You got a lot of idle programs out there and if you don't think they're vital you just go around to the various Hospital Systems you around to your county boards you go around your city governments, you find out how necessary we are to provide them with money. It just as firmly as I believe that we should provide those various agencies and various local governmental units it money. I believe that we should mandate the Department of Finance. In the various agencies responsible for providing us with these errors. To reevaluate the state cash flow problems and come up with a plan and I'm saying if they perhaps him do it alone. I I know that there's various legislators here who have various ideas that we should help them and I think that we should help him but I think that we should mandate them and also help provide them with a Cooperative method to try and get us out of this dilemma. It was a businessman in and also a small businessman which I consider myself as a farmer. I I know that sometimes Broening is necessary, especially during a time of a crisis. Wrap during a time when the projections are bad. perhaps around both of those and I want to say that I for one elected official you want to make Minnesota look any worse than it presently does. I for one individual to want to make my constituents think I'm up here trying to create a problem. But trying to prevent problem is dead from becoming worse. So, mr. President and members this body of your sickening Senator. Sikorski's motion towards the passage of at least a one-year borrowing Authority. And I think that all of you should address the fact that is necessary. It's important that each of you is the elected official with a lot of responsibility on your back that we should go along with the problems. We have and help prevent the crisis from becoming any worse. That was Senator Clarence / first from Faribault back if the motion to reconsider prevails at what stage will it be in the reason I'm asking mr. President, and I was just wondering if you were allowed to offer the amendment. Senator Robert Ash baxi Republican leader asking a procedural question. Passage of the bill again by custom when a motion to reconsider is made it's generally considered acceptable to offer amendments. So we done that. But generally surprised that I would just be sure to send her ass back that the any Amendment e or others want to offer would certainly be in order and that was Majority Leader Rodger Mall. Wash out the third reading and put the bill back to his to post second reading the status. Brother discussion all those in favor of the motion incapable saying I said it from Ramsey Senators Republican senator, Ron Cielo from Saint Paul. But you see life monster man house phone number one as follows on page 7 after line 26 insert section 7 reduction of Appropriations notwithstanding any other law to the contrary any and all the preparations and any line items there are from the general fund shell in addition to any other reductions limitations cancellations or abatements required for authorized by law be reduced by 2% thereof with respect to amount suspended or to be expended from and after January one 1982. This does not apply to repayments or payments to any sinking fund for buns certificate of indebtedness and other contractual obligations nor shall not apply. In any case it would cause any violation of federal law or impairment of obligation of contract by or with the state of Minnesota. Remember the sections and it was Secretary of the Senate Pat Fleming senator. Mr. President this is a simple amendment. I guess I call it to 2% Amendment. It's not my low-fat Amendment. And we spent the good part of yesterday's session agreeing on the floor that we have a real problem. I think that the general consensus on the floor was number one that we in fact that a budget that did not balance. I think we all agreed that there were four solutions to the problem one was to borrow the money another was to raise taxes and otherwise to create some more shifts in the last one would be to reduce some spending. Well, this is the alternative that I feel is the best way to go and that's to reduce spending. This particular bill is an amendment or this amendment is an amendment to the bill as amended by the Mormon. The reductions would not occur until after the first of this year of next year that is to take care of some of the problems at the cities that are on calendar year basis would be experiencing if the reductions occur before that time the total amount of money saved according to calculations by our staff would be 128 million. Therefore we would not be solving the entire problem, but we would be making a step in the right direction. The reason why I proposed amendment now, is this is that We cannot at any point that we wish to make a change in the direction of government, whether it beat increase taxes or decrease spending, we always have those few months, right and immediately in front of us where the argument is always going to be made. Well the cities and the various beneficiaries of the states AIDS and largest would not be able to adjust in time. So what we're saying here as we're going to act today to be effective in January one of 1982 so that everyone is placed on notice. I think the bottom line in the state of Minnesota is this is that we're simply running out of money. Number two, we can't rely on the revenue projections that have been distributed to us in the past year and number three. I think most of us have the intuitive judgment that the revenue flow that'll be coming into the state of Minnesota. Go. In fact be less than what is projective and some action must be taken. It must be taken. Now. This is a mere token. I believe of what must be done in the future. It