Minnesota Senate Republicans propose cutting $646 million from state budget
Republicans at the Minnesota Legislature say they want to save you money by cutting the budget and returning surpluses.
State Senate Republicans on Monday announced a plan that involves $646 million in cuts they say need to be made during this year's budget negotiations.
Some of their proposed cuts include $200 million for a proposed high-speed train line between Minneapolis and Duluth,
called the Northern Light Express
, $220 million in MnCare payments for undocumented noncitizens and $158 million in tax credits for people without a social security number.
"What we heard loud and clear this last election, what we're hearing from our constituents, is that they want to ensure that taxpayer dollars are going to Minnesota families and not incentivizing illegal behavior and illegal immigration here in the state of Minnesota," State Sen. Jordan Rasmusson, R-Fergus Falls, said.
The Minnesota House,
which returned to a rare 67-67 tie on Monday
, rejected a bill that would have put a constitutional amendment on the 2026 ballot that would mandate any budget surplus be put in a special fund and sent back to taxpayers. State House members voted along party lines on the bill, which needed 68 votes to pass.
The projected surplus for fiscal years 2026 and 2027 is $616 million. For 2028 and 2029, a budget deficit of $6 billion is projected.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
41 minutes ago
- The Hill
How Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill' stacks up against his 2017 tax bill
As Senate Republicans deliberate modifications to the reconciliation budget bill that the House of Representatives passed on May 22, one thing looks increasingly clear. Namely, the all-encompassing bill that President Trump favors will likely be enacted in July, despite protests from some Republican senators on various elements of the package. In that case, it would become the signature legislation of Donald Trump's second term, just as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 was in his first term. So, how do the two bills compare? One of the major accomplishments of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was to make the U.S. corporate tax code competitive with the rest of the world by lowering the marginal tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. According to economists Kevin Brady and Douglas Holz-Eakin, it did so by making the corporate rate cuts permanent, which proved to be highly successful. They point out that economic growth and business capital spending accelerated after the bill was enacted, and the U.S. did not lose a single multinational headquarters following a decade of large exoduses. The legislation currently being considered, by comparison, is focused on extending cuts in personal tax rates that are set to expire at the end of this year. Proponents claim that if the personal tax rates expire, most Americans will face tax increases that could weaken the economy. Democrats, however, argue that the tax cuts in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act primarily benefit the very wealthy rather than middle-class or lower-income families, and they favor boosting taxes on the wealthy and corporations. Jeff Stein of the Washington Post observes that to counter this, Trump pivoted during the 2024 campaign by proposing new tax cuts that were easier to sell to specific groups of voters. The proposals included an end to taxes on tips, overtime and Social Security, as well as a tax deduction on borrowing costs to buy American-made cars. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said the Republicans in his chamber expect to deliver on these campaign promises, according to Bloomberg. Stein points out that, in the process, there has been a significant change in the way the Republican leadership views tax policy since Trump's first term. Most of the policies in the 2017 law were developed over the course of many years by think tanks in Washington, with former House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and former Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) serving as the principal architects. Their overriding goal was to simplify the code and lessen distortions without adding to budget deficits. In comparison, the current Republican approach to tax policy is more populist-oriented and designed to provide tax relief to select groups of voters. Politico reports that Republicans are piling on new tax breaks in hopes of boosting tax refunds ahead of next year's midterm elections. The provisions include a larger child tax credit, a larger state and local tax deduction and others that would be made retroactively. One challenge is that the extension of the 2017 tax cuts and the new initiatives are estimated to cost the federal government about $4 trillion over the next 10 years. Accordingly, there is little chance that the budget deficit will be brought under control, with spending cuts of only $1.5 trillion below current projections contemplated over that period. Another concern is that the tax cuts in the bill passed by the House are less oriented to promote long-term growth than the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was. The Tax Foundation estimates that it would increase long-term GDP by only 0.8 percent (not annualized). It states that, 'by introducing narrowly targeted new provisions and sunsetting pro-growth provisions like bonus depreciation and [research and development] expensing, it leaves economic growth on the table.' Senate Republicans are trying to address this by including more permanent business tax cuts and full expensing for equipment and research and development in their version of the bill. The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board argues that one of the most constructive changes in the 2017 bill was letting businesses immediately deduct the full cost of capital outlays rather than spread them out. It boosted capital spending until full expensing was phased out in 2022. Another critique relates to fairness. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities contends that the House bill is skewed to the wealthy, costs more than extending the 2017 tax law and fails to deliver for families. It concludes that instead of changing course and prioritizing people with low and moderate incomes, the tax bill only offers more of the same. When the impact of proposed Medicaid cuts is factored into the equation, the Republican bill is unpopular with the public at large. For example, recent polls undertaken by Quinnipiac, the Washington Post-Ipsos and KFF all show that a plurality of voters oppose the House bill, with many citing the attempt to pare back Medicaid funding. Finally, my take is that Trump is making the same mistake Joe Biden did by believing that all-encompassing legislation is better than more targeted bills that spell out clear policy objectives. The principal difference is that Trump favors a grab-bag of tax cuts and spending cuts, whereas Biden was enamored with massive spending bills. In my book about Trump's economic policies in his first term, my assessment was that investors would respond enthusiastically to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which they did as the stock market rose steadily leading up to its passage. In comparison, the market's response this time is more ambiguous amid confusion about the objectives of the 'big, beautiful bill' and uncertainty about the global trade conflict. Nicholas Sargen, Ph.D., is an economic consultant for Fort Washington Investment Advisors and is affiliated with the University of Virginia's Darden School of Business. He has written three books, including 'Investing in the Trump Era: How Economic Policies Impact Financial Markets.'
