| Date | State | Bill No. | Bill Title | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 8, 2008 | MN | SF 875 | Minimum Wage Increase | Conference Report Adopted - Senate (40 - 18) |
| May 8, 2008 | MN | SF 875 | Minimum Wage Increase | Conference Report Adopted - House (89 - 45) |
| May 5, 2008 | MN | Howes Amendment: Gas Tax Holiday | Amendment Rejected - House (28 - 102) | |
| May 5, 2008 | MN | HF 3149 | Homeowner and Property Tax Bill | Bill Passed - House (80 - 52) |
| May 1, 2008 | MN | SF 875 | Minimum Wage Increase | Bill Passed - House (82 - 45) |
| April 23, 2008 | MN | HF 3195 | Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cap and Trade Program Report | Bill Passed - House (91 - 38) |
| April 14, 2008 | MN | SF 2822 | "Good Faith" Requirement for Insurance Companies | Conference Report Adopted - Senate (47 - 15) |
| April 14, 2008 | MN | SF 2822 | "Good Faith" Requirement for Insurance Companies | Conference Report Adopted - House (93 - 39) |
| March 31, 2008 | MN | SF 3099 | Health Improvement Program | Bill Passed - Senate (39 - 23) |
| March 27, 2008 | MN | Seifert Amendment: Breaches of Insurance Policy | Amendment Adopted - House (80 - 52) | |
| March 27, 2008 | MN | Marty Amnd. | Health Improvement Program Amendments | Amendment Rejected - Senate (32 - 33) |
| March 27, 2008 | MN | SF 2822 | "Good Faith" Requirement for Insurance Companies | Bill Passed - House (81 - 51) |
| March 19, 2008 | MN | SF 2822 | "Good Faith" Requirement for Insurance Companies | Bill Passed - Senate (50 - 15) |
| March 18, 2008 | MN | Scheid Amnd. | Insurance Payouts Amendment | Amendment Adopted - Senate (37 - 30) |
Key Votes
2008 Minnesota Business and Consumers Key Votes
State
- Minnesota down
- All States
- National
- Alabama
- Alaska
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- California
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- Florida
- Georgia
- Hawaii
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Mississippi
- Missouri
- Montana
- National
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin
- Wyoming
Issue
- Business and Consumers down
- All
- Abortion
- Abortion and Reproductive
- Agriculture and Food
- Animals and Wildlife
- Arts, Entertainment, and History
- Budget, Spending and Taxes
- Business and Consumers
- Campaign Finance and Elections
- Civil Liberties and Civil Rights
- Conservative
- Crime
- Death Penalty
- Defense
- Drugs
- Education
- Employment and Affirmative Action
- Energy
- Environment
- Executive Branch
- Federal, State and Local Relations
- Foreign Affairs
- Gambling and Gaming
- Government Operations
- Guns
- Health and Health Care
- Housing and Property
- Immigration
- Indigenous Peoples
- Judicial Branch
- Labor Unions
- Legislative Branch
- Liberal
- Marriage, Family, and Children
- Military Personnel
- National Security
- Science
- Senior Citizens
- Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
- Social
- Stem Cell Research
- Technology and Communication
- Trade
- Transportation
- Unemployed and Low-Income
- Veterans
- Women
Keyword Search
About the Selection and Description of Key Votes
Project Vote Smart provides easy access to congressional and state voting records and maintains a collection of key votes grouped by issue. Project Vote Smart uses the following criteria to select key votes:
- The vote should be helpful in portraying how a member stands on a particular issue
- The vote should be clear for any person to understand
- The vote has received media attention
- The vote was passed or defeated by a very close margin
- Occasionally, if a specific bill is consistently inquired about on the Voter's Research Hotline, the vote will be added
Project Vote Smart provides a summary of the version of the bill text associated with each selected key vote. The summary does not necessarily reflect the content of the final version of the bill. Summaries are written by Project Vote Smart's staff and interns, who adhere to the Project's strict policies and procedures in order to guarantee absolute impartiality and accuracy. Each key vote selection is reviewed by the Project's community of advisers, who are political scientists and journalists from all fifty states.