will relieve the problems on the legislature next year when perhaps a more serious action has to be taken with respect to the across-the-board cuts. Obviously next year if there's some particular hardship and some check particular program this legislature can meet and can reallocate some funds but bypassing this in the lot today to get it on the books. Everyone is on notice that there's going to be some reductions coming in the next year. Senator Ron seal off a republican from Saint Paul arguing on behalf of a 2% across-the-board spending cut with some exceptions is the senator in any other District in the state of Minnesota. We have three state institutions. We've got the cup of schools of Higher Learning and so on and I know that contract negotiations now A Center for sale offer in the mist of bickering and Bargreen bartering and so on. What would you envision may happen if we pass your Amendment and how do you envision the contracts that are presently being a negotiated would be affected by this type of commitment at this time? Surfer Manatee Center, first of all, I understand that the amount that has been set aside by the administration for salary improvements and benefit improvements for Lowe's employees is going to be insufficient in any event. So that's number one number two, I would see that it would have no great impact on the negotiations. I think that that the parties are going to be making their demands and request based on what they feel. They're realistic needs are and the realistic capacity the state to pay for them are as I said, this bill does not address all the Myriad problems with state government. It's a basic policy Direction in your particular case, if the merits of your case or such that this would mean that we would have to make some kinds of exceptions when we come back in January. You know, I'm not going it. I think that's a job in the finance committee. And I I've always admired the finance committee because of all the hours that they Put into these These are really tough decisions. This is an overall decision that we're going to reduce government spending my 2% We're going to start next year. It is merely to place all the parties. I know but that 2% is going to be coming. They can come back in January and argue their cases and perhaps when but we have to do something the alternative to 2%. The alternative to cutting back on spending is to raise taxes. Now if you want to do that, go ahead the other alternatives to ship. I heard I don't know how many comments negative comments. I heard in this body yesterday about ships. I mean, I know it's a five-letter word, but everyone talks about it. Like it's a four-letter word. So we got to do something. This is my solution to the problem. Not a perfect solution, but a solution it'll provide some direction and government next year by mr. President. As well as we heard her right from Rice going to point out to Center c-loc. The chips is a six-letter word. Mr. President and Senate receive a sad and evidently he has some insight where he has said that the present monies are insufficient to meet the contracts that are presently being negotiated. I would get to this body that if they're already insufficient that this is this will resent to a problem which is going to be more monstrous than most of us would imagine, you know, I usually think that that you get what you pay for and I've said that many times and I like to think that if we went good state employees good public employees, you got to be willing to give them a good pay scale for their work and I don't think this the time and we want to cut back some of our commitments and I've got to agree that the contracts aren't made but in the event that they do negotiate the contracts are made. I certainly 412 want to come back urine and January and Renee got a contract that we is as legislators and state of Minnesota made for employees. Die I realized I sent it to see Lobster proposal has merits I wished it that perhaps would have been done during a regular session but I don't think now is the time to start pulling with and tinkering with the obligation. We have to our many employees. resident mr. President term and this is Senator mole one particular Factor 2. get our way to get our way out to find her way out of but I don't think that it's it's the kind of thing you can do in a very short. Of time and I in the form of an amendment that it cuts 2% across the board of an across-the-board patches never a fair way of cutting budgets. There are perhaps some areas Med budgets that can. But cannot survive more than 2% And then again, there are some that probably in order to run the proper program need even more than the Appropriations that were made. So I don't think that's a reasonable way to do it. I think you could take a look at some of the school districts which would be impacted by this. They have already negotiated out contracts that have settled. And that is in effect cut their budgets for a close. This is not going to be a particularly favorable up. Amendment that they would look upon also. I think we're going to experience at that time starting next January of 82. We will then begin to feel the full impacts of federal budget cuts in this state and adding a 2% State caught on that. I think would have wood would be particularly harmful. So I would ask you to a turn down the amendment and to do it in a bit more rational manner with more time. And that's the reason for the study in the house file one. We got six to eight months to make a to keep pressure on all of us here to keep pressure on the Department of Finance to come up with a plan that would reduce that overall bonding Authority. So I would ask a no vote on the seal off Amendment. Listen to live to be from the floor of the