Policy Blog

February 4, 2010

Citizens League transportation advancement

As work on the Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA) continues through the expansion of MnPASS and the establishment of a more rapid bus transit option along I-35W and Cedar Avenue, it is important to note the other elements of the UPA and the larger transportation policy agenda of the Citizens League as we form a transportation "advancement group."

In addition to pushing for more transparent pricing of solo driving linked to transit improvements, the Citizens League also remains involved in the eWorkplace Initiative which is also part of the UPA.

In addition to the initiatives spurred by the $190 million in federal and state money that funded the UPA, the Citizens League also was involved in pushing for the Value Capture study at the University of Minnesota, which examines ways that beneficiaries of transportation investments could pay more directly for the benefits received.

The Citizens League transportation advancement group will monitor these and other developments and look for opportunities to further advance the Citizens League transportation policy agenda. If you are interested in the advancement group, email Annie Levenson-Falk at alevensonfalk[at]citizensleague.org.

Posted by Bob DeBoer at 2:01 PM | Comments (0)

February 2, 2010

We Need a Change for Judicial Selection

This year, the Citizens League, as part of the Coalition for Impartial Justice, is supporting a constitutional amendment that would change the system for selecting judges in Minnesota. At Monday's Mind Opener, we heard from Bar Association president Leo Brisbois and Supreme Court Justice Barry Anderson about why this reform is needed and what it would do. Here's a summary:

The current system

The state constitution provides for election of judges, but about 90% of judges are initially appointed by the Governor before facing reelection. This is the result of a quiet consensus among judges and lawyers that the appointment process is generally better at choosing qualified judges, because voters usually have so little information about judicial candidates. (When was the last time you felt like informed about the judicial candidates on your ballot?) Retiring judges usually leave in between terms, so that their replacements are initially named by appointment before coming up for either a contested -- or more usually unopposed -- election.

Nationally, Minnesota's judiciary ranks second in competence and fifth in impartiality and has historically enjoyed a good reputation for fairness and independence.

So if it's working well, why the push for change?

More and more states are seeing expensive, negative campaigns in judicial races, places like Texas, Ohio, California, and Wisconsin. Eventually, this trend will reach Minnesota, and we have a lot to lose if even the perception of fairness is lost because of millions in campaign funding from special interests.

In 2002, the US Supreme Court struck down long-held Minnesota requirements that were designed to prevent judges from taking positions on issues they may have to rule on. In Republican Party v. White, a case brought from Minnesota, the US Supreme Court held that states may not prohibit judicial candidates from discussing their political positions. Judicial candidates are now free to campaign on controversial political issues, seek party endorsements, and personally solicit campaign contributions.

What's at stake?

As Justice Anderson described, two things are at stake here:

First is the impartiality of the courts: Judges who had made campaign promises, especially in exchange for financial support, may be less apt to decide cases based on the merits of that individual case and more likely to be influenced by politics or by their supporters.

More importantly, though, is the perception of the court's impartiality. Whether or not expensive campaigns actually influence judges' decisions, said Justice Anderson, an average person looks at this and says, "You've gotta wonder." As money becomes a factor in judicial selection, studies have shown that the public's perception of influence increases, and respect for the courts decreases. Our society is based on a more or less voluntary obedience for the rule of law and the decisions of courts. This is a very dangerous path.

What would that change look like?

This, in a nutshell, is the proposal from the commission led by former Governor Al Quie and supported by the Citizens League and a host of other organizations from all across the political spectrum:

  1. Judicial vacancies would be filled by appointment by the Governor after recommendations from a judicial selection commission.
  2. Judges serve set terms then are up for retention elections. In these elections, the judges run on a simple yes or no vote with no opponent. If they are voted out of office, the open seat returns to the Governor for another appointment.
  3. To help voters be more informed about the candidates, all judges would face performance evaluations. They would be evaluated by a committee of citizens appointed by the Governor, the Legislature, and the Supreme Court, which would publicly report on judges' performance prior to retention elections.

