.5 3.9 2.4 1.9 2.1 10.2

house




Education Equity


Economic Equity

hEalth Equity




2005–2006PaRty/

distRicttotal

PointsRank

amERican indian


Bev scalze d-54B l 0.5 4.2 2.6 1.3 2 10.3

marty seifert r-21a l 1.8 1.4 0.9 3 1 7.7

tony sertich d-05B 10 11 4 4 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.9 2.9

dan severson r-14a l 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.6 1 2.5

katie sieben d-57a 5 12 4 0.6 0.9 2 3.8 1.9 8.7

steve simon d-44a l 0.6 3.8 5.1 4.1 1.7 15

dean simpson r-10B l 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.9 0.5 2.4

nora slawik d-55B 5 12 4 0.3 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.3 10.1

steve smith r-33a -20 16 4 8– 8 0.2 1.3 0.5 1.1 0.9 4

Judy soderstrom r-08B 5 12 4 4 8 1.7 0.3 0.8 1.5 0.9 5.1

loren solberg d-03B l 1.7 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.9 3.7

steve sviggum r-28B l 0.3 0.6 0.4 1.1 0.7 3.1

Barb sykora r-33B 5 12 4 0.2 0.8 0.6 1.1 0.7 3.4

paul thissen d-63a 5 12 4 0.4 3.5 5.8 4 2.1 15.5

kathy tingelstad r-49B 5 12 4 0.6 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.5 6.8

cy thao d-65a 15 10 4 4 4 1.5 26 25.7 7.2 6.7 65.9

dean urdahl r-18B 5 12 4 0.4 0.4 0.3 1.4 0.5 2.7

ray vandeveer r-52a l 0.5 0.6 1.5 1.2 1.2 4.9

Jean wagenius d-62B 10 11 4 4 1.8 3.1 6.7 4.6 3.2 19

neva walker d-61B 75 3 4 4+ 4 4 4+ 4+ 2.1 6 28.7 20 6.9 61.6

lynn wardlow r-38B -10 14 8 8 0.2 4.3 3.8 2 1.7 11.9

andy welti d-30B 10 11 4 4 0.1 1.3 0.9 1.4 1.1 4.7

andrew westerberg r-51a -5 13 8 0.9 2.3 0.9 1.8 1.9 7.4

torrey westrom r-11a -5 13 8 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.6 0.5 2.2

tim wilkin r-38a -5 13 8 0.7 4.8 4.3 2.3 3.2 15.2

kurt Zellers r-32B l 0.2 1.8 1.2 1.4 1.2 5.7

house




Education Equity


Economic Equity

hEalth Equity




2005–2006PaRty/

distRicttotal

PointsRank

amERican indian


Bev scalze d-54B l 0.5 4.2 2.6 1.3 2 10.3

marty seifert r-21a l 1.8 1.4 0.9 3 1 7.7

tony sertich d-05B 10 11 4 4 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.9 2.9

dan severson r-14a l 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.6 1 2.5

katie sieben d-57a 5 12 4 0.6 0.9 2 3.8 1.9 8.7

steve simon d-44a l 0.6 3.8 5.1 4.1 1.7 15

dean simpson r-10B l 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.9 0.5 2.4

nora slawik d-55B 5 12 4 0.3 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.3 10.1

steve smith r-33a -20 16 4 8– 8 0.2 1.3 0.5 1.1 0.9 4

Judy soderstrom r-08B 5 12 4 4 8 1.7 0.3 0.8 1.5 0.9 5.1

loren solberg d-03B l 1.7 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.9 3.7

steve sviggum r-28B l 0.3 0.6 0.4 1.1 0.7 3.1

Barb sykora r-33B 5 12 4 0.2 0.8 0.6 1.1 0.7 3.4

paul thissen d-63a 5 12 4 0.4 3.5 5.8 4 2.1 15.5

kathy tingelstad r-49B 5 12 4 0.6 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.5 6.8

cy thao d-65a 15 10 4 4 4 1.5 26 25.7 7.2 6.7 65.9

dean urdahl r-18B 5 12 4 0.4 0.4 0.3 1.4 0.5 2.7

ray vandeveer r-52a l 0.5 0.6 1.5 1.2 1.2 4.9

Jean wagenius d-62B 10 11 4 4 1.8 3.1 6.7 4.6 3.2 19

neva walker d-61B 75 3 4 4+ 4 4 4+ 4+ 2.1 6 28.7 20 6.9 61.6

lynn wardlow r-38B -10 14 8 8 0.2 4.3 3.8 2 1.7 11.9

andy welti d-30B 10 11 4 4 0.1 1.3 0.9 1.4 1.1 4.7

andrew westerberg r-51a -5 13 8 0.9 2.3 0.9 1.8 1.9 7.4

torrey westrom r-11a -5 13 8 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.6 0.5 2.2

