Senator Olafson Legislative Report
2-23-09
We have reached the halfway point in the legislative session, which is called crossover. Every Legislator I talk to agrees that it has been an extremely busy session, and we have all had a real challenge on our hands to respond to emails and phone calls from constituents. We simply don’t have time to respond if the message comes from a person who is not a constituent. If you have emailed or called and haven’t received a response from me or other Legislators, please know that we are doing our best to respond to as many as we can. If you write or call and suggest a certain vote on a certain bill, we certainly take note of your message even if you don’t receive an answer.
A group of us from the Senate were having supper together recently and even the longest-serving Senators agreed that this session is unlike any they have ever seen in terms of the workload. The Dean of the Senate, Senator David Nething of Jamestown has been in the Senate since 1966, and he offered his take on why it is such a busy session, and his explanation makes perfect sense. During this session, we are dealing with an unprecedented budget surplus. That has prompted most everyone, me included, to introduce bills which would have a fiscal impact, either by reducing tax revenues as a result of a tax reduction, or bills that would increase spending. The most significant fiscal impact bill I introduced would have been the bill which would end the practice of taxing vehicle incentives and discounts, and that bill has passed the Senate and is headed for the House. Any time a bill has a significant fiscal impact; it must be first heard in the policy committee. After the policy committee has acted on the bill, it comes to the Senate floor, and if approved, is then re-referred to Appropriations, where the bill is heard and acted on again. Then it comes back to the Senate floor for a final vote, and if approved, is then sent to the House to go through the same process. All of this takes time and effort and preparation for the bill sponsors, for the committees that hear the bills, and on the floor itself. We worked several evening sessions before crossover just to get all the bills through the floor sessions.
During this session, all of the bills on which I am prime sponsor have passed the Senate with the exception of one, which was the bill that would have prohibited the feeding of big game and hunting big game with the aid of bait. If you have read my previous columns, you know that the main concern with these activities is the risk of disease transfer. Other concerns are fair and equitable access to our wildlife resources and the fact that a disease outbreak is very costly for all taxpayers. The latest figures from Minnesota show that $75 million has been spent there in response to the outbreak and Michigan is now over $250 million and is spending $25 million per year with no end in sight. The bill was supported by the North Dakota Game and Fish Department, the North Dakota State Veterinarian, the North Dakota Board of Animal Health, the North Dakota Veterinary Medical Association, the North Dakota Stockmen’s Association, the North Dakota Chapter of the Wildlife Society, the North Dakota Wildlife Federation, the North Dakota chapter of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, the North Dakota Farmer’s Union, and the North Dakota Weed Control Association. During the hearing on the bill, the committee heard over an hour of science-based testimony which came from work done by the country’s preeminent experts on the issues of animal health and wildlife behavior. All of the science and all of the expert opinions have reached the same conclusion, which is that feeding big game and hunting with the aid of bait significantly increases the risk of disease transfer and threatens the domestic livestock industry, our wildlife resources and our taxpayers. The opponents to the bill presented no scientific evidence or expert opinion to support their position. It was clear during the hearing that the supporters of the bill were concerned about the greater public good and the opponents were only concerned about their own self-interests. The committee voted for a Do Not Pass recommendation on a vote of 4-3 and the bill failed on the Senate floor after a heated debate on a vote of 19 to 27. If 5 Senators had changed their vote, the bill would have passed. It was very disappointing to me to see that science and reason and expert opinions were trumped by emotion and self-interests.
The opponents to the bill believe that they have prevailed over their adversaries, but they should recognize that their adversaries are not me or other supporters of the bill. Their adversaries are science and the disease threat posed by the activities which the bill sought to prohibit. The science and the disease threat are not going to go away, nor are they going to be intimidated by political pressure. The science and the disease threat will be here as long as domestic animals and wildlife try to co-exist on our planet. Sadly, it appears that the only thing that will convince people of what needs to be done is a major disease outbreak. It is also unfortunate that we have the experience of other states to learn from, but we are ignoring the lessons and the warnings. In closing, a Winston Churchill quote that aptly describes the issue: “Want of foresight, unwillingness to act, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel; these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.”