To make this change requires a constitutional amendment. Legislation has been introduced this year (SF 70 and HF 224) to put this question to voters in the fall.

One additional note: Even though Minnesota's, judicial system currently gets high marks, it's important to note that trust in the court system is not equal across Minnesota's racial and ethnic community. As we began to discuss at on Monday, an improved selection process, along with more transparent information about judges, could make a retention election system more meaningful for all communities. Would someone care to comment on that?

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 12:43 PM | Comments (0)

January 21, 2010

Pathways to Prosperity: Recent Committee Work

Recently, the Pathways to Prosperity committee dispersed into several small groups to look at a variety of policies and programs from across the nation and the globe that might hold some promising ideas for re-orienting Minnesota's current system in more effective and efficient ways. We've now come back together as a full committee and had a very rich discussion about several conceptual frames that are showing signs of success. Here are some concepts we are exploring further:

Give incentives directly to families and hold them accountable for specific outcomes. This works well particularly when families are able to work with other families, develop supportive relationships, and learn together. This is in contrast to more traditional services in which funds are given to an institution that then chooses and delivers the services to a person or family.

Provide 'wrap around services.' This has been successful in the educational realm where the mission is to get kids college ready. These programs recognize the importance of helping families with other concerns that get in the way of educational goals, such as chronic health issues, violent crime, or poor housing. Wrap around services require collaboration between different institutions - a geographic effort - and provide a centralized zone in which families can access assistance and can interact with each other. Funding from public, private and non-profit is how many efforts get going and succeed.

Networks among neighbors and mutual aid societies. Whole communities should be engaged in helping their neighbors in times of need. Structures are needed for this. The current system funnels people into government offices where their primary relationship is with a caseworker. We need a system that guides people into interaction with their neighbors so they can build relationships with each other and develop supportive community structures. In such a system people are not just receivers of services they are also givers of support. They become problem-solvers and solution-designers. Accountability to each other is key. We want to explore what kinds of relationships to an obligated group create results - the civic infrastructure.

Our key question: How can we increase, or reallocate, resources, including community resources, for families on an equitable basis that increases choice? Our current system requires all families seeking assistance to 'navigate the line' - a maze of eligibility paperwork and assessments to determine what a family needs and what services they are allowed. Not all families need intensive services and many are capable of making independent choices and managing their own pathway out of poverty.

We are looking for ways to redirect some of the resources from this bureaucracy that not everyone needs, to intervening community-based alternatives that prevent poverty just as much as they ameliorate it. We want to realign incentives with opportunity and independence.

What do you think of these ideas, or what ideas would you recommend this committee explore further?

Posted by janna at 2:06 PM | Comments (0)

January 19, 2010

Judicial Attack Ads from Other States

Here's a collection of some attack ads from judicial election campaigns in various parts of the country (collected by the Justice at Stake campaign).

We should change the way we select judges before we see these kinds of costly, negative campaigns to elect judges in Minnesota.

Join us February 1 to talk with Supreme Court Justice Barry Anderson and Bar Association President Leo Brisbois about how to change the law and minimize the opportunity for these campaigns to taint the impartiality of our courts.

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 10:17 AM | Comments (0)

January 18, 2010

Volunteers Needed for Policy Review and Advancement

We're organizing several policy review and advancement groups now, and we're looking for members to lead and carry out their work.

These groups are organized by member conveners (rather than staff), and are based on existing Citizens League policy positions. They will develop policy statements and bring them to the Policy Advisory Committee, and later to the Board.

The time commitment varies depending on the topic and members' availability. The initial commitment is approximately 2-3 months, and members who would like to stay involved are welcome to do so as advancement efforts continue.

We plan on convening these groups within the next week or two, so sign up now if you're interested sign up now by emailing Annie Levenson-Falk (alevensonfalk[at]citizensleague.org).