tim wilkin r-38a -5 13 8 0.7 4.8 4.3 2.3 3.2 15.2

kurt Zellers r-32B l 0.2 1.8 1.2 1.4 1.2 5.7






Education Equity


Economic Equity

hEalth Equity




2005–2006PaRty/

distRicttotal

PointsRank

amERican indian


ellen anderson d-66 45 6 4 4+ 4+ 1.3 15 10.9 6.5 4.1 36.5

michelle Bachman r-52 -20 16 8– 0.3 0.8 0.9 1.1 0.9 3.9

thomas Bakk d-6 5 12 4 2 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.1 4.6

william Belanger, Jr. r-40 l 0.8 4.1 3.5 2.6 2 12.8

linda Berglin d-61 30 7 4 4+ 4 4.5 5.9 26.5 19.9 7.5 62.1

don Betzold d-51 45 6 4+ 4+ 4 1 2.5 1.5 2.2 2.1 8.8

terri Bonoff d-43 l 0.4 3.2 2.7 1.5 1.3 8.9

satveer chaudhary d-50 l 0.8 3.5 3.3 2.3 2.6 12.3

tarryl clark d-15 l 0.7 2.6 1.6 1.3 1.7 7.8

richard cohen d-64 l 0.5 2.8 4.9 3.5 2.9 14.1

dick day r-26 l 0.4 1 1.7 5 1.4 9

scott dibble d-60 15 10 4 4 4 0.9 2.7 5.9 3.2 2.7 15

steve dille r-18 l 0.3 0.5 0.2 2.3 0.5 3.6

michelle fischbach r-14 l 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.9 0.7 2.6

leo foley d-47 5 12 4 0.5 3.6 3.3 1.4 1.9 10.6

dennis frederickson r-21 l 1.1 0.9 0.6 3.2 0.8 6.3

chris gerlach r-37 l 0.4 2.4 2.1 2.2 2.4 9.1

david hann r-42 l 0.3 4.2 1.9 1.5 1.3 9.1

linda higgins d-58 50 5 4+ 4 4 4+ 1.3 14 40 4.2 5.4 64.5

John hottinger d-23 30 7 4+ 4 4 0.2 1.7 1.4 2.3 0.8 6.3

dean e Johnson d-13 5 12 4 0.1 0.2 0.5 5 0.8 6.2

debbie Johnson r-49 l 0.5 1.4 1 1.4 1.4 5.5

michael Jungbauer r-48 l 0.7 0.9 0.7 1.3 1.2 4.7

steve kelley d-44 20 9 4+ 0.5 3.7 4.5 3.3 1.8 13.6

Bob kierlin r-31 5 12 4 0.2 1.1 0.5 1 0.9 3.4

sheila kiscaden d-30 l 0.3 3.4 2.5 2.8 1.8 10.6

amy koch r-19 l 0.3 0.2 0.4 1.2 0.8 2.8

paul koering r-12 l 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.6 0.6 2.5

gary kubly d-20 l 0.7 0.6 0.4 2.4 1 4.8

keith langseth d-9 20 9 4+ 1.7 0.6 0.4 2.8 1.6 6.9

cal larson r-10 10 11 4 4 0.6 0.3 0.4 1.6 0.7 3.4

Brian leclair r-56 l 0.5 3.8 2.4 2.2 1.9 10.5

warren limmer r-32 l 0.3 1.9 1.1 1.1 1.2 5.4

Becky lourey d-8 45 6 4 4+ 4+ 3.5 0.4 0.8 1.3 1.4 7.3

sharon marko d-57 l 0.4 0.9 1.5 2.6 1.5 6.6

John marty d-54 25 8 4 4+ 0.6 4.7 2.4 1.7 1.7 10.9

senate




Education Equity


Economic Equity

hEalth Equity




2005–2006PaRty/

distRicttotal

PointsRank

amERican indian


mike mcginn r-38 -5 13 8 0.5 4.5 4.1 2.1 2.4 13.5

James metzen d-39 l 0.4 2.1 1.9 5.6 2.1 11.2

geoff michel r-41 l 0.3 3.4 1.5 1.2 1.4 7.7

mee moua d-67 20 9 4+ 1.2 15.5 11.1 8.5 4.1 39.2

steve murphy d-28 20 9 4+ 1 0.6 0.5 1.1 0.6 3.7

thomas neuville r-25 10 11 4 4 0.5 0.9 0.4 3.3 0.9 5.7

sean nienow r-17 l 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.8 0.9 3.4

