>>> "YOUR LEGISLATORS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE MINNESOTA CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION FROM DEVELOPING BEST PRACTICES THAT HELP FARMERS BETTER PROTECT OUR NATURAL RESOURCES TO THE LATEST INNOVATIONS IN CORN BASED PLASTICS.

MINNESOTA CORN FARMERS ARE PROUD TO INVEST IN THIRD PARTY RESEARCH LEADING TO A MORE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE FOR OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES.

MINNESOTA FARMERS UNION, STANDING FOR AGRICULTURE, WORKING FOR FARMERS ON THE WEB AT MFU.ORG.

>> Barry: GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THIS WEEK'S VERSION OF "YOUR LEGISLATORS".

MY NAME IS BARRY ANDERSON.

I WILL BE YOUR HOST AND MONDAY RATER FOR THE ONE HOUR CONVERSATION ABOUT THE IMPORTANT PUBLIC ISSUES FACING THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.

I WANT TO REMIND YOU, OUR VIEWERS, THIS IS YOUR PROGRAM, AND YOU ARE INVITED TO CALL IN YOUR QUESTIONS AT 87263178 OR SEND IN YOUR QUESTIONS TO OUR DISTINGUISHED PANEL OF GUESTS AT YOUR TV AT PIE NOR.ORG.

WE ARE ALSO ON TWITTER AT YOUR YOUR.

THATAT "YOURLEGISLATORS".

WE RELY ON GUESTS TO HELP UNRAVEL THE MYSTERIES OF ST. PAUL.

I ANTICIPATE WE WILL BE DOING A GREAT DEAL OF THAT THIS EVENING.

LET'S BEGIN BY INVITING OUR VETERAN LEGISLATOR ON THE PANEL THIS EVENING, REPRESENTATIVE ALICE HAUSMAN WHO HAS BEEN ON OUR PROGRAM ON MANY OCCASIONS THE LAST FEW YEARS.

SHE'S BEEN ONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES THAT WHEN SOME COMMITTEE COMES UP AND WE CAN'T FIND A SENATOR OR REPRESENTATIVE, WE CALL HER.

SHE'S ALWAYS BEEN GRACIOUS AND WILLING TO JOIN US TO HELP EXPLAIN WHAT'S GOING ON AT THE LEGISLATURE.

WE ARE DELIGHTED TO HAVE YOU AGAIN THIS EVENING, REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN, AND MAYBE YOU CAN TELL OUR VIEWERS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELF, YOUR HISTORY, SERVICE IN THE LEGISLATURE AND ANYTHING ELSE YOU THINK THEY SHOULD KNOW ABOUT YOU.

THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

>> YES.

IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR PEOPLE TO KNOW I REPRESENT A COUPLE DISTRICTS IN ST. PAUL AND SUBURBAN CITIES, AND FALCON, FAN HEIGHTS.

IF YOU HAVE BEEN AT THE STATE FAIR OR ROSEDALE MALL, YOU HAVE BEEN IN MY DISTRICT.

RIGHT NOW I'M CHAIRING THE HOUSING FINANCE AND POLICY COMMITTEE, AND I'M ALSO ON A TRANSPORTATION.

THOSE ARE THE TWO WHERE I SPEND A HUGE AMOUNT OF MY TIME, HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION.

FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, I CHAIRED CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, SO THAT WAS A BUILDING INFRASTRUCTURE ALL OVER THE STATE IS A BIG PART OF WHAT I HAVE BEEN DOING.

I WAS THE HOUSE AUTHOR OF BOTH THE BLUE LINE AND GREEN LINE AND THE BELL MUSEUM.

WHAT I HAVE ALWAYS SAID IS THE BIG THINGS TAKE A LOT OF TIME.

THEY ARE COMPLICATED.

SOMETIMES THEY HAVE BEEN VETOED BY GOVERNORS.

THE POINT IS YOU DON'T GIVE UP.

IF YOU ARE CONVINCED IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO, THE BIG THINGS TAKE A LONG TIME, AND YOU DON'T GIVE UP.

>> Barry: IT'S INTERESTING, REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN THAT YOU MENTIONED THE BELL MUSEUM.

THAT'S A VERY MUCH UNDERAPPRECIATED ASSET IN MINNESOTA.

IF SOME OF OUR VIEWERS HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT THE BELL MUSEUM THEY SHOULD GO THERE.

WE WILL GIVE YOU 15 SECONDS TO AGREE WITH ME ON THAT POINT.

>> OUR FOREBEARERS IN 1872, THE LEGISLATORS IN MINNESOTA ESTABLISHED IT.

THEY KNEW IN 1872 WE SHOULD PRESERVE OUR NATURAL HISTORY.

THEY WERE QUITE SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF HOW WE WERE GOING TO PRESERVE IT, THAT IT HAD TO HAVE THE RIGHT AIR AND ALL THE RIGHT HANDLING SO IT WAS WELL PROTECTED AND THEY WOULD GIVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA.

THEY WERE VERY, VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT IT.

JUST SO THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THE VISION OF OUR FOREBEARERS IN 1872 WHO KNEW THAT THIS NATURAL HISTORY SHOULD BE PRESERVED.

SO THAT IS OUR STATE'S NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM.

>> Barry: ALSO JOINING US THIS EVENING, AND ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATURE WHO HAS COME TO THE RESCUE OF THIS PROGRAM FROM TIME TO TIME WHEN WE NEEDED A GUEST.

SENATOR GARRY DAHMS FROM REDWOOD FALLS.

TELL OUR VIEWERS ABOUT YOURSELF.

>> I'M SENATOR GARRY DAHMS IN REDWOOD FALLS AND DISTRICT SENATE DISTRICT 16 WHICH ARE THE COUNTIES OF BROWN COUNTY, REDWOOD LYON, AND PRIOR TO THE COMING IN THE SENATE I WAS COUNTY COMMISSIONER AND OWNED AN INSURANCE AGENCY IN REDWOOD FALLS.

IN THE SENATE I CHAIR THE CONGRESS COMMITTEE, AND SERVE ON HOUSING AND CAPITAL BONDING COMMITTEE.

>> Barry: ALSO JOINING US FROM EDEN PRAIRIE, DISTRICT 48, SENATOR STEVE CWODZONSKI.

SENATOR, TELL OUR VIEWERS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELF.

>> THANKS.

I TAUGHT AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND AMERICAN HISTORY FOR 33 YEARS, AND 2016 I DECIDED TO PRACTICE WHAT I PREACHED AND RAN FOR STATE SENATE AND BEGAN THE SERVICE IN 2017.

I REPRESENT EDEN PRAIRIE AND HALF OF MINNETONKA AND I'M ON THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE, LOCAL GOVERNMENT, AND I'M GOING TO TAKE ALICE'S ADVICE ON NEVER GIVING UP OF PUSHING CIVICS, AND NO MATTER HOW DISCOURAGED I GET, I TRY TO GET CIVICS REQUIRED AS A SENIOR OR JUNIOR CLASS IN ORDER TO GRADUATE FOR 6 YEARS, AND SENATOR DAHMS AND I TALK.

WHEN I SEE AM I SAY HOW MANY IN THE DISTRICT, AND I TELL HIM IN THE 30s, AND I ENVY HIM, I DON'T HAVE ONE PARADE.

>> Barry: SENATOR DAIMS WOULD INVITE YOU TO JOIN HIM FOR ONE OF THOSE PARADES, I'M SURE.

>> HE NEVER HAS.

>> SENATOR, I WILL GIVE YOU A LIST.

>> Barry: SENATOR CWODZONSKI WAS TEACHING IN THE EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT WHEN THE SUPREME COURT MADE A VISIT THERE AS PART OF THE PROGRAM OF GOING TO HIGH SCHOOLS AND LAW SCHOOLS AS WELL.

BUT MOST VERY WE RELEVANTLY.

IT WAS A GREAT EXPERIENCE FOR THE COURT AND I HOPE IT WAS A GREAT EXPERIENCE FOR THE STUDENTS.

IT'S PART OF THAT EMPHASIS ON CIVICS AND GOVERNMENT THAT YOU SO APTLY MENTIONED AND MAYBE WE WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

FINALLY LAST BUT CERTAINLY NOT LEAST, DISTRICT 30B, REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO, WE ARE DELIGHTED TO HAVE YOU ON BOARD.