  • Transportation: Examine and recommend positions regarding value capture; work toward regional transportation solutions based on 2005 report Driving Blind.
  • Regional Governance: Help implement the Common Ground process that resulted from the 2008 Regional Policy Conference. Review Citizens League policy and evaluate federal initiatives related to regional governance.
  • Education Reforms: Take the work of last year's Policy Review Group, evaluate current reform efforts and position the Citizens League based on past and recent positions. This will include evaluation of federal and state initiatives.
  • Energy: Review 2001 Citizens League report on energy. Update and position the Citizens League in today's energy developments.

Some of these groups were available for sign-up last fall. If you signed up at that time, you are still on the list.

If you're interested in participating in any group, please let us know.

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 9:56 AM | Comments (0)

January 14, 2010

Pathways to Prosperity: More examples to consider

The following are more examples of policy design that the Pathways to Prosperity committee is considering.

Asset Building through Individual Development Accounts
Introduced in the 1909s, Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) are matched saving programs with specific purposes -- home purchase, renovation, post-secondary education and microenterprise -- for low-income individuals. A report, IDAs, Saving Taste, and Household Wealth, tracked the effectiveness of IDAs from 1997 to 2000 and found that participants of the program saved approximately $1,600 on average in their IDAs. The study attempted to answer whether or not the program encouraged people to save more or increase their household wealth.

The first finding was that whether or not you included the specific money in the IDA accounts, the average household financial assets grew for those on the plan. The second finding determined that the lower-wealth participants in the study responded faster to the saving incentives than others. This finding confirmed previous results showing that those with the lower incomes actually saved more. The third finding suggest that the IDA program can facilitate a culture of saving and shape desired saving behavior by providing access to institutional saving.

Complementary Currencies
Sometimes called secondary currencies or community currencies, the purpose is typically to rebuild local economies in areas suffering from a shortage of cash where untapped capacity is accompanied by unmet needs. It acts as a complementary medium of exchange to be used alongside national currency, but unlike conventional money it cannot leave the area, therefore ensuring there is always enough currency to allow people to trade amongst each other, even with a shortage of actual money.

Complementary currencies have been identified as a tool for alleviating the worst impacts of recession, for strengthening the local economy, and for developing skills and employability among the unemployed, perhaps providing a stepping stone into formal employment.

Program Examples
We are looking at a variety of program examples. Communities of HOPE in Detroit was founded on the belief that affordable and government-subsidized apartment communities can be transformed into positive, supportive and healthy places to live, grow and raise families if the residents, key stakeholders, and partnering organizations come together with the intent of creating value, reducing waste, and developing "social capital" that enhances lives. Initially, Communities of HOPE is working with about 25 apartment communities in metro Detroit that are managed by Premier Property Management, LLC. Communities of HOPE is planning to expand to other cities, starting with Minneapolis, in the coming months.

Communities of HOPE also increases their impact by bringing together multiple programs in ways that cause their impact to multiply. A good example is the innovative co-op food purchasing program being deployed by Communities of HOPE that enables healthy diets which enhance learning, social functioning and reduced health problems. That same co-op food purchasing system -- which would be hard to do without the strong support of the property management firm -- can also create some valuable infrastructure to support local food economy micro-entrepreneurship that allows residents to ramp up healthy food-related businesses that keep Food Stamp dollars re-circulating within the local economy.

Wage subsidies
We are exploring whether wage subsidies could be used more broadly as a substitute for "navigating the lines" to access the prosperity continuum. Are there ways to use wage subsidies more broadly and make them more portable to the individual? Our work with a Macalester economist also suggests that current income supports depress economic activity, while using the same funds as a wage subsidy would add to economic productivity. Could these subsidies act as a net increase in economic activity and a benefit to Minnesota employers as well as the individuals who use them?

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 10:08 AM | Comments (0)

January 13, 2010

Pathways to Prosperity: The Policy Opportunity

"Parents [in poverty] aren't allowed time to be involved at their child's school -- that's something that needs to be integrated into a lifestyle of financial independence." -- Citizens League interview, August 2009

People impacted by poverty must help to design a better set of policies and practices to combat poverty. Moreover these policies can promote community and family wealth while simultaneously promoting the health and growth of the overall economy. And we believe there is bipartisan support for an approach to poverty that is based first on developing pathways to prosperity.