2-23-09
We have reached the halfway point in the legislative session, which is called crossover. Every Legislator I talk to agrees that it has been an extremely busy session, and we have all had a real challenge on our hands to respond to emails and phone calls from constituents. We simply don’t have time to respond if the message comes from a person who is not a constituent. If you have emailed or called and haven’t received a response from me or other Legislators, please know that we are doing our best to respond to as many as we can. If you write or call and suggest a certain vote on a certain bill, we certainly take note of your message even if you don’t receive an answer.
A group of us from the Senate were having supper together recently and even the longest-serving Senators agreed that this session is unlike any they have ever seen in terms of the workload. The Dean of the Senate, Senator David Nething of Jamestown has been in the Senate since 1966, and he offered his take on why it is such a busy session, and his explanation makes perfect sense. During this session, we are dealing with an unprecedented budget surplus. That has prompted most everyone, me included, to introduce bills which would have a fiscal impact, either by reducing tax revenues as a result of a tax reduction, or bills that would increase spending. The most significant fiscal impact bill I introduced would have been the bill which would end the practice of taxing vehicle incentives and discounts, and that bill has passed the Senate and is headed for the House. Any time a bill has a significant fiscal impact; it must be first heard in the policy committee. After the policy committee has acted on the bill, it comes to the Senate floor, and if approved, is then re-referred to Appropriations, where the bill is heard and acted on again. Then it comes back to the Senate floor for a final vote, and if approved, is then sent to the House to go through the same process. All of this takes time and effort and preparation for the bill sponsors, for the committees that hear the bills, and on the floor itself. We worked several evening sessions before crossover just to get all the bills through the floor sessions.
During this session, all of the bills on which I am prime sponsor have passed the Senate with the exception of one, which was the bill that would have prohibited the feeding of big game and hunting big game with the aid of bait. If you have read my previous columns, you know that the main concern with these activities is the risk of disease transfer. Other concerns are fair and equitable access to our wildlife resources and the fact that a disease outbreak is very costly for all taxpayers. The latest figures from Minnesota show that $75 million has been spent there in response to the outbreak and Michigan is now over $250 million and is spending $25 million per year with no end in sight. The bill was supported by the North Dakota Game and Fish Department, the North Dakota State Veterinarian, the North Dakota Board of Animal Health, the North Dakota Veterinary Medical Association, the North Dakota Stockmen’s Association, the North Dakota Chapter of the Wildlife Society, the North Dakota Wildlife Federation, the North Dakota chapter of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, the North Dakota Farmer’s Union, and the North Dakota Weed Control Association. During the hearing on the bill, the committee heard over an hour of science-based testimony which came from work done by the country’s preeminent experts on the issues of animal health and wildlife behavior. All of the science and all of the expert opinions have reached the same conclusion, which is that feeding big game and hunting with the aid of bait significantly increases the risk of disease transfer and threatens the domestic livestock industry, our wildlife resources and our taxpayers. The opponents to the bill presented no scientific evidence or expert opinion to support their position. It was clear during the hearing that the supporters of the bill were concerned about the greater public good and the opponents were only concerned about their own self-interests. The committee voted for a Do Not Pass recommendation on a vote of 4-3 and the bill failed on the Senate floor after a heated debate on a vote of 19 to 27. If 5 Senators had changed their vote, the bill would have passed. It was very disappointing to me to see that science and reason and expert opinions were trumped by emotion and self-interests.
The opponents to the bill believe that they have prevailed over their adversaries, but they should recognize that their adversaries are not me or other supporters of the bill. Their adversaries are science and the disease threat posed by the activities which the bill sought to prohibit. The science and the disease threat are not going to go away, nor are they going to be intimidated by political pressure. The science and the disease threat will be here as long as domestic animals and wildlife try to co-exist on our planet. Sadly, it appears that the only thing that will convince people of what needs to be done is a major disease outbreak. It is also unfortunate that we have the experience of other states to learn from, but we are ignoring the lessons and the warnings. In closing, a Winston Churchill quote that aptly describes the issue: “Want of foresight, unwillingness to act, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel; these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.”