Fox News
43 minutes ago
- Fox News
'No basis in reality': Expert turns tables on key Democrat claim against Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'
Democrats in Washington, D.C., are misrepresenting major criticisms of President Trump's "big beautiful bill" with incorrect facts, according to an expert who spoke to Fox News Digital this week as Trump's budget reconciliation package is debated in Congress. "The bill doesn't cut benefits for anyone who has income below the poverty line, anyone who is working at least 20 hours a week and not caring for a child, and people who are Americans," Jim Agresti, president and cofounder of Just Facts, told Fox News Digital in response to criticisms from Democrats and a handful of Republicans, including Sen. Josh Hawley, that Trump's bill will cut Medicaid and disproportionately hurt the poor. "In other words, it cuts out illegal immigrants who are not Americans and fraudsters. So that narrative has no basis in reality. See, what's been going on since the Medicaid program was started? Is that it's been expanded and expanded and extended. You know, it got its start in 1966. And since that time, the poverty rate has stayed roughly level around 11% to 15%. While the portion of people in the United States on Medicaid has skyrocketed from 3% to 29%. Right now, 2.5 times more people are on Medicaid than are in poverty." Medicaid cuts and reform have been a major sticking point with Democrats, who have merged data from two new reports from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to back up claims that nearly 14 million would lose coverage. The White House and Republicans have objected, as not all the policy proposals evaluated were actually included in Republicans' legislation, and far fewer people would actually face insurance loss. Instead, Republicans argue that their proposed reforms to implement work requirements, strengthen eligibility checks and crack down on Medicaid for illegal immigrants preserve the program for those who really need it. "I agree," Dem. Rep. Jasmine Crockett said in response to a claim on CNN that Republicans "want poor people to die" with Medicaid cuts. Agresti told Fox News Digital that the Medicaid cuts are aimed at bringing people out of poverty and waste. "It's putting some criteria down to say, 'Hey, if you want this, and you're not in poverty, you need to work,'" Agresti said. "You need to do something to better your situation, which is what these programs are supposed to be, lifting people out of poverty, not sticking them there for eternity. So the whole idea is to get people working, give them an incentive. Hey, if you want to do better in life, and you want this Medicaid coverage, then you have to earn it." Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders has claimed the bill is a "death sentence for the working class," because it raises health insurance "copayments for poor people." Agresti called that claim "outlandish." "First of all, the Big Beautiful Bill does not raise copayments on anyone who's below the poverty line," he explained. "Now, for people who are above the poverty line, it requires states to at least charge some sort of copayment, and it also reduces, actually, the max copayment from $100 per visit to $35 per visit." Agresti went on to explain that under the current system, "people have basically free rein to just go to a doctor or an emergency room or any other place without any co-payment, and they're not in poverty." "What ends up happening is they waste a ton of money," Agresti said. "This has been proven through randomized control trials, which are the gold standard for social science analysis, where you have people in a lottery system, some people get the benefit, and some people don't, and what you end up seeing is that people who don't have to have skin in the game, abuse emergency rooms, they go there for a stuffy nose, rack up all this money, and it does nothing to improve their health. It's just wasteful." In a statement to Fox News Digital, Sanders Communications Director Anna Bahr said, "Mr. Agresti's facts here are simply incorrect." Sanders' office added that "nearly half of all enrollees on the ACA exchanges are Republicans" and pointed to the House-passed reconciliation bill that Sanders' office argues "says that if a worker can't navigate the maze of paperwork that the bill creates for Medicaid enrollees, they are barred from receiving ACA tax credits as well." "But workers must earn at least $15,650 per year to qualify for tax credits on the ACA marketplaces – approximately equal to the annual income for a full-time worker earning the federal minimum wage." Sanders' office also pointed to "CBO estimates that 16 million people will lose insurance as a result of the House-passed bill and the Republicans ending the ACA's enhanced premium tax credits." Sanders' office also reiterated that the House-passed bill makes a "fundamental change" to copay for Medicaid beneficiaries, shifting from optional to mandatory. "While claiming that I'm 'incorrect,' Sanders' staff fails to provide a single fact that