Latest news with #NicoleNeri
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
‘Big Beautiful Bill' dings states that offer health care to immigrants
Demonstrators gather for a protest organized by the Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee calling for the continuation of MinnesotaCare for adults in the country without authorization at the Minnesota State Capitol in May. The Republican budget bill the U.S. House passed last month would penalize Medicaid expansion states that provide health care to immigrants who are here on humanitarian parole. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer) The Republican budget bill the U.S. House approved last month includes a surprise for the 40 states that have expanded Medicaid: penalties for providing health care to some immigrants who are here legally. Along with punishing the 14 states that use their own funds to cover immigrants who are here illegally, analysts say last-minute changes to the bill would make it all but impossible for states to continue helping some immigrants who are in the country legally, on humanitarian parole. Under the bill, the federal government would slash funding to states that have expanded Medicaid and provide coverage to immigrants who are on humanitarian parole — immigrants who have received permission to temporarily enter the United States due to an emergency or urgent humanitarian reason. The federal government pays 90% of the cost of covering adults without children who are eligible under Medicaid expansion, but the bill would cut that to 80% for those states, doubling the state portion from 10% to 20%. That's the same penalty the bill proposes for states that use their own money to help immigrants who are here illegally. Ironically, states such as Florida that have extended Medicaid coverage to immigrants who are here on humanitarian parole but have not expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act would not be harmed by the bill, said Leonardo Cuello, a Medicaid law and policy expert and research professor at the Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy. It is 'wildly nonsensical and unfair' to penalize expansion states for covering a population that some non-expansion states, such as Florida, also cover, Cuello said. 'It would appear that the purpose is more to punish expansion states than address any genuine concern with immigrant coverage.' West Virginia is one of the states where lawmakers are nervously watching U.S. Senate discussions on the proposed penalty. Republican state Rep. Matt Rohrbach, a deputy House speaker, said West Virginia legislators tabled a proposal that would have ended Medicaid expansion if the federal government reduced its share of the funding, because the state's congressional representatives assured them it wasn't going to happen. Now the future is murkier. Cuello called the proposed penalty 'basically a gun to the head of the states.' 'Congress is framing it as a choice, but the state is being coerced and really has no choice,' he said. There are about 1.3 million people in the United States on humanitarian parole, from Afghanistan, Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Ukraine and Venezuela as well as some Central American children who have rejoined family here. The Trump administration is trying to end parole from some of those countries. A Supreme Court decision May 30 allows the administration to end humanitarian parole for about 500,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Not many of those parolees qualify for Medicaid, which requires a waiting period or special status, but the 40 states with expanded Medicaid could be penalized anyway when they do start accepting them as they begin to qualify, said Tanya Broder, senior counsel for health and economic justice policy at the National Immigration Law Center. It would appear that the purpose is more to punish expansion states than address any genuine concern with immigrant coverage. – Leonardo Cuello, Georgetown University research professor Meanwhile, an increasing number of states and the District of Columbia already are considering scaling back Medicaid coverage for immigrants because of the costs. The federal budget bill, named the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, is now being considered by the Senate, where changes are likely. The fact that so many states could be affected by the last-minute change could mean more scrutiny in that chamber, said Andrea Kovach, senior attorney for health care justice at the Shriver Center on Poverty Law in Chicago. By her count, at least 38 states and the District of Columbia would be affected by the new restrictions, since they accepted some options now offered by Medicaid to cover at least some humanitarian parolees without a five-year waiting period. 'They're all going to be penalized because they added in parolees,' Kovach said. 'So that's 38 times two senators who are going to be very interested in this provision to make sure their state doesn't get their reimbursement knocked down.' The change to exclude people with humanitarian parole was included in a May 21 amendment by U.S. Rep. Jodey Arrington, a Texas Republican who chairs the House budget committee. Arrington's office did not reply to a request for comment, though he has stressed the importance of withholding Medicaid from immigrants who are here illegally. '[Democrats] want to protect health care and welfare at any cost for illegal immigrants at the expense of hardworking taxpayers,' Arrington said in a May 22 floor speech urging passage of the bill. 