>>> "YOUR LEGISLATORS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE MINNESOTA CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION, FROM DEVELOPING BEST PRACTICES TO HELP 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.

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

>> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO PIONEER PUBLIC TELEVISION "YOUR LEGISLATORS".

I'M BARRY ANDERSON.

I'M THE HOST AND MODERATOR OF OUR PROGRAM THIS EVENING AND ALL THE WEEKS AHEAD UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE GOES HOME.

BEFORE WE GET TO THIS EVENING'S GUESTS, THOUGH, WE WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO REMEMBER A GUEST FROM LONG AGO.

HE PASSED AWAY LAST WEEK AT THE AGE OF 72.

RETIRED DISTRICT COURT JUDGE AND FORMER STATE SENATOR TOM NEVIL.

HE WAS OFTEN ON THE SET OF "YOUR LEGISLATORS" EXPLAINING THE DETAILS OF LEGISLATION AND ENGAGING IN BANTER WITH HIS FELLOW LEGISLATORS.

PARTICULARLY WAS IN FAMILY LAW AND SUPPORTED PUBLIC DEFENDERS AND OTHER BILLS ACCORDING TO THE RULE OF LAW.

THE DISTRICT COURT JUDGE HE HELPED FOUND AND HELPED PRESIDED OVER AND IN HIS RETIREMENT HE WAS INVOLVED IN PRISON MINISTRY.

HIS LEAST IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTION, NO DOUBT, WAS AS A GUEST ON THIS PROGRAM.

OFTEN HE WAS A LAST MINUTE VOLUNTEER.

EVERYONE ELSE WAS DETAINED BY HEARINGS OR FLOOR VOTES WHO WERE ALL ENRICHED BY HIS WISDOM AND THOUGHTFULNESS, AND OUR CONDOLENCES TO THE FAMILY AND SENATOR AND LATER JUDGE.

IN OUR EFFORT TO UNRAVEL THE MYSTERIES OF ST. PAUL TO INTRODUCE OUR DISTINGUISHED GUESTS AND PANELISTS WHO WILL BE DISCUSSING THE LATEST ISSUES OF THE DAY.

I WANT TO MENTION AS I DO EACH WEEK, THIS IS YOUR PROGRAM AND I INVITE YOU TO CALL IN WITH YOUR QUESTIONS OR E-MAIL YOUR QUESTIONS TO US AT YOUR TV AT PIONEER.ORG.

WE WILL SEE THAT THOSE QUESTIONS GET TO OUR PANEL.

I WANT TO REMIND OUR VIEWERS THAT YOU CAN SEND YOUR QUESTIONS IN WHERE WE ARE NOT ON THE AIR.

IF YOU ARE ON YOUR TUESDAY MORNING RUN AND YOU THINK MAYBE YOU ARE NOT RUNNING IN THE COLD, AND IF YOU ARE ON THE TUESDAY AFTERNOON WALK, AND YOU THINK OF A QUESTION YOU WANT OUR PANEL TO ASK, DON'T HESITATE.

LET'S TURN ON OUR GUESTS AND INTRODUCE OUR PANEL.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENS IN A LEGISLATIVE SESSION IS THAT WE WILL OCCASIONALLY HAVE GUESTS THAT WILL JOIN US A LITTLE BIT LATER, AND THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THIS EVENING.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM MILLER WILL BE JOINING US IN A FEW MINUTES WHEN HE'S SAFELY BACK IN HIS OFFICE.

LET'S BEGIN BY INTRODUCING OUR OTHER PANELISTS AND I'M GOING TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO TELL YOU THE VIEWER A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THEIR BACKGROUND, COMMITTEES THEY SERVE ON AND OTHER IMPORTANT MATTERS THAT THEY NEED TO SHARE WITH YOU, OUR VIEWERS.

LET'S START WITH A FREQUENT GUEST ON THE PROGRAM.

ACTUALLY YOU ARE SORT OF THE TOM NEVIL OF THIS ERA.

WE ASKED YOU TO FILL IN FOR SOMEBODY WHO GOT TIED UP IN LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS, AND IF THAT'S THE BASIS ON WITH YOU ARE WITH A US TONIGHT, SENATOR FRANKS, TELL OUR VIEWERS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELF.

>> THANK YOU, JUSTICE ANDERSON.

IT'S GREAT TO SEE YOU AND MY FELLOW LEGISLATORS.

FOLKS, I'M NICK FRENTZ, GREETINGS FROM BEAUTIFUL NORTH MANKATO.

PROUD TO SERVE AS AN ASSISTANT MINORITY LEADER, SERVED PROUDLY ON THE SENATE AGRICULTURE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE.

RANKING MEMBER ON THE UTILITY COMMITTEE AND ALSO LIKE TO SERVE ON THE RULES COMMITTEE, LEGISLATIVE AUDIT COMMITTEE AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT THEY ASK ME TO DO.

I'M COMING TO YOU LIVE FROM OUR BASEMENT HERE BECAUSE I JUST CAME HOME TONIGHT.

MY OTHER LIFE IS I'M A LAWYER AND I HAVE BEEN PRACTICING LAW FOR ABOUT 35 YEARS, AND THIS WEEK IS THE START OF MY SIXTH YEAR IN THE SENATE AND DAMN PROUD OF IT.

THANK YOU.

>> PRIVILEGE OF VISITING A LITTLE BIT ON THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE, AND IT WAS MY PRIVILEGE AND HONOR TO SWEAR IN THE NEW SENATE PRESIDENT, DAVID OSMICK AND ASSISTANT SERGEANT OF ARMS.

THOSE CEREMONY OF EVENTS WERE PRETTY SPECIAL.

IT WAS A VERY SPECIAL GREETING FOR SENATOR THOMAS AND YOU HAD TO BE -- THAT WAS AN EMOTIONAL MOMENT FOR EVERYBODY.

>> AGREED.

>> ALSO JOINING US FROM THE SENATE, DISTRICT 8 IN ALEXANDRIA, SENATOR BILL INGEBRIGTSEN.

HE'S ALSO BEEN A FREQUENT QUEST FOR US, AND LIKE A COUPLE OTHER GUESTS THIS EVENING, HE WILL BE RETIRING AT THE SESSION.

WE WILL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT SOME WAY TO BRING YOU BACK FOR EXTRA COMMENTARY.

TELL OUR VIEWERS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELF.

I DON'T THINK HE CAN HEAR US.

WE WILL COME BACK TO SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN, AND WE WILL GO TO REPRESENTATIVE PAUL MARQUART FROM DISTRICT 04B IN DILWORTH.

REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART, TELL OUR VIEWERS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELF.

>> WELL, THANK YOU, JUSTICE ANDERSON, ALWAYS GRADE TO BE PART OF THE PROGRAM.

I RENT DISTRICT 4B WHICH IS PARTS OF CLAY, NORMAN, AND I LIVE IN DILWORTH BY THE FAR GO MOORHEAD AREA.

I'M A TEACHER, STILL TEACH, TAUGHT FOR 38 YEARS, AND IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE THIS IS MY 22nd YEAR.

I CURRENTLY CHAIR THE HOUSE TAXES COMMITTEE AND SERVE ON THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE, AND AS FAR AS FAMILY, BEEN MARRIED TO MY WIFE FOR 40 YEARS.

