Again we must caution our state’s lawmakers that amending our state’s constitution ought to be done sparingly and with care.
We urge lawmakers to reject a bill that calls for voters in November to decide whether Minnesota’s Constitution should be amended to make membership voluntary in both private and public unions.
Now, membership is not compulsory but non-union employees in most unionized shops are required to pay a “fair share” fee of up to 85 percent of normal dues.
Regardless of your views about the “right-to-work” bill, this issue has no place in our Constitution. Instead, it should be decided by the people who are impacted by these rules.
Again, some of our lawmakers are attempting to enact laws through referendum rather than through the legislative process. In doing business that way, the issues avoid the risk of a veto by Gov. Mark Dayton, known as a strong supporter of unions.
A number of issues may come to voters in November to keep Dayton’s veto pen from action. Using the amendment process to legislate is simply bypassing a tried and true method that Minnesotans should be able to trust to enact laws. Our government is designed to allow the legislative branch to work in collaboration with the executive branch. And the people in each of the branches are elected by their constituents to reflect their views. And while that collaboration between branches hasn’t been seen frequently in recent years, bypassing that structure isn’t always wise.
Regardless of which party is pushing a particular issue, legislating through amendments to the Constitution is risky, as the philosophies of residents and the environment in which we live can change dramatically in just a few years.
A state’s constitution serves as the framework for its government, and amendments should strengthen that structure. But adding issues popular at a single moment in time could instead weaken the value of the constitution.