'But by the results of this last election, it's abundantly clear: The people see through this too and they have totally rejected the Democrats' radical agenda.' Some states already are considering cutting Medicaid coverage for immigrants, though Democratic lawmakers and advocates are pushing back. Washington, D.C., Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser has proposed phasing out a program that provides Medicaid coverage to adults regardless of their immigration status, a move she says would save the District of Columbia $457 million. Minnesota advocates protested a state budget deal reached last month with Democratic Gov. Tim Walz to phase out health care coverage for adults who are here illegally, a condition Republican lawmakers insisted on to avoid a shutdown. Similarly, Illinois advocates are protesting new state rules that will end a program that has provided Medicaid coverage to immigrants aged 42-64 regardless of their legal status. The program cost $1.6 billion over three years, according to a state audit. The state will continue a separate program that provides coverage for older adults. 'Our position is that decision-makers in Illinois shouldn't be doing Trump's work for him,' said Kovach, of the Shriver Center on Poverty Law. 'Let's preserve health coverage for immigrants and stand up for Illinois immigrant residents who have been paying taxes into this state for years and need this coverage.' Illinois state Sen. Graciela Guzmán, a Democrat whose parents are refugees from El Salvador, said many of her constituents in Chicago may be forced to cancel chemotherapy or lifesaving surgery because of the changes. 'It was a state budget, but I think the federal reconciliation bill really set the tone for it,' Guzmán said. 'In a tough fiscal environment, it was really hard to set up a defense for this program.' Oregon Democratic Gov. Tina Kotek is among the governors holding firm, saying that letting immigrants stay uninsured imposes costs on local hospitals and ends up raising prices for everyone. 'The costs will go somewhere. When everyone is insured it is much more helpful to keep costs down and reasonable for everyone. That's why we've taken this approach to give care to everyone,' Kotek said at a news conference last month. Medicaid does pay for emergency care for low-income patients, regardless of their immigration status, and that would not change under the federal budget bill. Franny White, a spokesperson for the Oregon Health Authority, said her state's Medicaid program covers about 105,000 immigrants, some of whom are here illegally. She said the policy, established by a 2021 state law, can save money in the long run. 'Uninsured people are less likely to receive preventive care due to cost and often wait until a condition worsens to the point that it requires more advanced, expensive care at an emergency department or hospital,' she said. California was among the first states, along with Oregon, to offer health insurance to immigrants of all ages regardless of their legal status. But it now is considering cutting back, looking to save $5 billion as it seeks to close a $12 billion budget deficit. In May, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed freezing enrollment of immigrant adults who are here illegally, and charging them premiums to save money. 'It's possible that other states will decide to cut back these services because of budgetary concerns,' said Drishti Pillai, director of immigrant health policy at KFF, a health policy research organization. If the federal budget bill passes with the immigrant health care provision intact, states would have more than two years to adjust, since the changes would not take effect until October 2027. 'We have time to really understand what the landscape looks like and really create a legal argument to make sure folks are able to maintain their health care coverage,' said Enddy Almonord, director for Healthy Illinois, an advocacy group supporting universal health care coverage. Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@ Like Minnesota Reformer, Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
‘Big Beautiful Bill' dings states that offer health care to some immigrants here legally
Demonstrators gather for a protest organized by the Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee calling for the continuation of MinnesotaCare for adults in the country without authorization at the Minnesota State Capitol in May. The Republican budget bill the U.S. House passed last month would penalize Medicaid expansion states that provide health care to immigrants who are here on humanitarian parole. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer) The Republican budget bill the U.S. House approved last month includes a surprise for the 40 states that have expanded Medicaid: penalties for providing health care to some immigrants who are here legally. Along with punishing the 14 states that use their own funds to cover immigrants who are here illegally, analysts say last-minute changes to the bill would make it all but impossible for states to continue helping some immigrants who are in the country legally, on humanitarian parole. Under the bill, the federal government would slash funding to states that have expanded Medicaid and provide coverage to immigrants who are on humanitarian parole — immigrants who have received permission to temporarily enter the United States due to an emergency or urgent humanitarian reason. The federal government pays 90% of the cost of covering adults without children who are eligible under Medicaid expansion, but the bill would cut that to 80% for those states, doubling the state portion from 10% to 20%. That's the same penalty the bill proposes for states that use their own money to help immigrants who are here illegally. Ironically, states such as Florida that have extended Medicaid coverage to immigrants who are here on humanitarian parole but have not expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act would not be harmed by the bill, said Leonardo Cuello, a Medicaid law and policy expert and research professor at the Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy. More states offer health care coverage for certain immigrants, noncitizens It is 'wildly nonsensical and unfair' to penalize expansion states for covering a population that some non-expansion states, such as Florida, also cover, Cuello said. 