WE HAVE TWO DAUGHTERS, BOTH IN EDUCATION, BOTH MARRIED AND ONE OF THE REASONS MAINLY SINCE I'M RETIRING THIS YEAR IS THREE VERY FUN GRANDCHILDREN.

ADDISON, LINCOLN, AND THAT'S GOING TO KEEP IN RETIREMENT BUT IT'S GREAT TO BE HERE.

>> WE ARE DELIGHTED TO HAVE YOU JOIN US.

BEFORE WE ARE DONE THIS EVENING, I HOPE TO GIVE OUR THREE RETIRING MEMBERS, AND GIVE OUR THREE RETIRING MEMBERS TO SPEND A FEW MINUTES REFLECTING ON THEIR SERVICE AND WHAT THEY SEE AHEAD FOR THE LEGISLATURE.

BUT I THINK WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE THIS EVENING BY GOING RIGHT TO MATTERS AT HAND.

LET'S BEGIN WITH -- FIRST OF ALL, SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN CAN YOU HEAR US?

>> I THINK I CAN.

CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> WE ARE GOOD.

TELL OUR VIEWERS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELF, SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN.

>> LET'S SAY I'M TECHNOCHALLENGED, GENTLEMEN.

AS NICK AND EVERYBODY KNOWS, I HAD A HARD TIME GETTING ON THERE.

BUT NEVERTHELESS, HERE I AM.

OF COURSE I'M THE SHERIFF FROM WEST CENTRAL MINNESOTA, ALEXANDRIA FERGUS FALLS, AND I AM STARTING MY 16th YEAR IN THE SENATE.

PREVIOUS TO THAT I WAS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ELECTED SHERIFF OF DOUGLAS COUNTY.

I'M CHAIRING THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCE COMMITTEE, FINANCE COMMITTEE, AND AS WELL AS SENATE FINANCE, VARIOUS OTHER SUBCOMMITTEES.

THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

>> WE ARE DELIGHTED TO HAVE YOU.

I THOUGHT WE WOULD START TONIGHT WITH A BUDGET QUESTION.

THIS IS A QUESTION THAT A VIEWER SENT IN EARLIER TODAY AND THE VIEWER IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE $7 BILLION SURPLUS.

OBVIOUSLY IT'S GREAT TO HAVE A SURPLUS BUT WAS RAISING QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW LARGE THE SURPLUS REALLY WAS.

FOR EXAMPLE, WE KNOW THERE'S A WORKERS' COMPENSATION SHORTAGE THAT'S A LITTLE SHORT OF 3 BILLION.

THERE'S MONEY THAT PROBABLY SHOULD GO INTO THE RAINY DAY FUND, AND THERE'S ALSO THIS ISSUE OF HOW MUCH OF THAT SURPLUS IS CONTINUING SURPLUS AND HOW MUCH OF IT IS ONE-TIME MONEY.

LET'S START WITH YOU, SENATOR FRENTZ.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT BUDGET SURPLUS.

GOOD THING TO HAVE?

HOW MUCH OF IT IS THERE REALLY, AND WHAT DO YOU SEE IS THE PRIORITIES IN THIS SESSION FOR THAT SURPLUS.

>> TELL YOUR VIEWER THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION TO LEAD WITH.

THE BUDGET ON PAPER IS 7.7 BILLION, BUT IF YOU ADJUST FOR INFLATION, IT'S A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN THAT, AND THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE TRUST FUND, IT FULLY REPLENISHED AND ALSO BROUGHT BACK TO ITS PREVIOUS SIZE WOULD BE 2.7 BILLION.

THAT WILL HELP RELIEVE PRESSURE ON THE SMALL BUSINESSES AS THEY WOULDN'T SEE AN INCREASE IN THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE RATES.

WE HAVE PLEDGES OUT THERE TO SUPPORT THE FRONTLINE WORKERS.

RETURNING SOME OF THAT MONEY TO THE TAXPAYER IN THE FORM OF REBATE CHECKS HAS BEEN PROPOSED, AND I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

I'M SURE REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART WOULD BE WILLING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF LONGER TERM INDIVIDUAL TAX CUTS.

I'M OPEN-MINDED TO THAT, BUT YOU MAKE A GREAT POINT, JUSTICE ANDERSON.

WE HAVE A ONE-TIME SURPLUS, AND BY THE WAY THE TAX RATES REALLY DIDN'T CHANGE.

WHAT CHANGED IS THE AMOUNT OF CORPORATE REVENUE, INDIVIDUAL INCOME AND SALES TAX REVENUE.

THAT'S WHY WE ARE AT THE SURPLUS, AND WHETHER WE WANT TO MAKE A MORE PERMANENT CHANGE FORECASTING THE CHANGE INTO THE DISTANT FUTURE THREATENS TO PUT US IN A DEFICIT.

I'M STILL OPEN-MINDED TO IT.

THAT'S THE SHORT VERSION.

THANK YOU.

>> VERY GOOD, SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN, YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE SURPLUS.

>> AS FAR AS CONTINUING MONEY, THAT'S KIND OF UP IN THE AIR.

WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.

FEBRUARY, OF COURSE, COMES OUT ANOTHER REPORT FROM THE MMB, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY ANOTHER FORECAST, SO WE ARE NOT REAL SURE WHERE THAT'S GOING TO BE, WHETHER IT'S GOING TO BE UP OR DOWN FOR THE 7.7.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE GOT TO LOOK AT CAUTIOUSLY.

AS YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A BUDGET YEAR.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE THINGS WE NEED TO, THAT SEEMS TO BE ADDRESSED IMMEDIATELY, AND THAT THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE, OF COURSE IS ONE OF THEM FOR SURE.

IT'S GOING TO BE AN INCREASE IN TAXES IF WE DON'T ADDRESS THAT, AND THAT'S OF COURSE OVER $2 BILLION.

WE ALSO GOT TO LOOK AT SOME TAX REDUCTION AND GIVE MEANINGFUL TAX REDUCTION THAT'S ONGOING.

SOCIAL SECURITY, FOR INSTANCE, I KNOW THAT'S BEEN BANTERED AROUND FOR A WHILE.

WE ARE ONE OF THE VERY FEW STATES THAT HAS THAT CONTINUING FOR THOSE THAT ARE ON SOCIAL SECURITY.

SO I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE FRONT AND CENTER TAX RELIEF BILLS IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A TAX RELIEF BILL AS WELL AS PUBLIC SAFETY.

PUBLIC SAFETY AND IT NOT BEING A BUDGET YEAR, BUT PUBLIC SAFETY IS IN OUR FACE EVERY DAY.

EVERY TIME WE TURN THE TV ON.

WE CAN'T THROW MONEY AT THINGS LIKE THAT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT THERE ARE INCENTIVES THAT WE CAME OUT TODAY EARLIER IN OUR CAUCUS WHAT WE ARE CALLING THE COPS PROGRAM WHERE WE HAVE 67 MILLION PLUS DOLLARS OR INCENTIVES TO RETAIN OFFICERS AND GIVE THEM SOMEWHAT OF A BONUS, IF YOU WILL.

WE ARE FINDING OUT THAT WE ARE NOT ABLE TO HIRE OFFICERS STATEWIDE, NOT ONLY MINNEAPOLIS, ST. PAUL, BUT STATEWIDE.

THAT SHOULD BE A CONCERN FOR EVERYBODY.

THAT'S GOING TO BE ONE OF THE BIG TOPICS THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT EXPENDING DOLLARS.