INTRODUCE YOURSELF TO OUR VIEWERS, AND TELL THEM ABOUT THE BACKGROUND, EXPERIENCE, DAY JOB, COMMITTEES YOU SERVE ON, OR ANYTHING YOU THINK THEY NEED TO KNOW.

>> PERFECT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN YOU AGAIN.

THIS IS THE SECOND GO AROUND, AND IF MY GRAPHICS SAYS 50, IT'S INCORRECT, BECAUSE THE LETTERING IS SO SMALL I CAN'T SEE IT ITSELF.

I SERVE 30B WHICH IS THE ALBERTVILLE, ST. MICHAEL, HANOVER AND DAYTON, AND I HAVE HAD THE HONOR OF SERVING IN THE LEGISLATURE, THE MINNESOTA HOUSE FOR THE PREVIOUS 8 YEARS.

I SERVE MY GREAT COMMUNITY.

IF YOU HAVE BEEN TO THE ALBERTVILLE MALL, YOU HAVE BEEN TO MY DISTRICT OUTSIDE THE SEVEN COUNTY AREA.

THE COMMITTEES I SERVE ON, PUBLIC SAFETY.

I PERSONALLY ALSO SERVE ON THE COMMERCE COMMITTEE IN THE HOUSE AND THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT COMMITTEE.

MY DAY JOB, I DO CYBER SECURITY FOR A LIVING, BEEN IN THE CYBER SECURITY FIELD FOR OVER 15 YEARS, AND A LICENSED REAL ESTATE AGENT AND LICENSED GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND MY WIFE AND I ARE BOTH SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS IN THE REAL ESTATE DEAL.

BETWEEN REAL ESTATE AND CYBER SECURITY AND THE LEGISLATURE, I HAVE A VERY FULL PLATE.

>> Barry: CYBER SECURITY, OF COURSE, THAT HAS NOT BEEN A TOPIC OF CONVERSATION.

NOBODY IS AT ALL CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

IT HASN'T SURFACED AS AN ISSUE ANYWHERE.

>> EVERY HEADLINE IS REINFORCEMENT OF JOB SECURITY.

>> Barry: IT IS A SENSITIVE ISSUE EVERYWHERE WE GO, AND IT'S NOT GOING TO GET ANY LESS COMPLICATED.

LET'S START OUR PROGRAM OUT THIS EVENING.

LET'S START OUR PROGRAM OUT, BECAUSE WE ARE GETTING NEAR CRUNCH TIME WITH THE LEGISLATURE.

WE ARE NOT QUITE THERE YET.

BUT AS WE GET CLOSER TO THE END OF THE SESSION, WE HEAR MORE AND MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT BILL AND WHAT IT MIGHT LOOK LIKE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

WE REFER TO THAT AS THE BONDING BILL.

WE HAVE A NUMBER OF LEGISLATORS HERE WHO HAVE SOME BACKGROUND IN THAT.

LET'S START WITH YOU, SENATOR DAIMS AND WE WILL GO TO REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN AND REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO AND CWODZONSKI ON THE BONDING BILL.

WHAT DO YOU SEE TRANSPIRING THERE, ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADVISE OUR VIEWERS OF.

SENATOR DAHMS, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

>> THIS FALL WE WENT OUT AND DID A BONDING TOUR.

WE VISITED VARIOUS COMMUNITIES AND WENT OUT FIVE WEEKS, AND USUALLY THOSE WOULD BE FOUR-DAY WEEKS.

WE HAD THE TOUR OF THE ENTIRE STATE INCLUDING THE METROPOLITAN AND INNER-CITY AREA.

WE VISITED PROBABLY 200 DIFFERENT PROJECTS.

NOW WE HAVE HAD TWO MEETINGS IN THE CAPITAL HERE SINCE WE HAVE BEEN IN SESSION.

THE FIRST MEETING WAS TO GO THROUGH THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET.

THE LAST MEETING, WHICH WAS YESTERDAY, WE WENT THROUGH A LOT OF THE ASSET PRESERVATION PROJECTS FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA AND THE STATE COLLEGE MINNESOTA STATE.

WE HAVE BEEN OUT AND WE HAVE LOOKED AT A LOT OF PROJECTS.

NOW THE NEXT STEP IS WE WILL HAVE A COUPLE MORE MEETINGS INTERNALLY, AND THEN WE WILL START PUTTING TOGETHER THE BONDING BILL.

THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW MUCH THE BONDING BILL WILL BE, AND I'M KIND OF THINKING WE ARE PROBABLY GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 1 TO 1 1/2 BILLION, MAYBE PUSH 2 BILLION.

BUT 2 WOULD BE THE UPPER LIMIT WE WOULD BE AT.

A LOT OF GOOD PROJECTS, AND SENATOR BAKK IS LOOKING AT FOCUSING ON ASSET PRESERVATION IN THE BONDING TRIP.

RATHER THAN LOOKING AT NEW BUILDINGS, WE ARE LOOKING AT A LOT OF ASSET PRESERVATION FOR A LOT OF THE BUILDINGS WE HAVE, ESPECIALLY IN THE COLLEGES AND THE STATE COLLEGES.

ALL IN ALL, I THINK WE WILL HAVE A PRETTY ROBUST BILL.

WE LOOKED AT A LOT OF GREAT PROJECTS BOTH IN TWIN CITY AREA AND OUT OF STATE.

I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF PROJECTS TO DO.

I WOULD SAY THERE'S A GOOD $6 BILLION IN REQUEST TO PROJECTS.

WE WOULD DO A LITTLE LESS THAN A THIRD OF THAT AT THE END OF THE SYSTEM.

IN A BONDING BILL, I'M SURE, LIKE USUAL, IT WILL BE PROBABLY THE LAST BILL WE DO AND THAT'S DIFFICULT IN AN OFF YEAR, NONBUDGET YEAR, POLICY YEAR.

I WOULD ASSUME THAT WILL BE A BILL WE WILL HANDLE SATURDAY AND SUNDAY THE LAST PART OF THE SESSION.

BUT THAT REMAINS TO BE SEEN.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE BONDING BILL.

THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONCERN ABOUT -- I HAVE HAD A COUPLE OF VIEWERS WHO HAVE EXPRESSED THE CONCERN OR INTEREST IN NEW CHEMISTRY BUILDING ON THE CAMPUS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA AND WONDERING ABOUT THE STATUS OF THAT AND I REALIZE THAT THIS MIGHT NOT BE RIGHT IN YOUR BABBALLIWICK.

>> IT'S THE DAMAGE WE HAVE BEEN DOING TO HIGHER EDUCATION THAT I WOULD LIKE TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT.

I HAVE BEEN AN OUTSPOKEN CRITIC OF THE GOVERNOR REBRANDING THE BONDING BILL AS THE LOCAL JOBS AND PROJECTS BILL.

THAT'S HOW HE HAS REBRANDED IT.

IT USED TO BE THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THAT.

IF YOU HAD A PROJECT IN CAPITAL INVESTMENT, YOU HAD TO DEMONSTRATE IF ALL THE TAXPAYERS IN THE STATE ARE GOING TO PAY FOR THIS, WHAT IS THE REGIONAL OR STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS.

THE OPPOSITE OF LOCAL PROJECTS AND THE MOMENT THE REBRANDING WAS DONE, THERE WAS AN EXPLOSION OF BILL INTRODUCTIONS WITH LOCAL PROJECTS, LOCAL PROJECTS.

THOSE ARE EARMARKS.

I WOULD TELL YOU EARLY ON I LEARNED ABOUT CAPITAL INVESTMENT FROM PEOPLE LIKE SENATOR THAT HG HISTORY IN INFRASTRUCTURE.

THEY UNDERSTOOD EARMARKING PROJECTS ISN'T A GOOD IDEA, THAT IT UNDERMINES THE WORK OF STATE AGENCIES.

SO I HAVE JUST BEEN VERY, VERY FRUSTRATED BY THAT REBRANDING AND THE MOVE TO MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF EARMARKS AND LOCAL PROJECTS.

THEY FIGHT WITH THE BIG LOSER IN THIS HAS BEEN HIGHER EDUCATION, BECAUSE THE MORE WE DO THAT, THE LESS WE DO IT FOR ASSET PRESERVATION, AND THE MORE WE DO THAT, THE LESS WE DO FOR HIGHER EDUCATION ACADEMIC FACILITIES ALL OVER THE STATE.

JUST A FRUSTRATION IN TERMS OF HOW WE ARE -- HOW OUR CULTURE HAS CHANGED.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO, YOU ARE ON CAPITAL INVESTMENT, I BELIEVE, YOU INDICATED, BONDING BILL.

