>> Mary: HELLO AND WELCOME TO "ALMANAC: AT THE CAPITOL."

I'M YOUR HOST, MARY LAHAMMER.

WE'RE GOING TO JUMP RIGHT IN TONIGHT WITH NEWS THAT BROKE TODAY OF THE STATE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION DECIDING THAT BARRING FELONS FROM VOTING DOES NOT VIOLATE THE STATE CONSTITUTION BUT ESSENTIALLY KICKED THE ISSUE TO LAWMAKERS RIGHT HERE AT THE STATE CAPITOL.

AND JOINING ME NOW TO TALK ABOUT THAT, WE HAVE REPUBLICAN, BRIAN MCCLUNG, WORKED FOR THE PAWLENTY ADMINISTRATION AND DEMOCRAT JAVIER MORILLO.

LET'S TALK ABOUT IT BECAUSE YOU PROBABLY SAW AT THE TOP THERE, ACLU, FOLKS WHO REALLY CARE ABOUT DISPARITIES ARE VERY UPSET BY THIS DECISION.

EXPLAIN YOUR REACTION.

>> YOU KNOW, IT IS UPSETTING BECAUSE IT'S A BAD SITUATION THAT WE WOULD -- THAT PEOPLE WOULD BE PUNISHED FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES.

I THINK PEOPLE JUST -- MINNESOTANS GENERALLY AGREE, RIGHT, THAT IT'S JUST FAIR, YOU SERVE YOUR SENTENCE, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE RE-ENTERED INTO SOCIETY.

SO I THINK PEOPLE ARE DISAPPOINTED, BUT ALSO REALLY ENERGIZED FOR, LIKE, MAKING THE CASE AT THE LEGISLATURE, WHERE THIS TIME WE ACTUALLY, IT'S PAST THE -- PASSED THE HOUSE, FELON VOTING RESTORATION.

IT'S GOING TO BE VOTING ON IN THE SENATE VERY SOON.

WE HOPE, THE COALITION IS HOPING THAT IT WILL ALSO BE BIPARTISAN THERE.

AND THE SUPREME COURT GIVES THEM THE ABILITY TO SAY TO LEGISLATORS, IT'S ON YOU.

>> Mary: LET ME JUMP IN WITH A FACTOID BECAUSE I HAVE A TRUSTED WELL-PLACED DFL SENATE SOURCE THAT SAYS IT DEFINITELY WILL NOT COME UP THIS WEEK BUT MAYBE AS SOON AS NEXT WEEK.

PIVOTING, WE HEARD THE WORD BIPARTISAN.

THIS IS INCREASINGLY A BIPARTISAN ISSUE.

HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT IT THIS >> YEAH, I THINK THERE ARE CERTAINLY A NUMBER OF REPUBLICANS HO AGREE THAT WHEN SOMEBODY'S DONE SERVING THEIR TIME, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO VOTE.

AND IT'S KIND OF A COMMON-SENSE THING.

A LOT OF STATES ACROSS THE COUNTRY RE THAT WAY.

THAT WHEN YOU'RE INCARCERATED, YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE, BUT WHEN YOU'RE OUT, EVEN IF YOU'RE ON PROBATION OR PAROLE, YOU DO.

AND I THINK REPUBLICANS SHOULD SUPPORT THAT.

I SUPPORT THAT.

AND I THINK THAT THAT'S A WAY TO REDUCE RECIDIVISM.

I MEAN, WE WANT PEOPLE, WHEN THEY'RE OUT OF JAIL, WHEN THEY'RE OUT OF PRISON, THEY'VE SERVED THEIR TIME, TO BE ENGAGED IN SOCIETY.

AND THE NUMBER ONE BIGGEST THING YOU CAN DO TO BE ENGAGED IS TO VOTE.

SO I DO THINK THAT RESTORING THAT MAKES SENSE.

AND I THINK WE'RE LIKELY HEADED IN THAT DIRECTION.

>> Mary: THAT HAS HAPPENED IN SOME VERY RED STATES.

NOT EVEN PURPLE STATES, RIGHT?

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

YEAH.

YOU THINK BACK, WE WERE TALKING BEFORE THE SHOW, THERE USED TO BE THIS IDEA THAT SOMETIMES FELONS WOULD LOSE THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE PERMANENTLY.

LIKE HOW BIZARRE IS THAT?

THAT MAKES NO SENSE.

