Walz’ Sixth State of the State Address

Minnesota Report

Yesterday evening, Governor Tim Walz (DFL-MN) addresses the joint session of the legislature and rendered his sixth State of the State Address. He opened his remarks calling on Republicans, likely House Republicans, to come together for our state, “The Best Place to Raise a Child.”

He hit all of the high points of what the trifecta in Minnesota brought to our state and effectively doubled down on those programs. He looked to the East, to Washington DC and took aim at the amassing dark clouds forming from the Donald J Trump (R) Administration and what will be wrenched away from our state with Federal cuts to existing services. These will be met through increased costs on the effected institutions. In the case of Medicare and Medicaid cuts these will be met in full measure but increases of the HMO’s Premium Tax.

He made a pledged, his budget will be balanced for this biennium and into the future, by preventing waste, fraud and abuse, incorporating AI to stop any illegal activity before it occurs, lowering costs of government services through better delivery methods and better customer service.

In the case of the immigration issue, he used a line from a Bob Dylan song “Shelter From the Storm” to indicate Minnesota was a safe haven, even though college students have been snatched by ICE agents.

All and all, the message was short, upbeat, aspirational and heartening, with a clear eye on Washington for it’s next bevy of troubles.

Here is a link to watch the speech on your own.

Trump’s Devolution of America Into Barbarianism

National & Minnesota Report

Barbarianism, you ask? Well yes, when we treat strangers in a fashion that casts them in to prisons in El Salvador it is akin to the prison colonies of yore. Where it was just the Governor of a nearly any place in the world who had not to account to anyone but his King. This means the island nations of the world were conquests for the colonization. The term barbarism is applied and is defined as extreme cruelty or brutality and is a tactic used by playground bullies. And a fat playground bully is all that Donald J Trump (R) is.

As we watchthe approach Trump’s Administration is taking regarding immigration is not at all a Christian approach and warrants a re-visitation to the bible. Matthew 25 Verses 31-46

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne.

32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.

33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.

35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in,

36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink?

38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you?

39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink,

43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Additionally lest we forget, this placard is at the foot of the Statue of Liberty still has value. Emma Lazarus in 1883: Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

The Expected End to the Legislative Session is Clearly Visible: A Stalemate on the Horizon

Minnesota Report

Unless something seismic occurs—a shift so profound that we couldn’t have foreseen it in January—the conclusion of this legislative session is fast becoming inevitable. As we predicted months ago, the absence of clearly defined rules for Conference Committees, coupled with the intransigence of House Republicans who have, for all intents and purposes, refused to acknowledge the need to compromise, leaves Minnesota’s legislature at a standstill. Unless House Republicans are willing to set aside their rigid positions and cooperate with the DFL Senate leadership and Governor Tim Walz (DFL-MN) to secure the necessary votes, we are staring down the barrel of gridlock.

The root of this deadlock is clear: Republicans, steadfast in their anti-government ideology, seem unwilling to engage with the reality that without federal support—accounting for roughly one-third of the state budget—Minnesota faces a fiscal chasm. The withdrawal of these critical funds will leave a substantial hole in the budget, one that we know cannot be filled by cutting essential services or hoping for federal rescue.

There will not be a Bonding Bill, because of the inane Republican mindset this is short-term money. Just as the misguided statement the DFL spent $18 billion in the last legislative session when $12 billion of it was Federal money.

The only practical solution to raise the revenue required to maintain a functioning state government is found in two key areas: Sports Gambling and the establishment of a Casino in downtown Minneapolis. Both of these revenue-generating initiatives, which would direct a significant portion of the proceeds to the state, have been floating around political circles for years, yet still lack the traction they need to move forward. Mark Dayton, before he was elected Governor, first proposed the idea of a casino in the heart of Minnesota’s largest city, yet it remains a distant vision for the state’s future.