gen olson r-33 l 0.2 1.1 0.6 1.1 0.8 3.7

Julianne ortman r-34 l 0.2 1.5 0.6 3.2 0.9 6.2

Jane ranum d-63 20 9 4+ 0.5 5.1 6.4 4.9 2.8 19.1

sandy pappas d-65 25 8 4+ 4 1.7 16.4 17.6 12.7 6 52.6

pat pariseau r-36 -5 13 8 0.3 1.3 0.8 1.4 1.3 5.1

lawrence pogemiller d-59 l 1.4 6.7 10.3 5.5 4.2 27.6

mady reiter r-53 -10 14 8 8 0.3 2.1 0.9 1.4 1.1 5.7

ann rest d-45 l 0.5 3 4.6 2.6 2.1 12.8

claire robling r-35 10 11 4 4 1 2.4 0.8 2.4 1.1 7.6

Julie rosen r-24 l 0.4 0.4 0.4 3.2 0.7 4.8

carrie ruud r-4 -5 13 8 9.2 0.7 0.2 0.8 1.6 12.4

dallas sams d-11 l 0.4 0.3 0.4 1.1 0.7 2.8

tom saxhaug d-3 l 1.6 0.2 0.3 0.6 1 3.6

linda scheid d-46 5 12 4 0.6 9.3 16 3.5 3.9 32.9

david senjem r-29 10 11 4 4 0.3 4 1.8 1.7 1.3 9

rod skoe d-2 l 1 0.8 0.3 2.6 0.9 5.6

wesley skoglund d-62 25 8 4 4+ 2.1 3.3 7.8 6.3 3.8 22.7

yvonne solon d-7 5 12 4 2.4 1.4 1.7 1.1 1.8 8.2

dan sparks d-27 l 0.2 0.8 0.5 5.1 0.7 7

leroy stumpf d-1 5 12 4 1 0.8 0.3 2.6 0.9 5.6

david tomassoni d-5 l 1.1 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.9 3.3

Jim vickerman d-22 5 12 4 0.4 1.8 0.7 4 0.9 7.4

Betsy wergin r-16 -40 20 8– 8– 1.4 0.4 0.2 1.1 0.8 3.8

charles wiger d-55 l 0.5 3.1 2.5 2.7 2.4 10.7

senate




Education Equity


Economic Equity

hEalth Equity




2005–2006PaRty/

distRicttotal

PointsRank

amERican indian


mike mcginn r-38 -5 13 8 0.5 4.5 4.1 2.1 2.4 13.5

James metzen d-39 l 0.4 2.1 1.9 5.6 2.1 11.2

geoff michel r-41 l 0.3 3.4 1.5 1.2 1.4 7.7

mee moua d-67 20 9 4+ 1.2 15.5 11.1 8.5 4.1 39.2

steve murphy d-28 20 9 4+ 1 0.6 0.5 1.1 0.6 3.7

thomas neuville r-25 10 11 4 4 0.5 0.9 0.4 3.3 0.9 5.7

sean nienow r-17 l 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.8 0.9 3.4