AGAIN, THE RAINY DAY FUND IS BEING REPLENISHED BECAUSE OF GOOD LEGISLATION WE DID SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

THAT'S IN GOOD SHAPE.

BUT AGAIN.

IT WOULD BE PRUDENT FOR US, I THINK, TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE FEBRUARY FORECAST BEFORE WE START LOOKING AT EXPENDING THOSE DOLLARS.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART, YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE BUDGET SURPLUS.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

WE CERTAINLY NEED TO WAIT UNTIL FEBRUARY LIKE SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN JUST SAID.

BUT ABOUT HALF OF THE 7.7 BILLION DOLLARS IS ONE TIME AND HALF OF IT IS ONGOING.

IT'S ABOUT A 50/50 MIX.

FOR PRIORITIES THIS YEAR, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK WE HAVE TO USE CAUTION.

WE ARE LOOKING AT INVESTMENTS AND TAX CUTS WHICH I THINK SHOULD BOTH BE INTO A PLAN BUT WE HAVE TO BE CAUTIOUS SO WE DON'T OVER EXTEND IN THE FUTURE, SO THAT WE CAN PAY FOR EDUCATION, HEALTHCARE THAT WE KNOW PUBLIC SAFETY THAT WE KNOW ARE ALWAYS IMPORTANT.

WE HAVE TO USE CAUTION.

BUT SOME OF THE PRAIRTS THAT WE SHOULD HAVE, FIRST OF ALL, COVID-19 IS STILL PART OF THE PROBLEM.

WE KNOW THAT COVID-19 DISPROPORTIONATELY HIT INDIVIDUALS IN SMALL BUSINESSES.

IF YOU ARE AN INDIVIDUAL WITH LOWER INCOME GOING INTO COVID-19 OR YOU DID NOT HAVE A JOB, YOU GOT HIT HARDER DURING COVID-19.

IF YOU ARE A SMALL BUSINESS, IN LEISURE OR ENTERTAINMENT OR LODGING OR RESTAURANTS, YOU GOT HIT HARDER.

WE HAVE TO FIRST OF ALL MAKE SURE THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND SMALL BUSINESSES GET TO RECOVERY BUT ALSO GET TO REBUILDING.

I THINK THAT SHOULD BE JOB NO.

1.

SECOND, I THINK PROBABLY THE BIGGEST ISSUE FACING OUR ECONOMY RIGHT NOW IS THE WORKFORCE SHORTAGE.

I MEAN, THAT'S LEADING TO INCREASED PRICES AND LEADING TO INFLATION.

IT'S LEADING TO SHORTAGES IN CHILD CARE, NURSING, PUBLIC SAFETY, ALL OF THESE FIELDS, IT'S DRIVING UP PRICES AND HURTING OUR ECONOMY, AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE KNOW IS THIS IS BEING CAUSED BY NO SURPRISE, ABOUT 2042 THE DEATH RATE FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY WILL PASS THE BIRTH RATE.

THE WORKFORCE IS SLOWING DOWN.

ONE THING WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO, AND I WILL LOOK IN THE TAX AREA IS HOW CAN WE RETAIN AND ATTRACT NEW YOUNG PEOPLE AND YOUNG FAMILIES.

WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CHILD CARE COSTS, LOAN COSTS, HOUSING AND THOSE THINGS, AND REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND REDUCE COSTS IN THOSE AREAS.

YOU KNOW, PUBLIC SAFETY ALWAYS SHOULD BE THE STATE'S TOP PRIORITY.

I MEAN, WHEN I WAS THE MAYOR BACK IN DILWORTH WE WOULD SEND OUT SURVEYS TO THE RESIDENCE, AND THE NO.

1 QUESTION WAS HOW SAFE DO YOU FEEL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IF YOU DON'T FEEL SAFE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, NO OTHER SERVICE MATTERS.

I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE SESSION, BUT TO ME, IT SHOULD ALWAYS BE A TOP PRIORITY, AND I THINK WHAT'S BEEN ENCOURAGING ABOUT THE TALK ON PUBLIC SAFETY, BUT I HEAR, YOU KNOW, GOVERNOR SAYS YOU DO THAT.

THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE HAS PLANS WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO PUT MORE DOLLARS INTO ATTRACTING NEW POLICE OFFICERS.

HOW CAN YOU PREVENT CRIME?

HOW CAN WE MAKE CRIMINALS MORE ACCOUNTABLE?

ALL OF THOSE THINGS I'M HEARING AND ALL OF THOSE ARE IN EFFECT OF THE PREVIOUS PLANS WE HAVE TOGETHER.

I'M OPTIMISTIC HOW WE CAN GET SOMETHING DONE.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MILLER, THANKS FOR JOINING US FROM PRINSBURG, DISTRICT 17A, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SURPLUS OF 7.7 BILLION DOLLARS BUT ALSO THE UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION FUND AND RAINY DAY FUNDS WHICH HAVE CLAIMS ON THAT SURPLUS AS WELL, AND ITS STATUS AS I UNDERSTAND IT ANYWAY, ONE TIME MONEY.

MAKE YOU COULD TALK ABOUT YOUR VISION RELATIVE TO THAT SURPLUS.

>> THANKS, BARRY, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR MY TARDINESS.

I GOT OFF THE ROAD A LITTLE BIT LATE ON THIS ONE, BUT I'M GLAD I WAS ABLE TO JOIN CLOSE TO THE BEGINNING BUT APPRECIATE THIS TIME.

BETWEEN THE ONE-TIME MONEY -- IN MY OPINION, WE ARE IN A BIENNIUM SYSTEM.

WE PASSED A BUDGET LAST YEAR.

WE FULLY FUNDED GOVERNMENT WITH A HUGE INCREASE IN SPENDING LAST YEAR AND ONE-TIME MONEY WE SPENT LAST YEAR AS WELL.

WE WERE DRUNK WITH MONEY LAST YEAR.

WE HAVE A SURPLUS.

SO THERE'S TWO WAYS THAT WE CAN GIVE IT BACK TO THE HARD WORKING TAXPAYERS IN MINNESOTA WITH ONE-TIME MONEY.

I THINK WE NEED TO DO A STRAIGHT ACROSS THE BOARD TAX CREDIT AND WE CAN FIGURE OUT THE NUMBERS ON THAT.

THIS IS THE TIME WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET RID OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY TAX.

WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET RID OF THE DEATH TAX.

I'M NOT A REAL BIG BACK OF THE SYNTAX EITHER, AS WE CALL IT.

WE CAN FOR SURE DRAW THOSE DOWN.

I DON'T HAVE THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS, AND WE PROBABLY ARE GOING TO TELL ME I SPENT $15 MILLION BY WHAT I'M JUST SAYING.

IN ANY CASE, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HOW GOOD IT'S BEEN FOR PEOPLE AND PEOPLE AFFECTED BY THEIR JOBS, YOU KNOW, THEIR BUSINESSES WERE HARMED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, BUT LET'S NOT MAKE THIS COMPLICATED.

LET'S GIVE THEM THEIR MONEY BACK AND LET THEM DO WITH IT WHAT THEY THINK THEY NEED TO DO.

GOVERNMENT COMING IN WITH MORE PROGRAMS, AND GOVERNMENT COMING IN TO EMPHASIZE THIS AND PUSH IT IN THIS DIRECTION OR THAT DIRECTION IS TINKERING ON AN ECONOMY THAT'S GOING TO CATCH ITS BREATH AND KEEP ITS FEET ON THE GROUND.