'It would appear that the purpose is more to punish expansion states than address any genuine concern with immigrant coverage.' West Virginia is one of the states where lawmakers are nervously watching U.S. Senate discussions on the proposed penalty. Republican state Rep. Matt Rohrbach, a deputy House speaker, said West Virginia legislators tabled a proposal that would have ended Medicaid expansion if the federal government reduced its share of the funding, because the state's congressional representatives assured them it wasn't going to happen. Now the future is murkier. Cuello called the proposed penalty 'basically a gun to the head of the states.' 'Congress is framing it as a choice, but the state is being coerced and really has no choice,' he said. There are about 1.3 million people in the United States on humanitarian parole, from Afghanistan, Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Ukraine and Venezuela as well as some Central American children who have rejoined family here. The Trump administration is trying to end parole from some of those countries. A Supreme Court decision May 30 allows the administration to end humanitarian parole for about 500,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Not many of those parolees qualify for Medicaid, which requires a waiting period or special status, but the 40 states with expanded Medicaid could be penalized anyway when they do start accepting them as they begin to qualify, said Tanya Broder, senior counsel for health and economic justice policy at the National Immigration Law Center. It would appear that the purpose is more to punish expansion states than address any genuine concern with immigrant coverage. – Leonardo Cuello, Georgetown University research professor Meanwhile, an increasing number of states and the District of Columbia already are considering scaling back Medicaid coverage for immigrants because of the costs. The federal budget bill, named the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, is now being considered by the Senate, where changes are likely. The fact that so many states could be affected by the last-minute change could mean more scrutiny in that chamber, said Andrea Kovach, senior attorney for health care justice at the Shriver Center on Poverty Law in Chicago. By her count, at least 38 states and the District of Columbia would be affected by the new restrictions, since they accepted some options now offered by Medicaid to cover at least some humanitarian parolees without a five-year waiting period. 'They're all going to be penalized because they added in parolees,' Kovach said. 'So that's 38 times two senators who are going to be very interested in this provision to make sure their state doesn't get their reimbursement knocked down.' The change to exclude people with humanitarian parole was included in a May 21 amendment by U.S. Rep. Jodey Arrington, a Texas Republican who chairs the House budget committee. Arrington's office did not reply to a request for comment, though he has stressed the importance of withholding Medicaid from immigrants who are here illegally. Need to go to the hospital? Texas and Florida want to know your immigration status. '[Democrats] want to protect health care and welfare at any cost for illegal immigrants at the expense of hardworking taxpayers,' Arrington said in a May 22 floor speech urging passage of the bill. 'But by the results of this last election, it's abundantly clear: The people see through this too and they have totally rejected the Democrats' radical agenda.' Some states already are considering cutting Medicaid coverage for immigrants, though Democratic lawmakers and advocates are pushing back. Washington, D.C., Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser has proposed phasing out a program that provides Medicaid coverage to adults regardless of their immigration status, a move she says would save the District of Columbia $457 million. Minnesota advocates protested a state budget deal reached last month with Democratic Gov. Tim Walz to phase out health care coverage for adults who are here illegally, a condition Republican lawmakers insisted on to avoid a shutdown. Similarly, Illinois advocates are protesting new state rules that will end a program that has provided Medicaid coverage to immigrants aged 42-64 regardless of their legal status. The program cost $1.6 billion over three years, according to a state audit. The state will continue a separate program that provides coverage for older adults. 'Our position is that decision-makers in Illinois shouldn't be doing Trump's work for him,' said Kovach, of the Shriver Center on Poverty Law. 'Let's preserve health coverage for immigrants and stand up for Illinois immigrant residents who have been paying taxes into this state for years and need this coverage.' Illinois state Sen. Graciela Guzmán, a Democrat whose parents are refugees from El Salvador, said many of her constituents in Chicago may be forced to cancel chemotherapy or lifesaving surgery because of the changes. 'It was a state budget, but I think the federal reconciliation bill really set the tone for it,' Guzmán said. 