gen olson r-33 l 0.2 1.1 0.6 1.1 0.8 3.7

Julianne ortman r-34 l 0.2 1.5 0.6 3.2 0.9 6.2

Jane ranum d-63 20 9 4+ 0.5 5.1 6.4 4.9 2.8 19.1

sandy pappas d-65 25 8 4+ 4 1.7 16.4 17.6 12.7 6 52.6

pat pariseau r-36 -5 13 8 0.3 1.3 0.8 1.4 1.3 5.1

lawrence pogemiller d-59 l 1.4 6.7 10.3 5.5 4.2 27.6

mady reiter r-53 -10 14 8 8 0.3 2.1 0.9 1.4 1.1 5.7

ann rest d-45 l 0.5 3 4.6 2.6 2.1 12.8

claire robling r-35 10 11 4 4 1 2.4 0.8 2.4 1.1 7.6

Julie rosen r-24 l 0.4 0.4 0.4 3.2 0.7 4.8

carrie ruud r-4 -5 13 8 9.2 0.7 0.2 0.8 1.6 12.4

dallas sams d-11 l 0.4 0.3 0.4 1.1 0.7 2.8

tom saxhaug d-3 l 1.6 0.2 0.3 0.6 1 3.6

linda scheid d-46 5 12 4 0.6 9.3 16 3.5 3.9 32.9

david senjem r-29 10 11 4 4 0.3 4 1.8 1.7 1.3 9

rod skoe d-2 l 1 0.8 0.3 2.6 0.9 5.6

wesley skoglund d-62 25 8 4 4+ 2.1 3.3 7.8 6.3 3.8 22.7

yvonne solon d-7 5 12 4 2.4 1.4 1.7 1.1 1.8 8.2

dan sparks d-27 l 0.2 0.8 0.5 5.1 0.7 7

leroy stumpf d-1 5 12 4 1 0.8 0.3 2.6 0.9 5.6

david tomassoni d-5 l 1.1 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.9 3.3

Jim vickerman d-22 5 12 4 0.4 1.8 0.7 4 0.9 7.4

Betsy wergin r-16 -40 20 8– 8– 1.4 0.4 0.2 1.1 0.8 3.8

charles wiger d-55 l 0.5 3.1 2.5 2.7 2.4 10.7





references

1 Minnesota Minority Education Partnership, “2006 State of Students of Color,” 2006. This graduate rate is based on the number of students who complete high school in four years, starting from ninth to twelfth grade.

2 Rebecca Sohmer, “Mind the Gap,” Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program, 2005.

3 Minnesota Department of Health, “Minnesota Health Access Survey for 2001 and 2004,” 2006.

4 u.S. Department of Labor Statistics, “Employment Status of Civilian Noninstitutional Population by Race for Minnesota,” 2004.

5 Laura Smith, “Native American Trust Land Transfers in Minnesota,” Center for urban and Regional Affairs, university of Minnesota, Spring 2004.

6 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, “Emerging Markets Homeowner-ship Initiative,” 2004.

7 Institute on Race and Poverty and Council on Crime and Justice, “Min-nesota Statewide Racial Profiling Report: All Participating Jurisdictions, Report to Minnesota State Legislature,” September 2003.

8 Minnesota State Demographic Center, “2000 Census Shows a More Racially and Ethnically Diverse Minnesota,” 2001.

9 Minnesota State Demographic Center, “Minnesota Population Projec-tions by Race and Hispanic Origin, 2000–2030,” January 2005. This projection is an under-estimate, as people of color are already 13.7 percent of the population.

10 Minnesota Minority Education Partnership, “2006 State of Students of Color,” 2006.

11 Bob Sternberg, Star Tribune, September 14, 2006.

12 Minnesota Office of The Secretary of State, “Statewide Results for Gover-nor” 2002; Minnesota Office of The Secretary of State, “Statewide Results for u.S. Senator,” 2002.

13 Minnesota State Demographic Center, “Minnesota Selected Economic Characteristics,” 2005.


15 Minnesota Department of Education, “Minnesota School Readiness: year Two Study,” February 2004. For those not yet prepared for reading, nonwhite with 14 percent to white with 10 percent; for math, nonwhite with 14 percent to white with 9 percent.

16 National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2003; Jon Bascal, “No Excuses: Closing the Twin Cities’ Regional Gap in Learning,” American Experiment Quarterly, Spring 2004.


18 Rebecca Sohmer, “Mind the Gap,” Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program, 2005.

19 The Minneapolis Foundation, “All Kids Learn: A Minnesota Meeting Series on K–12 Education,” February 2004. The source for the state-wide estimate is the Minneapolis Department of Education.

20 Ibid.

21 Projection is based on number of families of color with children aged 0–5 that participate in the Child Care Assistance Program in Minnesota.

22 Minnesota State Legislature, “House Journal on HF 4162,” June 2, 2006.

23 National Governors Association Summit on Early Childhood Education, Gov. Pawlenty’s Remarks, July 13, 2006.

24 Committee on Early Childhood Pedagogy, National Research Council, 2001.

25 Thomas S. Dee, “Teachers, Race, and Student Achievement in a Ran-domized Experiment,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, February 2004. When taught by someone of their own race, students of color scored higher than their peers whose racial backgrounds are different from teachers.

