The Felonious Barbers
Ever have one of those days when you're sure something happened, but then in the absence of direct evidence, you think, "maybe I dreamed it?" Welcome to my day yesterday.
There was a lot going on when I came in yesterday. The 6th District candidates -- some of them -- were on Midday and my TV had the House committee taking on the Vikings. And I had the usual nonsense waiting for me that is always waiting for me.
Out of the corner of my eye, however, I could SWEAR there was a hearing or floor debate in either the House or Senate on a bill that would address licensing restrictions currently on felons, which prevents them from becoming barbers or cosmetologists in Minnesota.
My first reaction, of course is, "is there a problem with an abundance of felonious barbers in Minnesota that I'm not aware of?" And my second thought -- again, of course -- was "Shoot. I wish I had some musical talent because I'd call my group The Felonious Barbers. (Although if I go solo, I will change my name to Felonious Monk).
Create a More Connected Minnesota
MPR News is your trusted resource for the news you need. With your support, MPR News brings accessible, courageous journalism and authentic conversation to everyone - free of paywalls and barriers. Your gift makes a difference.
Anyway, today I decided to investigate the mysterious case of the felonious barbers and cosmetologists that apparently is going on, people, right under our noses, but I couldn't find it.
First, the House Web site's search function is a joke. Search "barber" and you come up with some press release from Rep. Marty Seifert that he issued in 2001, crowing about some breakthrough legislation that benefits barbers. I stopped only momentarily to wonder why he didn't see the coming crisis with felons with clippers. But I moved on.
Then I realized: maybe it's in the Senate. And, aha! I'm not (that) crazy. The Senate did, in fact, debate HF3464. And approved it 35-30. It looked to be mostly along party lines, which tells me it must've been a cool debate. I'm sorry I missed it.
Why do I bring this up? Because this is never going to see the light of day (from the media, I mean. Why cover this when you can do the 42nd, 43rd, and 44th story of the session about the stadiums?). There must've been an interesting debate; perhaps there was a big crime involving a felon posing as a barber or a cosmetologist. I don't know. I missed the debate.
Personally, I have no clue why you even need a license to cut someone's hair in Minnesota and often wonder what would happen if we didn't. Would there be a sudden influx of bad haircuts? Would Al's Hair Emporium expand offerings to nail polishing and methamphetimines? If we prevent them from becoming barbers -- where someone is always in the chair keeping an eye on them -- will felons become insurance agents instead?
We're the 4th biggest binge-drinking state in the country, and we didn't need licenses to accomplish that. Couldn't we cut hair well without licenses? Unless we've been binge drinking, of course.
Anyway, yes, I make light of it and I'm sure it's a serious subject. But I lament that while I was listening to a debate with the same old candidates saying the same old thing in answer to the same old questions (don't take offense, it would've been the same with any group of candidates), this debate was going on in the public arena... and nobody will know.
I actually think it WOULD be insightful (if not inciteful) if at the next big candidate debate...we ignore the same old issues because we know the same old answers....and ask questions about whether barbers should be licensed.
I bet you'd learn something about the candidate you didn't know before.
And that'd be a start.