shows the BBB cuts health care for poor working Americans," Agresti responded. "It's especially laughable that they cite expanded Obamacare subsidies in this context, because people in poverty aren't even eligible for them," Agresti continued. "After this 'temporary' Covid-era handout expires, people with incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty level — or $150,600 for a family of five — will still be eligible for this welfare program, although they will receive less." Agresti argued that the claim a "max $35 copay (for people who are not poor) 'hurts working families'" is not supported by research "which makes generalizations and merely cites 'associations.'" "As commonly taught in high school math, association doesn't prove causation," Agresti said. Sanders' office told Fox News Digital, "Mr. Agresti seems to believe that a working family of four earning only $32,150 per year doesn't deserve help affording their health care. Health care in the United States is more expensive than anywhere in the world. Terminating health care coverage for 16 million Americans and increasing health care costs for millions will make it harder for working people to afford the health care they need, even if Mr. Agresti doesn't agree." Agresti also took issue with the narrative that cuts cannot be made to Medicaid without cutting benefits to people who are entitled to them. "The Government Accountability Office has put out figures that are astonishing, hundreds of billions of dollars a year are going to waste," Agresti said. "So, yeah, some criteria to make sure that doesn't happen is a wise idea. Unfortunately, there is a ton of white-collar crime in this country, and this kind of crime is a white-collar crime. It's not committed with a gun, or by robbing or punching someone, it's committed by fraud, and there's an enormous amount of it. "And the big, beautiful bill, again, seeks to rein that in by putting a criteria to make sure we're checking people's income, we're checking their assets. A lot of these federal programs, government health care programs, they've stopped checking assets. So you could be a lottery winner sitting on $3 million in cash and have very little income. And still get children's health insurance program benefits for your kids." Hawley said on Monday that he did not have a problem with some of the marquee changes to Medicaid that his House Republican counterparts wanted, including stricter work requirements, booting illegal immigrants from benefit rolls and rooting out waste, fraud and abuse in the program that serves tens of millions of Americans. However, he noted that about 1.3 million Missourians rely on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and contended that most were working. "These are not people who are sitting around, these are people who are working," he said. "They're on Medicaid because they cannot afford private health insurance, and they don't get it on the job." "And I just think it's wrong to go to those people and say, 'Well, you know, we know you're doing the best, we know that you're working hard, but we're going to take away your health care access,'" he continued.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
The Karen Read race
CASE CLOSED, RACE OPEN — The drama surrounding the drawn-out Karen Read murder trial finally reached its courtroom conclusion Wednesday. Now, it's about to hit the campaign trail. Read was acquitted Wednesday of the second-degree murder charge prosecutors retried her for, accusing her of killing her boyfriend, John O'Keefe. The made-for-TV trial and retrial (now part of an HBO docuseries with a three-part Netflix film on the way) attracted a flurry of attention across the country and outside the courthouse. It also drew scrutiny to Norfolk County District Attorney Michael Morrissey's office, particularly after one of the lead investigators on the case, Michael Proctor, was suspended and then fired after an investigation found he shared details of the case with non-law enforcement personnel and disparaged Read in a series of texts. Morrissey has already drawn two Democratic challengers — Craig MacLellan, a former prosecutor in Suffolk County, and Djuna Perkins, a former assistant district attorney in Suffolk County— who both launched their campaigns amid the messy trial last year. Perkins called on Morrissey to step down in a lengthy Facebook post in the wake of the verdict, criticizing the cost of retrying the case. Republicans are also eyeing the office. The MassGOP put out calls to potential candidates on social media over the past few days. Morrissey's campaign didn't respond to an inquiry yesterday. A poll conducted shortly after the verdict showed Morrisey's support flagging. Only about 4 percent of the more than 1,100 registered voters who responded to the Opinion Diagnostics survey — which ran from 5 p.m. to midnight Wednesday after the jury announced their verdict — said they believed he had performed his job as Norfolk County District Attorney well enough to deserve reelection. Sixty percent said they believed it's time for someone new to fill the role. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. Based on those results, 'It is impossible for me to see how he is going to be reelected in 2026 either by winning a Democratic primary, or winning a general election,' pollster Brian Wynne told Playbook. Morrissey, who hasn't faced an electoral challenge in more than a decade, still has a cash advantage. He has $426,696 in his campaign account as of the end of May, more than both Perkins ($30,517) and MacLellan ($25,002). GOOD FRIDAY MORNING, MASSACHUSETTS. Stay cool and stay off the Mass Pike this weekend if you can help it. TODAY — Gov. Maura Healey speaks at Embrace Boston's 'Embrace Ideas Festival' at 1 p.m. in Boston. Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll speaks at a ribbon cutting for Martha's Vineyard Hospital & Navigator Nursing Home's workforce housing initiative at 5 p.m. in Edgartown. Boston Mayor Michelle Wu speaks at the Pine Street Inn job training graduation at 10:45 a.m. in the South End. THIS WEEKEND — Rep. Katherine Clark is on WBZ's 'Keller @ Large' at 8:30 a.m. and NBC 10 Boston Weekend Today at 9:30 a.m. Sunday. Have a tip, story, suggestion, birthday, anniversary, new job, or any other nugget for the Playbook? Drop me a line: kgarrity@ DATELINE BEACON HILL — Senate putting reproductive rights bill on floor next week by Chris Lisinski, State House News Service: 'The Senate plans to vote next week on legislation updating a 2022 law that shields reproductive and transgender care providers from out-of-state legal action, Senate President Karen Spilka said Wednesday. Marking a response to the shifting policy landscape under the Trump administration, the Senate Ways and Means Committee plans Wednesday to advance the bill (S 2522) that top Senate Democrats pledged to pursue more than two months ago.' — Massachusetts state lawmaker 'lucky' to avoid serious injuries in hit-and-run by Lance Reynolds, Boston Herald: 'Rep. Steven Xiarhos — a Republican who represents Sandwich and parts of Barnstable and Bourne — was involved in the hit-and-run on Route 3 in Braintree, while en route to the State House from Cape Cod, at about 10 a.m. on Wednesday. 'Another driver, operating recklessly at a high rate of speed, struck the rear of Rep. Xiarhos' vehicle on the highway and narrowly missed colliding with a nearby motorcycle,' Xiarhos' office posted on social media Thursday afternoon.' MIGRANTS IN MASSACHUSETTS — Mexican workers arrested in immigration raid in South End by Kevin G. Andrade, The New Bedford Light: 'In what may be the largest single immigration detention in the city since January, federal agents detained multiple men near a popular South End restaurant on Thursday. Between five and eight Mexican men on their way to work in the building trades were detained in an operation at the corner of South Second Street and Cove Street in the South End, according to Corinn Williams, director of the Community Economic Development Center of Southeastern Massachusetts.' — Advocates push for juvenile fingerprint data sharing to end, as ICE detains Chelsea teens by Sarah Betancourt, GBH News: 'In Chelsea, at least five minors who were recently arrested by the Chelsea Police Department were detained by federal immigration authorities after their release from police custody. The similarities of these incidents have many in the community feeling extreme distress. In Massachusetts, it's standard practice for police to collect fingerprints of the people they arrest, and share those fingerprints to a database with the FBI.' THE RACE FOR CITY HALL BIG SPENDERS — The money keeps flowing in Boston's mayoral race. The 'Your City, Your Future' that's backing mayoral hopeful Josh Kraft also reported a spate of new donations Wednesday, including $100,000 from billionaire John Paulson, who was floated as a potential Trump Treasury secretary after the president won his second term. The pro-Wu 'Bold Boston' super PAC also reported its first fundraising haul Wednesday night. The PAC has raised $743,000 so far this cycle, a number that includes a $100,000 donation from 1199 SEIU MA PAC, $175,000 from the Environmental League of Massachusetts Action Fund and $100,000 from Karen Firestone, the mother of Mike Firestone, Wu's chief of policy. — McCauley stepping down from Ward 5 for likely mayoral run by Matt Petry, The Newburyport Daily News: 'Revealing that he has known for months that he would not be seeking another term representing Ward 5, City Councilor Jim McCauley shared why he is seriously considering a run for mayor. 