26 Estimates are based on Minneapolis School District’s Racial Demograph-ics for 2001–2002 to 2005–2006. Estimate assumes that St. Paul and Duluth, the other first class cities, have similar teacher demographics.

27 Minnesota Immigrant Freedom Network and Hispanic Advocacy Center for Empowerment through Research, 2006.

28 Minnesota State Legislature, “Non-citizens Won’t Get Tuition, Bills in Limbo—New Laws 2005.”

29 Minnesota Department of Finance, “Fiscal Note for SF 358,” March 28, 2006. This total figure is based on documentation that students of color that are foreign-born make up 96 percent of total foreign-born student enrollment.

30 Minnesota Department of Education, “ELL Education Program Guide-lines for Funding,” October 2004.

31 This is the approximate annual tuition and fees for the 2006–2007 academic year at university of Minnesota.

32 Council on Crime and Justice, “Reducing Racial Disparity while Enhanc-ing Public Safety: Key Findings and Recommendations,” June 2006.

33 Criminal Justice Statistics Center, “Race and Ethnicity of Juveniles in Minnesota’s Justice System,” August 2001.

34 Council on Crime and Justice, “Reducing Racial Disparity while Enhanc-ing Public Safety,” June 2006.

35 Institute on Race and Poverty and Council on Crime and Justice, “Min-nesota Statewide Racial Profiling Report: All Participating Jurisdictions. Report to the Minnesota Legislature,” September 22, 2003.

36 Council on Crime and Justice, “Low Level Offenses in Minneapolis: A Study of What Happens to Arrests,” February 2004. Overall, the convic-tion rate was 20 percent; of this, less than five percent was for loitering and lurking.

37 Council on Crime and Justice, “Defining the Disparity, Taking a Closer Look,” 2002.

38 Minnesota Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee, “2006-2009 Minnesota Comprehensive Three-year Plan,” 2006.

39 Council on Crime and Justice, “The Collateral Effects of Incarceration on Fathers, Families and Community,” March 2006. Qualitative-based inter-views were conducted predominately with people of color; Call to Justice Conference, Testimony from Richard Amos, Minneapolis Community and Technical College, June 28, 2006.


40 Dr. Christopher uggen, “Draft Report on Felon Disenfranchisement in Minnesota,” university of Minnesota Department of Sociology, March 29, 2006.

41 According to Minnesota Department of Corrections, there were 55,000 felons as of 2003. 69 percent of these felons were non-incarcerated, either on probation or parole. That leaves 37,950. Assuming that 35 percent are people of color, this would mean that 13,282 would be eligible for employment at race track. Between 1990 and 2003, the felon population increased by 137 percent. The yearly figure assumes a continual increase based on historical figures.

42 State of Minnesota Journal of the House Eighty-Fourth Session, Chapter No. 197 HF 3464, May 11, 2006.

43 Dr. Christopher uggen, “Draft Report on Felon Disenfranchisement in Minnesota,” university of Minnesota Department of Sociology, March 29, 2006.

44 Estimate developed by Tom Johnson, Council on Crime and Justice, September 22, 2006.

45 Institute on Race and Poverty and Council on Crime and Justice, “Min-nesota Statewide Racial Profiling Report: All Participating Jurisdictions. Report to the Minnesota Legislature,” September 22, 2003.

46 Ibid.

47 According to Minnesota State Court Research Office, 3,571 convictions for the offense specified are applicable to this bill in 2004. The estimate assumes that of the 3,571, 80 percent are juveniles of color, 2,857; Minnesota Department of Finance, “Fiscal Note for SF 1232,” March 29, 2005; Minnesota Department of Finance, “Fiscal Note for HF3345: Deferred Prosecutions, Private Data, Increased Monetary Thresholds, Study of Collateral Consequences, Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission,” March 16, 2006.

48 Examples of fourth or fifth degree offenders are driving after revocation, driving after cancellation, no valid drivers license, loitering with intent (prostitution) and lurking with intent to commit a crime.

49 Criminal Justice Statistics Center of Minnesota Planning, “Race and Eth-nicity of Juveniles in Minnesota’s Justice System,” July 2001; Council on Crime and Justice, “Reducing Racial Disparity while Enhancing Public Safety: Key Findings and Recommendations,” June 2006.

50 u.S. Census Bureau, 2000. Estimates are for those between ages 18 - 64.