Additionally, a well-calibrated increase in taxes on higher incomes and property values is an absolute necessity. This would provide a cushion for the inevitable financial shortfall that we can already see on the horizon. In a time when revenues are falling short, we must accept that tax hikes on those most able to contribute will be the only lifeline available.

To add another layer of complexity, we must consider the longer-term impacts of federal policies. The idiotic and reckless approach of  Donald J. Trump (R), with his relentless efforts to dismantle the federal government, has left our country in a precarious position. The damage is profound, and repairing it will take at least six years once his influence has waned—assuming, of course, that the country survives this turbulent period without descending into a third-world nightmare or collapsing entirely.

So as we move toward the inevitable conclusion of this session, we ask: will Minnesota’s legislators wake up to the fiscal realities at hand, or will they continue to allow ideology to stifle pragmatic solutions? Time is running out, and the moment for action is fast approaching. The end of this session—and the state’s future—will depend on decisions made in the coming days. The question is: will anyone be brave enough to make them?

Four Married Legislator Couples in MN History

Minnesota Report

It was, to say the least, curious when former Speaker Kurt Daudt (R) singled out the recently married Republican legislators, Sen Jason Rarick (R-11, Pine City) and Rep Marion “O’Neill” Rarick (R-29B, Maple Lake), as the latest example of legislative couples in Minnesota. Their districts—103 miles apart—could hardly seem further removed from the reality of their shared lives, much less their political work in St. Paul. The Speacial Election in SD 06 do offer another potential political union if Keri Heintzeman (R-06, Nisswa), win the senate seat and joins her husband, Rep Josh Heintzeman (R-06B, Nisswa), at the Capitol.

While these are interesting anecdotes, they omit the broader historical narrative of married legislators in Minnesota. We must ask: How well do Speaker Daudt and others truly understand the rich history of marital partnerships in our legislature? For context, we need only glance back at the legacy of political couples who have shaped our state’s laws and policies.

The first such notable couple was Brooklyn Park’s Sen Bill Luther (DFL), who began his legislative career in the House in 1975, then transitioned to the Senate in 1977, serving until 1994 before moving on to Congress. He was joined by his wife Darlene (DFL) who served in the House from 1993-2022.

In 1995, the political landscape shifted yet again when Sen Ellen Anderson (DFL-66, St. Paul) married Rep Andy Dawkins (DFL-65A, St. Paul). In a rare alignment, the two represented adjoining districts, a geographic coincidence that allowed them to work closely together on numerous legislative initiatives.

So, Mr Speaker, while we appreciate your attempt to highlight current legislative couples, it seems more than fair to ask that you broaden your perspective and recognize the full depth of history. For instance, it’s important to acknowledge that these political unions transcend partisan lines, serving as vital components of Minnesota’s democratic history. And perhaps, in doing so, we can move beyond partisan assumptions to celebrate the role that marital partnerships have long played in shaping our state’s future.

In this instance, we would encourage Speaker Daudt to remove the partisan lens through which he views Minnesota’s political legacy, allowing for a richer, more inclusive understanding of the complex history that has led us to this moment. After all, to understand the present, one must first appreciate the lessons of the past.

Trump Tariffs Halted for 90 Days, But Why?

National & Minnesota Report

In what can only be described as a bewildering flip-flop, President Donald Trump (R) recently announced a 90-day pause on tariffs that had been set to dramatically reshape the global trade landscape. This sudden backpedal comes after the president, just days earlier, declared his unyielding commitment to the tariffs, insisting that he wouldn’t “blink.” Yet, on Wednesday, he did exactly that, just as the tariffs were on the cusp of implementation. This shift begs the question: Was this the result of pressure from donors, plummeting bond markets, or was it merely a case of Trump caving to political realities?

Former Federal Reserve Chair and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen didn’t mince words when discussing Trump’s economic policies, bluntly calling them the “worst self-inflicted wound” by any administration. Her assessment encapsulates the stunning incompetence that has come to define the Trump era, where chaotic, erratic decisions have often been followed by equally chaotic reversals.