We are looking at specific practical opportunities to begin to change policies, resources, and incentives that govern access to prosperity in Minnesota. As another participant in the Pathways to Prosperity project put it, "Because of the shortness of the public process, the policies are, in turn, very short-sighted -- sustainability is not on the map. Cost-effectiveness and expediency are 'more important.'"

Some examples:

Asset Building through Prize-Linked Savings
The Citizens League has been in discussions with the nonprofit D2D (Doorways to Dreams) and the Minnesota Credit Union Network to explore the potential for "prize-linked savings" opportunities in Minnesota.

Research has disclosed a number of barriers to saving money, including the lack of childhood lessons about the importance of saving, feeling overwhelmed by life and getting by paycheck to paycheck, difficult and sometimes tragic prior experiences that can make goals for the seemingly distant future seem unattainable, and pressure within social networks to share any resources. It is perhaps not surprising that 38% of lower-income Americans surveyed said that winning the lottery was the most practical way to accumulate a large sum of money.

Based on the research and modeled after longstanding successful programs abroad, a "prize-linked savings" initiative was piloted in 2009 with Michigan credit unions. In seven months, more than 9,000 new accounts were created totaling over $4.5 million. Fifty-five percent of account-holders had not saved money regularly before; 44% had household income less than $40k and 16% under $20k; 39% had financial assets (excluding home equity) of less than $5,000; and 59% played the lottery in the prior 6 months.

Next: More examples to consider

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 11:34 AM | Comments (0)

January 11, 2010

Pathways to Prosperity: The Policy Need

Current policies and systems are like a rigged game of "Chutes and Ladders." Society values hard work and determination. For the poor, those who work hard (may) rise to the top step by step. Yet lacking financial capital and social connections, there are few ladders that can help the poor get ahead more swiftly. But there are many chutes that can send them back to the beginning in an instant -- health conditions, a breakdown in transportation or child care, or the sudden loss of a job.

We must change the game -- adding ladders and eliminating chutes so that the probability of continual advancement increases significantly. Rather than lines that define poverty, we must think of a continuum: the prosperity continuum. What is it? How does one access it? How might we add ladders and eliminate chutes? In our view, the prosperity continuum is not an artifact only for the poor but for all Minnesotans. As long as the poor must play by different (more challenging) rules, they will struggle to get ahead. In the meantime, we note that more and more Minnesotans are at economic risk as the probability of chutes -- loss of a job, a health shock, foreclosure -- grows.

The challenge is to answer the "how" question. Think, for example, about subprime mortgages, which were designed by a small group of Wall Street financiers to stretch earnings from the home mortgage industry. If a single product can wreak havoc among the near poor and bring global capital to its knees, surely we can also design mechanisms that have the opposite effect. We must go beyond stating that change is needed to designing practical operating mechanisms, such as clear expectations (e.g. what do we mean by personal responsibility) and incentives and opportunities to act differently. If we don't change what we actually do, then how can the outcomes change?

This work requires a set of trusted community institutions working together and a specific set of civic leadership and participation skills. It has become clear that these skills must be developed at all levels and in all types of institutions.

Next: The policy opportunity

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 8:15 AM | Comments (0)

January 7, 2010

Pathways to Prosperity: Managing the Line

We have created an elaborate infrastructure around administering programs for the poor. Governmental and non-governmental institutions have been built up with the responsibility to manage the "line," not necessarily to move people out of poverty. This serves to legitimize existing systems whether or not we are getting the desired outcomes.

Indeed, in 2008 Minnesota counties spent $800 million administering programs for lower-income Minnesotans -- roughly the equivalent of nearly 11,000 jobs just in county administration. As William Easterly writes in his book The White Man's Burden, "The rich have markets, the poor have bureaucracy."