>> WE HAVE A VIEWER THAT WANTS TO TALK ABOUT SPORTS BETTING.

THIS IS SOMETHING KICKING AROUND IN OTHER STATES.

THE QUESTION IS ARE WE GOING TO LEGALIZE IT HERE?

THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF COMPLICATED PIECES TO THIS.

I THINK IT'S A QUESTION THAT WE HAVE HAD BEFORE.

LET'S BEGIN WITH SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

SPORTS BETTING?

ANYTHING HAPPENING IN THE SESSION WITH THAT.

>> QUITE FRANKLY, I HAVE NEVER PARTICIPATED IN THAT.

I KNOW THERE'S AN AWFUL LOT OF EXCITEMENT GOING ON IN THE LEGISLATURE WITH REGARDS TO THAT.

HOWEVER, I DON'T THINK THE REVENUE TAG OR THE REVENUE COMING INTO THE STATE OF MINNESOTA IS AS LARGE AS PEOPLE WOULD THINK IT IS.

HOWEVER, WE ARE SEEING A LOT OF OUR FOLKS GO OVER TO WISCONSIN AND OTHER BORDERING COMMUNITIES, DOING JUST THAT.

YOU KNOW, ONE WOULD THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, A GAMBLING ADDICTION IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT ONE SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT.

HOWEVER, IF THEY ARE GOING TO BE DOING IT ANYWAY, I GUESS ONE WAY OF, YOU KNOW, NOT SOLVING THAT PROBLEM, I GUESS, IT'S NOT THAT YOU CAN'T FIGHT THE PROBLEM, BUT IT'S THAT THE PROBLEM IS THAT THOSE DOLLARS ARE GOING SOMEPLACE ELSE AND NOT STAYING HERE IN MINNESOTA.

I'M A LITTLE UNDECIDED MYSELF.

I KNOW MY CAUCUS IS, I THINK, OVER ALL, I WOULD HAVE TO SAY IN FAVOR OF IT AS WELL AS I THINK IT'S CERTAINLY A BIPARTISAN THING.

HOWEVER, IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN, I GUESS, WHETHER THIS HAPPENS.

SO IT CERTAINLY HAS GOT SOME LEGS IN THE LEGISLATURE, I CAN SAY THAT.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART, YOUR THOUGHTS.

SPORTS BETTING.

>> WELL, IT'S NOT A TOP PRIORITY FOR ME.

I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS TO DO.

MORE IMPORTANTLY WE ARE STILL, LIKE I SAID HELPING RECOVER FROM COVID-19 AS REPRESENTATIVE MILLER MENTIONED.

PEOPLE HAVE BEEN THROUGH A LOT IN THE LAST TWO YEARS.

LET'S TAKE CARE OF THIS FIRST.

I HAVEN'T BEEN HEAVY TO ANY DISCUSSIONS AND LIKE SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN SAYS, I THINK THERE IS LEGS GAINING ON THIS, AND PROBABLY SOMETHING WE ARE GOING TO BE DEALING WITH THIS SESSION.

BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S KIND OF OUT OF MIND OUT OF SIGHT AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.

I DON'T SEAWRIGHT NOW WHERE IT IMPROVES THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITH THE AVERAGE EVERYDAY PERSON AND I THINK WE REALLY HAVE TO HAVE THE SESSION.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MILLER, WE ARE COMING TO WOLF SEASON IN MINUTE.

SPORTS BETTING.

>> SO I CAME INTO OFFICE BEING CLEAR ON MY POSITION ABOUT THE EXPANSION OF BETTING.

I'M NOT FOR IT.

I HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT WITH THAT SINCE I HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO BE.

THIS IS NO DISREGARD TO WHAT PEOPLE'S INTERESTS ARE.

I GUESS I'M BUT ONE VOTE ON THIS.

I HAVEN'T REALLY PRESSED THE ISSUE HARD, BUT WHEN THE VOTE COMES, I DON'T SUPPORT IT.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO HAVE MORE WAYS TO LEGALLY GAMBLE.

WE HAVE ENOUGH OF THOSE.

IF YOU LOOK, THE WAY THAT I UNDERSTAND THIS WAS IS WE ARE TRYING TO SHORE UP SOMETHING THAT COULD BE PROTECTED AGAINST LAWSUITS AND I MIGHT BE WRONG WITH THAT.

BUT THAT'S THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD IT.

YOU CAN ALREADY DO THE SPORTS GAMBLING IN MINNESOTA BUT THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT FIRMING THAT UP A LITTLE BIT.

NO, I WOULDN'T SUPPORT ANY EXPANSION LIKE THAT.

>> SENATOR FRENTZ, SPORTS GAMBLING.

>> I THINK I CAN SUPPORT IT, BUT NOT IF IT GETS JAMMED DOWN SOMEONE'S THROAT.

IT WOULD HAVE TO BE PART OF A GROUP EFFORT WHERE THERE'S PEACE IN THE VALLEY.

THERE'S CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE.

THE SAME WAY WE HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT LEGALIZING RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA, THERE ARE POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY MY FELLOW LEGISLATORS ABOUT THE DOWNSIDE.

I SEE THOSE, AND I ALSO AGREE THE REVENUE SHOULD NOT BE THE MAIN FOCUS.

I THINK WE WANT TO HAVE HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE FINALLY.

I THINK IT'S GOT MOMENTUM IN SOME WAYS.

MY GUESS IS AS IT BECOMES MORE COMMON AND VISIBLE IN OTHER STATES, THAT WILL CREATE PRESSURE ON THE PARTIES TO REACH A DEAL, AND I WILL BE FINE WHEN THAT DAY COMES.

I HAVE TO AGREE WITH REPRESENTATIVE MILLER, I DON'T THINK THAT DAY IS COMING WITH THIS SESSION.

>> LET'S TALK ANOTHER QUESTION THAT A VIEWER HAS.

WHAT ABOUT A WOLF SEASON THIS YEAR.

IS THERE GOING TO BE A WOLF SEASON?

>> I'M NOT THE ONE TO ASK.

SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN MIGHT KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THIS.

THIS HAS BEEN A DISCUSSION EVERY YEAR, I THINK, SINCE I HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE, WE HAD SOMETIMES TO WHERE THERE'S A MORATORIUM ON IT THAT OPENED UP.

A LOT OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH WHAT THE FEDS SAY.

BUT I DO SUPPORT THE WOLF HUNTING.

I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE DONE NOT ONLY -- FOR MANY DIFFERENT REASONS.

BUT I WOULD SUPPORT IT.

IF WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE DECISION ON THAT, I THINK WE SHOULD GO FORWARD AND INSTITUTE A WOLF SEASON ON THIS.

>> SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN YOU AND I HAVE HAD AT LEAST A COUPLE OF SKAGGSS TO DISCUSS THE WOLF SEASON AND WOLF HUNTING.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

WOLF SEASON THIS YEAR OR NOT?

>> WELL, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THIS YEAR.

BUT IT DEFINITELY CAN BE.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NOW HAS TAKEN THEM OFF THE LIST AGAIN.

IT MEETS THE STATUTE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAD IN 2011.

IN FACT, I WAS PART OF THAT PROCESS.

AT THAT TIME WE HAD UPWARDS OF 2500 TO 3,000 ANIMALS.