Minnesota Senate Senator, Sikorski Gerald Sikorski from Stillwater. It's all called quote solution unquote. Is that a solution? It's a pontificating statement that we're going to cut 2% And then we're going to turn it over to the finance committee and let those people with all the admiration in the world but no assistants make the make the 2% cut. Let me tell you what happened with the 1% cut across the board in the the health welfare and Corrections budget, which we already approved in welfare. They're talking about eliminating the RSVP program. They're talking about the cutting several million dollars in county aids for the administration welfare program. I've already received inquiries from both sides of the aisle in this body as to the appropriateness of those cuts in concern about the impact and their local counties and and they're in the senior citizens in the RSVP programs. Maybe many of you got the letters thanking you for saving RSVP program that now the department the governor's office or talking about cutting because of that 1% cut, so don't talk about this is being a solution. This is no solution. This is a very easy statement that doesn't approach a resolution of the problem or sensitively respond to the overspending that occurs in our state budget or to the need to raise tax revenues. That's part of entire approach an entire real solution to this problem. The Minnesota Senate is debating a bill that would increase the state short-term borrowing Authority for 1 year that bill was voted down yesterday afternoon on the Senate has no voter to reconsider the measure and at this moment is it is discussing a proposed amendment by GOP Senator Ron sealock from Saint Paul to cut Appropriations across-the-board by 2% after January of next year. This is the chairman of the Senate finance committee. Of the total budget there wouldn't be any way to really identify the impact of that 600 million and where it would end where it would impact the most severe or the least. I am not sure that with some in-depth study and spend some time on the issues that some reductions in spending in some areas can be accomplished but to just indicate through as Senator sieloff indicates a simple short amendment of approaching this so complex issue in this manner would really be satisfactory. I indicated yesterday on the Florida Senate that I really thought that this total issue required some time and should be in the legislative process in the hearing so that the research can be accomplished and then you hear the criticisms of cost of the legislature and I indicated that the 100 million dollar borrowing that the governor did last time for 8 months of that. The cost of the taxpayers was 5600000 dollars. So a couple of days or a week in a committee is is like a spit in the ocean compared to to that in and cost and that's why my remarks yesterday. Really the thrust of that was that this total issue. I have to be in the legislative process. So where we can have a open and throw discussions and research on the Arnot. I think it would be totally inappropriate to adopt 2 off hand without being able to look at all the working papers the ramifications of every specific item of this satu percent reduction in the area. I think would we also be inappropriate I think this has to be accomplished if accomplished would have to be accomplished after a thorough legislative hearings are research and discussion. senator from Ramsey Center Selah Miss presents, you know why I was fully aware of the fact that making a proposal such as this would cast me adrift in a sea of complexity and there would be every objection in the world made to this bill except the real one. And that is that this legislature has failed to grasp the reality that we that we are in a particular phase of our economy where we're having declining revenues and increased to manzanar cost. The result of that is this special session where we're being asked to approve a half a billion dollars. Close to a half a billion dollars in short-term borrowing Authority. I happen to believe there's a principal there. I don't believe in that. I think that we ought to balance the budget not only in letter of the Constitution but also in spirit that that's been the history of our state that's what the people of this state expect the people to State expect a government that works and they're not getting a government that works. We're here today to consider borrowing money. That is one of the alternative solutions to the problem that we have more obligations and we have income. With respect to what Senator Sikorsky said on. Italy some of the things that he said is true and on. Early what the senator will it said is true that there are some areas which cannot sustain Cuts as much as others. But unless we bite the bullet unless we make a decision that we're going to do something about it. We're going to come back here in January and be totally unable to cope with the problem again, because the same people the same units are government are going to be saying when you can't just spring this on us, you just can't do this to us. All of a sudden. All I'm asking is that we put ourselves in record right now. This is what we're going to do and when we get back next year if there are particular needs for particular entities, we can reshuffle these monies from one to the other depending on the knee and we can Shuffle it in such a way to keep the overall budget 2% lower than what we originally passed. I think that this is a statement of policy. This is a statement of policy by the legislature that we want to balance the budget and that we want to do it within the means possible. And if this is a start and it's the right direction brother discussion at sooner from Dakota Southern Wrangler Mr. President