Indeed, the tariff suspension was made just as the stock market began to panic, and bond yields plunged. Trump, who has frequently claimed credit for any positive market movement, seemed quick to step back when it became clear that the very policies he championed were beginning to unravel. As recently as Tuesday, Trump had doubled down on his stance, declaring that tariffs were necessary to “level the playing field.” Yet, only a day later, he stood before the cameras announcing a temporary halt, admitting that the tariffs were causing too much unease. It was, in essence, a desperate attempt to stymie the market volatility his own administration had created.

The disconnect between Trump’s earlier rhetoric and his sudden retreat only highlights his failure to understand the economic consequences of his actions. It was no surprise to many when House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt tried to justify the president’s reversal, claiming that the media “clearly missed” the genius of Trump’s so-called “Art of the Deal.” This laughable defense only serves to underscore the delusion surrounding Trump’s policies, where self-aggrandizing narratives often overshadow basic economic understanding. Besides, he didn’t even write the book it was ghostwritten for him by Tony Schwartz, nor is it likely he even has read it.

What’s more, Trump’s habitual need to shift blame remains ever-present. As the tariffs began to take their toll, he quickly pivoted to blaming the Biden administration for everything that went wrong. In fact, just as this article is being written, Trump is convening a cabinet meeting where his secretaries and the ever-present Elon Musk are sitting around a table, engaging in yet another round of disparaging remarks aimed at the current administration’s “failed policies.” It’s a familiar refrain from Trump’s camp: When things go wrong, it’s always someone else’s fault, never his.

In this environment, it seems that Trump and his sycophantic cabinet members have become so caught up in their inflated egos that reality has become secondary. If beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder, then perhaps Trump’s cabinet should be replaced with mirrors and recorded messages that constantly remind them of how wonderful he is. After all, Trump’s reality is one that can only exist in a world of sycophants, yes-men, and uncritical followers who are willing to ignore his many blunders.

The ultimate irony of this tariff debacle is that the very same people who cheerlead his every move are now watching him retreat from a policy that was supposed to signal his tough, deal-making persona. Instead, we are left with an administration that has repeatedly shown it is more adept at making disastrous, self-inflicted wounds than actually managing the complex global economy. It’s time to stop pretending that Trump’s economic decisions are anything other than a series of reckless moves driven by political posturing rather than any real understanding of the world’s financial systems.

In the end, the 90-day tariff pause isn’t a victory for Trump—it’s a glaring admission of failure. This 90-day reprieve may provide temporary relief, but it does nothing to address the underlying incompetence and unpredictability that has marked Trump’s economic policies from the beginning. The truth is, when it comes to international trade and economic strategy, Trump is a man who continues to make promises that he is incapable of keeping, and when his policies begin to backfire, he’s quick to blame others and take credit for things he had no part in. His “Art of the Deal” is nothing more than an illusion—a hollow boast from a president who has consistently failed to deliver on his grand economic vision.

Trump’s Greatest Disconnect with His MAGA Supporters: The Economics of Oversold Lies and Broken Promises

National & Minnesota Report

When Donald J Trump (R) was a candidate, his message resonated with millions of Americans. He was the self-proclaimed outsider who would “drain the swamp,” bring jobs back to the country, and strike deals that would make America great again. He sold a shiny, simple narrative about how his genius in business would fix the economy. Fast-forward to his time in office, and it quickly became clear: Trump the Candidate and Trump the President were two entirely different beings—especially when it comes to understanding and addressing the economic challenges faced by the average American.

What is the greatest disconnect between Trump and his MAGA supporters? It’s not just his policies, though they are riddled with contradictions, false promises, and outright failures. The real issue lies in the deep, almost tragic, gap between Trump’s oversimplified economic rhetoric and the actual economic literacy of his base. You see, Trump’s supporters—largely made up of people who did not complete higher education—are often unable to understand the complex issues of macroeconomics and microeconomics that are necessary to critically evaluate his policies.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a significant portion of Trump’s base is comprised of voters without higher education. In 2020, approximately 58% of Trump voters had only a high school education or less, compared to 34% of Biden voters. This demographic, largely white working-class voters, faces daily struggles with economic insecurity, and yet many are unable to fully grasp the intricate economic systems that affect their lives. The average person isn’t reading economic textbooks or tuning into finance podcasts. Instead, they’re focused on the immediate—the kitchen table economics of inflation, gas prices, and the rising cost of living.