ONCE YOU HAVE SERVED YOUR TIME, RIGHT, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO RE-ENGAGE IN SOCIETY AND BE A PART OF IT.

SO I THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> Mary: ONE OF THE PLAINTIFFS TODAY IN THE CASE SAID SHE WOULDN'T HAVE HER VOTING RIGHTS RESTORED UNTIL SHE WAS 71 YEARS OLD.

CERTAINLY, THIS IS A DEATH SENTENCE FOR VOTING.

>> RIGHT, NO.

THE UNFAIRNESS IN IT, I MEAN, FRANKLY, LIKE VERY UPSETTING THAT IT'S TAKEN THIS LONG.

AND I'M GLAD THAT THIS IS FINALLY GOING TO PASS.

THERE'S A COMPONENT THAT HAS TO DO WITH RACIAL DISPARITIES BECAUSE IT IMPACTS RACIAL -- RACIAL MINORITY GROUPS MORE.

BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN IN A STATEMENT -- STATE LIKE MINNESOTA THAT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WHO WILL BE AFFECTED ARE PEOPLE OF COLOR.

LIKE IT'S ACTUALLY -- THERE ARE VERY MANY URAL MINNESOTANS WHO ARE IMPACTED BY THIS.

AND IT'S A LOT OF -- IT'S VOTERS OF EVERY COLOR.

>> Mary: DID WE EXPECT THE COURT TO DO SOMETHING ELSE?

GOVERNOR PAWLENTY HAS SOME APPOINTMENTS THERE, INCLUDING THE CHIEF JUSTICE, IF I'M CORRECT, RIGHT?

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

WELL, THERE ARE TWO PAWLENTY APPOINTEES ON THE SUPREME COURT RIGHT NOW.

THE MINNESOTA UPREME COURT HAS A LONG HISTORY OF SENDING THINGS BACK TO HE LEGISLATURE WHEN THEY CAN.

AND, SO, REALLY AM NOT SURPRISED BY THIS DECISION.

THEY TRY NOT TO USURP THE POWER OF THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, WHICH IS PROBABLY SMART.

AND KEEP IN MIND THAT THE OPINION WAS WRITTEN BY THE LOAN FORMER -- LONE FORMER LEGISLATOR ON THE BENCH, PAUL THISSEN.

THAT, TO ME, WAS PART OF THE SIGNAL THAT THIS RESTS WITH THE ELECTED BODY AND THAT'S WHERE IT SHOULD -- >> Mary: KIND OF, OUR I SHALL SAY CHERISHED TRADITION OF A NONPARTISAN JUDICIARY, SAYING, WE'RE NOT OING TO TIP THE BALANCE ON WHAT COULD BE A POLITICAL ISSUE, WHILE THE STATES AROUND US ARE GETTING VERY PARTISAN, ENDORSING, SPENDING MONEY ON RACES, MINNESOTA IS STILL IMMUNE FROM THIS, IS THIS DECISION KIND OF REFLECTING THAT?

>> I THINK SO.

AS DISAPPOINTING AS IT WAS TO THE COALITION, I DO LIKE -- I THINK THE FACT THAT FORMER REPRESENTATIVE THISSEN, NOW SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, WROTE THE DECISION, IT DOES -- BECAUSE TO HAVE A FUNCTIONING GOVERNMENT, WE ACTUALLY NEED THE BRANCHES TO ALL DO THEIR JOBS.

AND I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE COURT TO NOT AT A POINT LIKE THIS, NOT SAY, WE'LL TAKE ON THE JOB.

JUST SAY, IT'S ACTUALLY YOUR JOB.

>> Mary: LET'S TALK ABOUT YOUR FORMER BOSS BECAUSE, ACTUALLY, A LOT OF LEGISLATION IS RELEVANT.

WE JUST HAD, I THINK IT WAS LAST WEEK, GOVERNOR WALZ SIGNED THE MOST AGGRESSIVE RENEWABLE ENERGY BILL SINCE REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR TIM PAWLENTY, WHEN IT WAS COOL TO BE ENVIRONMENTAL REPUBLICAN.

>> WE THOUGHT IT WAS COOL, RIGHT?

SO, IN 2007, GOVERNOR PAWLENTY PROPOSED THE EXT GENERATION ENERGY ACT.

AND, SO, THAT WAS TAKING US TO 20% RENEWABLE BY 2020.