'In a tough fiscal environment, it was really hard to set up a defense for this program.' More States Offer Health Coverage to Immigrant Children Oregon Democratic Gov. Tina Kotek is among the governors holding firm, saying that letting immigrants stay uninsured imposes costs on local hospitals and ends up raising prices for everyone. 'The costs will go somewhere. When everyone is insured it is much more helpful to keep costs down and reasonable for everyone. That's why we've taken this approach to give care to everyone,' Kotek said at a news conference last month. Medicaid does pay for emergency care for low-income patients, regardless of their immigration status, and that would not change under the federal budget bill. Franny White, a spokesperson for the Oregon Health Authority, said her state's Medicaid program covers about 105,000 immigrants, some of whom are here illegally. She said the policy, established by a 2021 state law, can save money in the long run. 'Uninsured people are less likely to receive preventive care due to cost and often wait until a condition worsens to the point that it requires more advanced, expensive care at an emergency department or hospital,' she said. California was among the first states, along with Oregon, to offer health insurance to immigrants of all ages regardless of their legal status. But it now is considering cutting back, looking to save $5 billion as it seeks to close a $12 billion budget deficit. In May, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed freezing enrollment of immigrant adults who are here illegally, and charging them premiums to save money. 'It's possible that other states will decide to cut back these services because of budgetary concerns,' said Drishti Pillai, director of immigrant health policy at KFF, a health policy research organization. If the federal budget bill passes with the immigrant health care provision intact, states would have more than two years to adjust, since the changes would not take effect until October 2027. 'We have time to really understand what the landscape looks like and really create a legal argument to make sure folks are able to maintain their health care coverage,' said Enddy Almonord, director for Healthy Illinois, an advocacy group supporting universal health care coverage. Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@ SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Building trades hold out hope for data center tax breaks in Minnesota budget — and other labor news
Construction continues on the sprawling Rosemount Data Center on land bought by Meta near Dakota County Technical College, shown Thursday, May 29, 2025. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer) Take a seat in the Break Room, our weekly round-up of labor news in Minnesota and beyond. This week: Building trades push for data center tax incentives; head of violence intervention nonprofit charged with felony wage theft; Trump flips on Nippon-U.S. Steel deal; Planned Parenthood lays off 66 workers; judge dismisses lawsuit challenging holiday pay for nursing home workers; and trade war hurts global jobs outlook. With Democrats and Republicans at an impasse over an infrastructure spending package for the third year in a row, building trade unions are banking on lawmakers extending tax breaks for data centers to spur investment in high-paying construction jobs. The push comes as President Trump's federal funding cuts and ongoing trade war, compounded by high interest rates, have soured the economic outlook for construction jobs. 'There's not a surplus of work right now,' said Richard Kolodziejski, government affairs director for the North Central States Regional Council of Carpenters. Building one large data center can cost upwards of $1 billion, dwarfing the roughly $700 million bonding bill Minnesota lawmakers could authorize this year to pay for water treatment plants, roads and other infrastructure. The building trades unions warn that Minnesota will lose jobs to neighboring states if it doesn't compete on tax breaks to entice tech giants like Amazon and Meta to build data centers. The tax incentives also help justify prevailing wage requirements, which ensures much of the construction will be done by union workers. But some progressive lawmakers chafe at the idea of giving tax breaks to some of the richest companies in the world while the state stares down a looming budget deficit. They aren't convinced these projects wouldn't be built anyways given the state's cold climate and strong economy. 'I understand not wanting to give tax breaks to the wealthy, but those are the folks creating the jobs,' said Tom Dicklich, executive director of the Minnesota State Building & Construction Trades Council. One hyperscale data center costing $750 million creates upwards of 1,800 construction jobs and 300 ongoing operational jobs, according to a 2022 report on Wisconsin by Mangum Economics, which has produced similar reports sponsored by tech and energy companies for Virginia and Illinois. A coalition of building trades unions, energy companies and other businesses cited that report in a letter to lawmakers urging them to extend the sales tax exemption on software, servers and other equipment used to power the data centers. The growing cost of tax breaks for data centers has vexed public sector unions, who see the lost revenue cutting into funding for the schools, nursing homes and state agencies where their members work. The public sector unions — SEIU, Education Minnesota, AFSCME, MAPE and Inter Faculty Organization — signed onto a letter opposing an early version of the bill (HF1277) backed by the building trade unions, pointing out that the cost of the sales tax exemption has increased by more than 20-fold since 2018. That cost is expected to continue to rise, reaching $219 million in forgone sales tax revenue on servers, software and other equipment in fiscal year 2029. It was a rare instance of discord among unions who are typically disciplined about being unified in public, despite their many differences across industries. Member unions of the Minnesota AFL-CIO had signed onto a resolution in support of sales tax exemptions for constructing data centers, but the bill that was introduced in February went further. It extended sales tax exemptions on electricity and allowed data centers to claim the sales tax exemption up front rather than through a rebate, which creates a public record of how much sales tax was lost. 