This is where Trump’s rhetoric hits a brick wall. He sells a narrative of simple solutions—one-size-fits-all answers that promise prosperity without any clear understanding of the complexities involved. The promise of bringing jobs back through tariffs, for example, was an illusion of grandeur. Trump’s trade wars led to higher prices for consumers and lost jobs in many industries, such as agriculture, which was especially harmed by retaliatory tariffs from other countries. Yet, despite the clear negative impact on his supporters’ lives, Trump insisted that his “winning” strategies were working.

His campaign slogans worked wonders in stoking fear, but the economic realities were ignored. While Trump parroted about “great trade deals” and “job creation,” his economic team made policies that disproportionately benefited the wealthiest Americans and large corporations, not the working-class voters who were promised a better life. According to the Tax Policy Center, Trump’s tax cuts overwhelmingly benefited the wealthiest Americans, with 83% of the benefits going to the top 1% of earners by 2027. This was a betrayal of the very people who believed Trump was their voice in Washington.

Trump’s voters, many of whom are concerned about inflation and the cost of living, were sold the idea that Trump’s economic policies would fix their problems. Yet, these concerns—real and pressing to working-class Americans—were completely disconnected from the policies that Trump advocated for. The Trump administration’s tariffs did not bring jobs back in any meaningful way; instead, they led to higher prices for everyday goods like food and electronics, all while enriching the very corporations that had outsourced those jobs in the first place.

It’s no secret that Trump, the businessman, sold himself as a deal-maker. But it was a deal with a clear catch—in the real world, there are no easy, instant solutions to the complex issues of international trade, labor markets, and tax policy. Economics is not as simple as claiming victory over a trade deficit or asserting that “America will win.” It’s nuanced. It requires long-term planning, investment in education and infrastructure, and an understanding of how global economies work. Trump, unfortunately, was only ever able to focus on the illusion of success, the quick win that would leave his supporters thinking they were on the winning side.

The stark truth is that while inflation and the cost of living are kitchen-table issues for many Americans, Trump’s policies didn’t address them. His policies were often recklessly oversimplified, glossing over the complexities of economic realities. By the time it became evident that his economic decisions were actually harming the very voters who believed in him, it was too late.

Take, for example, the jobs that were supposed to return as a result of his trade wars. He promised that his tariffs would make it impossible for companies to outsource labor, but the reality was that businesses found new ways to adapt—most often by increasing prices or investing in automation rather than bringing back jobs. This left many workers in industries like manufacturing with no new opportunities and higher costs for the goods they consumed.

Even worse, Trump repeatedly misled his base with grandiose statements that bordered on delusional. For instance, he boldly claimed that his tax cuts would pay for themselves and lead to huge economic growth. Yet, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the tax cuts contributed to a $2 trillion increase in the national debt, with no significant long-term economic gains to show for it. Instead of creating an economic miracle, Trump’s tax policies disproportionately benefited corporations and the wealthiest Americans while leaving the middle class to shoulder the consequences.

In his desire to maintain the facade of a strong economy under his leadership, Trump has shown a complete lack of understanding about what actually drives sustainable growth. Macroeconomics, which deals with the economy as a whole, and microeconomics, which concerns individual markets and behaviors, are clearly not “kitchen-table” issues for his voters. But Trump made them so by overselling simplistic solutions. As the man who once promised to make America great again, his economic legacy is, in reality, a series of self-inflicted wounds, as Janet Yellen so aptly put it. His ignorance of economic theory and reality led him to make decisions that not only didn’t help his supporters but actively harmed them.

