Shaken Baby Prevention Bill Passes Minnesota House

By a vote of 122 to 12, a bill aimed at reducing the risks of shaken baby syndrome passed the Minnesota House with overwhelming bi-partisan support today. Authored by Representative Phillip Sterner (DFL-Rosemount) the bill would require sudden infant death and shaken baby syndrome training for childcare providers to address the risks not just for infants, but for children to age 5.

“Minnesota has always been a leader in common-sense child protection laws,” said Representative Sterner after the bill’s passage. “This bill simply helps make sure child-care providers have accurate information about the risks of shaking a small child up to the age of five, which in turn may help avert a tragedy.”

Shaken baby syndrome is the term used to describe signs and symptoms that result from violently shaking a small child. The most serious symptoms include: decreased muscle tone, irritability, bruising, decreased appetite or vomiting, poor swallowing or sucking, difficulty breathing, seizures, and difficulty moving head or maintaining visual focus. In the most extreme cases, death of an infant or young child can occur. A leading cause of morbidity and mortality in infants, one third of the victims of SBS survive with minor consequences, one-third suffer permanent injury and one-third die. It is estimated 1,500-3,000 children nationally are diagnosed with the syndrome each year.

Currently, Minnesota has different training standards for child care providers in corporate and family day care settings, and the statutes regarding training are unclear in various family and corporate care statues. HF 782 would keep current training time requirements for SIDS and shaken baby syndrome at current levels; however, it would make those requirements uniform among day care and foster care providers. It would also improve instruction to help providers learn about the syndrome, the dangers and effects of shaking a child, and the causes and triggers that may bring about child shaking.

“We have a special responsibility to protect our youngest Minnesotans.” said Sterner. “Passing this bill during National Shaken Baby Awareness Week reminds us of this responsibility, and helps ensure that caregivers charged with taking care of young children understand the terrible consequences of shaking a child.”

Getting People Back to Work

“State Representative Phillip Sterner, who was on hand to see how the program was going, said he supports DCTC’s efforts and hopes it results in residents finding jobs.

“Getting people back to work is the key,” he said.”

This was taken from the Rosemount Town Pages (4-17-09)

Not only is Representative Sterner active in promoting legislation that helps businesses, he is out in the community helping individuals find jobs, supporting these programs and meeting with small and large businesses in the district to see how we can make Minnesota more economically secure for families.

Honoring Veterans

Because of a bill I am co-author of SF236/HF433, we will now celebrate March 25 as Medal of Honor day in Minnesota. The countless scarifies medal of honor winners have made for our country can never be re-payed. However, we can continue to honor their service and sacrifice. We owe these men and woman a debt of gratitude and I am glad that because of this bill, the Governor and members of the state legislature will honor these veterans.

Disability Legislation

I am proud that today a bill I am a co-author of SF265/HF254 was approved by the Governor. This legislation would require local and state governments to distribute crime alerts in a format that disabled citizens can access. I am not the biggest fan of government mandates on local entities, but this is an essential way to make our communities safer and stronger and I am glad that this legislation is now law.

Successful budget and session will require compromise and cooperation

Midway through my first session as your State Representative, economic issues continue to dominate our discussions. Minnesota is facing a $6.4 billion budget deficit unlike any in our state’s previous history, while job losses are at the highest level since 1983. This perfect storm has left thousands of Minnesotans struggling to hang on to the lives they’ve built for themselves and their families.

These unprecedented conditions are the backdrop of our work to craft Minnesota’s state budget for the next two years. Saving and creating jobs must be the centerpiece of any budget we pass. Equally important is stabilizing our state’s financial picture for the long term. Perhaps the highest priority is finding new ways of delivering essential government services, because the old way of doing things just doesn’t cut it anymore.

As of last week, the House, the Senate and the Governor had all released their budget proposals. Now we’re in the process of finding where our approaches match, and where we need to reconcile competing ideas. I thought it might be useful to look at the three budgets proposals. Then I’d like you to contact me with your thoughts about which approach makes the most sense to you.

The Governor’s plan uses a combination of cuts to health care, city and county aid, along with education payment shifts. He also includes revenue in the form of $1 billion in long-term borrowing and uses one-time federal stimulus money to pay for ongoing funding needs. He provides a slight increase in school funding with a new mandate that requires Q-Comp in every school district and a new pay-for-performance plan. While the Governor’s plan does not include an increase in state taxes, his own Department of Revenue stated that the plan would increase property taxes more than $625 million in 2010, and would leave a budget deficit in excess of $2.5 million two years from now.

The Senate plan is a straightforward combination of across-the-board budget cuts and unspecified tax increases. To their credit, the Senate plan balances the budget for the long term and doesn’t leave a deficit two years from now; however, the 7% cut from every area doesn’t prioritize certain needs over others. At the very minimum, the Senate proposal would mean $1 billion less for schools – almost certainly leading to teacher and other school staff layoffs and increased class sizes.

The House uses a combination of strategic spending cuts – the largest percentage coming from state government. Federal stimulus money, delayed payments to schools and a progressive revenue increase make up the rest. The House proposal prioritizes education by protecting early childhood, K-12 and higher education from budget reductions, creates a small surplus for the next biennium, and replenishes the state’s depleted budget reserves.

While there are significant differences in the three approaches, several similarities stand out. Everyone agrees that we can’t just cut our way out of this mess. And everyone on both sides of the aisle agrees that in order to provide the things that Minnesotans expect from state government – good schools, safe communities and access to health care – more revenue is needed, whether we borrow it, bond for it, or raise it through economic growth or other means. The challenge will be to find revenue that both sides can agree on that is fair, predictable and sustainable.

On issues as important as this, we need to keep the lines of communication open with both sides of the aisle and with the Governor in order to find a compromise that all sides can support. When I came to the Legislature, I pledged to work in a bi-partisan fashion to build consensus. At the end of the day the Legislature writes the legislation and the Governor has to sign it. That means we’ll all have to work together, compromise and focus on the best interests of all Minnesotans – now and in the future.