Next: The policy need

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 9:47 AM | Comments (0)

January 6, 2010

Pathways to Prosperity: Navigating the Line

"Why do I need four or five case workers, each with their own set of guidelines and requirements, and why do I need to complete a 20-page health care application every six months? It seems like the system is trying to keep me poor, not help me leave poverty. I'd like to see the people who have designed the system try to negotiate the system." -- Participant in Blandin-sponsored "Circles of Support" project in Grand Rapids

Of course, the idea of a "line" is a simplification. In actuality, there are multiple lines. Over the decades, a host of government programs and tax incentives have developed -- each with their own set of requirements and eligibility. As a result, those in poverty must expend an extraordinary amount of resources "navigating the line" of poverty. As one person put it, "Being poor is a full-time job." Another commented, "It is like putting together a puzzle to match all my family members with health coverage." The head of a local corporate community affairs office that deals with low income people daily said, "few people have the stamina to go through so many agencies. It's humiliating and confusing."

Moreover, while the poverty line was drawn to establish an income threshold for those in need of help, it has become a measure of differential treatment and assumptions about those in poverty. Those on the "poor" side of the line are in every instance marked by the help they receive: food stamps, Section 8, vouchers, Medicaid--all of which signal "this person is poor" and perhaps, by implication, incompetent, stupid, or lazy.

By trapping the skills and human capacity of the poor in complex systems of government bureaucracy, they lose opportunities to improve their economic and social capital. Our economy and society suffer from this loss as well.

Next: Managing the line

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 8:37 AM | Comments (0)

January 5, 2010

Pathways to Prosperity: Drawing the Line

For more than 40 years, Minnesota and the nation have approached poverty reduction in particular way based on "drawing the line" of poverty. This approach emerged from the 1960s as part of the "War on Poverty." Although other fundamental approaches were debated, a governmental, program-based approach was adopted to fight poverty. In essence, a line was drawn (the poverty line), which is still a foundational part of how we deliver programs today.

It is well documented that strong disincentives to earn are inherent in this line-driven approach. Also called the "welfare wall," the Citizens League first identified these disincentives in 1977. Subsequent reports in 2006 by Minnesota House Research (The Gain to Work for Low- and Moderate-Income Workers) and the 2007 report Disincentives to Earn by the Center for Public Finance Research document this effect to a great degree.

For example, House Research found that for households with incomes between $23,500 and $41,700, every extra $100 increase in earnings resulted in a $4 decrease in net earnings. A person attempting to navigate his or her way out of poverty through the conventional means of hard work and increased earnings will collide head-on with the welfare wall.

Next: Navigating the line

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 10:17 AM | Comments (0)

January 4, 2010

Pathways to Prosperity: Conclusions to Date

This post is the first in a series that will review the conclusions of our Pathways to Prosperity project, looking at what keeps Minnesotans in poverty. We hope this gives you some ideas, and that you'll share your feedback.


In the Pathways to Prosperity project, the Citizens League has been working with a diverse group of people intimately familiar with poverty -- some have known poverty firsthand; others serve the poor. Their conclusion? Rather than end poverty, current programs unintentionally perpetuate poverty.

Low income people lack access to two critical resources: financial resources and social capital/connections. Following all the rules of current poverty reduction programs produces neither money nor social connections. Instead, current programs:

  • Provide strong disincentives to earn (if you increase earnings, you lose more in benefits);
  • Create incentives that undermine family stability;
  • Contain health care coverage barriers that discourage working; and
  • Restrict the accumulation of assets (which serve as a critical personal safety net for middle-class families).

To understand how actual outcomes can be so diametrically opposed to intended outcomes, we must look deep into the foundation of current anti-poverty programs (and we will in upcoming blog posts).

Next: Drawing the line

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 4:01 PM | Comments (0)

December 24, 2009

Moving Forward with the Water Policy Report

Since the Water Policy Study Committee released its report, To the Source, in November, members and staff have been working to advance report's recommendations.