At the end of the day, the blame lies with Trump and his administration’s inability to translate populist rhetoric into actual policy solutions. His disconnect with the realities of economics and his voters’ struggles was his greatest flaw, and it’s one that continues to shape the discourse as he prepares to run again for president. When the next election cycle rolls around, will his supporters still buy into the same oversimplified, fact-free rhetoric? Or will they start asking themselves why, after all the grand promises, they’re still waiting for the greatness Trump promised them?

The truth is, Trump’s economic policies never worked for the people who needed them most. Instead, they left a legacy of inflated egos, misguided tax breaks, and inflated trade promises, all while the American people picked up the tab.

Trump’s Tariff Strategy: A Dangerous Game of Manipulation and Malfeasance

International, National & Minnesota Report

As the world watched in stunned silence, Donald J. Trump’s (R) tariff strategy unfolded like a disastrous symphony of political theatrics and economic chaos. It wasn’t just the working-class Americans who were getting squeezed by inflated prices, or the global trading partners left in the wake of the self-inflicted wounds. Behind the scenes, a much darker, more nefarious picture began to emerge—one that pointed to a deliberate and calculated attempt to devalue the stock market for the benefit of a select few. Could Trump’s infamous tariffs have been a manipulative power play to allow his cronies, particularly in South Africa, to purchase undervalued stocks and capitalize on their inevitable recovery once the threat of tariffs subsided?

Let’s break this down.

When Trump announced his trade wars in 2018, claiming tariffs on billions of dollars of Chinese imports, he promised to “level the playing field” and bring back American jobs. The rhetoric was nationalistic, the soundbites were populist, and the message was clear: Trump was standing up for the common worker. But those who were paying attention quickly realized that, under the surface, things weren’t adding up. The tariffs, while supposedly aimed at protecting American industries, were wreaking havoc on American consumers, raising the cost of goods and damaging industries like agriculture, manufacturing, and technology.

But there’s more to this than meets the eye. Trump’s repeated and erratic tariff announcements created massive instability in global stock markets, sending stock prices plummeting with every new tweet or press conference. For months, the market trembled as the trade war between the United States and China escalated, only to be met with yet another abrupt policy change. Companies that had been the darlings of Wall Street suddenly saw their stock prices tumble—a perfect storm for those in the know to swoop in and buy up undervalued assets.

What if, just what if, this wasn’t all a series of accidental blunders or misguided economic policies? What if Trump’s tariff strategy was, at its core, a means to devalue the stock market deliberately, thereby creating an opportunity for his wealthy, well-connected allies to buy up shares at a bargain price? And who, you ask, are these beneficiaries? The answer may lie with Trump’s South African cronies—business partners, financiers, and other shadowy figures who have long had a hand in the Trump Organization’s dealings.

The South African Connection: A Web of Deals and Deception

It’s no secret that Trump has a history of questionable relationships with foreign nationals, and the South African link is particularly troubling. Patrice Motsepe, a billionaire mining magnate from South Africa, is one name that comes to mind, and he is closely followed by Peter Thiel. Motsepe, a man with deep political connections in both South Africa and across Africa, has been a vocal Trump supporter and a financial backer of several of Trump’s ventures. But what if these connections go deeper? What if Motsepe and others were using their access to Trump to create an artificially depressed market, knowing that once the tariffs were lifted or the market stabilized, these stocks would surge once again?

In the case of Thiel, he was the staunch support of Senator JD Vance’s (R-OH) selection for Vice-President. He is known as an iconoclastic technology investor,. This positions him like a vulture circling around artifically depressed stocks. It’s not beyond the realm of possibility that this manipulative tactic was designed to line the pockets of those with inside knowledge of what Trump’s next move would be.

