Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Gearins opinion and the action of our leadership. As mentioned above we can re-file with the Minnesota Supreme Court as well as appeal Judge Gearins ruling. All of this could be avoided if the governor would simply perform his constitutionally required duty; that is, call a special session so we can avoid a government shutdown. So why did we file these petitions with the two courts? First and foremost we took an oath to support and uphold the constitution. It is our belief Governor Dayton and the attorney generals intended actions will violate Minnesotas Constitution. Filing the petitions not only begins the process of stopping their actions but it also gives us a place the table. In general we contend the executive branch is violating the separation of powers provisions, specifically Articles 3, 4 and 11, section 1 of the Minnesota constitution. In addition, he is failing to act and making requests without any basis in law: 1. Budget appropriations Articles 3, 4 and 11 sections 1 clearly define the roles of the three branches of government. Only the legislative branch has the authority to appropriate funds to be paid out of the treasury. Governor Dayton and the attorney general are attempting to bypass the legislature by requesting the courts to determine core functions and then order the office of Minnesota Management and Budget to make payments from the treasury. 2. Mediator The governor has requested the court to appoint a mediator. This is unprecedented and has no legal basis. The authority and constitutional duty to negotiate with the legislature belongs solely to the governor. 3. Special Session By failing to call a special session to avert a government shutdown, the governor is failing to act on his constitutionally prescribed duty. This also effectively shuts the legislature out of the budget process. The governor has effectively created a constitutional crisis. He has failed to negotiate in good faith and attempted to obstruct the legislative process. When we presented the governor with a balanced budget he waited until session was complete before vetoing the bill. As a result the legislature was not able to bring the bill to the floor for revision and further debate. He continues to avoid negotiations and instead attempts to have the court appoint a mediator. Now he refuses to call a special session and has begun working on unilaterally funding government operations. With the governors approach, there is no need for a legislature. Governor Dayton is attempting to usurp legislative prerogative to appropriate funds. By his actions he hopes to avoid legislative difficulties and disrupt the protective checks and balances of our state constitution.
If you have any questions or comments about these cases, or any other issue, please feel free to contact me any time. Sincerely, Roger