51 u.S. Census Bureau, “Income Profiles: Poverty Status of Families with Children under 18,” 2000.

52 Minnesota Coalition for the Homeless, “A Report on Homelessness in Minnesota,” 2005. Data is from Wilder Research, “Homeless in Min-nesota 2003.”

53 The Minneapolis Foundation, “Opportunity for All: Closing the Racial Disparities Gap in Minnesota,” 2006.

54 u.S. Census Bureau, “Income Profiles: Median Earnings by Race for Population 16 years and Over,” 2000.

55 victor Contreras, Jaime Duran, Kathryn Gilje, “Migrant Farmworkers in South-Central Minnesota: Farmworker-Led Research and Action for Change,” Center for urban and Regional Affairs Reporter, volume XX1, Number 1, February 2001.

56 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, “Emerging Markets Homeowner-ship Initiative,” 2004.

57 Beth Silver, “St. Paul Office Has Top Claims-Approval Rate,” St. Paul Pioneer Press, March 6, 2005.

58 Center for urban and Regional Affairs, “Migrant Farmworkers in South-Central Minnesota: Farmworker-Led Research and Action for Change,” February 2001. It is estimated that “each year between 20,000 to 35,000 migrant agricultural workers come to Minnesota to work in farm fields and food processing plants.” 91 percent of these workers are recruited and employed by crew leaders who normally handle payment procedures.

59 Minnesota State Legislature, “Minimum Wage Bill Passed,” in Jobs, Energy and Community Development Committee update, February 3, 2005.

60 Minnesota Department of Finance, “Fiscal Note for H2289: Minority veterans Outreach Program Established,” April 18, 2005. It was esti-mated that on a part time basis 335 veterans were served by the veterans Outreach Coordinator/Claims Representative. Around 58 percent of 335 were veterans of color.

61 u.S. Census Bureau, 2000. 26 percent of Black households earn less than $14,999, 27 percent for American Indians, 22 percent for Multi-racial people, 17 percent for Latinos, 16 percent for Asian-Pacific Islanders while only 11 percent for whites. One limitation of this estimate is that it uses households instead of workers who earn minimum-wage, but it does help to illustrate the racial proportions of minimum-wage earners.

62 Minnesota House of Representatives Press Information Services, New Laws Effective August 1, 2005, July 2005.

63 u.S. Census Bureau, 2000.

64 Minnesota House of Representatives House Research Department, “Minimum Wage,” September 2005.

65 Jobs Now Coalition, “The Cost of Living in Minnesota,” April 2006.

For a single parent with two children, one would need to make $35,454 in Greater Minnesota and $43,828 in the Metro Region, which is 215 percent of the poverty line.

66 unit projection developed by Tonja Orr, assistant commissioner, Min-nesota Housing Finance Agency, July 2006.

67 Housing Minnesota, “Legislative Priorities for the 2005 Session.” January 2005. There are an additional 16,000 people experiencing homelessness, beyond 4,000 long-term homeless that the governor has targeted with resources.

68 u.S. Census Bureau, “State of Minnesota Housing Profiles: vehicles Available,” 2000. 27 percent of Black households have no vehicle avail-able, 20 percent of Asian-Pacific Islander households, 17 percent of Multi-racial households, 15 percent of Latino households, and only six percent of white households. The statewide rate for all racial categories is 7.70 (2.3 percent for owner occupied households and 5.4 percent for households who rent). This is a conservative estimate because it does not account for the homeless population.

69 Minnesota State Legislature, House Journal, page 5039.


70 Minnesota Department of Health, “Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities Initiative Report to the Legislature,” January 2005. Minnesota State Demographic Center, “Nonwhite and Latino Populations in Min-nesota Continue to Grow Rapidly,” August 2006.

71 Minnesota Department of Health, “Minnesota Health Access Survey for 2001 and 2004,” 2006; Minnesota Department of Human Services, “Disparities and Barriers to utilization Among Minnesota Health Care Program Enrollees,” December 2003. People of color that were surveyed reported low percentages for having a doctor of the same racial/ethnic group than whites; Minnesota Department of Health, “Immigrant Health, A Call to Action: Recommendations from the Minnesota Im-migrant Health Task Force,” January 2005.

72 Minnesota Environmental Partnership, “Ninth Annual Minnesota Envi-ronmental Briefing Book,” 2005.

73 Erik Zabel and Susan Castellano, “Lead Poisoning in Minnesota Medicaid Children,” Minnesota Medical Association, volume 89, May 2006.