ANY OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THAT?

ANYTHING TO SHARE WITH THE VIEWERS ABOUT THE UNDERGRADUATE CHEMISTRY BUILDING ON THE CAMPUS OR THE UNIVERSITY.

REGARDLESS OF THE SPECIFIC PROJECTS, TALK TO US ABOUT THE PROCESS AND WHAT YOU SEE HAPPENING WITH THE BONDING BILL.

>> REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN HAS BEEN IN OFFICE FOR 32 YEARS, I HAVE NOT SERVED ON ANY COMMITTEES WITH HER OR CROSSED PATHS WITH HER ON ANY LEGISLATION WE HAVE TEAMED ON.

BUT WHAT SHE SAID IN REGARDS TO A PHILOSOPHY OF THE BONDING BILL, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH.

THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF CAPITAL INVESTMENT SHOULD BE THE FOLLOWING, AND I'M SAYING THIS AS A FIRST TIME MEMBER OF THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT.

BUT I'M LEARNING A LOT ON THE COMMITTEE.

HAVING LISTENED TO MANY OF THE DIFFERENT BILLS, THE FOLLOWING PHILOSOPHY IS WHAT SHOULD BE TAKING PLACE.

UNFORTUNATELY I DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING.

THAT IS THE STATE HAS ASSETS ACROSS THE STATE SUCH AS PRISONS, SUCH AS COLLEGE UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS, HISTORICAL SOCIETY TYPE BUILDINGS ACROSS THE STATE, ALL DIFFERENT SHAPES, AGES, AND THESE BUILDINGS ARE APPRECIATING, AND THEY ARE HAVING ROOFS THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED HVAC SYSTEMS THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED, A WHOLE HOST OF THINGS.

WHEN A STATE OWNS A BUILDING LIKE A PRISON, IT IS THE STATE'S RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THAT BUILDING IS FIXED AND MODERN AND OPERATING EFFICIENTLY.

BUT WHEN WE SEE THESE MIX OF LOCAL PROJECTS, I'M JUST DUMFOUNDED AT WHAT I HAVE BEEN SEEING.

I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE WITH CHAIR HAUSMAN WE NEED TO PRIORITIZE REGIONAL OR SIGNIFICANT TYPE PROJECTS.

THAT'S WHAT I WILL CONTINUE TO PUSH TOWARD AS A MEMBER OF THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT COMMITTEE.

>> Barry: SENATOR CWODZONSKI.

>> I'M NOT ON BONDING BUT I HAVE ENJOYED WHAT ALICE AND ERIC JUST SAID BECAUSE I THINK I TEND TO AGREE WITH THAT.

IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE MAYBE GOTTEN AWAY FROM THAT AS ALICE SAID WITH MORE EARMARKS THAN INVESTMENTS IN STATE OWNED PROPERTIES.

I WAS AT THE U IN THE LAST '70s, EARLY '80s, AND YOU HAD TO WEAR YOUR JACKET IN CLASS.

THE BUILDINGS WERE SO COLD AND RUN DOWN.

I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT PEOPLE THAT CAME BEFORE ME SAW FIT TO INVEST IN ALL OF THOSE BUILDINGS, AND LIKE THE HALL YOU CAN SIT IN A COMFORTABLE SHIRT UNLIKE WHEN I WAS THERE.

I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT ABOUT HIGHER ED.

I'M VERY GRATEFUL THAT SANDY PAPPAS IN THE DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS ON BONDING HAS BEEN VERY NICE, ALWAYS ASKING ALL OF US, WHAT DO YOU NEED?

WHAT DO YOU WANT?

I THINK WE WILL GET A NEW ROOF HERE OUT OF THE BONDING BILL, I HOPE.

>> Barry: LET'S TALK ABOUT TRANSPORTATION.

REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN, LET'S START WITH YOU.

THAT'S A TOPIC YOU CERTAINLY STAKED OUT OVER THE COURSE IN YOUR YEARS IN THE LEGISLATURE.

I RECOGNIZE THIS IS NOT A BUDGET YEAR.

TYPICALLY YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THE BIG TRANSPORTATION BILL THAT WE WILL HAVE NEXT YEAR, FOR EXAMPLE.

NONETHELESS, TRANSPORTATION ISSUES SEEMS TO SURFACE IN NONBUDGET YEARS AS WELL.

TALK TO OUR VIEWERS ABOUT TRANSPORTATION PRIORITIES IN THIS SESSION.

>> SO FOR ME, THEY ARE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THEY MIGHT BE FOR OTHER MEMBERS BECAUSE I'M WORKING WITH CITIZEN GROUPS WHO ARE TRYING TO MOVE US IN VERY DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS WITH TRANSPORTATIONAL ALTERNATIVES.

ONE IS ALL ABOARD MINNESOTA AND THEY HAVE DONE AN ECONOMIC STUDY ABOUT THE IMPACT OF INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL.

CORRIDORS OF COMMERCE, WE DISCOVERED THE IMPORTANCE OF LINKING ROADS IN ECONOMIC CENTERS, BUT ALL ABOARD MINNESOTA HAS DONE THE ECONOMIC STUDY IF WE COULD CONNECT THOSE MAJOR POLICIES WITH INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL.

WE WERE SUCCESSFUL LAST YEAR IN GETTING 10 MILLION TO MATCH 32 MILLION FOR A SECOND TRAIN TO CHICAGO.

SO THAT IS COMPLETE.

I HAVE TO SAY IN MINNESOTA, THIS HAS FOR SOME STRANGE REASON BEEN A PARTISAN ISSUE.

RAIL HAS BEEN A PARTISAN ISSUE.

I SERVE ON MIDWEST INTERSTATE PASSENGER RAIL COMMISSION.

WHEN I MENTIONED THIS -- I'M TALKING MIDWESTERN STATES.

YES, RAIL IS EXPLODING ACROSS THE WORLD, ACROSS THE NATION, BUT ALSO THE MIDWEST.

WE TRAIL OUR MIDWEST ECONOMIC COMPETITORS.

KANSAS, TEXAS, INDIANA, ILLINOIS, MISSOURI.

THEY ARE ALL MOVING AHEAD.

THEY ALL UNDERSTAND IT'S PART OF THE ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS AND HEALTH OF THEIR REGION.

WHEN I MENTIONED THIS AT THIS MIDWEST COMMISSION, AND I SAID OUR STATE IT'S BECOME PARTISAN, I HAVE TO TELL YOU ACROSS THE SPECTRUM I GOT THESE BLANK LOOKS ON THE PART OF EVERYONE.

THEY COULDN'T HELP IT.

THEY ASKED HOW IS THAT PARTISAN?

IT ISN'T.

IN OTHER MIDWESTERN STATES, IN REPUBLICAN GOVERNED STATES, THEY ARE ACTIVELY MOVING FORWARD APPLYING FOR FEDERAL GRANT MONEY AND MINNESOTA IS NOT.

WE ARE BEHIND OTHER MIDWESTERN STATES, OTHER ECONOMIC COMPETENT COMPETITORS.

THAT'S THE FRUSTRATION.

THERE'S ANOTHER GROUP.

IT'S CALLED CITIZENS ADVOCATE FOR REGIONAL TRANSIT WHO BELIEVE TRANSIT PLANNING HAS BEEN TOO MUCH DRIVEN BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, BY COUNTIES, SPECIFICALLY, AND WHAT THEY ARE SAYING IS THAT MEANS THEY MAKE THE DECISIONS ABOUT A TRANSIT SYSTEM BASED ON WHAT'S GOOD FOR THEIR COUNTY AND NOT WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE REGION.

WHAT THEY ARE SUGGESTING IS THERE'S GOT TO BE A MUCH MORE REGIONAL DRIVEN PLAN SO THAT IT MAKES SENSE FOR EVERYONE IN THIS ENTIRE METROPOLITAN AREA.

WE USED TO SAY SEVEN COUNTIES.

IT'S BEYOND THAT.

BUT WE HAVE SO MUCH TO LEARN FROM THE CITIZENS WHO ARE TRYING TO HELP US BROADEN OUR VIEW OF TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES.

>> Barry: SENATOR DAHMS IN ADDITION TO THE GENERAL DISCUSSION ABOUT TRANSPORTATION ISSUES THAT MIGHT OCCUR IN THE SESSION AND PERHAPS RESPONDING TO SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT SENATOR HAUSMAN HAS RAISED WE HAVE A VIEWER FROM RENVILLE COUNTY, YOUR TERRITORY WHO IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY AND WANTS TO KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO BE THE SUBJECT.