I would like to rise in support of sandersi lost Amendment and I think it's important that we discuss a little bit of this. You know yesterday. We were hearing a lot of discussion about to some of the questions were raised by all of the problems that have been created and I think this solution although is center city offices. It's not a perfect solution very few around the legislature are these days but this is a change a change in government that is better than borrowing and I think as soon as he often said there is a principle involved in here. Now if we want government to remain the in the policies we want to tell the people that we're going to have business as usual and we're going to maintain two policies is the same as government spending it we have had. Without making this adjustment now. I think that's the kind of question. We're about a tentative Gathering a while back and one of the discussions here at that meeting was a long speech on government tax reductions in those kinds of things in somebody at that speech made the quote and I hope he forgives me for using it but he says, you know, some of the people feel it's lucky. We're not getting all the government were paying for I think it's that kind of attitude that people have is that they feel that they're not getting the kind of government they want and they're paying too much for what they get and to ask that a 2% reduction and say that that is not possible in most places. I don't think Rings true with what the people out there would believe. There aren't a lot of easy solutions these days because there's not a lot of easy money to come by. But I just want to make one little point that seems to be overlooked here a lot. And that is this year in this biennium. We are going to spend 1.2 billion dollars more than we spent the last biennium. 1.2 billion dollars more now some place somewhere somebody in that bunch of got more than they got the last time. and if there is not some room to make some 2% reductions here, how can you say that there's all this money this new money additional money for what we spent last time is going out and it we've had such tremendous reductions in the total amount of money we spend You know around home. I guess I was always raised that on certain occasions for special special conditions. You do have to go out and make some but most of the time my folks came up to the years of the depression and those things to do when you don't have the money you don't spend it. And I think that's always affected me and my lifestyle is I know it's affected my parents. No. Granted some of this slight adjustment is going to cause some people some problems. I think it's time. We start thinking about these problems because the only way we're going to ever get through what is coming in? The next few years is to think about serious positive ways of solving these problems. They're not all going to be perfect and they're not all going to be without hurting someone. Because we all get hurt to a certain extent when we work with people and we all can't have everything we want whether it's in the home the family or any of us. Problems are not that easy to solve for us and they're not going to be solved by just starting it for a while and expecting to find a miraculous cure the Cure I think in the area that we have to work with. We're pretty well Outline by sender sielaff. There aren't that many easy choices. If we're not willing to make adjustments now, when are we going to be willing to make them? Who is up first? I can't remember. Turn from St. Louis. Are you in was up earlier so I can say Euler? 100 years ago and 100 days ago. We find that cuts in state budgets and governmental budgets can only reasonably be made in substantial quantity is when it's done across the board. Legislators across the country in the Congress have been Paralyzed by segmenting their budgets and trying to deal with the various segments in the interest that follow those segments individually. It's been an impossible task for state government to provide any reduction and that's why even though someone might acknowledge the argument of the senator from Washington County that it would be better to selectively reduce the budget that this body and all governmental bodies have found that impossible. And even in the Congress where I'm Miracle of Miracles, we finally see a budget reduction. It isn't on a selective basis. It's on across-the-board basis like the senator from Ramsey proposes. Nespresso, we find that the dfl what purpose does the USA from Washington Road St. Louis with a question on the point. He just made it to the accuracy of his point was regards to the federal budget across so-called across-the-board Cuts. Will you used to present all yelled at the end of my remarks in a bottle of the floor? Thank you. Mr. President. Mr. President the dfl all since the legislature ended and during the session has been complaining about the very budget that they passed they've been complaining that is going to shift unnecessary burdens into the next biennium. Where was your alternative? There was no alternative the dfl budget never did appear that the only alternative budget was by the urban Coalition and now we look at some Alternatives in spending cuts. And what we have is the independent Republicans putting forth an idea. I thought immodest 1/2 modest and what's the dfl alternative nothing? Study maybe action. No, let me read you from chapter 2 of the special session laws the first special session of 1981 section 12 a bill for which all those who have righteously spoken voted for. Budget review continued the policy of the 72 legislature shall be to continue to review the 8283 state budget during the interim between the 81 and 82 sessions in order to find COS savings to