'It would be one thing, if the unions were upfront, that this bill is good for their members … Unfortunately, they want the rest of the Labor Movement to support their lobbying efforts and to call tax cuts for billionaires a 'pro-labor' bill. This we cannot do,' SEIU Healthcare Minnesota & Iowa President Jamie Gulley wrote in a post to his members in April, explaining his opposition. The debate was so contentious, Gulley wrote that one unnamed trade union to threaten to leave the AFL-CIO. The building trades counter that data centers add to state coffers through other taxes, including income taxes paid by their members. 'We don't have line items in the state budget that goes directly to the building trades,' Dicklich said. 'Where we can get work, we have to go after that.' Amazon announced amid the ongoing negotiations at the Legislature that the company is suspending plans for a big data center in Becker, the Star Tribune reported. Bishop Harding Smith, the head of the violence intervention nonprofit Minnesota Acts Now, was charged with felony wage theft and theft by swindle in Hennepin County on Thursday for allegedly pocketing $150,000 from a county contract intended to go to workers' wages. While wage theft is common, charges are still relatively rare even since Minnesota made it a felony in 2019. The first felony wage theft conviction was handed down just last month to a painting contractor for stealing more than $35,000 in wages from workers on an affordable housing project in Minneapolis. 'Bishop Harding Smith failed to pay his employees what he agreed to as part of the contract with Hennepin County and then lied about it when seeking payroll expense reimbursements,' Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said in a statement announcing the charges. 'As I said when our office secured the state's first wage theft conviction, this behavior will not be tolerated.' According to the charging document, Harding signed a contract with Hennepin County in 2021 in which he would be an unpaid volunteer and would pay all other workers $35 an hour. The contract was later updated to increase the contract amount to more than $550,000 and provide Harding with a $35 an hour wage. Investigators found most employees were paid $20 an hour even though he billed the county as if they were paid $35 an hour. Harding admitted to investigators that he did not pay workers what they were entitled to but denied fraudulent intent, according to the complaint. In a rare instance of unanimity on the campaign trail last year, both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump opposed Japanese-owned Nippon's $14.1 billion bid to purchase U.S. Steel. The politics were simple: The United Steelworkers, representing tens of thousands of workers in purple states like Pennsylvania, fiercely opposed the deal. And in a campaign fought over blue collar workers, supporting a foreign company taking over an icon of American industry would have been unthinkable. Now back in the Oval Office, President Trump has seemingly flipped on his opposition to the deal, writing on his social media platform last Friday that there will be a 'planned partnership' between the two steel giants Trump said U.S. Steel would remain in America with its headquarters in Pittsburgh, and the deal would create 70,000 jobs. It's unclear how a 'planned partnership' would be different than a buyout, and as The American Prospect noted, the U.S. Steel website describes the deal as a merger. United Steelworkers President Dave McCall sent a letter to members, which include 3,500 workers in Minnesota, reiterating his concerns. 'Throughout recent months, as the public conversation has turned to Nippon 'investing' in U.S. Steel or 'partnering with' U.S. Steel, Nippon has maintained consistently that it would only invest in U.S. Steel's facilities if it owned the company outright. We've seen nothing in the reporting over the past few days suggesting that Nippon has walked back from this position,' he wrote. Federal funding cuts are forcing Planned Parenthood North Central States to close eight clinics across Minnesota and Iowa this summer, laying off 66 workers and reassigning three dozen more. The health system, which is the main abortion provider in Minnesota, announced the closures on Friday afternoon, blaming a $2.8 million freeze in Title X funding in Minnesota that supports sexual and reproductive health. The organization also cited the near total abortion ban in Iowa following the Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade and House Republicans' 'big beautiful bill,' which defunds Planned Parenthood and makes cuts to Medicaid, which subsidizes care for more than 30% of its patients. More than 400 workers at the Planned Parenthood affiliate, which covers Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska and the Dakotas, unionized with SEIU Healthcare Minnesota & Iowa in 2022 and ratified their first labor contract last year. Megan Amato, a longtime licensed practical nurse in Iowa and Nebraska, said she was devastated by the news in a statement shared by the union. 