I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THAT PARTICULAR INTERSECTION.

I TRAVELED THAT PART OF THE STATE A GREAT DEAL.

MAYBE WE SHOULD RESPOND TO THAT VIEWER'S CONCERNS FIRST AND MAYBE MORE GENERALLY ON THE TRANSPORTATION ISSUE.

I THOUGHT I SAVED THAT SPECIFIC FOR YOU BECAUSE THAT'S YOUR TERRITORY.

THE QUESTION IS YOURS.

>> I'M NOT SURE -- I'M NOT ON THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE, SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH 212 AND 71.

I KNOW THE INTERSECTION CERTAINLY.

IT IS A CONCERN.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANYTHING HAPPENING ON THAT THIS YEAR.

BUT I SHOUL SHOULDN'T SPEAK THES OR ISN'T.

I'M NOT SURE.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THIS YEAR, AND WE HAVE PROVIDED FUNDING TO DO IT, AND THAT'S WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF MONEY COMING FROM THE FEDERAL DOLLARS.

THERE IS A MATCH THAT THE STATE HAS TO PUT UP IN ORDER TO GET THOSE DOLLARS, AND IT'S AROUND $6 BILLION OVER A CERTAIN PERIOD OF YEARS.

WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE GOT THE MATCH PUT IN IN ORDER TO GET THOSE DOLLARS OVER A PERIOD OF YEARS, AND THE OTHER THING WE ARE DOING IS INCREASING A PORTION OF THE SALES TAX ON TIRES, BATTERIES, ACCESSORIES, THINGS LIKE THAT.

AUTOMOBILE PARTS GOES BACK INTO THE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT.

IN OUR BILL WE ARE GOING TO MOVE THAT TO 100%.

BY DOING THAT WE WILL BRING IN ANOTHER 200 MILLION PER BIENNIUM TO PUT INTO TRANSPORTATION.

ALONG WITH THAT, WE ARE INCREASING THE AMOUNT THAT GOES IN THE TOWNSHIPS AND SMALL CITIES.

IN RURAL MINNESOTA THAT'S A BIG ISSUE.

IT WOULD BRING CONSIDERABLY MORE DOLLARS INTO THE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT ACROSS THE BOARD WHICH WHETHER YOU ARE IN MINNEAPOLIS OR ST. PAUL OR THE RURAL AREAS, YOU WOULD BENEFIT FROM THAT.

AS FAR AS TRANSPORTATION, I THINK ALICE IS CORRECT.

I THINK THERE IS A DIVISION ON WHO SUPPORTS WHAT ON THAT.

ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT A LOT OF US HAVE IS THE COST THAT KEEPS FOLLOWING THE TRAIL OF THE TRANSIT SYSTEM.

THAT COST, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RIDERSHIP, IT'S VERY LOW.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE COST OF EACH RIDE, IT'S VERY HIGH.

WE HAVE GOT A PROBLEM WITH THE LATEST LIGHT RAIL THAT'S BEING BUILT WITH A FEW APARTMENT BUILDINGS AND THINGS GOING ON WITH THAT.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE SETTLED.

WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GET THE USAGE OF THE LIGHT RAIL, GET THE USAGE UP, BECAUSE IT'S VERY, VERY COSTLY UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM IT IS.

MUCH MORE COSTLY THAN WHAT IT IS WITH THE BUS SYSTEM.

THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WOULD SEE.

>> Barry: SENATOR CWODZONSKI, TRANSIT ISSUES, TRANSPORTATION, TRANSIT, ALL OF THAT.

>> YEAH, ALICE, I DIDN'T KNOW YOU WERE INSTRUMENTAL IN STARTING THE GREEN LINE BECAUSE THE GREEN LINE IS PLANNED TO FINISH IN MY DISTRICT.

I FOR YEARS HAVE SAID IF WE WANT TO KEEP OUR YOUNG PEOPLE GOING OFF TO CHICAGO, NEW YORK, SAN FRANCISCO, D.C. FOR SCHOOL AND THEY HAVE FALLEN IN LOVE WITH THE MASS TRANSIT SYSTEMS.

THEY SAY WHY DON'T WE DO THINGS LIKE THIS IN MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL.

THIS IS WHAT THE YOUNG PEOPLE WANT.

THEY ARE GOING TO LIVE DIFFERENTLY, SIMPLER OR MAYBE TRY TO GET BY WITH ONE CAR RATHER THAN A TWO-CAR FAMILY.

WE HAVE TO MEET THEIR NEEDS.

THEY ARE GOING TO LIVE IN CITIES THAT HAVE SAFE, RELIABLE MASS TRANSIT.

I KNOW THE GREEN LINE THAT ENDS IN MY DISTRICT, THE LAST FIVE STOPS ARE IN MY DISTRICT.

AT THE END THEY BUILT A THOUSAND APARTMENTS AND CONDOMINIUMS RIGHT AT THE END LINE, AND MANY OF THOSE ARE GOING TO BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THERE'S BEEN POCKETS.

ALICE MENTIONED CORRIDORS OF COMMERCE.

YAI CAN'T THINK OF A BETTER PHRE FOR THAT, AND MEETING THE NEEDS OF THE LITTLE COMMUNITIES ARE GOING TO BE AT EACH STOP.

I KNOW BOTH CHAMBERS PASSED ALMOST YOU UNANIMOUSLY AN AUDITD A YEAR AGO, THE PRICE TAKE FROM DOWNTOWN TO EDEN PRAIRIE WAS 1.9 BILLION, AND NOW I THINK IT'S AT 2.7.

WE HAVE TO DO HOMEWORK TO FIND OUT WHAT WENT WRONG DURING THAT PROCESS.

BUT WE WILL GET IT RIGHT.

IT'S GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE, EVEN YOUNG PEOPLE IN OUR CITY AND PEOPLE IN SOUTHWEST MINNESOTA THAT HATE THE TRAFFIC IN THE CITIES WILL BE ABLE TO PARK THEIR CARS AT EDEN PRAIRIE ANDGS DOWNTOWN AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ALL THE WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITIES DOWNTOWN AND MINNEAPOLIS HAVE TO OFFER.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

TRANSIT TRANSPORTATION ISSUES.

>> A FEW THINGS I WANT TO ADD IS THE FIRST FOUR YEARS I SERVED IN THE HOUSE I WAS ON THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS TALKING ABOUT AS A TECHNOLOGIST BACK THEN WAS NOT THAT TRANSIT IS PARTISAN.

IT'S NOT.

LIGHT RAIL IS THE PROBLEM.

TRANSIT INCLUDES LIGHT RAIL AND BUSES.

I'M A HUGE PROPONENT OF BUSES.

IF WE GO BACK A FEW MORE YEARS, IT WASN'T 1.9 BILLION.

IT WAS SLIGHTLY LESS THAN A BILLION DOLLARS TO BUILD LIGHT RAIL.

IT'S NOW APPROACHING 3 BILLION.

THE ASSUMPTION IS A HUB AND SPOKE MODEL.

LIGHT RAIL ASSUMES PEOPLE LIVE IN THE SU P BUSH SUBURBS AND WAO TRANSPORT THEMSELF TO A HUB.

WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH COVID, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE YOU ARE.

BUT IT MATTERS YOU ARE THERE.

WORKING REMOTE, DP AND TECHNOLOGY, AND THEY DON'T WANT TO MOVE TO THE CENTER CORE.

THEY WANT TO MOVE TO RURAL MINNESOTA WHERE THERE IS A GOOD PIPELINE BANDWIDTH AVAILABLE FOR THEM TO UPLOAD AND DOWNLOAD AND WORK REMOTE.

LIGHT RAIL, ONCE IT'S IN THE GROUND, IT CAN'T BE MOVED.

IT CAN'T ADAPT ITSELF TO SHIFTING POPULATION LIFESTYLE TRENDS.

BUSES, ON THE OTHER HAND, CAN.

IF RIDERSHIP GOES DOWN, THEY CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS LIKE THE NORTH STAR RAIL HERE UP NEAR WHERE I AM NEAR ELK RIVER, IT'S AN ABYSMAL FAILURE, HEMORRHAGING MONEY WITH RIDERSHIP.

THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON IS PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO GO TO A CENTRAL CORE.

THE THINGS I HAVE BEEN HEARING FROM MANY OF MY CONSTITUENTS ARE THE CRIME RATE IN MINNEAPOLIS.