74 The Minneapolis Foundation, “Racial Disparities in Minnesota,” July 2006; Minnesota Department of Health, “Asthma in Minnesota,” September 2005.

75 u.S. Department of Labor, “A Profile of u.S. Farm Workers: Demograph-ics, Household Composition, Income and use of Services, May 2005. According to the survey, seven out of 10 farm workers were foreign-born. Of the foreign born workers, 94 percent of farm workers were born in Mexico; Margaret Reeves and Kristin Schafer, “Fields of Poison,” Pesticide Action Network North America, 2002.

76 D. villarejo and S.L. Baron, “The Occupational Health Status of Hired Farm Workers,” Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, 14, July - September 1999; National Center for Farmworker Health, “Occupational Safety,” 2004. The author uses national data because there is a lack of research on the exposure and impact of pesticides on Latino farmworkers in Minnesota.

77 Minnesota House of Representatives Public Information Services, Health Policy and Finance Committee Audio File for HF 3578, March 28, 2006.

78 Britt Robson, “Running Man,” City Pages, August 30, 2006.

79 In 2003, there were 61,000 children under six years of age who were tested for blood lead in Minnesota. To estimate the children of color that were tested, the figure of 57 percent was used because this is the composi-tion of the Minnesota Family Investment Program caseload. See Erik Zabel and Susan Castellano, “Lead Poisoning in Minnesota Medicaid Children,” Minnesota Medical Association, volume 89, May 2006; Min-nesota State Legislature House Research, “Characteristics of AFDC and MFIP Cases Have Changed Significantly,” December 2002.

80 Lydia Howell, “Survival Issue Lead the Poor, People of Color to ‘Enviro’ Activism,” Pulse of the Twin Cities, October 2005.

81 victor Contreras, Jaime Duran, Kathryn Gilje, “Migrant Farmworkers in South-Central Minnesota: Farmworker-Led Research and Action for Change,” Center for urban and Regional Affairs Reporter, volume XX1, Number 1, February 2001.

82 Minnesota Environmental Partnership, “Ninth Annual Minnesota Envi-ronmental Briefing Book,” 2005.

83 u.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 2005.

84 Minnesota Medical Association, “2005 Legislative Report,” 2005.

85 Applied Research Center, 2005.

86 HACER, “Driver License Safety and The Role of Minnesota’s Drivers’ License Policy,” March 2005.

87 Tom Laventure, “Minority Political Summit,” Asian American Press, October 2, 2006.

88 Minnesota Department of Human Services, “Welfare in Minnesota: Facts and Figures,” April 2006. 57 percent of the MFIP case load is people of color.

89 Minnesota Budget Project, “Fiscal year 2006–2007 Budget: Impact on Working Families and Individuals,” August 2005.

90 Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, “Reforming Welfare and Rewarding Work: Final Report on the Minnesota Family Investment Program, vol. 1: Effects on Adults,” 2000. The study was conducted over a three-year follow-up period. Minnesota findings provide support for hypothesis that housing assistance may promote labor market gains for welfare recipients.

91 u.S. Census Bureau, 2005.

92 Ibid.

93 Seth Freed Wessler, “Setback to State-level Protection for Immigrants,” Colorlines, September–October 2006.

94 Minnesota State Legislature House Research, “Indians, Indian Tribes, and State Government, January 2003.

95 Minnesota Department of Human Services, “Foster Care: Caring for Children in Out-of-Home Placement,” May 2006. This number is used to show how many children would be served by programs, not to suggest that the Task Force will provide direct service to these children.

96 Cecelia Martinez and Gabriel Strong, “Recognizing the Importance of Native Language: Funding Models for Native Language Revitaliza-tion,” Grotto Foundation, March 2005. American Indian Policy Center, “Introductory Data on American Indians,” 2000. Richard LaFortune, Na-tive Languages as World Languages: A vision for Assessing and Sharing Information About Native Languages Across Grant-making Sectors and Native Country, Grotto Foundation, 2004.

97 Dr. vine Deloria, “Rethinking Tribal Sovereignty,” Address at Sovereignty Forum, university of St. Thomas, May 26, 1995. vine Deloria died at age 72 on Sunday November 14, 2005.