'Last fall, I made a decision not to run for reelection in my ward. And over the last six or eight months, I've seen some things that I think we could do better with a change. I think I can represent that change,' McCauley said, earlier this week while sitting down with Daily News staff.' — West Springfield town councilor, a former cop, aims to silence mayor's 'echo chamber' by Aprell May Munford, The Springfield Republican: 'Over the last 10 years, town government has been on a spending spree, Town Councilor Daniel M. O'Brien says. To oppose that, O'Brien is running for mayor. He took out papers June 2 to run against incumbent Mayor William C. Reichelt in the November election. Reichelt says O'Brien's statements are not true, that town spending is reasonable, and residents are getting value for their money.' PLANES, TRAINS AND AUTOMOBILES — MassDOT goes with Irish service plaza operator over local objections by Matthew Medsgar, Boston Herald: 'The MassDOT board of directors has awarded a 35-year service plaza contract to an Ireland-based company over the hundreds of objections offered against the deal. The board sat through more than an hour of complaints about the deal during their regular meeting on Wednesday, with dozens of speakers arriving in person to voice their displeasure and hundreds of opinions offered to them in writing, before overwhelmingly approving the contract selected by a committee formed for that purpose.' ON CAMPUS — UMass Amherst sounds the alarm amid federal uncertainty by Juliet Schulman-Hall, MassLive: 'As the federal government cuts back on research and curtails foreign student enrollment, the University of Massachusetts Amherst is sounding the alarm and preparing for the worst, according to a Wednesday email from school administrators. All academic and administrative departments on campus have been asked to develop budget scenarios that include 3% and 5% reductions, according to the administrators. The departments are also being instructed to only hire for positions deemed critical to university operations. Hires that cost more than $50,000 must be approved by the vice chancellor or provost, the administrators wrote.' FROM THE DELEGATION — Markey wants answers from Verizon over lead in old phone lines by Jim Kinney, The Springfield Republican: 'U.S. Sen. Edward J. Markey D-Mass., wants to know where Verizon's old lead-sheathed telephone cables are and what the legacy phone company is doing to protect its workers and the public. A sediment sample collected by federal inspectors from a telephone worker manhole under Central Street in Springfield in January was found to be 3% lead.' FROM THE 413 — Déjà vu: Northampton City Council fails to pass budget for second straight year by Alexander MacDougall, Daily Hampshire Gazette: 'In a repeat of last year's outcome, the City Council on Wednesday failed to approve Mayor Gina-Louise Sciarra's budget for next fiscal year, owing in large part to the council president's legal inability to cast the deciding vote. Under the city's charter, the city budget must be passed by a two-thirds majority of the nine-member council, or with six votes. But Council President Alex Jarrett, who represents Ward 5 and spoke in support of the mayor's $145 million budget, could not take the final vote on the budget due to his daytime role in running the Pedal People co-operative collection service.' — Residents petition Amherst to help curb ICE actions in town by Scott Merzbach, Daily Hampshire Gazette: 'Amherst residents are petitioning the Town Council to push back on Immigration and Customs Enforcement actions that might lead to immigrants being held against their will and possibly being deported from the United States. At Monday's council meeting, the second held following the late May incidents in which two Amherst residents were picked up by ICE, an appeal was made by residents for police officers to take a more active role in helping immigrants living in the community, and identifying the legitimacy of federal agents who may be operating in town.' THE LOCAL ANGLE —Worcester city councilors fear for their safety amid rise in threats and harassment by Sam Turken, GBH News: 'Worcester city councilors say they've received an increasing number of threats in recent weeks, as tensions across the community remain high following an immigration arrest that turned chaotic. During a City Council meeting Tuesday, Councilor Etel Haxhiaj said she has been stalked, accosted at public events, and sent messages targeting her sons and calling for her to be raped and killed.' — Bridgewater-Raynham teachers speak out ahead of override elections by Emma Rindlisbacher, The Taunton Daily Gazette — How New Bedford is reviving vacant properties by Grace Ferguson, The New Bedford Light. WHAT ELSE YOU SHOULD BE READING — Five years after COVID closed schools, Massachusetts parents still worry about pandemic effects on kids by Maria Probert, The Boston Globe. — Whistleblowers claim 2024 psychedelics ballot initiative violated campaign finance laws by Jack Gorsline, HorizonMass. — Fall River plows forward amid tariffs and harsh immigration policies by Omar Mohammed, The Boston Globe. HEARD 'ROUND THE BUBBLAH HAPPY BIRTHDAY — to state Sen. Sal DiDomenico, Mark Gardner, The Boston Globe's Samantha J. Gross, Eagle-Tribune alum Breanna Edelstein, Tom Tripicco, Sydney Asbury, and Anastasia Nicolaou. HAPPY BIRTHWEEKEND — to former state Rep. James Dwyer and Mason Reynolds, who celebrate Saturday; and to Sunday birthday-ers Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who is 76; state Rep. Tram Nguyen, state Rep. Kay Khan, Matt Sheaff and Brendan Concannon.