I HAVE HEARD NUMEROUS TIMES PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO COMMUTE DOWNTOWN.

THEY DO NOT WANT TO GO ATTEND ANY RECREATION ACTIVITIES DOWNTOWN WHERE THEY PREVIOUSLY HAD QUITE HEAVILY BECAUSE OF THE FEAR OF THE VIOLENCE AND CRIME HAPPENING IN MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT MORE EFFICIENT AND FUTURE TECHNOLOGIES AND NOT CONTINUE TO LOOK BACKWARDS TO VERY COSTLY LEGACY TECHNOLOGIES.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN, GO BACK TO THE TOPIC, AND ANYONE COULD FEEL FREE TO DO SO AS WELL.

YOU HAVE SPENT QUITE A BIT OF TIME STUDYING IT.

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT INNER-CITY RAIL, MINNESOTA HAD A LINE THAT RAN FROM THE METROPOLITAN ARREST TO DULUTH.

AREATO DULUTH.

IT WAS ABANDONED IN '86 BECAUSE OF RIDERSHIP ISSUES.

THERE'S ALSO DISCUSSING ABOUT A LINE FROM ROCHESTER TO THE TWIN CITIES AND OF COURSE AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THE STIN TWINCITIES TO CHICAGO.

I AM WONDERING IF YOU CAN RESPOND TO RIDER SHIP ISSUES AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S A CONCERN HERE.

>> BY THE WAY ALL ABOARD HAS FOUND THE STUDY OF ALL OF THOSE.

CORE STUDIES IN THE MINN DOT PLAN.

THE ONE THAT THEY SAY HAS THE ABSOLUTE HIGHEST RIDERSHIP PROJECTION IS THE ONE THAT GOES SOUTH FROM THE CITY, AND IT ENDS UP GOING FROM DULUTH AND KANSAS CITY.

I'M SORRY IN DES MOINES, NOT DULUTH.

DES MOINES.

THE SOUTHERN ROUTE, THEY ARE MOVING.

THEY ARE APPLYING FOR FEDERAL FUNDS.

SO WE HAD BETTER GET ON BOARD OR WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE CONNECTED.

BUT ALL ABOARD MINNESOTA SAYS THAT'S THE HIGHEST RIDERSHIP.

WE MAKE MISTAKES.

THE NORTH STAR CORRIDOR SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONNECTED TO ST.

CLOUD.

THAT'S WHERE THE POPULATION CENTER IS.

THAT'S WHERE THE COLLEGE CAMPUSES ARE.

IT'S THE MISTAKES WE MAKE WHEN WE PLAN OUR ROUTES.

THE NORTH STAR ABSOLUTELY FOR RIDERSHIP SHOULD HAVE GONE TO DULUTH.

HERE IS THE THING ABOUT SUBSIDIES THAT I THINK WE NEVER TALK ABOUT.

THERE'S LOTS OF ATTENTION TO WHAT PEOPLE CALL SUBSIDY OF TRANSIT.

WE NEVER TALK ABOUT THE SUBSIDY OF ROADS.

THERE IS NO WAY THAT EVERY CAR PAYS FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE ROADS AND BRIDGES IN THIS STATE.

IN THIS TRANSPORTATION BILL IN THE HOUSE, I BELIEVE THERE'S $10 MILLION FOR TOWNSHIP ROADS.

NOBODY ASKS THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC ON ANY OF THOSE TOWNSHIP ROADS.

NOBODY ASKS THAT QUESTION.

HOW MANY CARS RIDE ON THOSE TOWNSHIP ROADS?

BUT WE ARE PUTTING $10 MILLION OF GENERAL FUND MONEY.

THAT'S A SUBSIDY FOR THOSE CARS THAT ARE GOING TO USE THAT.

I CAN RECALL AGAIN -- YOU LEARN FROM PEOPLE LIKE REPRESENTATIVE LEADER.

HE USED TO STUDY WHEN WE PUT 60 MILLION IN FOR LOCAL BRIDGES.

HE SAID TO ME ONE TIME ALICE, SOME OF THOSE BRIDGES ARE A CULVERT THAT SERVES ONE FARM.

SO WE MAKE IT SOUND WHEN WE SAY ROADS AND BRIDGES AS THOUGH THAT'S NOBLE AND THAT'S NOT SUBSIDY.

IT IS SUBSIDY JUST AS IS TRA TRANSIT.

>> IF IT'S ALL RIGHT, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT.

>> Barry: GO AHEAD, SENATOR DAHMS.

>> THERE'S CERTAINLY A BIG DIFFERENCE IN ROADS AND BRIDGES IN RURAL MINNESOTA AND LIGHT RAIL IN THE TWIN CITIES.

AS REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO TALKED ABOUT THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIGHT RAIL AND THE TOTAL PACKAGE OF TRANSIT.

WHEN I WAS TALKING EARLIER I WAS TALKING ABOUT TRANSIT BUT I SHOULD HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT LIGHT RAIL.

WHEN YOU HAVE LIGHT RAIL, IT MOVES PASSENGERS, PERIOD.

WHEN YOU HAVE ROADS AND BRIDGES, IT NOT ONLY MOVES AUTOMOBILES AND PEOPLE BUT IT MOVES GOODS AND COMMODITIES.

IF YOU WANT TO GET RID OF ROADS AND BRIDGES IN RURAL MINNESOTA LET'S SEE WHAT PEOPLE IN THE METROPOLITAN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO EAT FOR FOOD.

THAT'S HOW WE MOVE THE COMMODITIES FROM THE PROCESSING PLANTS TO THE DISTRIBUTORSHIPS.

THAT IS PRODUCT THAT COMES IN AND OUT OF THE TWIN CITY AREA.

WHEN YOU HAVE LIGHT RAIL, IT MOVES ONE THING.

IT MOVES PASSENGERS.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT.

REPRESENTATIVE CWODZONSKI MENTIONED ABOUT A LOT OF YOUNG PEOPLE LIKE THAT PROCESS, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT YOU ARE MOVING ONE COMMODITY VERSUS CERTAINLY WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ROADS AND BRIDGES.

I WANT TO POINT THAT OUT.

>> Barry: SURE WE WILL HAVE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY.

THERE ARE PROBABLY MERENGUE ALSE HAVEN'T COVERED.

>> Barry: A VIEWER FROM LEWIS LLEWISTONCONCERNED ABOUT NURSINE ISSUES, AND WONDERS IF THE SURPLUS CAN'T BE USED FOR NURSING HOME ISSUES.

THIS IS A BROADER TOPIC THAN NURSING HOMES.

BUT LET'S START THERE.

TELL OUR VIEWER WHAT YOU CAN ABOUT THIS TOPIC.

>> I THINK I'M SPEAKING FOR ALL FOUR OF US WHEN I SAY COMPARED WITH FOUR YEARS AGO, I DIDN'T HEAR ABOUT SHORTAGES IN NURSING HOMES OR RETIREMENT HOMES OR HOMES FOR PEOPLE THAT CAN'T MAYBE NECESSARILY LIVE ON THEIR OWN.

NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN WE ARE HEARING ABOUT SHORTAGES OF STAFF, SHORTAGES OF BEDS, SHORTAGES OF FACILITIES.

I JUST THINK AS THE BABY BOOMERS AGE, WE HAVE A SHORTAGE NOW OF THESE FACILITIES AND THE PEOPLE WILLING TO WORK IN THESE FACILITIES.

WE ARE IN FOR A PRETTY DIRE SITUATION COMING UP.

WE HAVE GOT TO START MAKING PRETTY MAJOR INVESTMENTS AND GETTING KIDS IN HIGH SCHOOL TO WANT TO PURSUE A CAREER IN HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY, MACING 12, MAKING 12,14, 16 BUCKS AN HOUR.

A I HEARD THAT THING TODAY FROM A CONSTITUENT.

IT'S UNSUSTAINABLE.

WE HAD BETTER GET OUR HEADS TOGETHER AND SOLVE THIS PROBLEM, BECAUSE IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO, YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS ISSUE.

>> I DO NOT SERVE ON AND NEVER HAVE SERVED ON ANY OF THE COMMITTEES THAT WOULD HAVE THIS JURISDICTION OR PURVIEW.

I'M DEFINITELY NOT A GO TO PERSON WITH DETAILS ON THIS.

BUT A RELATED ISSUE THAT DOES REALLY IMPACT OUR SENIORS IS SOCIAL SECURITY.

