Issue Position: Constitutional Amendments

Issue Position

Amendments should be reserved for essential constitutional issues. They should be rarely put to the voters. There are valid reasons to put constitutional amendments on the ballot: (1) to expand the freedoms of Minnesotans, not limit those freedoms; (2) to further protect and advance the long term interests and resources of Minnesota. The recently passed Legacy Amendment helps to advance our interests and protect our resources. However, John opposes constitutional amendments as a means to impose ideology that limits our freedom. The current crop of Republican sponsored amendments attempt to limit our freedoms. They want to reverse Minnesota's constitutional amendment history of expanding voter rights. The Republican sponsored voter ID amendment, if it passes, will disenfranchise thousands of legitimate Minnesotans. The proposed marriage amendment is a Republican attempt to limit civil rights. To constitutionally limit civil rights through an amendment is unprecedented and wrong. The amendment proposal passed last year and those to be heard this session have no merit. John opposes them.

Source