'When I started 18 years ago, we had 17 clinics in Iowa. After these closures we will be down to two,' Amato said. 'I am the only person who does my job in the whole state and I worry about what that means for the future of abortion care in Iowa.' None of the clinics slated to close in Minnesota provide abortion care, but do provide birth control, education and other health care services. PPNCS said it will continue investing in telemedicine to serve patients, which includes medication abortion for patients with a Minnesota address. In a victory for Minnesota's new Nursing Home Workforce Standards Board, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit brought by two industry groups challenging the board's authority to mandate that nursing homes pay workers time-and-a-half on 11 holidays. The lawsuit was the first legal challenge to the board since the Legislature created it in 2023 to set minimum pay and working standards for nursing home workers across the state. The International Labour Organization cut its global employment forecast by 7 million jobs as President Trump's trade war roils the world economy. The United Nations agency previously projected the world would add 60 million jobs in 2025, revising it down to 53 million jobs this week. According to the report, nearly 84 million jobs across 71 countries are directly or indirectly tied to consumer demand in the United States, which is being throttled by uncertainty and higher prices from Trump's tariffs. A federal appeals court on Thursday reinstated Trump's 'reciprocal' tariffs after the U.S. Court of International Trade paused them on Wednesday. The International Labour Organization also reported that the share of the world's gross domestic product going to workers globally ticked down over the past decade from 53% to 52.4%. In other words, less of the world's income is going to the workers generating that income by creating goods and providing services. While the decline is slight, the International Labour Organization estimates it works out to about $290 less per worker in 2024 purchasing power.
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Immigrant rights activists protest plan to end low-cost health insurance for undocumented adults
Demonstrators gather for a protest organized by the Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee calling for the continuation of MinnesotaCare for undocumented adults outside of the Governor's Reception Room at the Minnesota State Capitol Tuesday, May 27, 2025. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer) Minnesota immigrants voiced outrage Tuesday about a planned rollback of a law that allowed undocumented adults to access low-cost health insurance. Dozens of immigrant rights activists chanted in English and Spanish outside the governor's reception room in the Capitol Tuesday afternoon, slamming Gov. Tim Walz and his fellow Democrats for making a deal with Republicans to end undocumented adults' eligibility in MinnesotaCare, the state-subsidized health insurance program for the working poor. The Democratic-Farmer-Labor-controlled 2023 Legislature opened up MinnesotaCare to undocumented Minnesotans. Undocumented people could start enrolling in MinnesotaCare on Jan. 1; roughly 20,000 are now on the rolls. If the deal goes through as expected, however, their coverage would expire at the end of the year. Walz and DFL legislative leaders Rep. Melissa Hortman and Senate Majority Leader Erin Murphy need Republican support to craft a two-year state budget because Republicans share control of the House, 67-67. If lawmakers don't pass a budget by the end of June, state government will shut down. Budget bills — many of them still outstanding — will require Republican support to pass the House, and Republicans have made kicking undocumented immigrants off of MinnesotaCare a top priority in negotiations. Walz and DFL leaders joined Republican House Speaker Lisa Demuth at a press conference on May 15 announcing a budget deal that included removing undocumented adults, but not children, from MinnesotaCare. 'Why should immigrants continue to vote for the Democratic party?' immigrant rights activist and Minneapolis City Council candidate Emilio Rodríguez said to the crowd on Tuesday. He also criticized 'pro-life' Republican politicians who support the revocation of health care for immigrants. 'DFL, shame on you. Immigrants are people too,' protesters chanted. They also repeated a slogan long used in Latin America to protest tyrannical governments: 'El pueblo unido jamás será vencido,' which means 'the people united will never be defeated.' Walz wasn't in the reception room during the protest; he was receiving a briefing from the National Guard at the time, a spokesperson said. José Méndez, a Mexico-born mechanic and immigrant rights activist, said he's thankful to have health insurance through his job, but he has several friends who were only able to access health insurance when MinnesotaCare expanded eligibility in January. For Méndez, the rollback of health insurance for undocumented adults is just one of the many abuses immigrants have suffered in the United States: low pay, racism, discrimination by law enforcement officers. Republicans who control the federal government are ramping up deportations and revoking other benefits from immigrants. Méndez is also opposed to a proposed tax on remittances — money that immigrants send to their family in their home country — included in the U.S. House Republican tax bill. 'Now they want to take away our health care,' Méndez said in Spanish. 'Instead of helping us, they want to screw us over even more.'