Roughly, the report recommends:

  1. A collaborative system of water governance that promotes the role of the public -- citizens, businesses, etc. -- to participate in framing issues and setting priorities, problem solving and developing solutions, implementing solutions, and holding each other accountable for results. This will require both Minnesotans changing our behaviors to promote healthy waters and changing processes for public engagement with government.
  2. Design the roles and responsibilities of government to promote this collaborative model. A central role of government is to design environments where individual citizens and institutions are oriented to accomplish public purposes -- like clean water -- and meet their own interests in the process.
  3. Create an online water resource information hub that compiles data and analysis collected by groups around the state in a single site that is understandable and useful to average people.

(For more information on the report and the recommendations, click here.)

With the report completed, a team of study committee members and Citizens League staff is discussing the recommendations with potential partners, legislators, and others to advance the work. Here are the highlights:

  Legislature: We were invited to present to the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee earlier this month. Members are also meeting with their senators and representatives, especially those who hold positions on committees related to water policy.

Watershed districts: We presented our report at the annual meeting of the MN Assn. of Watershed Districts (MAWD) in early December. The MAWD conference was a great opportunity to reconnect with some people we hadn't seen since the committee finished meeting this summer and to meet others who were very interested in and supportive of the report. We are continuing discussions with managers and staff of a few watershed districts to promote our recommendations and to develop the recommendations into actionable ideas at the local watershed level.

State agencies: Member Janna Caywood is participating in a Pollution Control Agency committee that is developing a new civic engagement protocol for PCA work.

Community: Janna has organized her neighbors in the Como neighborhood of St. Paul to improve the health of Como Lake through the Como Lake Neighbor Network. (See coverage in the Park Bugle.) Other members are involved with the League of Women Voters, the MN Environmental Initiative and a variety of other community and stakeholder groups.

In the news: Check out coverage from the Rochester Post-Bulletin and the TC Daily Planet, as well as the latest issue of the MN Journal.

If you have questions or are interested in getting involved, contact Annie Levenson-Falk at alevensonfalk[at]citizensleague.org or 651-293-0575, ext. 16.

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 12:58 PM | Comments (0)

December 23, 2009

Different Choices: Redesigning Public Services

The Civic Caucus has just released its statement, Different Choices: Redesigning Public Services. Although the statement is not a Citizens League work product, many of those who developed this statement have a long policy history with the Citizens League and our body of work on public service redesign, therefore Citizens League staffers Sean Kershaw and Bob DeBoer are signed on as supporters of this statement as well as several active members of the Citizens League Policy Advisory Committee.

A few comments from the Citizens League perspective regarding this statement:

  • Near the end of the statement, the Civic Caucus makes this call for leadership from the next governor: . . .defer ideology for the work of establishing a foundation of collective action that will exceed any official tenure. This foundation of collective action is what the Citizens League calls the civic policy agenda. The civic policy agenda is based on the belief that all individuals and institutions have a role in developing and implementing policy proposals, and that the skills and aptitudes that help people succeed in the places where they spend their time (work, community, learning, worship) can also make them effective in addressing our policy challenges. The civic policy agenda is the continual exploration and development of new ways to engage a broader base of people and institutions in policy solutions according to these two principles.

  • The Civic Caucus states: Successful redesigns work through the existing political environment without being constrained by it. The process suggests an unconventional approach, exploring different ways of doing things and not just propping up established systems and methods. It gives people an opportunity to be part of a solution themselves, inviting their input. This is an extremely important statement and very much in alignment with the first Citizens League guideline for conducting our policy work: People who are affected by a problem must help to define (and solve) the problem. Redesign, therefore, cannot only be the realm of "experts" in issue areas and public policy, but must be the work of all of us and the institutions that we build to create sustainable solutions.

  • The Civic Caucus asks us to: Think of a box. On one end are the "inputs" to the box, or taxes and other forms of revenue. On the other end are the "outputs," or what we see as the product of government agencies and services. The answers do not come on their own. It is through tireless, inclusive work on what goes "inside the box" that makes the difference between a state that is ordinary and one that's extraordinary. This is what makes policy redesign so difficult. There are no silver bullets. We must devise better methods/processes to really engage those in "the box" who carry out the current design and who have the knowledge to help make the change. It is very difficult to design that from the outside today with the elaborate infrastructure that has been created around many public issues. As much as government may be part of many solutions, a government-only strategy stops progress in many instances.