IN FACT, WE HAD THE THIRD LARGEST POPULATION IN THE NORTH AMERICAN CONTENT NEXT TO ALASKA AND CANADA HERE IN MINNESOTA ALONE.

THOSE NUMBERS HAVE GROWN CERTAINLY.

WHENEVER YOU TALK TO MINNESOTA DEER HUNTERS THAT HUNT IN THE NORTHEAST, I WOULD SAY NORTH OF HIGHWAY 2 AND NORTHEAST, THEY SEE A LOT OF WOLF THAT THEY HADN'T SEEN BEFORE AND NOT SO MANY DEER.

LIKE ANY OTHER ANIMAL THE DNR MANAGES, I KNOW THE DNR IS READY.

THEY HAD A PLAN IN PLACE FOR A LONG TIME.

IT WILL BE COMING FORWARD THIS YEAR, I BELIEVE, WHETHER IT HAS LEGS OR NOT.

I THINK IT'S CERTAINLY GOING TO COME FORWARD.

BUT NEVERTHELESS, AGAIN, I TRULY BELIEVE, AND IT'S A BEAUTIFUL ANIMAL.

I UNDERSTAND LOVING THE ANIMAL.

I LOVE ALL OF OUR ANIMALS BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE MANAGED EVERY OTHER ANIMAL, AND WE SHOULD DO THIS AS WELL.

THESE NUMBERS ARE UP, AND I THINK WE SHOULD PASS IT AND I CERTAINLY WILL ADD IT TO MY BILL AS I DID LAST YEAR.

IT WAS IN MY BILL.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART, YOUR THOUGHTS, WOLF SEASON.

>> I HAVE SUPPORTED IT IN THE PAST.

IF IT DOES COME UP FOR A VOTE, I WOULD SUPPORT IT.

>> SENATOR FRENTZ?

>> I WOULD SUPPORT IT.

IT'S NOT A FRONT BURNER ISSUE DOWN HERE IN THE MANKATO AREA, BUT I WANT TO AGREE WITH SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN ON ANOTHER THING.

BY AND LARGE MINNESOTA HAS DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB OVER THE LAST 20, 30 YEARS MANAGING THE ANIMALS, AND I THINK OF CWD, AND I THINK THE WOLF ISSUE IS MUCH OF THE SAME.

IT'S GOT MY SUPPORT, NOT SOMETHING I HEAR A LOT ABOUT DOWN HERE.

NO WOLVES IN THIS BASEMENT, I CAN TELL YOU THAT.

WHETHER IT HAPPENS THIS YEAR OR NOT, I CAN'T QUITE TELL.

>> I DON'T THINK UNLESS IT HAS CHANGED AROUND THE MAN COAT ON AREA THAT THE WOLVES WERE A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE.

AT LEAST WHERE THEY WERE FOUR YEARS AGO.

MAYBE THAT'S CHANGED.

>> I CAN SAY OVER HERE NORTH MANKATO, WE DON'T HAVE THAT ISSUE.

>> I'M CERTAIN, JUDGE, THAT YOUR CALLER PROBABLY WAS FROM THE CATTLE ASSOCIATION OR DEER HUNTER, AND I HEAR THIS ALL THE TIME.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE LOOKED AT AGAIN CERTAINLY.

>> IT'S AN ISSUE THAT EFFECTS PARTICULAR PARTS OF THE STATE IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY.

IN OTHER PARTS IT DOESN'T REGISTER AT ALL.

BUT WE DO HAVE THE ENTIRE STATE, ALL 87 COUNTIES TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT, RIGHT?

LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT TRANSPORTATION ISSUES AS IT RELATES TO ALL 87 COUNTIES.

THERE HAVE BEEN TRANSPORTATION ISSUES.

SOME OF THEM CONCERN LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT, SOUTHWEST RAIL TRANSIT LINE HAS BEEN MUCH IN THE NEWS.

WE HAVE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES THAT EFFECT GREATER MINNESOTA AS WELL.

LET'S START, REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART, WITH YOU.

MAYBE YOU COULD TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT TRANSPORTATION ISSUES AND TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THE SOUTHWEST LINE, PERHAPS WE CAN INCLUDE THOSE AS WELL.

THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

>> YOU KNOW, TRANSPORTATION ISSUE IS HUGE, AND OF COURSE IN RURAL MINNESOTA, AROUND THE STATE, I THINK MINN DOT SAYS WE NEED $600 MILLION OF REVENUE EVERY YEAR TO MAINTAIN ROADS AND BRIDGES.

HOW DO WE GET THERE?

NOW THE MONEY WE ARE GETTING ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE FROM THE FEDS IS QUITE SIGNIFICANT, LITERALLY BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, LIKE FIVE YEARS OF WHAT WE RECEIVE IN OUR GAS TAX, FIVE YEARS OF THAT, AND VERY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT.

BUT WE NEVER HAVE BEEN ABLE TO COME UP WITH A WAY TO REALLY PAY FOR IT ONGOING.

SO IF YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT, YOU WOULD SUPPORT A GAS TAX INCREASE.

IF YOU ARE A REPUBLICAN, YOU SUPPORT INCREASING THE GENERAL FUND, WHICH WE HAVE DONE.

SO WE NEVER SEEM TO GET KIND OF A COMBINATION.

I THINK THE BEST WAY WOULD BE A COMBINATION.

BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN POLITICALLY, AND I WOULDN'T SUPPORT IT UNLESS THERE WAS A BUY-IN BY BOTH SIDES.

BUT TO GET TO 600 MILLION, YOU COULD DO 200 MILLION IN A GAS TAX WHICH WOULD BE 6 OR 7 INCREASE.

THAT'S A USER TAX.

WHAT FOLKS DON'T REALIZE IS THAT EVEN THOUGH ON THE GAS TAX RURAL MINNESOTA PAYS ABOUT 50% OF IT.

THEY GET BACK ABOUT 70% UNDER THE FORMULA, CONSTITUTIONAL FORMULA THAT SAYS IT CAN ONLY GO FOR ROADS, CAN'T GO FOR LIGHT RAIL OR ANYTHING ELSE.

SO IT'S A USER TAX.

TO THEN TAKE 200 OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND, WHICH REPUBLICANS SUPPORT AND MAYBE BOND FOR 200 MILLION.

YOU HAVE GOT PEOPLE TOGETHER AND YOU CAN COME UP WITH 600 MILLION.

I WOULDN'T PROPOSE THAT UNLESS ALL SIDES GOT TOGETHER ON THAT.

OTHERWISE IT'S NO GOOD AT ALL.

MY PARENTS GOT MARRIED IN 1935.

DURING THE GREAT DEPRESSION.

I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT STATS AS TO WHAT WE PAID IN GAS TAX AS PER YOUR INCOME, YOUR FAMILY INCOME, AND THEY WERE PAYING ABOUT THREE OR FOUR TIMES MORE OF THEIR INCOME AND GAS TAX BACK THEN THAN WE ARE NOW.

SO WE CERTAINLY HAVEN'T KEPT UP WITH THE BURDEN.

BUT MY PARENTS UNDERSTOOD THE IMPORTANCE OF PAYING INTO AN INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM AND HOW THAT WOULD BENEFIT YOUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN AND GREAT GRANDCHILDREN DOWN THE LINE.