IT'S ONE OF THE TOPICS I HAVE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF FEEDBACK ON IS THE TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY.

I THINK MINNESOTA IS ONLY -- I THINK IT'S LESS THAN 11.

WE WERE ONE OF 11 STATES A FEW YEARS AGO THAT STILL TAXED SOCIAL SECURITY.

I THINK IT MIGHT BE LESS THAN THAT AND DOWN TO 4 OR 5.

THERE IS A GREAT AMOUNT OF STRESS, ESPECIALLY WHAT WE ARE SEEING WITH THE INFLATION ACROSS THE ECONOMY.

PEOPLE ON FIXED INCOMES, IF THEY LIVE IN THEIR HOME, SENIOR LIVING CARE, THE STRESS OF THE RADICAL DRAMATIC INCREASES IN COST, BUT YET FIXED INCOMES WITH TAX POLICY THE WAY IT IS, AND MANY OF THE OTHER DEMANDS IS SOMETHING THAT WE DEFINITELY NEED TO PASS THIS YEAR.

NOT REDUCING, BUT ELIMINATING THE TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN, NURSING HOMES, AND ALSO THE SOCIAL SECURITY TAX IF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT.

THAT IS A QUESTION FROM A VIEWER IN MILAN AS WELL.

TO THE EXTEND THE PANEL WANTS TO ADDRESS IT, AND I'M INTERESTED IN YOUR RESPONSE ON THE NURSING HOME ISSUES AND REIMBURSEMENT AS WELL.

>> I THINK IT'S A VITAL CONCERN THAT WE REALLY ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT.

THE WORKFORCE GENERALLY IN A BROAD RANGE OF AREAS, BUT WHEN IT HAS TO DO WITH CARING FOR VULNERABLE PEOPLE, VULNERABLE POPULATIONS, WE FEEL IT SO MUCH MORE.

SO I THINK THERE'S A STRONG FEELING THAT SOMEHOW WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO ADDRESS IT THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

>> Barry: SENATOR DAHMS.

>> WELL, I THINK SENATOR CWODZONSKI BROUGHT UP A VERY GOOD POINT ABOUT THE SHORTAGE OF FOLKS.

UNFORTUNATELY WHAT REALLY HURTS THAT PROCESS, NO MATTER WHAT INDUSTRY WE LOOK AT, WE HAVE A LARGE SHORTAGE OF PEOPLE AVAILABLE TO TAKE THE JOBS WHICH REALLY MULTIPLIES AND PUTS PRESSURE ON THE NURSING HOMES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

WE HAVE A BILL THAT WE WILL BE PASSING OUT OF THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, WHICH WILL HELP DO SOME THINGS TO HELP RECRUIT MORE PEOPLE IN THE INDUSTRIES OF THE NURSING HOMES, ASSISTED LIVING, THAT TYPE OF THING, THE HOME FOR THE DISABLED AND ASSISTED LIVING.

THERE'S GOING TO BE -- WE DO HAVE A BILL THAT WILL BE COMING OUT THAT WILL HELP WITH THAT, TRYING TO GET MORE PEOPLE INTO TRAINING, TRYING TO GET WAGES RAISED, TRY TO HELP WITH KEEPING PEOPLE WITH LONGEVITY.

BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO MAKE SURE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING THAT THAT WE HAVE A WAY OF KEEPING THAT PIPELINE OPEN AND MAKE THESE COMPETITIVE JOBS SO WE ARE NOT LOSING THEM TO SOME OF THE OTHER AREAS TO WHERE THERE'S A LOT LESS STRESS.

IF YOU ARE GOING TO GO WORK AT A NURSING HOME, YOU REALLY HAVE TO BE DEDICATED TO DO THAT, BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT DOING IT BECAUSE OF THE SALARY.

YOU ARE DOING IT BECAUSE OF THE WANT TO HELP PEOPLE.

SO WHEN WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO HELP THESE PEOPLE WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE COME UP WITH A WAY OF PAYING THEM AND REWARD THEM FOR DOING THAT, AND I THINK THAT WILL HELP SOME.

TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY PART OF IT THAT WE DID PASS THE FIRST PIECE OF OUR TAX BILL OFF THE HOUSE SENATE FLOOR SITTING THERE AT THIS POINT TO BE MATCHED UP WITH ANOTHER PIECE, AND IN THERE WE DID INCLUDE THE ELIMINATION OF THE INCOME TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY.

WE CURRENTLY HAVE LAST COUPLE YEARS, WE HAVE TAKEN SOME OF THE INCOME TAX OFF THE LOWER BRACKETS ON THE SOCIAL SECURITY.

BUT THIS WOULD REMOVE INCOME TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY ACROSS THE BOARD.

>> YOU WILL NEED TO HAVE PAUL MARQUART ON TO TALK ABOUT THE TAX ISSUES.

THEY ARE PRETTY COMPLICATED THIS YEAR.

>> Barry: THEY ARE INDEED.

SENATOR CWODZONSKI, DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES OR SHOULD WE MOVE ON?

>> SURE.

I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES.

IT'S PROBABLY THE ONE THING I HAVE GOTTEN THE MOST E-MAILS AND TEXTS AND VOICE MAILS THIS YEAR, THE NO.

1 ISSUE.

I DON'T KNOW.

THE SOCIAL SECURITY TAX IS ONLY ON THE TOP 40% OF WAGE EARNERS.

IF YOU ARE IN THE LOWER 60% TAX RATE AND COLLECTING SOCIAL SECURITY, YOU ARE NOT PAYING ANY TAX ON THE SOCIAL SECURITY.

THAT'S A VARIABLE FOR ME.

I THINK THE FIGURE IS IN THE MILLION DOLLARS IS WHAT THE STATE TAKES IN BECAUSE OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY TAX.

THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY SO PEOPLE COLLECTING SOCIAL SECURITY ARE STILL HELPING OUT OUR SCHOOLS AND OUR ROADS AND ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT RELY ON TAXES.

I'M ON THE FENCE ON IT.

IF IT WAS A STAND ALONE BILL AND IT CAME TO ME IN THE SENATE, I DON'T KNOW.

I WOULD HAVE TO GIVE IT SOME SERIOUS THOUGHT.

>> Barry: LAST WEEK WE RAN INTO SCHEDULING PROBLEMS.

WE HAD A COUPLE OF VIEWRPS THAT WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE 9 TO $10 MILLION SURPLUS AND MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE SURPLUS.

THE CONCERNS RANGE FROM CONCERNED ABOUT PERHAPS SENDING TOO MUCH BACK IN TERMS OF TAX RELIEF OR SPENDING TOO MUCH MONEY AND SOME VIEWERS WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE ISSUE DO WE REALLY KNOW HOW MUCH SURPLUS IT REALLY IS?

HOW MUCH OF IT WITHIN-TIME MONEY?

LOTS OF COMPLICATED ISSUES IN DEALING WITH THAT SURPLUS.

VIEWERS WERE WONDERING WHAT THE STATUS OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE.

REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO, I DON'T THINK WE STARTED WITH THAT TODAY.

PUT YOU UP TO BAT WITH THAT DIFFICULT QUESTION.

YOU CAN TAKE THE BALL AND RUN WITH IT, AND WE WILL GO TO REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN.

>> ONE OF THE PRINCIPLES I LEARNED AS FORMER CITY COUNCILMEMBER IS GOVERNMENT HAS OBVIOUSLY SERVICES THAT IT MUST PROVIDE.

THOSE SERVICES MUST BE PAID FOR.

TO BE ABLE TO PAY FOR THOSE, THERE OBVIOUSLY HAS TO BE A METHOD OF RAISING REVENUE.

BUT ANY AMOUNT THAT'S ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT IS OVER TAXATION.

LAST YEAR WE FULLY FUNDED STATE GOVERNMENT AND INCREASED FUNDING TO RECORD LEVELS IN MINNESOTA'S HISTORY.

EVEN ABOVE AND BEYOND STATE GOVERNMENT BEING 100% FULLY FUNDED, WE ARE APPROACHING A 10-DOLLAR SURPLUS.

IT REPRESENTS OVER TAXATION BY OR ON HARD WORKING MINNESOTA, FAMILIES AND BUSINESSES ACROSS THE STATE.

WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS THIS MONEY NEEDS TO GO BACK TO THOSE WHO OVERPAID.

RIGHT NOW MY CONCERN IS NOT SHORING UP GOVERNMENT, NOT MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S A RAINY DAY FUND FOR GOVERNMENT.