WHICH THE STATE HAS ACTUALLY EXCEEDED, RIGHT?

WE GOT HERE AHEAD OF THAT SCHEDULE.

AND, SO, THAT AT THE TIME WAS THE STRONGEST RENEWABLE ENERGY STANDARD IN THE COUNTRY.

AND NOW I THINK WHAT GOVERNOR WALZ HAS DONE IS THE NEWEST STRONGEST STANDARD ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

SO, YEAH, I DO -- THERE'S BEEN A CHANGE IN TONE.

FROM GOVERNOR PAWLENTY'S PERSPECTIVE, BACK IN 2007, WE WANTED TO POSITION MINNESOTA AS A LEADER IN THIS SPACE.

THAT THERE ARE JOBS TO BE CREATED, THAT WE COULD DO GOOD THINGS, DO IT THE RIGHT WAY.

AND THAT WAS OUR MESSAGE AND IDEA.

AND I THINK THAT CAN BE A REPUBLICAN IDEA.

>> Mary: I WAS OLD ENOUGH TO BE THERE FOR THE BILL SIGNING, WHICH WAS COMPLETELY BIPARTISAN.

>> YEAH.

>> Mary: THIS NOT SO MUCH.

>> WELL, SO, BUT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MEANTIME, RIGHT, BETWEEN THEN AND NOW, TIM PAWLENTY ALSO RAN FOR PRESIDENT, WHERE HE THEN KIND OF WALKED BACK HIS SUPPORT FOR THAT VERY BILL BECAUSE BEING -- BELIEVING IN CLIMATE CHANGE BECAME A PARTISAN ISSUE.

SO, UNFORTUNATELY, IT HAS BECOME PARTISAN IN A WAY THAT IT SHOULDN'T AND THAT IT WASN'T IN THE PAST, RIGHT?

IT IS ABOUT JOBS.

IT IS ABOUT CREATING JOBS.

IT IS ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE PLANET.

AND THAT'S A GOOD THING.

AND, SO, NOW IT COULD ONLY PASS WITH A DEMOCRATIC TRIFECTA.

>> Mary: FINAL ISSUE, 24-HOUR WAITING PERIOD FOR ABORTION WAS SIGNED BY GOVERNOR PAWLENTY.

THAT'S GONE NOW, TOO.

>> YES.

THOSE ISSUES HAVE CHANGED.

OF COURSE, WITH THE DFL TRIFECTA, YOU KNOW, REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS WAS RIGHT ON THE TOP OF THEIR AGENDA.

AND, SO, YES, YOU SEE SOME OF THOSE CHANGES HAPPENING.

AND THAT'S -- YOU KNOW, ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES, WE'RE SEEING SOME OF THOSE PLAY OUT.

>> Mary: IS THERE ANY CHANCE DEMOCRATS HAVE GONE TOO FAR ON THAT ISSUE?

>> LOOK, I THINK DEMOCRATS LEARNED A LESSON THE LAST IME WE HAD A TRIFECTA.

OUR LEADERS IN THE SENATE AND HOUSE, NERVOUS ABOUT NOT PUSHING SOME THINGS LIKE DRIVER'S LICENSES, MINIMUM WAGE, WE HAD TO, LIKE, REALLY FORCE THE ISSUE.

>> Mary: I SHOULD COME ACK, DRIVER'S LICENSE, TOO, WAS ANOTHER PAWLENTY ERA POLICY THAT'S GETTING WALKED BACK NOW.

>> SURE.

ALSO, YOU KNOW, GOVERNOR PAWLENTY PUT THE STATUS CHECK ON DRIVER'S LICENSES AT THE TIME.

SO THAT WAS REALLY PART OF IT THEN.

WAS IN THAT POST-9/11 KIND OF ATMOSPHERE AND ATTITUDE THAT WE REALLY NEED TO BE TRACKING AND PAYING ATTENTION TO WHO'S, YOU KNOW, USING A DRIVER'S LICENSE.

>> Mary: THAT GOING TO PASS THE SENATE AS WELL?

>> I BELIEVE SO.

[ OVERLAPPING CONVERSATION ] >> AND THAT ALSO HAS -- THAT HAS HAD BIPARTISAN SUPPORT OVER THE YEAR.

BUT I THINK DEMOCRATS LEARNED A LESSON THE LAST TIME.

WE WERE TIMID AND THEY LOST IT ANYWAY.

THIS TIME THEY'RE ACTUALLY