further reduce expenditures in the biennial budget. Independent Republicans have started that review we have started making our proposals. Where is the dfl review? Did you just blindly vote for the policy use you established or did you just do it for political purposes and I would suggest when we return here January 12th of 1980 to the dfl will not have fulfilled the commitment of chapter 2 section 12 that they will ignore their responsibilities that they set forth in public that they will ignore this alternative without providing other Alternatives in the legislature will go forward with business as dismal as usual as it's been. Deserve from Washington Center either specific or general terms the across-the-board cuts that were made in the defense department budget by the federal Congress. There you go. I miss your presence and Rec to sikorski's. I understand the budget that the national budget there were there was one major area that received increased expenditures. And the rest of the budget would sure was discretionary expenditures received would best be characterized as an across-the-board approach. Although one could find examples to to prove that rule book. Mr. President. I'd like to thank the the senator but he did qualify statement with is he understands the budget and notwithstanding his his his background as a graduate of the Wharton School of Finance or business or Commerce. Whatever the the ending is, the it doesn't understand the federal budget in or the state budget inciting history of 100 days ago the across-the-board Cuts that the governor proposed and we accepted in the budgeting process that we proposed and passed out of this body and out of the legislature in the 1% and health well for Corrections, when they're when they come home to roost are not across-the-board the commissioners of the various departments have the authority to translate those across-the-board cuts. However, they want and they tend to specialize them in certain areas. But for whatever reason the same thing is on it happening on the federal level. There was no across-the-board cut in the federal level. It may sound fine and it may help you make the glib and easy solutions quote-unquote that we talked about here today and I stand and talk or give another political speech, but the fact is your citation of a of a federal example is just in contradiction to the proposal that you're seeking to. Gain support for there was an across-the-board in the Federal nasm in across-the-board in the state. And even if this is adopted the responsibility shifts from the tax committee that you happen to sit on down to the finance committee that some of the other people here sit on and then those those cuts have to be made and if you want to make the speeches and make the boats here you come on down to the subcommittee and full committee meeting with there is a 50 some million-dollar cut that has to be made in the medical assistance and Income Maintenance programs before July 1st of next year the governor the Department of Welfare in the citizens committee that was appointed to come up with those of the solution to that 50 million-dollar cut hasn't thus far been able to even begin to talk about $1 that 50 million dollars and I welcome you to come and share with us how that 50 million dollars and all the other 30 million that this 2% This is going to be accomplished in that in that budget, but it's not going to be across the board. Tara from Hennepin Center Bergen Bergen from Minneapolis Senator Mull's Amendment criticized because it didn't borrow money for long enough. Of time and it didn't borrow enough money and today it's been criticized because it's going Too far and not making great enough commitment to solve the problem. I guess I voted for the bill yesterday because I saw it as a commitment to begin working to solve this problem of borrowing money to meet ongoing operational expenses. And I believe that we will be looking at a number of ways of doing them. One of them being more reductions in expenditures. Another being the suggestion that Senator will it has made that we look at rescheduling some of our payments. But I don't think passing this amendment now. He's a responsible way of dealing with the problem. It is an easy way. It says we don't have to carefully look at the budget. We don't have to make the decisions ourselves. We can more or less turn that responsibility over to the Department's I don't think that's what are constituents send us here to do. I think they want us to be responsible for those decisions and I think the bill as it has been amended and as it stands now makes a commitment to do that and it says that we will be doing that. This is live debate from the floor of the Minnesota state senate. The lawmakers are arguing over an amendment by GOP Senator Ron Cielo from Saint Paul. The sealife amendment and we're going to have the vote on that Amendment. Now the amendment would cut State spending across the board by 2% starting in January of next year the bill that's being debated. This is an amendment to would increase the state short-term borrowing Authority by 360 million dollars for one year that amendment was that amendment was added to the bill yesterday. The bill itself was voted down and a motion was made to reconsider the bill today and that motion prevailed just a moment. We'll have the results of the vote on the sielaff amendment. The debate was strictly along party lines with independent Republicans arguing in favor of the 2% across-the-board cut. the secretary will And Senator Jack Davies, the president of the Senate is about to announce the roll-call here. this process this process took a long time yesterday afternoon yesterday evening on the bill on the one-year borrowing Authority Bill the