UNTIL WE CAN KIND OF GET PASSED THE I HAD LOGICAL BARRIERS WHICH WE HAVE THAT NEITHER SIDE CAN CROSS, WE ARE JUST GOING TO KIND OF PIECE THINGS TOGETHER THROUGH BONDING BILLS AND WHATEVER.

BUT WE HAVEN'T REALLY COME UP WITH A GOOD PERMANENT WAY TO FUND OUR EDUCATION OR TRANSPORTATION, AND THAT'S UNFORTUNATE.

I HOPE SOMEDAY WE GET THERE.

I WILL LEAVE OTHERS TO TALK ABOUT LIGHT RAIL.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MILLER, YOUR THOUGHTS.

>> THANK YOU AGAIN.

>> WELL, I'M TRYING TO GET INTO THE CONVERSATION HERE, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE WANT TO HEAR.

THEY KEEP THROWING ISSUES AT ME AND I SAY THAT'S WHERE I STAND ON IT.

ONE COMMENT REAL QUICK ON THE GAS TAX.

I DON'T COMPLETELY DISAGREE WITH REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART.

BUT THE PROBLEM IS THERE IS KIND OF THE IDEOLOGICAL DIVIDE ON THE GAS TAX, BUT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES IS CONSISTENTLY PEOPLE ARE TELLING US THEY DON'T WANT US TO INCREASE THE GAS TAX.

WE KIND OF SERVE IT TO THEM IN DIFFERENT WAYS, AND WE HAVE GOT TO GET A LITTLE BIT OF BUY IN, BUT WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT, THEY DON'T SUPPORT THAT.

THAT'S QUITE FRANKLY A PROBLEM IF YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO DO.

IF YOU WANT THE MONEY SPENT ON ROADS, AND HOW I MAKE THAT CONNECTION, I DON'T KNOW.

I'M IN RURAL MINNESOTA, AND JUST LIKE SENATOR FRENTZ NOT HAVING TO WORRY TOO MUCH ABOUT LIGHT RAIL IN PRINSBURG, MINNESOTA.

BUT I DO HAVE TO CONCERN MYSELF WITH THE SHEER COST OF IT.

IT'S JUST FRANKLY -- YOU HAVE TO -- YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T ALWAYS GO DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR WHETHER THIS IS AN INVESTMENT.

YOU PUT INTANGIBLES IN THERE AS TO WHAT THE VALUE IS AND BIGGER PICTURE IS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT BUT IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY THE INCREDIBLE COSTS NOT ONLY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION BUT FOR THE OPERATIONAL LIGHT RAIL, YOU REALLY HAVE TO STRETCH FAR THE INTANGIBLES THAT ARE THERE.

IT IS SO EXPENSIVE, SO EXPENSIVE PER RIDER, SO EXPENSIVE PER MILE WHEN YOU COMPARE IT TO OTHER MODES OF TRANSPORTATION.

IT JUST SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE BECOME A STATE THAT'S BECOME INFATUATED WITH SOMETHING JUST SIMPLY IS NOT THE RIGHT FIT FOR OUR STATE.

YET WE KEEP PRESSING FORWARD WITH IT.

I WISH WE COULD JUTS STOP.

EVERY TIME I SAY STOP, WE KEEP EXPANDING IT.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE ALSO DID IT ISN'T LIGHT RAIL BUT NOW WE HAVE THE TRAIN LINE THAT'S GOING UP TO DULUTH OR AT LEAST THE BEGINNINGS OF THAT WHICH MAKES NO SENSE TO ME.

>> SENATOR FRENTZ, TRANSPORTATION.

>> WELL, I WILL TAKE THE LIGHT RAIL PART OF IT FIRST.

I'M A BELIEVER IN MASS TRANSIT, I THINK IT SAVES US MONEY.

I SERVED ON THE SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AND THE PUBLIC SHARE OF THE TRANSPORTATION ON LIGHT RAIL WHEN IT'S AT ITS NORMER RIDERSHIP IT'S ACTUALLY LOW.

WE HAD 221,000 RIDERS FOR THE WEEK OF THE SUPER BOWL.

WE CAN SEE WITH ELECTRICITY, IT'S OPERATING AT A VERY ECONOMICAL RATE.

I LIKE THAT.

THERE'S ANOTHER LESSON IN THERE.

LEGISLATORS THAT SUCCEED, IN MY OPINION, ARE LISTENING TO THE PUBLIC.

THERE WERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT RAISED THESE CONCERNS ABOUT SOUTHWEST LIGHT RAIL AND THE PROGRESS OF THE CONSTRUCTION THAT WERE -- I DON'T WANT TO SAY THEY WERE IGNORED BUT THE PROBLEMS ARE NOW BACK, AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT WERE CONCERNED ARE NOW SAYING I TOLD YOU SO, AND THOSE ARE LEADING TO COST OVER RUNS.

I KNOW PRIVATE COMPANIES HAVE THESE KINDS OF PROBLEMS, AND IT'S NOT WORKING OUT EXACTLY LIKE FORD MOTOR COMPANY WANTED IT.

THAT'S A DIFFERENT ZOOM CALL.

BUT YOU WANT TO LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC IN ALL STAGES OF THE DIFFERENT PROJECTS, AND TO THE QUESTION OF STABLE ONGOING FUNDING, I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE SMARTER WAY, BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE GOT A STABLE LONG-TERM FUNDING THAT WOULD ALLOW THE COUNTY ENGINEERS, MINN DOT TO MAKE SOME PLANS OVER SEVERAL YEARS.

I STILL THINK STABLE LONG-TERM FUNDING HAS ELUDED US.

BUT I WILL ADMIT THIS, WITH THE ONE-TIME MONEY WE PUT INTO BONDING WITH THE MONEY COMING FROM THE FEDS, IT'S FAIR TO SAY WE HAVE SOME MONEY NOW IN THE SHORT TERM TO REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART'S POINT, AND MAYBE WE CAN FIND THE SOLUTION.

AGAIN, I THINK IT'S GOT TO BE SOMETHING EVERYONE BUYS INTO.

I DON'T SEE SORT OF JAMMING SOMETHING THROUGH WITH A THIN MARGIN.

OUR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ARE TOO IMPORTANT NOT TO FIND ANOTHER PIECE IN THE VALLEY.

I HOPE WE DO.

>> SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN.

>> THE LIGHT RAIL, I THINK, HAS BEEN POUNDED ON A LITTLE BIT HERE.

BEING A RURAL LEGISLATOR, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT AT ALL.

MY 16 YEARS, GOING ON 16 YEARS DOWN THERE, SITTING RIGHT NEXT TO THE LIGHT RAIL WHERE I LIVE, I SEE THE RIDERSHIP THERE, AND IT'S JUST NOT THERE.

IT'S THE END OF THE RAIL, I GIVE YOU THAT.

I UNDERSTAND IT GETS BUSIER, BUT FOR YEARS THEY WERE CHARGING.

YOU WERE ON THE HONOR TO CHARGE AND YOU CAN'T EXPECT TO RUN A BUSINESS LIKE THAT AND MAKE IT WORK.

SO IT JUST SEEMS TO BE A BIG MONEY ROLL THAT NEVER ENDS.

AS SENATOR FRENTZ SAID, LISTEN TO THE FOLKS.

NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

START LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE DOWN THERE.

PUSH COMES TO SHOVE, IF WE DECIDE TO BUILD SOMETHING OR THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND PAY FOR IT.

I DON'T FEEL I WOULD SUPPORT ANYTHING OUT HERE WITH REGARDS TO THAT.