A Malignant Scheme for Profit

As the tariffs began to take their toll on industries, certain sectors—especially technology, agriculture, and automotive—saw their stocks fall into undervalued territory. The likes of Apple, Tesla, and Caterpillar, companies with solid long-term growth potential, saw their stock prices drop. Meanwhile, investors with deep pockets and the right connections began scooping up these valuable shares for pennies on the dollar. It’s not hard to imagine that once the “threat” of tariffs was over—whether due to a change in policy under Trump or his successor—these same stocks would rebound, as they always do, bringing massive profits to those who were shrewd enough to short them during the instability.

While the market was in turmoil, Trump and his allies reaped the rewards of this chaotic environment. Elon Musk, who has been known to have a somewhat cozy relationship with Trump, certainly didn’t miss this opportunity. Tesla’s stock, which saw wild fluctuations during the tariff period, eventually rebounded as expected. Meanwhile, Trump’s corporate donors and key partners—some of them tied to questionable overseas business dealings—could have been quietly preparing to capitalize on this market downturn. It’s a perfect storm of market manipulation and self-interest, with the American people bearing the brunt of the costs.

The Real Beneficiaries: Power, Influence, and Control

It’s hard to ignore the staggering possibility that Trump’s tariff strategy wasn’t just a misguided attempt to revive American manufacturing, but a calculated financial scheme meant to enrich a few well-connected individuals. Who benefits from this? Trump, for one, and his inner circle, which includes foreign nationals who are known to have ties to the president’s business empire. Trump’s South African partners, like Motsepe, have been known to have their fingers in numerous profitable ventures, many of which could benefit greatly from a temporary stock market downturn.

Let’s not forget about the Trump Organization itself. If Trump were to offload some of his own holdings during this tumultuous period, it could allow him to buy them back at a lower price once the tariffs were eased or eliminated. With his track record of making money off real estate and hotel deals, it’s not unreasonable to suspect that he saw this market instability as yet another opportunity to enrich himself and his cronies.

The American workers, on the other hand, are left holding the bag—bearing the brunt of higher costs, struggling with stagnant wages, and getting caught up in the political spectacle of trade wars that never delivered the promised results. They are not the beneficiaries. They are the pawns, manipulated into thinking that Trump’s “America First” agenda was a plan that would help them, when in reality, they were just collateral damage in a game of global financial manipulation.

Conclusion: A Sinister Power Play

Is this all just a conspiracy theory, or is it the reality of what Trump’s tariffs were truly about? The evidence suggests that Trump’s economic decisions—especially with respect to his tariff strategy—were not born out of a desire to protect the American worker, but rather out of a desire to manipulate the markets for the benefit of himself and his global cronies. Whether it was Trump’s own financial interests, his South African business partners, or his allies in the tech world, the real beneficiaries of his actions were always those with the power to move markets and profit off their volatility.

This is a dangerous game of manipulation and malfeasance, and it shows the stark reality that, for Trump, the American people have always been a means to an end. They were never the priority. The only thing that mattered was maintaining power and wealth for himself and his inner circle. The American worker? Well, they were just a stepping stone in the pursuit of profit. The tariffs? Just another tool in his arsenal of financial power plays.

It’s time to call it what it is—manipulation. And the real shame is that, as always, it’s the people at the bottom who pay the price.

After a Server Issue, We’re Back Up and Running, One Important Item We Missed: House Budget Targets

Minnesota Report

Since the House is the body of origination of all spending bills, they set the tenure of the starting points for negotiation with the Governor and Senate on all spending bills. Here is the House Budget Proposal broken out by Committee area. This is followed by the official statements by both House Speaker Lisa DeMuth (R-13A, Cold Spring) and Speaker Emeritus Melissa Hortman (DFL-34B, Broklyn Park).

FinanceCommitteeTargets2025

Demuth: Bipartisan House agreement reached on ‘common-sense budget’ framework

The Minnesota House has reached bipartisan agreement on the framework of a new state budget that that includes the largest spending reduction in Minnesota history to address a looming shortfall.

