The Free Press of Mankato, Oct. 23
Budget outlook: State fairly well-prepared for downturn
Why it matters: Minnesota is fairly well-positioned for the next recession, whenever it comes, but it can do more to minimize the pain.
It’s been more than 10 years since the most recent recession hit, but state policymakers should know - and do - that the economic cycle has not been repealed. There will be another recession, and probably sooner than later. Indeed, the current expansion is the longest on record.
A recent report by Pew Charitable Trusts on state preparedness for the inevitable downturn ranks Minnesota near the top in its ability to minimize the pain when it comes.
Among the highlights: The state’s budget reserves are better than average. It has lower than average debt and pension obligations. And it has restored many of the cuts made to balance the budget during the Great Recession, which gives policymakers more options to deal with a potential shortfall.
Pew also praises the state’s “stress testing,” a process in which the state budget office examines how different scenarios would reduce tax revenues. Not every state does that.
Minnesota has a more diverse economy than many states and little exposure to the volatility of oil and gas production. So we have less of a boom-or-bust economy than, for example, North Dakota. That doesn’t mean the next recession will bypass the Gopher State completely, but it should lessen its impact.
Minnesota’s position for a downturn may be better than most, but it is not perfect.
One point Pew makes is that Gov. Tim Walz’s administration should pick up on is expanding the stress tests to expenditures. While the state may have a good handle on how a downturn would affect revenues, it may not know as well how much it would affect expenditures.
And the Department of Management and Budget’s most recent outlook recommends expanding the budget reserve to $2.3 billion during this biennial budget period, which began July 1. The reserve at the end of June was $2.1 billion. The 2019 Legislature reduced the reserve fund. That is a decision that merits rethinking in 2020.
___
Minnesota Daily, Oct. 20
Reactions to Warren’s pregnancy discrimination show a reluctance to listen to peoples’ voices
The platitude of ’believe women’ means nothing without serious consideration of how sexism affects women’s lives.
Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren has recently highlighted the pervasiveness of discrimination against pregnant people by speaking openly about the fact that she herself was fired for becoming pregnant.
“When I was 22 and finishing my first year of teaching, I had an experience millions of women will recognize,” Warren wrote on Twitter. “By June, I was visibly pregnant - and the principal told me the job I’d already been promised for next year would go to someone else. This was 1971, years before Congress outlawed pregnancy discrimination - but we know it still happens in subtle and not-so-subtle ways.”
Conservative leaning publications, like The Washington Free Beacon, attempted to rally against Warren’s story, saying that there was no proof and that records show that Warren resigned from her teaching position. Mainstream news sources also tried to cast doubt on Warren, pointing out inconsistencies in how she has spoken about the incident throughout the years. Warren has explained that she has been more open to sharing what happened than in the past.
Despite many people sharing their own stories of pregnancy discrimination in solidarity with Warren, she has been forced to defend herself against incessant attempts to poke holes by male pundits.
Pregnancy discrimination is difficult to prove. It is not a documented process and it is likely that records will not reflect many people’s experiences. The reaction of the media and Warren’s colleagues, particularly men, shows a disregard for anyone’s ability to speak about their own encounters with sexism.
The perceptions of women are regularly dismissed, particularly when that woman is running for president. Warren’s story is more than just her own, however. Though pregnancy discrimination was outlawed in 1978, pregnant people are still denied workplace equality. Pretending otherwise is not just ignorant, it is a malicious shutdown of individuals’ voices.
Pregnancy and motherhood are still seen as workplace liabilities. In The American Journal of Sociology, researchers from Cornell University found that there is a “motherhood penalty” in employment. When men are or have a desire to be fathers, employers see that as a commitment to paid work.
Meanwhile, when others are or have to desire to be mothers, they are seen as less employable, without a commitment to paid work. They are held to a harsher standard by employers, and are less likely to receive promotions or raises. Parental status is an advantage for men, but a disadvantage for those who desire to be mothers. The point Warren makes in sharing her story is that this kind of discrimination is consistent, pervasive, and usually goes under the radar.