  • The Civic Caucus focuses on the state general fund which is a major source for funding programs and state priorities. It is important to note that there are billions of dollars that are also tied up in special funds and constitutional dedications. In addition, we must keep our eye on possible changes that call for a much broader realignment of resources to meet common goals. These might be policy options that change the incentives in current systems leading to different outcomes in the use of private resources. In some cases, the current incentives that drive decisions throughout Minnesota represent resources much greater than the state general fund. What is the call to various institutions who implement a variety of public policies? How do we get them to think beyond their own self-interest and understand that our ability to be partners with government in problem-solving will create the sustainable solutions?

  • The Civic Caucus makes this statement: Minnesota has a history of being a high-tax, high-service state. We have been able to tax higher because we offer a better product: Our quality of life, our economic and social climates, a dynamic and well-educated society. We think it is important to note that Minnesota is no longer a high-tax state (see July 2007 Minnesota Journal). The most recent years available from the Minnesota Taxpayers Association show that Minnesota is solidly middle of the pack in overall state and local taxes per $1,000 of personal income ranking #23 (2005), #20 (2006), and #19 (2007). Our slight increase in rank is due to increasing property and excise (includes gas) taxes compared to other states, while our rank in income and corporate taxes have decreased. Our property (#30) and sales taxes (#36) still rank relatively low compared to other states, and our income (#9), corporate (#14), and excise (#12) still rank relatively high, but overall Minnesota is a middle-tax state. We are probably still trying to be a high-service state because that has been our tradition. We wholeheartedly agree that raising taxes would certainly not solve our problems alone and that taxes should not be raised unless in the context of significant redesign or realignment of resources. We also agree that Minnesota's "game" is surely not to compete on lowering tax rates.

Posted by Bob DeBoer at 11:57 AM | Comments (0)

November 23, 2009

Pathways to Prosperity Project Update

**An update on the Pathways to Prosperity project, from policy intern Janna Caywood.**

On October 15th, we convened the first meeting of the Pathways to Prosperity study committee. The committee, a group of over 40, is made up of engaged citizens, those who are affected by poverty, and those who work to alleviate poverty. Using the framing document that was created in Phases I and II of this project, the committee is developing a set of recommendations for a new policy direction in Minnesota.

To guide us in this work, we've identified three values that are critical to any successful pathway to prosperity:

  • Develop the human capacity of Minnesotans experiencing poverty, to include identifying and building on individual, family and community strengths; making transparent the processes, structures and policies impacting those needing assistance; and illuminating the influence of social-economic-cultural context.
  • Build the civic infrastructure within Minnesota communities, to include building connections, networks, and collaborative structures; creating community resources, assets, equality of opportunity; and increasing social capital, economic independence and civic engagement.
  • Ensure fairness and equity in the service delivery system and the policies and institutions undergirding this, to include positively impacting racial, gender, or other disparities beyond socio-economic status; and providing greater and more convenient access to resources as needed along the prosperity continuum.

We've set an ambitious agenda and are currently reviewing a range of example programs and policies from around the globe. We've divided ourselves into several small groups who will apply the above values to these examples and draw ideas and inspiration for a Minnesota policy framework.

We are giving special attention to example programs and policies that:

  • Cross-cut and integrate the traditional funding silos (education, healthcare, employment, housing, transportation).
  • Change incentives for stakeholders and focus resources along new paths towards prosperity.
  • Alter the use of or need for rules and regulation.
  • Have the potential to be replicated to the regional scale.

We are fortunate to have such a dedicated and thoughtful committee and are looking forward to the results of this important and timely work.

Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 9:48 AM | Comments (0)

Subscribe to this blog (RSS 2.0). View the archives or view by category →