House Speaker Rep. Lisa Demuth, R-Cold Spring, said legislators have agreed to cut $4 billion from the current budget, with an additional $1.2 billion reduction in 2026-27. Demuth said reduced spending is essential after Democrats in full control of the Capitol spent the $18 billion surplus, raised taxes by $10 billion and increased the state budget by $20 billion – a 40-percent hike – in 2023. The state now faces a projected $6 billion shortfall.

“House Republicans are holding strong on fiscal responsibility, securing budget figures that would represent the largest spending cut in state history and taking a major step toward fixing the shortfall,” Demuth said. “I look forward to our committee chairs working to put together a common-sense budget that makes life more affordable for Minnesotans. At the same time, we need to continue working to crack down on fraud, waste and abuse that is costing taxpayers dearly and damaging the state’s bottom line.”

Education is one area of the budget where Demuth said different approaches need to be reconciled during the budget-making process. Gov. Tim Walz proposes trimming more than $240 million from education in 2026-27 and another $445 million in 2028-29. This includes cutting merit-based teacher compensation (Q Comp), special education transportation, and non-public pupil support.

Meanwhile, Demuth said school districts are feeling the weight of more than 65 unfunded mandates placed on them in 2023. This includes a new leave program, sick-time requirements, and unemployment insurance mandates for hourly school-year employees applied during the summer months.

“Our children continue falling behind in the classroom, yet more and more mandates are putting school districts in dire straits financially,” Demuth said. “We need to turn this around by eliminating micromanagement, mandates, and misplaced priorities in Minnesota’s K-12 education system so we can focus on helping our students succeed.”

Speaker Emeritus Hortman’s Statement on Budget Targets

Today, House and Senate Republicans released their joint budget targets. House DFL Leader Melissa Hortman released the following statement:

“The Republican targets released today are the way back to deficits, the way back to cuts at our local schools, and the way back to tuition hikes. House DFLers are ready to participate in passing a budget that serves Minnesotans, but we won’t participate in passing a budget that takes us backward. We will work to achieve a compromise that invests in Minnesota and Minnesotans, but this budget doesn’t do that.

“What is positive is that Republicans are at least saying they will let conference committees do the work they are supposed to do. The more public and open final negotiations are, the more likely we can get to an orderly, on time finish—for a change.”

Secretary Simon Statement on U.S. SAVE Act

Minnesota Report

SAINT PAUL – On April 10, 2025, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the U.S. Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act commonly known as the SAVE Act.  

Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon issued the following statement:  

“The SAVE Act would cause unprecedented chaos in the U.S. election system – preventing millions of Americans from voting, slowing or stopping work in elections offices, and threatening election workers with criminal prosecution.

Fundamentally, the SAVE Act would change how Americans register to vote. It would require American citizens to go in person to a local election office to prove citizenship. For some, they may be able to show their passport. For others, they may need a birth certificate and a matching photo ID. These requirements would cost Americans time and money. This extra effort could very well lead to American citizens deciding it is just not worth it to vote.  

This legislation especially harms people who have changed their names since birth, members of our military, rural Americans, students, those experiencing poverty, and survivors of domestic violence or natural disasters. These are all groups of people who are more likely to need to repeatedly register to vote and are less likely to have up-to-date and official citizenship documentation in their possession – and the time and money to obtain the proper records and provide them to an election official.

Further, changes under the SAVE Act would be effective immediately. This would be disastrous for state and local election officials who would be forced to rework complicated election systems without the necessary time or resources to enact such wide sweeping changes. More disturbingly, the SAVE Act adds new civil and criminal penalties for election workers who would be left navigating these changes without support, guidance, or resources needed from the federal government.

Ultimately, the SAVE Act would upend the authority of states to conduct free and fair elections. As a defender of the freedom to vote, I strongly encourage the U.S. Senate to reject this proposal.”  

Secretary Simon Statement on Presidential Executive Order on Elections

Minnesota Report

 

On Tuesday, our Secretary of State Steve Simon (DFL-MN) issued the following press release, which although short in length echoes our sentiments on the Election Executive Order proclaimed by Donald J Trump on Monday. In our opinion, Simon effectively notes, Trump has no standing at all in dictating policies or procedures regarding elections.