The platitude of ’believing women’ must expand beyond sexual assault. Believe people when they talk about sexism in all forms. As long as voices are being dismissed, there will be no substantive progress in gaining equal footing. Not just pundits, but everyone in their daily lives, needs to learn to listen when people speak up.
___
Minneapolis Star Tribune, Oct. 25
Hennepin County’s encryption of police radio traffic and 911 calls is a blow to openness
Sheriff’s move to encrypt radio traffic and 911 calls should be reconsidered.
The Hennepin County Sheriff Office’s move to encrypt radio calls is a decision that bears closer scrutiny, for it’s part of a larger effort around the country by law enforcement to severely limit the types of information that the public, the news media and even other law enforcement agencies can hear in real time.
As of last Wednesday, 911 calls and radio traffic for the office and the 25 law enforcement agencies that use Hennepin County’s dispatch service can no longer be heard without an encrypted scanner. Agencies outside that jurisdiction - which include the State Patrol, Minneapolis police, the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Department and several cities within Hennepin County that have their own dispatch centers - are among those blocked out unless an alternate channel is opened up.
In an interview with an editorial writer last week, Hennepin County Sheriff David Hutchinson and officials from a half dozen other law enforcement agencies that participated in the decision laid out their reasoning. Whether it was Brooklyn Park, Orono, Wayzata or Maple Grove, every chief said his department had experienced instances in which listening in on police scanner traffic resulted in incorrect or unnecessarily detailed information being made public. Some said law enforcement operations had been compromised and officer safety jeopardized.
Hutchinson, who as a candidate opposed encryption, now says that he was “unaware of the long-range planning” at the time and that as he learned more he became a proponent. An editorial writer was shown screenshots of Facebook pages that relayed scanner traffic in real time, sometimes with specific addresses, detailed information and even speculation about the identities of victims and suspects. Others redacted the last two digits of an address.
… Police chiefs said mental health calls have popped up with addresses. Criminals or suspects are among those who can and have used sophisticated scanner apps to monitor unencrypted police communications from cellphones. Former hobbyists now can use social media to relay that information themselves.
It’s clear Hutchinson and the other agency officials have legitimate concerns about how social media has transformed the landscape and, at times, overtaken judgment. The risks are real.
However - and it’s a big “however” - it’s disconcerting that in the seven years of planning for this transition, these entities did so little to get input from the public, news organizations and even their own partners in law enforcement. Minneapolis police appeared blindsided by the move. John Elder, a spokesman for the Minneapolis Police Department, told an editorial writer that “we found out the day before encryption started, much to our chagrin.”
Interestingly, given the degree of concern shown by Hutchinson and others, Elder said that Minneapolis will not be making a similar move: “We have no intention of going to encryption,” he said. “We haven’t seen the need.” Elder did say the county’s encryption has complicated work for Minneapolis police, who work closely with Hennepin sheriffs, particularly downtown.
“As of (last) Wednesday, when our officers have something Hennepin needs to know about, instead of just getting on the radio, they call it on to the (Hennepin) dispatch center,” Elder said. “Before, we all had each others’ radio channels.” Even county commissioners expressed surprise. Commissioner Mike Opat told an editorial writer: “It came up quite quickly. I can’t say we were given much warning or had a chance to be briefed on it much at all.” The sheriff’s office has a high degree of autonomy, he said, but “I think this should have been done better, with more advance notice for everyone.”
Adam Scott Wandt, an expert on technology in law enforcement at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, told an editorial writer that there has been a surge of police departments across the country encrypting their main communications frequencies.
“There have been real problems with misuse (of unencrypted channels), including by criminals,” he said. But, he added, “there are some real negatives, and a major one is lack of transparency.” A former peace officer and EMS chief, Wandt said that “in my opinion, the best practice, without a doubt, would be to provide encryption codes and radios to bona fide members of the media. Locking out the media altogether causes a situation that’s ripe for fraud and abuse of power.”
Hutchinson and the assembled chiefs said last week that they want to work with the media and are looking at options. At a time when trust in law enforcement demands more transparency, not less, the sheriff and his advisory board should ensure that the new system is workable for all.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.