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Some Minnesota lawmakers want to extend tax breaks for energy-sucking warehouses. Why?
Minnesota Technology Center houses multiple data centers, including a Cologix and a Vaultas data center, in this facility next to U.S. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis Friday, May 23, 2025. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer) Minnesota lawmakers are considering giving some of the country's most profitable tech companies tax breaks on their data centers up to the year 2102 — when most of the legislators and lobbyists furiously negotiating the deal will be dead. Minnesota currently has 42 data centers, with the majority spread across the metro. Nationwide, tech companies are rapidly building data centers — large warehouses with computer servers used to power the internet — to store and process data. The massive computing power required to develop nascent artificial intelligence breakthroughs are leading companies to seek more data centers. Minnesota offers sales tax breaks for qualified data centers on purchases of computers, servers, software and cooling and energy equipment. This tax break, which comes in the form of a refund, is set to expire in 2042. But lawmakers are considering extending the break, perhaps as an olive branch since they're also going to revoke the sales tax exemption on the electricity that data centers consume. This is expected to generate around $140 million in revenue over the next four years. Minnesota is facing a multi-billion dollar budget deficit in the next few years, and lawmakers are currently looking to cut programs and services — and a few tax subsidies — to balance the budget. But since the decision by legislative leaders to revoke the sales tax exemption on electricity will sour the state's relationship with companies that own data centers, some lawmakers hope expanding current tax breaks far into the future will incentivize companies to keep building their warehouses full of servers in Minnesota. Amazon recently announced that it's suspending plans for a large data center in Becker 'due to uncertainty' — one week after lawmakers announced they were eliminating the sales tax exemption on electricity. Gov. Tim Walz on MPR News Friday said that Amazon's decision to suspend its Becker data center was 'pretty bad lobbying' because lawmakers are still negotiating data center provisions. 'We also have one of the most generous tax credits as it stands, but we have to balance our budget. I think a lot of Minnesotans are saying, 'Well, you couldn't do a tax cut to my sales tax, but you could do a tax cut to Jeff Bezos.' I think that was one where it's right-sized.' Minnesota law currently allows qualified data centers a sales tax exemption on technology equipment for 20 years, up to the year 2042. But a proposal from Senate Democrats would extend the tax break to 40 years and sunset it at 2062. This means that a data center that makes its first purchase in 2062 could continue claiming the exemption until 2102. Members of the taxes working group — an unofficial meeting of Senate and House members who are negotiating a budget agreement before Walz calls a special legislative session — are debating the data center tax exemptions. Sen. Grant Hauschild, DFL-Hermantown, said during a meeting Friday that Minnesota needs to remain competitive with other states. 'We are getting investments from these companies to Minnesota,' Hauschild said. 'Other states … have other exemptions that will build these data centers. So we have to understand, do we want investments in Minnesota or do we not want investments?' Proponents of sales tax exemptions for data centers tout property tax revenue and job creation. But data centers operate with few workers. Like a bridge or highway, once the project is complete, most of the jobs are gone. And since the number of data centers is growing, the tax breaks will become even more expensive over time. In Washington State, the tax breaks intended to create jobs have cost more than $474 million since 2018, ProPublica reported. Most of the benefits through the tax breaks went to Microsoft, not local communities. Minnesota Rep. Aisha Gomez, DFL-Minneapolis, on Friday said that when Minnesota first enacted the sales tax break for data centers in 2011, the state estimated it would forgo $5 million annually in revenue. But a recent estimate from the Department of Revenue found that even with the elimination of the sales tax break on electricity, the software and other equipment exemption will still cost Minnesota around $100 million annually — and $219 million in fiscal year 2029. 'This is a sales tax exemption that is being asked for by the largest, most profitable corporations that have ever existed on the face of the earth,' Gomez said. 'I think it's really important that we actually look at what this really is, and we look at the powers that are lining up to try to force us to make this decision. And we think long and hard… (about) whether it's appropriate that this kind of money should be going from the public coffers into the hands of billionaires.' Data centers are huge consumers of both electricity, and water needed to cool down the equipment. The Department of Revenue estimated that the 42 data centers in the state consumed 1.6 billion kWh of electricity in 2023. Running a dishwasher for one hour uses 1 kWh of power.