board was open for about 20 minutes. has Efforts were made to find the necessary 34 Volts for Passage. Presumably a few members getting getting a last-minute opportunity to vote. Sometimes during floor debate members are off the floor off in the retiring room and they come back out to vote. Tradition in the Senate is that each member must push his or her own voting button in the House of Representatives? It is informally permitted for one number two. cast of vote for another Volvo to do deserve it. Senator Davies allowing the members plenty of opportunity to cast their ballots. Amendment will be added by simple plurality of those voting it takes an absolute majority to pass a bill in the legislature is the only person in the chamber who's not doing it. Senator John Keith what was voted to desire to vote? Senator Davies ask that question repeatedly yesterday afternoon. As we awaited the results. He does have a way of dragging it out. I think he's about to say Zaire and got to do. This present I believe the senator be here momentarily. We are awaiting the arrival on the floor one of the members. Apparently, we're going to see how well he does the 220 and he did a very well. All those heavy go to the desert. The secretary will close the role. Roll being completed 26 hours and 35 days. The Seahawks amendment is not adaptive. Further discussion of this is on the bill to increase short-term borrowing Authority by 360 million dollars over one year. Sarah from the Harbert Center Willett Willett president before we take a vote on the bill again. I would like to have the Senate aware of a little more information of what I talked about yesterday. end Understand that I am is Disturbed with bypassing the legislative action in the Minnesota state senate is I am in the United States Congress. General Ewell indicated that to some references to some action at the national level. I don't like the Senate adopting an alternative offered by commissioner burger at from the finance committee is the only alternative. And when it comes to adopting a policy of extended borrowing authority to the executive branch of government. and I indicated that too in a very short time that that I have had the opportunity to work on this issue limited my ability to come up with several kinds of suggestions and Alternatives, but I was able to quickly identify just a couple of areas and I have done that and Are those the reason that that it was fairly easy to pinpoint these two items is because it's the same budgeting schedule as the legislature has and that's in the education area. and the changing of the payment schedules we talked about the problem now of short-term borrowing needed to meet cash flow problems cash flow problems are is because of larger payments at times when when the cash hidden in the treasury is not there. So a change of that scheduling to provide the payments at times when the cash is there seems to be a way to address the issue. As I looked at the Alternatives available that could be looked at them in pinpointed too quickly and it fell into the into the education area in school-age. And in that we have the payment schedule established by law know that sets the the school aid payments up in 9 payments Of 81.88 million dollars a month August through May excluding the month of October, which is the normal settlement months from the 81 the year of 81. So my suggestion on that was to alter that schedule keeping in mind that the school districts would get the same amount of money. There would be no reduction. Now I'm doing that it would change the schedule from And make the payments starting in August in the month of August at 7% And the September at 7th and then the October months would be either the normal settlement month. And then 7% for November, December and January. And then changing the schedule so that February March April and May is 12% the payment and the June payment being 17% So that the school districts would get the same same amount of money that the legislature authorized through the action of the last session. Then the 89 million dollars that we authorized to be paid starting in one payment in August. Let the governor held back. That would be that those payments would be made in 10 payments. Now I'm doing that. Just those two changes. Would mean that the legislature would only have to authorize 105.6 million dollars. More borrowing is authorized in the law. No. A substantial reduction and that's only put together very quickly. And that's my point is that this should have been immediately referred to committee. so that Other Alternatives could have been considered in the open and federal public discussions. So at the school districts and everyone could be involved in in in seeing what the ramifications of any of those scheduling changes would be and we've been denied that. and I I think that to buy this governor coming back from Europe and grabbing the telephone and calling the speaker of the house and calling the majority leader and send it to say I want you in here on Wednesday. And I want you to Paso a proposal in one day and I want you to do it my way is typical of this Administration and I think it's it's time that this legislature says no we're at we're sick and tired of looking at the burger app alternatives to the financing this state and we're going to take a look at some other Alternatives and this being one is is doing some rescheduling know yesterday. I indicated that there are 240. 