98 Tom Robertson, “White Earth Members Seek Ban on Genetically Modi-fied Wild Rice,” Minnesota Public Radio, March 8, 2005. “Wild rice is a valuable and critical part of our state history and culture” said interviewee Winona LaDuke of White Earth Reservation.

99 Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, “Transportation Background,” Janu-ary 2006.

100 Minnesota Department of Administration, December 2005.

101 Minnesota Department of Administration, “The Impact of Illegal Im-migration on Minnesota,” January 2005.

102 Minnesota House Legislative and Congressional Maps, “2002 Minnesota House Districts,” February 2006. These are House legislative districts that have the largest percent change in people of color from 2000 to 2005.

principal researcher jerm�ine toney, le�d rese�rcher

advisOry cOMMittee

el�ine s�lin�s, jesus torres, ch� lee, M�urice nins, d�vid nicholson, jennifer godinez, juli� gr�nth�m.

special thanKs

dr. rose Brewer, university of Minnesot�; dr. Bruce corrie, concordi� university; ceceli� M�rtinez, grotto Found�tion.

research and editOrial assistance

g�ry delg�do, Men�chem Kr�jcer, t�mmy johnson �nd rinku sen, applied rese�rch center; Beth newkirk, s�l Mir�nd�, gwyneth Olson, veronic� avil�, d�n W�lsh �nd the Bo�rd of Org�nizing apprenticeship project; n�ncy johnson, gre�ter Minne�polis d�y c�re associ�tion; susie Brown, F�mily �nd children services; joe n�th�n, center for school ch�nge, university of Minnesot�; cheryl Wilson �nd jodi nelson, Metropolit�n interf�ith council on afford��le housing; de�or�h schlick, affirm�-tive Options; ned Moore, steven renderos �nd rodrigo s�nchez-ch�v�rri�, all p�rks alli�nce for ch�nge; unny n�m�udirip�d, M�ur� Brown �nd jo h��erm�n, alli�nce for Metropolit�n st��ility; vic rosenth�l �nd alyse erm�n, jewish community action; h�shi a�di, som�li action alli�nce; c�ty royce, community st��iliz�-tion project; Beth Kodlu�oy, home line; jo�n pe�rson; r�chel c�ll�n�n, Minnesot� co�lition for the homeless; jim erkel, Minnesot� center for environment�l advoc�cy; Bernie hesse, uFcW lOcal 789; Winon� l�duke, White e�rth reserv�tion; Bill english, co�lition of Bl�ck churches/afric�n americ�n le�dership summit; j�cqueline Belzer �nd dor�n schr�ntz, isaiah; rosit� B�lch, resource center of the americ�s; t�mik� ro�inson, pioneers for positive ch�nge; nicole ly; josephine c�stle, afric�n americ�n action committee; Bill Wilson, higher ground ac�demy; Minnesot� Welf�re rights committee; M�ri�no espinoz� �nd alondr� espejel, Minnesot� immigr�nt Freedom network.

cO-releasers

americ�n civil li�erties union of Minnesot�americ�n indi�n policy centercenter for southe�st asi�n rese�rch

�nd educ�tioncouncil on crime �nd justicehisp�nic advoc�cy �nd community

empowerment through rese�rch

Funders

the Minnesot� r�ci�l equity report c�rd on the st�te legisl�ture w�s m�de possi�le �y funding support from:

the Minnesot� dreaM Fund of the Minne�polis Found�tion

and the following supporters of the Org�nizing apprenticeship project �nd its r�ci�l justice org�-nizing initi�tive, of which this project is � p�rt:

the Otto Bremer Found�tion the st. p�ul Found�tion the st. p�ul comp�nies the he�dw�ters Found�tion for justice the j�y �nd rose phillips F�mily Found�tion the Minne�polis Found�tionFirst univers�list church, Minne�polis. the McKnight Found�tion the archi��ld Bush Found�tion the unit�ri�n univers�list ve�tch

progr�m �t shelter rockthe Friends of the Org�nizing

apprenticeship project

art directOr

Mónic� hernández, applied rese�rch center

the form�t for this report w�s inspired �y the drum M�jor institute’s score c�rd on the middle cl�ss.

layOut

holly h. coughlin, tri�ngle p�rk cre�tive

cOpy editOr

sid Korpi, proof positive

2525 e. Franklin ave., suite 301minneapolis, mn 55406p: (612) 746-4224F: (612) 746-4227

www.oaproject.org


minnesota legislative report card - race forward...(1) to function as an annual tool for holding...

Documents