WITH REGARDS TO THE GAS TAX, GOVERNOR WALZ CAME IN, AND IT DIDN'T HIT TOO WELL, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAD ENOUGH MONEY IN THE COFFERS.

WE PUT OUT THE BIGGEST TRANSPORTATION BILL IN THE HISTORY OF MINNESOTA.

WE HAVE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION TO TRANSPORTATION.

I THINK THE COST OF FUEL IS A HUGE DRIVER OF CONCERN FOR ESPECIALLY RURAL MINNESOTA WHERE THEY HAVE TO DRIVE SO FAR TO THE JOBS OR DRIVE SO FAR TO THE SCHOOL AND WHAT NOT, AND GO UP ANOTHER 10 CENTS A GALLON, AND I THINK IT ISN'T ONLY A STATE ISSUE, IT'S CERTAINLY BEEN A FEDERAL ISSUE WITH THE PIPELINE SITUATION THAT'S GOING ON AND WHAT'S GOING ON IN RUSSIA THAT'S AFFECTING US ALL.

I DON'T THINK THE STATES ARE DOING -- AT LEAST MINNESOTA IS NOT DOING A BAD JOB.

BUT THE FEDERAL MONEY WE TALK ABOUT, THE ENDLESS AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S SHAKING OUT OF THE TREE COMING FROM WASHINGTON, D.C. IS KIND OF INTERESTING.

LET'S NEVER FORGET, IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO EITHER BE PAID BACK BY EITHER US AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN OUR LIFETIME, OR OUR KIDS.

WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH THE MONEY SHOWING UP.

>> WE HAVE GOT TWO QUESTIONS WHICH ARE, I THINK, IF I HAVE CORRECTLY ANALYZED THE PARTISAN COIN CORRECTLY, THEY PLAY IN DIFFERENT PARTISAN CAMPS.

ONE VIEWER WANTS TO KNOW ARE WE GOING TO GET THE SO-CALLED WALZ CHECKS ON THE VENTURA CHECK MODEL THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, AND THE OTHER VIEWER IS CONCERNED ABOUT OTHER ISSUES AND WANTS TO KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THE STATE WOULD CONSIDER USING THE SURPLUS TO ELIMINATE THE TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY.

I DON'T WANT TO OVER STATE THE CASE OBVIOUSLY.

THERE MAY BE PEOPLE IN VARIOUS CAMPS SUPPORTING THESE TWO THEORIES.

BUT AT LEAST IT STRIKES ME THEY MAY COME FROM DIFFERENT ANGLES.

I WONDER IF OUR PANEL COULD QUICKLY TELL US WHAT DO YOU THINK THE CHANCES ARE EITHER ONE OR BOTH OF THESE MIGHT BE IN A BILL.

LET'S START WITH SENATOR MARQUART.

GO AHEAD.

>> FIRST OF ALL, GOVERNOR WALZ PUTS ABOUT OVER HALF OF THE BUDGET SURPLUS RIGHT BACK INTO THE POCKETS OF BUSINESSES AND INDIVIDUALS, 2.7 BILLION DOLLARS, AND 1 BILLION TO FRONTLINE WORKERS AND WHEN PEOPLE TALK ABOUT GIVING THE MONEY BACK, GOVERNOR WALZ IS DOING JUST THAT.

ANY TIME THE GOVERNOR PROPOSES SOMETHING, THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE THAT CAN HAPPEN.

I THINK, PROVIDING TAX CUTS FOR SENIOR CITIZENS SHOULD BE AN ABSOLUTE TOP PRIORITY.

WHEN IT COMES TO SOCIAL SECURITY, THE THING TO REMEMBER IS THAT ON THE SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS, 68% OF ALL SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS ARE NOT CURRENTLY TAXED.

IT'S A COMPLEX FORMULA.

BUT 68% OF THOSE BENEFITS ARE NOT TAXED AND 55% OF ALL SOCIAL SECURITY RECIPIENTS ARE NOT TAXED.

IF YOU ARE LIVING ONLY ON SOCIAL SECURITY, YOU ARE NOT BEING TAXED ONE TIME ON THOSE DOLLARS.

IN FACT YOUR INCOME IS UNDER 50,000, YOU ARE PROBABLY NOT BEING TAXED HARDLY ANYTHING AT ALL.

WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS THINGS -- AND THIS WILL CERTAINLY BE PART OF THE MIX, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THINGS THAT CUT TAXES FOR ALL SENIOR CITIZENS, NOT JUST THE WEALTHIEST MINNESOTANS AND THAT COULD BE PROPERTY TAXES.

OUR SENIOR CITIZENS LIVE IN A HOME, AND LET'S LOWER PROPERTY TAXES AND LET'S LOWER RENT COSTS AND MAKE SURE THOSE NURSING HOMES ARE THE HIGHEST QUALITY THEY ABSOLUTELY COULD BE.

THAT'S WHAT SENIORS REALLY NEED.

BUT CUTS FOR SENIOR CITIZENS IS GOING TO BE A TOP PRIORITY.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MILLER, SOCIAL SECURITY TAX CUTS.

WHAT DO YOU THINK.

>> AS I SAID AT THE BEGINNING, I'M BEFORE HELPING THE SOCIAL SECURITY INCOME TAX PROBLEM.

I THINK IT'S A SMALL GESTURE TOWARDS A BIGGER PROBLEM IN WRITING CHECKS DIRECTLY TO PEOPLE.

YOU ARE GOING TO BE SENDING CHECKS TO PEOPLE THAT DIDN'T PAY ANY TAXES AT ALL.

$300 IS $300, AND THAT'S WHY I SAY DO A TAX REBATE THAT'S REFLECTIVE OF THE PEOPLE THAT PAY TAXES.

WE HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WHETHER TO REFUND IT OR NOT.

I THINK THAT'S A FAIR QUESTION.

ANYWAY, MY CONCERN WITH WHAT REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART SAID, MY CONCERN ABOUT ADDRESSING THINGS LIKE PROPERTY TAXES AND I DON'T WANT TO PUT WORDS INTO HIS MOUTH.

REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART AND I HAVE A VERY GOOD RESPECTFUL RELATIONSHIP, AND I'M ON THE COMMITTEE, AND I WANT TO CONTINUE THAT.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ABOUT ONE THING.

WHEN I HEAR PUTTING INTO PROPERTY TAXES ONE OF THE BIG PRIORITIES THAT I BELIEVE GOVERNORS HAVE HEARD THIS IS TO INCREASE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID, AND WHAT HAPPENS IS WE PUT MORE MONEY INTO LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID AND WE CALL IT PROPERTY TAX REDUCTION BECAUSE IT'S GOING AGAINST WHAT PROPERTY TAX IS PAID FOR, BUT THOSE COMMUNITIES DON'T REDUCE THE PROPERTY TAXES AT ALL.

THEY TAKE ON THE MORE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID.

THAT'S PROBLEMATIC FOR ME.

IF THERE IS MONEY THAT IS GOING TO ADDRESS PROPERTY TAX ISSUES, OKAY.

BUT I WANT IT TO HAVE A DIRECT REFLEXION ON THAT.

I DON'T WANT IT TO GO INTO THE PRODUCT AND HAVE THE CITY MAINTAIN WHAT THE PROPERTY TAX RATES ARE AND COLLECTIONS ARE.

>> SENATOR FRENTZ?