240 items in a payment schedule Can I pull out only one item 13? and in a computer run out of that one item. Now we should be spending a few days and going through those items to identify where if possible any other alternative or changes in the scheduling could be accomplished with the least amount of negative impact. And I think that if that would be done that we could present to the Senate. and alternative bill that would provide again a further reduction even below what I've suggested here today of the hundred five point six additional. I think we could go lower than that. In fact, maybe even wipe it all out. I don't know because we haven't had time to get into that. But I think that's what we ought to do. I think it's incumbent on us to look at those alternatives. No, I have prepared amendments. Do offer to do this? But as I sit here today and I listen to discussion and I hear a senator sieloff offering a an amendment without having the opportunity to thoroughly. Research the ramifications of that. I think it would be inappropriate. Because I think that that has to be thoroughly discussed and in committee. No, I think if this does pass out of here today, it'll go over to the house and from all indications what we hear. It's going to be rejected and we're going to we're going to be into some kind of a conference committee to resolve the differences. I hope it's that time and I and I will at that time come to that group with this alternative and I don't know what time elements will be working constraints will be working within but will also have Are the staff in the finance committee looking at what's available in that schedule, but keep in mind that the the scheduling of those payments as far as local government payments are made at the end also the tax committee. And so there has to be there has to be people represented from that committee that address so that scheduling including the school ages committee. So I'm not going to offer those amendments today. Because again, it would be denying all the members of the Senate the opportunity to to set in on those committee hearings and see what the ramifications of that action would be. But I just wanted to bring to you very briefly what just to changes would do. And just think of what the borrowing cost to taxpayers for that 100 million five million $600,000 for the last hundred million that was borrowed. And now we're authorizing will be authorizing more unless other alternatives are looked at. I think those Alternatives like to be looked at to reduce that borrowing to save that taxpayers when I like to see that money go to New York Banks. The interest rate. I think that's a bad way to spend taxpayers money here. We make reductions and nursing homes. We make reductions in in education. We make reductions in in Grants and scholarships and higher education all those kinds of things so we can give it away at an absorbent interest rate to some bank or someplace. I think that's not good government. And I think that this legislature should be given the opportunity to thoroughly. Look at all the Alternatives. I've I've I've indicated to you too. That could save the legislature a substantial amount of interest on borrowed money. And I hope that when we get into discussing the differences that we will be able to look at not only these two but all of the rest so that we can come back with a with a much smaller proposal to consider. Further discussion center from Sibley Center in a republican. What have you been doing for? The last six months? Haven't you been reviewing the budget? Haven't you been looking in detail? What's happening with those payments seems to me that's the process. We're going through in the finance committee continually talking about time. Time to look at things in detail. You should have it at the tip of your thumb to find out then in to make these determinations brother talking about the scheduling. Rescheduling of the payments and education I believe that was governor quiz proposal originally to spread these out into the formula that amount of dollars that we have appropriated Munoz dollars were appropriated in the first days of this session in the Senate word arrangements made and looking at the the cash flow situation of what would happen. When that large amount of dollars were allocated out of the general fund what would happen with the cash flow in that general fund seems to me that's some of the duties of the finance committee and really, you know yesterday. I heard all the ideas that were offered on this floor to to resolve the problem and spreading out payments and reducing that necessity of the large amounts of deficit spending for cash flow. But today why aren't the Amendments offered if you have Ideas what to offer them now is the time to act now is the time to resolve that problem is you have let's offer them. President cruises catch dinner from Hubbard Center will president I I have to stand. And comment on the remarks of the distinguished senator. Reineke who serves on the finance committee he knows as well as I do that we don't handle the The payment schedule to local units of government and those things happen. In the tax committee, we did so early look at all these issues. In fact of the matter is we got our way in the Senate? And we reduce spending 7 million below with the governor recommended senator. Even though he threatened vetoes. Constant threat of ethos fact of the matter is in its public record that mr. Winter when questioned about the cuts that the finance committee with making and state departments in the bureaucracies in Saint Paul. He indicated that the governor says that if the Senate Cuts those bureaucracies any farther, he'd veto the spending bills. Let's put a bird where it's at Senator. Don't tell me I didn't look at Cuts. I did I had other cuts. We got 7 million more than this executive officer said he wanted. Don't come in here and gimme that I covered that budget from every every Angela was in it. And we accomplished all we could and that section of spending. And the tax committee address the other sections