MY NO.

1 CONCERN IS THE HUNDREDS OR OVER A THOUSAND CONSTITUENTS WHO CONTACTED ME THAT ARE HURTING BECAUSE OF THE INFLATION THAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING IN THIS OBAMA -- BIDEN ERA RATHER, AND THE INFLATION THAT THEY ARE EXPERIENCING, THE -- ONE OTHER AREA OF TAX WOULD BE WITH THE HOUSING PRECIOUS THAT ARE HAPPENING, THE TAXABLE VALUE FOR TAX PAYABLE NEXT YEAR ARE INCREASING FROM 10 TO 40%.

IT'S GOING TO CREATE A GREATER STRAIN ON PEOPLE'S BUDGETS.

THEIR BUDGETS ARE NOT INCREASING 40%.

BUT WHETHER IT BE THE COST OF BREAD, MILK, EGGS, WHETHER IT BE THE PROPERTY TAXES THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY NEXT YEAR, WHETHER IT BE THE COST OF GASOLINE.

THIS MONEY WE HAVE OVER COLLECTED NEEDS TO GO BACK TO THOSE THAT OVERPAID.

THAT'S MY PRIORITY.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN, YOUR THOUGHTS ON SURPLUS AND HOW TO HANDLE IT.

>> YES.

MY HUGE FRUSTRATION HERE IS WE HAVEN'T EDUCATED THE PUBLIC ABOUT THIS.

WE SHOULD CONSTANTLY BE SAYING PROJECTED SURPLUS, PROJECTED SURPLUS.

IN OTHER WORDS, A GROUP OF ECONOMISTS SAT DOWN.

THEY LOOKED AT THE NEXT TWO YEARS, AND THEY SAID WHAT DO WE THINK WILL HAPPEN IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS IN REVENUE AND EXPENSES?

AND THEIR POINT IS -- AND BY THE WAY, THEIR PROJECTION WAS MADE BEFORE RUSSIA ATTACKED UKRAINE.

THAT'S WHEN THEIR PROJECTION WAS MADE.

THEIR PROJECTED SURPLUS.

THE PERSON WHO LEARNED THIS LESSON ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE A PROJECTED SURPLUS WAS JESSIE VENTURA.

REMEMBER WHEN HE RAN FOR OFFICE AND WE TALKED ABOUT BOATLOADS OF MONEY, AND HE WAS GOING TO GIVE IT BACK.

THEN HE BECAME GOVERNOR.

HE SAID OH, THAT'S NOT MONEY IN THE BANK.

YOU MEAN I WOULD HAVE TO BORROW MONEY TO GIVE IT BACK?

YES, THAT'S RIGHT.

YOU WOULD HAVE TO BORROW MONEY TO GIVE IT BACK.

THEN I GUESS WE CAN'T DO THAT.

THAT'S THE LESSON WE SHOULD HAVE LEARNED THEN.

IT'S A PROJECTED SURPLUS.

EVERYTHING GOES IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS THE WAY THOSE ECONOMISTS HAVE PREDICTED.

WE WOULD HAVE THAT AMOUNT OF REVENUE OVER EXPENSES.

YES, THERE IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CUSHION IN THE BANK AT THIS POINT.

BUT IT IS BY NO MEANS A DEPENDABLE AMOUNT THAT WE CAN SPEND FREELY WITHOUT CONCERN FOR THE FUTURE.

SO A PROJECTED SURPLUS, THAT'S WHAT IT IS, AND IT JUST MEANS WE HAVE GOT TO BE PAYING ATTENTION VERY, VERY CAREFULLY.

>> Barry: SENATOR DAHMS.

>> I THINK REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO HIT IT ON THE HEAD.

WE HAVE A 9.3 BILLION SURPLUS AND 40% IS CONSIDERED TO BE ONE-TIME MONEY.

IF WE ARE LOOKING AT A 5 POINT SOME BILLION DOLLARS SURPLUS.

THIS IS A PROJECTED SURPLUS, BUT LET'S BE REALISTIC ABOUT IT.

THERE'S A PROJECTED SURPLUS FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF BIENNIUMS PASSED THIS.

IF WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT PROJECTED, FINE, BUT LET'S LOOK FURTHER OUT INTO IT, AND NOT THIS PROJECTION.

WE STILL HAVE A PROJECTED SURPLUS.

WITH THAT SAID, I THINK THAT WE DO NEED TO GIVE SOME OF THIS MONEY BACK TO THE PEOPLE THAT PUT THE MONEY IN.

IT'S KIND OF INTERESTING, BUT ONLY IN GOVERNMENT IS IT UNFAIR TO GIVE IT BACK TO THE PEOPLE THAT GAVE YOU THE MONEY.

WITH THAT SAID, WE NEED TO LOOK INTO GIVING PART OF THAT BACK, AND WE HAVE A BILL THAT WE INTRODUCED ON THE SENATE FLOOR.

IT'S PASSED OFF THE SENATE FLOOR, AND THAT BILL WOULD DECREASE THE INCOME TAX AT VARIOUS LEVELS STARTING AT THE BASE LEVEL.

IT WOULD DECREASE THAT CONSIDERABLY.

SO AS REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO TALKED ABOUT, INFLATION IS EATING IN TO PEOPLE'S POCKETBOOKS, AND ONE OF THE LAST SURVEYS I HAVE SEEN, THEY ARE PROJECTING A FAMILY OF FOUR FOR BASICS AT ABOUT $100 A WEEK AND IT'S ABOUT $5,200 A YEAR, AND I CAN TELL YOU THE FOLKS INCOMES ARE NOT COMING UP EQUAL TO THAT TYPE OF INFLATION.

WITH THAT SAID, WE PROBABLY ARE GOING TO NEED TO DO SOMETHING.

LET'S REDUCE SOME OF THE TAXES WE ARE TAKING IN BASED ON THAT PROJECTION.

>> Barry: SENATOR CWODZONSKI.

>> YEAH, WE HAD A SPIRITED DEBATE LAST WEEK ON THE FLOOR OR TWO WEEKS AGO, WHETHER WE SHOULD GIVE IT BACK IN THE WAY OF ONE-TIME MONEY OR GIVE PERMANENT TAX RELIEF TO PEOPLE.

I FOUND IT A PRETTY INTERESTING DEBATE.

BASICALLY WHAT ALICE WAS SAYING ABOUT PROJECTED SURPLUS, AND NO ONE HAS MENTIONED THAT I HEARD ANYWAY, THAT THE SURPLUS DOESN'T FACTOR IN INFLATION BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE FIGURE THE SURPLUS OUT.

WHEN THE ECONOMISTS TALKED ABOUT THE BUDGET SURPLUS AT THAT TIME, THIS IS JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO, INFLATION WAS AT 2%, AND NOW WITH IT BEING AROUND 7 OR 8%, I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE MOST OF THIS MONEY AND PUT IT AWAY INTO A RAINY DAY FUND BECAUSE I THINK WE ARE IN PERHAPS IN THE BIENNIUMS WE WILL BE DEALING WITH A PRETTY INTERESTING SITUATION, AND I WOULD HATE TO PASS THIS ONTO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO FOLLOW ALICE AFTER SHE RETIRES AND GIVE THEM THIS BURDEN OF TRYING TO BALANCE THE BUDGET GIVEN A LOOMING DEFICIT.

GIVEN WE HAVE A SURPLUS, ONE OF THE THINGS I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO PUSH HASN'T GONE ANYWHERE BUT I DID INTRODUCE A BILL THAT IN 2003, THE FUNDING PEAKED FOR EDUCATION FOR OUR SCHOOLS.

WE HAVEN'T KEPT UP.

WE ARE 16% BEHIND WHERE FUNDING WAS IN 2003.

I WOULD LOVE TO TAKE A BILLION AND A HALF OF THESE DOLLARS AND BRING 2003 FUNDING FOR EDUCATION TO THE LEVELS THAT WE COULD DO IN 2022 WITH JUST ABOUT MAYBE 1/8 OF THE SURPLUS.

THAT WOULD BE WHAT I WOULD DO WITH THE MONEY.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO, I WANT TO GO BACK TO YOU BECAUSE WE KICKED OFF THE CONVERSATION WITH YOU.

SOMETIMES INFLATION IS FOLLOWED BY RECESSIONS.

THERE WAS A TAX CHANGE THAT WAS BENEFICIAL TO TAXPAYERS.