SAINT PAUL – On March 25, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order on elections.

Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon issued the following statement:

“The President’s recent executive order on elections, if allowed to take effect, would threaten the ability to vote for millions of eligible Americans by adding costly and burdensome new requirements for those registering to vote.  

It attempts a federal takeover of state and locally administered election systems – in part by threatening states with an unlawful cutoff of funding. 

Plainly, this order disregards the U.S. Constitution.

Minnesotans trust our elections because of our common-sense balance of security and accessibility. We already use paper ballots, maintain secure voter registration systems, and count only ballots matched to a registered voter and received by election day.

This executive order would undermine the balance of security and accessibility and erode the freedom to vote for millions of eligible Americans. 

Our office is exploring legal options to stop this order from taking effect. I will always defend our free and fair elections, no matter what this administration will attempt to do.”

Trump Polling Numbers in Key States Falter

National and Minnesota Report Yesterday, articles in the New York Times and the Washington Post spelled good news for the former Vice-President Joe Biden’s campaign (D). https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/25/upshot/poll-2020-biden-battlegrounds.html...

Senate Bonding Then and Now (2018 v 2020)

Minnesota Report Two years ago, the Republican controlled State Senate brought forward it’s Capitol Investment Bill, which failed to pass on a party line vote of 34-33, seven votes short of the 2/3rds majority of 41 votes. What is interesting I what the Republicans...

Minnesota Department of Health COVID-19 Page

Minnesota Report On Friday, Governor Tim Walz (DFL-MN) along with Commissioner Jan Malcolm released the State of Minnesota’s comprehensive COVID-19 page on the Department of Health’s Website. Additionally, the MN House also has a page which provides more and...

Trump’s Continued Call for Hydroxychloroquine

National Report In spite of not having scientific support for his position Donald J Trump (R) continues to put forward his contention that the use of Hydroxychloroquine a drug for Malaria and Lupus and Erythromycin a drug for bacterial infections as a panacea to the...

Walz Executive Orders During Pandemic

Minnesota Report As we are in the midst of the second week of the Stay at Home Executive Order 20-20 more orders are coming from Governor Tim Walz (DFL-MN) to stipulate what options are available to our state’s citizens. Today, Executive Order 20-25 Authorizing Peace...

The Coming of the Four Horsemen

If you want to be memorable in Minnesota State Capitol politics it is good if you are referred to as something other than your name. It is often helpful when a term or a phrase can be applied to your, group, issue or initiative. If you want to be known as something...

2018 House State Fair Poll

Minnesota Report We at Checks & Balances are continuing our tradition of publishing the State Fair Polls found at the State Fair booths in the Education Building. Again, as we have said before, these provide an insight into the mindset and the issues of interest...

2018 Senate State Fair Poll

Minnesota Report State Senate  2016 State Fair Poll Questions (Choose one answer per question)   Demographics Residence Minneapolis/St. Paul Rural Suburban Regional hub of at least 40,000 people (Rochester, Duluth, St. Cloud, Mankato, Moorhead) Another state No...

Candidates Wolgamott and Ek are Each, Seeking a Shot at Redemption

Minnesota Report In December of 2005, the MN Supreme Court Ruled House Candidate Sue Ek (R-MN) ineligible as a candidate for the House seat 15B, do to her failure to reside in the district 60-days prior to the filing period. This means the highest court in our state,...

read more

Leadership Shuffles

Minnesota Report First, it was the rapid one-week ouster of Republican Party Chair Jennifer Carnahan, then the announcement by Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka (R-09, Nisswa) leaving the leadership post and not seeking reelection, followed by the more surprising...

read more

Subscribe to Checks and Balances

Checks & Balances is experiencing some dramatic changes. We are creating a more robust site for your viewing pleasure.
 

Subscribe to Checks and Balances

State(s)

Archives