Appropriations. And no school age as far as as far as the governor submitting something in the formula school-age, you'll have to ask the chairman of the of the education subcommittee about that. I didn't hear of any thing that he offered. The only the only thing I ever heard that governor off offer was two words. No one veto. Nothing more constructive than that. resident center from Sibley Center Senator Willett regarding the looking at the total budget. Maybe you should you know reiterate that blame on the text committee. Doesn't doesn't he review his bills over there with you don't you review what has passed the text committee? That seems to be the problem. The reason we're in this situation. And it's still up to you. Together with the tax committee chairman to review so it seems to me that you were laying the blame on the correct Place taking it off the governor's back and putting it on to text committee chairman. I guess that's where the problem really lies around here because of those large payments that do go out early in the fiscal year when the intake is not there. I think we should have some answers coming out of that tax committee answers from the text committee chairman of what he's really doing with our budgeting process. The chairman of the finance committee says it isn't his fault that isn't our fault and I serve on that committee. Someone has to take the blame you it's it's the tax committee chairman I believe now. Well, we're hearing a little partisan colloquy on the floor of the state senate this morning over the blame for the state's budget problems tax committee. Chairman Doug Johnson made a short moment. One of my colleagues has gone to get the my golden shovel to bring it to Senator Senator Anakin. Would you bring it over please? I missed your presence and Son of Anarchy. Certainly you would know that the role of the tax committee chairman in this whole process has been an absolutely the correct Manner and I would certainly deny any part of the problem that we've got. The Senate is debating a bill that would extend the state short-term borrowing Authority by one year. Reference to the shovel is a little item that was presented on the last day of the session was scribed for use during a Doug Johnson speech reference to the property money for the payment of certificates interest thereon another expenses Etc tells player one. And once again will have a roll call. Now this roll call yesterday afternoon last evening actually lasted about 20 minutes as an effort was made to find a 34 volts needed for passage. There shouldn't be any problem today if things go according to plan, I'll Pat Kessler has been up on the floor checking into what that plan is Pat. Can you fill us in briefly? Basically, what will happen Bob is this? Why don't you come up to this microphone here? I think we're having a problem with so that one good enough. What will happen Bob is probably this so there has been a lot of talk this morning. There have been a good many meetings since about 8 8:30 this morning about what will happen. The Senate is right now reconsidering a bill that it defeated yesterday that is a bill which would extend the borrowing authority of the governor by one year. We would give him the borrowing authority of 360 million dollars. Now the house version is for 2 years 440 million dollars. The Senate is expected to pass this bill on reconsideration after a bit of political arm-twisting some political coercion on the floor and off the floor the Senate Majority Leader Rodger, Moe and the Senate Majority Leader Robert Ash back both believe they have enough votes to pass this it will then go back to the House of Representatives, which is expected to reject it because it will be rejected. It will go to a conference committee. Probably this afternoon the plan is To try to convince conference committee members to accept a bill much like the house passed a two-year Bill giving the governor the authority to borrow more money for two years up to eight hundred million dollars, but putting a self-destruct mechanism in what they call a sunset clause which would make the bill go Abby go out of practice. It would no longer be in effect after two years that might be a compromise or it could be a long and probably acrimonious summer if they don't reach agreement this afternoon, but basically they will go to conference committee this afternoon that looks like the plan now, Okay, Pat, we might get the results are now having voted. Who desired to vote? some insane absentees Senate President, Jack Davies getting everyone ample opportunity push their button red or green. 34 volts are ordered to Desert about all those heavy-duty do desert about the secretary will close the roll they're all being completed their 37 eyes and 24 days of the bills passed title agreed to alright know that shows that indeed the first step in this scenario that has been worked out for today did indeed go along just as planned the Senate session open the bout an hour ago with Emotion by Senator Gerry Sikorski to reconsider the boat where buy this bill was defeated late yesterday afternoon around 6 or so, then Lee sent it to considered one Amendment and Amendment 5 GOP Senator Ron Cielo from St.Paul that would attempt to deal with the cash flow Problem by cutting State spending 2% across-the-board cut starting on January 1st of 1982 that measure Was Defeated that amendment was defeated by a vote of July 26th, 2:35. And then we had a little bit of argument about just exactly who is to blame for the state's economic problems for the budget. Is in a bit of difficulty and has been in a bit of difficulty. I ever since last fall then leave final vote 37 to 24 to extend the state short-term borrowing authority to 360 million dollars just for