Here's What Minnesota House File 1097 Actually Says:
H.F. No. 1097, as introduced - 85th Legislative Session (2007-2008) Posted on Feb 16, 2007
1.1A bill for an act
1.2relating to local government; modifying the definition of "dependent" for
1.3purposes of group benefits for local government officers and employees;
1.4amending Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 471.61, subdivision 1a.
1.5BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
1.6 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 471.61, subdivision 1a, is amended to read: 1.7 Subd. 1a. Dependents. Notwithstanding the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1969, 1.8section 471.61, as amended by Laws 1971, chapter 451, section 1, the word "dependents" 1.9as used therein shall mean spouse and minor unmarried children under the age of 18 years 1.10and dependent students under the age of 25 years actually dependent upon the employee, 1.11and others as defined by governmental units at their discretion. 1.12 Sec. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
1.13Section 1 is effective the day following final enactment.
The Minnesota Family Council and Minnesotans in Defense of Marriage are having grand mal seizures because the sponsors of this bill are suggesting that local units of government could have some discretion in defining benefits for their employees.
This isn't a mandate to give benefits to anybody - it just removes a restriction from the law.
Get over it, already.
UPDATE by Eva: Jason Lewis was ranting about this bill on his show today.