In a game of political chicken over the state’s “clean cars” emissions standards, Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor legislators have won. This time.

After months of debate and efforts by the state’s Republicans to stall the upcoming two-year budget if DFL Gov. Tim Walz did not rescind his clean cars proposal, the Minnesota House of Representatives on Friday approved by a 99-34 vote an environmental budget bill that includes tougher vehicle emissions standards and requires state auto dealers to carry more hybrid and electric vehicles.

But in this ongoing, hotly debated battle, which pushed the Minnesota Legislature into special session, the matter is likely to turn into a key 2022 election issue. Walz is up for re-election. Republicans, who are are hoping to gain control of the Minnesota House as well, are suggesting the governor has abused his emergency powers authority and pointing to civil unrest in Minneapolis following the death of George Floyd.

The state’s DFL party controls the Minnesota House of Representatives 70-64. The Republican caucus holds a slim 34-31-2 edge in the Minnesota Senate. And the Senate Majority Leader, Sen. Paul Gazelka (R), who helped negotiate the compromise bill, has made it clear the fight is not over. The compromise bill passed 49-14 in the Senate.

“The environmental bill will be moving forward,” Gazelka had said in a press conference earlier last week, confirming the Senate Republicans had backed down on their demand to delay the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) from implementing emissions standards effective Jan. 1, 2024.

Gazelka said that he did not approve of an administrative law judge’s decision in early May to support Walz’s tougher car emissions standards, which closely align with California’s rules, nor with the MPCA’s role in any rulemaking. He and fellow Republicans want the standards addressed in a legislative process. Instead, Gazelka says the compromise “means this becomes an election issue.”

Friday’s two-and-a-half-hour debate on the clean cars issue showed that the vehicle emissions standards have become a political hot potato in Minnesota.

Even the state’s more liberal DFLers weren’t overly excited about the comprehensive environmental bill, which included $367 billion for agencies and programs ranging from the MPCA, the Department of Natural Resources, state parks, the Minnesota Zoo and Science Museum. Progressive DFL legislators didn’t think it went far enough into dealing with climate change.

Rep. Rick Hansen (DFL) authored the House bill and was one of a small group of legislators who helped frame the compromise.

“I come here not to praise this bill nor to bury it,” Hansen said Friday before debate. “I come here to ask you to vote for it.” He acknowledged “weeks of very, very, very difficult negotiations.”

But Hansen, who in earlier conference committee meetings often criticized Republican efforts to stall the vehicle emissions standards as “brinkmanship,” said “we’re just disgusted by it,” and moved quickly back to political jabs at the opposition. Hansen said Republicans used “closure of the (state) parks…as a potential bludgeon.”

Hansen also used his time to criticize proposed cuts by Republicans of several environmental issues advocated by DFLers in the Minnesota House.

“The Senate [Republicans] had proposed cutting pollinators (funding for programs to foster an increase in bees and monarchs),” Hansen said. “They had proposed cutting microplastics (funding). They had proposed cutting STEM projects. They had proposed cutting funds for the Science Museum. All that is restored.”

Republican Rep. Josh Heintzeman led the party’s opposition to the clean cars language in the bill. But two amendments he proposed were defeated in party-line votes. The first had requested the bill be sent back to the Minnesota House committee for discussion; the second was to delete the clean cars language entirely from the bill.

“Obviously, there’s been a controversial discussion about this issue,” Heintzeman said, adding that the Republicans’ goal was to ask that the MPCA “no longer intends to pursue (emissions standards) adoption” until “a thorough opportunity to get to some of the facts.”

A significant number of fellow Republican House members supported Heintzeman’s amendment proposals to slow down or eliminate the MPCA’s rulemaking authority.

“It don’t (sic) make sense to follow California standards and also technology that’s not up to snuff in Minnesota weather,” said Rep. Jeff Backer, (R). Backer said electric car batteries don’t perform well in minus-30 degree cold.

Backer said other than Republicans’ ongoing disagreement over Walz’s emergency powers actions during the COVID pandemic, the clean cars issue was the second most important issue among his constituents in north central and western Minnesota. Fellow Republican Rep. Brian Johnson was more blunt.

“We don’t need a bunch of legislators from California telling us what to do,” Johnson said. “We’ve seen the mess in California. It’s almost as bad as the mess in Minneapolis.”

Heintzeman added: “I don’t think the (MPCA) agency has the credibility to push something like this forward.”

“The technology is going to get better. That’s a good thing. But trying to force it through baffles as opposed to telling the market to reach those needs and expectations.”

Critics say bill doesn’t go far enough

Despite the compromise on the environmental bill, some DFLers in the State Senate voted against the package because of its lack of attention to climate change issues.

“We’ve got a problem here and a real crisis,” said 11-term DFL Sen. John Marty, one of the Senate’s most liberal legislators.

“I’ve talked to a lot of people who want to buy electric cars, and their dealers don’t carry them,” Marty said. “But we can’t talk about climate change in this bill. I’m going to vote against it because of that.”

Sen. Bill Engebrigtsen (R), who chaired the Senate’s environmental committee and championed its bill, often said Walz’s clean cars initiatives could not be included and was willing to shut down state government if it was. But he backed down from that stance.

“Everybody is anxious to move on,” he said. “This is a good bill.”

Fellow Republican Sen. Andrew Mathews disagreed and said the matter should not be left up to executive branch rulemaking, calling it an effort “to go around the legislative process.”

“The people of Minnesota have several shots down the road to get this changed,” he added, hinting at hopes the Republicans can win control of both state chambers and the governor’s race.

But Gazelka, who fellow Republicans in the House criticized for closing them out of negotiations, had the final word.

“It’s always a cautionary tale of be careful you don’t go too far, too soon,” he said. “I don’t want to follow California emissions standards. I think Minnesota could have found its own way.”