THE RECESSION THAT FOLLOWED IMPACTED OUR VERY PROGRESSIVE TAX COLLECTION SYSTEM, AND THERE WERE, I THINK, 6 OR 7 SPECIAL SESSIONS THAT WERE NECESSARY THAT FOLLOWED.

DOES THIS SERIOUS RUN-UP OF INFLATION THAT WE EXPERIENCED AND WHICH MAY IN FACT THIS MAY BE THE OPENING GAMBIT HERE, IT MAY GET WORSE, DOES THE POSSIBILITY OF A RECESSION DOWN THE ROAD INFLUENCE AT ALL THE DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW MUCH SHOULD BE RETURNED TO TAXPAYERS?

>> 100% FOR ME ANYWAY.

I THINK IT EVEN MAKES IT MORE FORCEFUL THAT WE NEED TO RETURN.

I THINK THAT RECESSION IS INEVITABLE.

IS IT GOING TO BE LATER THIS YEAR OR NEXT YEAR?

THAT, I DON'T KNOW.

BUT IT IS INEVITABLE.

INFLATION IS CLEARLY HAPPENING RIGHT NOW.

WHAT IS ALSO HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IS THE RISE OF INTEREST RATES WHICH IS GOING TO IMPACT EVERYTHING THAT WE BORROW OR EVERYTHING WE HAVE ON CREDIT.

THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON EVERYBODY THAT IS USING CREDIT.

SO IF AND WHEN A RECESSION OCCURS, IF AND WHEN INFLATION CONTINUES TO SKYROCKET, SOMEBODY IS GOING TO HAVE TO TIGHTEN THEIR BELT.

I WHOLEHEARTEDLY DISAGREE THAT THIS TAX OVER COLLECTION THAT WE HAVE CONFISCATED THAT WE SHOULD TUCK IT AWAY AND BE SURE GOVERNMENT IS SHORED UP AT SOME FUTURE DATE.

RIGHT NOW PEOPLE ARE EXPERIENCING THE PAIN.

EVERYTHING GASOLINE TANK FILLED UP, EVERY TIME THEY GO TO THE STORE TO PURCHASE GROCERIES.

WE NEED TO GET THE DOLLARS BACK IN THE HAND.

IF SOMEBODY NEEDS TO TIGHTEN THE BELT, IT NEEDS TO BE GOVERNMENT.

WE ARE HAVING TO FORCE OUR BUSINESSES TO TIGHTEN THEIR BUILT WHICH COMES IN THE WAY OF LAY OFFS OR WE ARE HAVING TO FORCE OUR FAMILIES TO TIGHTEN THEIR BELTS.

WHEN BELT TIGHTENING IS GOING TO HAPPEN, IT NEEDS TO BE US THROUGH CUTTING THE SIZE, SCOPE AND SPENDING OF DOLLARS IN GOVERNMENT.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN, I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE LAST WORD ON THIS, AND WE WILL MOVE ONTO THE LAST TOPIC OF THE DAY.

ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> I THINK NOT.

>> Barry: WE ONLY HAVE A COUPLE MINUTES LEFT.

VERY QUICKLY, THE GOVERNOR TODAY SAID THAT THERE WOULD BE NO SPECIAL SESSION.

ARE WE GOING TO GET THE UNEMPLOYMENT TRUST FUND THING RESOLVED?

REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN, WE WILL START WITH YOU.

>> WELL, I HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT HAS NOT BEEN MY ISSUE AT ALL.

I'M JUST A PERIPHERAL OBSERVER OF THAT.

I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING OF WISDOM TO SAY THERE OTHER THAN HIS COMMENTS, I THINK, WERE NOT WELL RECEIVED TODAY.

>> Barry: SENATOR CWODZONSKI VERY QUICKLY.

>> I THINK WE WILL GET IT RESOLVED.

>> Barry: SENATOR DAHMS.

>> I THINK WE WILL GET IT RESOLVED, BUT I FOUND IT VERY INTERESTING THAT IN A NONBUDGETTARY YEAR, THE GOVERNOR SUGGESTING HE WILL NOT DO A SPECIAL SESSION.

I DON'T KNOW WHY IT CAME TO SURFACE BECAUSE WE DON'T DO SPECIAL SESSION.

WHY WOULD WE DO A SPECIAL SESSION IN A POLICY YEAR TO WHERE WE GO SINE DIE AND GO HOME AND THE MONEY GETS PUT TO REST UNTIL NEXT YEAR.

THAT ONE CAME OUT OF LEFT FIELD.

>> Barry: SENATOR LUCERO.

>> GOVERNOR'S COMMENTS WERE NOT WELL RECEIVED BECAUSE OF THE FOUR CAUCUS, YOU HAVE THE REPUBLICAN SENATE MAJORITY WHO HAS PASSED AND IS PROMOTING THE FIX FOR THE UI TRUST FUND.

YOU HAD THE SENATE DEMOCRAT MINORITY VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE BILL, A GREAT NUMBER OF THEM.

YOU HAVE THE GOVERNOR PUSHING FOR IT.

YOU HAD THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN MINORITY IN FAVOR OF THAT.

SO FOUR OF THE FIVE.

THE ONE HOLD OUT THE ONE THAT STANDS IN THE WAY IS THE DEMOCRAT HOUSE MAJORITY, ARE PREVENTING THE FIX, THE UI TRUST FUND WHICH SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED, AND WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN THE CONSEQUENCE OF THAT WHICH IS THE TAX INCREASE PASSED ALONG .

>> Barry: SENATOR HAUSMAN, YOU HAVE BEEN GRACIOUS WITH YOUR TIME, WITH OUR VIEWERS OVER THE YEARS.

YOU HAVE HAD A LONG CAREER SERVING WITH PEOPLE IN YOUR LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT.

REFLECT A LITTLE BIT ON YOUR SERVICE, THAT WHICH IS PARTICULARLY NOTABLE TO YOU.

LET'S GO OUT WITH YOUR THOUGHTS AT THE END OF THIS PROGRAM.

>> THE THING IS THAT I LEARNED EARLY ON, WE ARE A DIVIDED LEGISLATURE, BUT WHETHER YOU ARE IN THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY, YOU SHOULD GET THINGS DONE FOR MINNESOTANS.

IF I'M IN THE MINORITY, I CAN'T USE THAT AS MY EXCUSE.

I STILL BUILD RELATIONSHIP.

I BUILD TRUST BETWEEN MEMBERS, AND I STILL HAVE TO ACCOMPLISH THINGS.

I LEARNED THAT EARLY ON FROM DAVID BISHOP, A REPUBLICAN FROM ROCHESTER.

HE AND I WORKED TOGETHER WHEN I WAS IN THE MINORITY AND WE DELIVERED A VISITORS CENTER THAT LINKS COMO ZOO CONSERVATORY.

I HAVE HAD THAT EXPERIENCE WITH CAPITAL INVESTMENT CHAIRS.

WHEN YOU WORK TOGETHER, YOU CAN GET THINGS DONE ACROSS THE PARTISAN DIVIDE.

I THINK FOR US TO CONTINUE TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT BECOMES VERY IMPORTANT.

BUILD RELATIONSHIPS.

BUILD TRUST.

>> Barry: I WANT TO THANK ALL OF OUR GUESTS TONIGHT.

I WANT TO THANK REPRESENTATIVE HAUSMAN.

I WANT TO INVITE YOU THE VIEWERS THAT RETURN.

NEXT WEEK WE HAVE A SPECIAL PROGRAM INVOLVED WITH TWO MEMBERS OF THE MINNESOTA SUPREME COURT.

LEGISLATORS WILL RETURN IN THE FOLLOWING THREE THURSDAY EVENINGS.

WE HOPE YOU WILL BE WITH US FOR EACH OF THOSE PROGRAMS.

THANK YOU, AND GOOD NIGHT.

>>> "YOUR LEGISLATORS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE MINNESOTA CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION FROM DEVELOPING BEST PRACTICES THAT HELP FARMERS BETTER PROTECT OUR NATURAL RESOURCES TO THE LATEST INNOVATIONS IN CORN BASED PLASTICS.

MINNESOTA CORN FARMERS ARE PROUD TO INVEST IN THIRD PARTY RESEARCH LEADING TO A MORE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE FOR OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES.

MINNESOTA FARMERS UNION, STANDING FOR AGRICULTURE, WORKING FOR FARMERS.

ON THE WEB AT MFU.ORG.

CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY CAPTION ASSOCIATES, LLC WWW.CAPTIONASSOCIATES.COM