>> 75% CHANCE THERE'S A WALZ CHECK IN SOME AMOUNT.

I DO THINK MOST PEOPLE IN MY NECK OF THE WOODS ARE SAYING GIVE SOME OF IT BACK.

I SAID IN TV AND RADIO ALREADY, I THINK AT LEAST HALF SHOULD GO BACK IN SOME DIRECT FORM.

YOU ASK WHAT THE ODDS ARE.

I SAID IT.

THERE IT IS.

I LOOK AT IT A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, REPRESENTATIVE MILLER.

EVEN THOSE THAT ARE AT THE LOWER LEVELS THAT DON'T PAY INCOME TAX, THEY PAY IN OTHER WAYS, PAY SALES TAX, AND I THINK THEY ARE DESERVING OF SOME OF THE DIRECT REBATES, AND IF YOU GO TO THE AVERAGE FAMILY AND SAID LOOK, YOU CAN GET -- JUST TO TAKE AN EXAMPLE OF AN INDIVIDUAL CUT IN THE TIER OF THE SECOND POINT.

, YOU CAN GET 6 BUCKS MORE IN EVERY PAYCHECK.

MOST MINNESOTANS IN THAT LEVEL WILL SAY I CAN TAKE THE 300.

THAT'S MY SENSE OF IT.

ON SOCIAL SECURITY, YOU HAVE GOT TO HAVE THE TAX CHAIR OF THE HOUSE.

THERE'S AN ARGUMENT THAT THAT IS NOT THE BEST WAY TO HELP ALL OF OUR SENIORS, AND THAT IT BENEFITS DISPROPORTIONATELY THE WEALTHIEST SENIORS, AND I KNOW VERY NICE MEN AND WOMEN LIVING IN THAT.

WE HAVE GLEN TAYLOR LIVING IN THAT AREA.

I DON'T WANT THE TAX POLICY TO BE PUT AT THE TOP.

AARP IS NOT THAT EXCITED ABOUT IT AND IT TELLS ME SOME OF THE OTHER PRIORITIES THAT WE MIGHT LOOK AT WITH THAT MONEY MAY FAVOR THE LARGER NUMBER OF SENIORS, AND WITH THAT I WILL JUST SAY ANY TIME YOU ARE ON WITH THE HOUSE TAX CHAIR, YOU HAVE TO WATCH YOUR ANSWERS.

>> VERY SAFE SENATOR FRENTZ.

>> SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN?

>> WELL, I GUESS I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT BEING SAFE, QUITE FRANKLY, AND WHILE YOU AND I KNOW EACH OTHER WE WALK TOGETHER OCCASIONALLY AT SM.

PAUL AND KEEP OURSELVES SANE.

I SAY WE GIVE THE DOLLARS -- IF WE GIVE THE DOLLARS BACK, WE GIVE TAX CREDITS TO THOSE THAT ACTUALLY PAID THE TAXES.

THAT MIGHT BE IN THE FORM OF PROPERTY TAXES.

AS FAR AS NAMING THE CHECKS COMING BACK, I'M NOT SURE THAT GOVERNOR VENTURA EVEN CALLED THEM JESSIE CHECKS.

I THINK SOMEBODY MADE THAT UP.

I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

MAYBE INDIVIDUAL OVER CHARGE CHECKS -- IT SHOULD BE CALLED AN OVER CHARGE CHECK COMING BACK.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS WE HAVE OVER CHARGED.

THAT'S WHERE THIS SURPLUS IS ABOUT.

THE CASE COULD BE MADE A LOT OF THAT CAME FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

BUT NONETHELESS, IT'S OUT OF OUR POCKET.

WE HAVE BASICALLY OVER CHARGED.

WE HAVE GOT TO BE PRUDENT AS TO HOW WE GET THIS BACK, BUT OUR TOP PRIORITY HAS TO BE SOCIAL SECURITY TAX.

GLEN TAYLOR.

I DON'T KNOW GLEN TAYLOR, NEVER MET HIM.

I DON'T WANT TO BEAT UP ON ENTREPRENEURS LIKE HIM.

IF HE'S PAID HIS TAXES OVER THE YEARS AND IT'S A LOT MORE THAN ME, I'M AWFUL SURE, THEN HE SHOULD BE GETTING AN EQUAL AMOUNT BACK.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULD NOT DO THAT FOR ESPECIALLY THE ENTREPRENEURS THAT MAKE MINNESOTA GREAT THE WAY IT IS RIGHT NOW.

IT'S GOING TO BE QUITE A DEBATE, NO QUESTION ABOUT IT.

INDIVIDUAL CHECKS COMING BACK, YOU KNOW, I AM FOR THE FRONTLINE WORKERS GETTING THEIR CHECKS, BUT AFTER THAT, I THINK TAX CREDITS IS GOING TO BE MORE MEANINGFUL.

>> ONE OF THE INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT THIS EVENING'S PROGRAMS IS WE HAVE THREE MEMBERS, SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN AND MARQUART AND REPRESENTATIVE MILLER, ALL WHO ARE GOING TO BE LEAVING AT THE END OF THE SESSION AND NOT SEEKING ANOTHER TERM IN THEIR RESPECTFUL HOUSE, SENATE AND HOUSE.

I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE -- WE HAVE 10 MINUTES LEFT.

I HAVE A COUPLE OTHER ISSUES WE MAY GET TO.

BUT I WANT TO LEAVE ENOUGH TIME TO GIVE EACH OF THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE TALK ABOUT TWO THINGS.

THE TWO THINGS I HAVE IN MIND ARE FIRST, AS YOU REFLECT BACK ON YOUR TIME AND SERVICE HERE IN ST. PAUL AT THE CAPITAL, IS THERE SOMETHING YOU THINK YOU HAVE ACCOMPLISHED?

I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE YOU SHARE THAT WITH OUR VIEWERS, AND ANY ADVICE YOU WOULD OFFER TO THE LEGISLATURE THAT WOULD BE COMING, THE LEGISLATURE THAT WOULD BE ELECTED IN NOVEMBER AND START ON JANUARY 2 OF 2023 THAT YOU THINK THEY SHOULD FOCUS ON, MAYBE INSTITUTION ALI OR POLICY.

IT'S KIND OF AN OPEN FIELD QUESTION.

WE THINK WE SHOULD GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO OUR RETIRING MEMBERS, AND SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN, I'M GUESSING YOU MIGHT HAVE A LITTLE BIT IN AGE ON REPRESENTATIVE MILLER AND REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART.

WE WILL GIVE YOU THE FLOOR FIRST.

MAYBE YOU COULD TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT.

>> NOT ANYWHERE OVER THEIR AGE, NOT THAT FAR.

AS YOU CAN SEE I HAVE GOT A FULL HEAD OF THEIR.

>> THERE IS THAT.

>> MY WIFE HAS ASKED ME THAT VERY QUESTION.

WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO SAY WHEN THEY ASK YOU WHAT HAVE YOU AACCOMPLISHED?

>> I HAVE SERVED FIVE OR SIX DIFFERENT COUNTIES GOING ON 16 YEARS HERE NOW.

NOT ONLY AS A SHERIFF BUT IN THE SENATE, AND JUST THE IDEA.

PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW THERE'S 201 OF US THAT COME TO THE LEGISLATURE, AND IT'S A TRUE HONOR.

THERE ISN'T VERY MANY THAT GET THAT OPPORTUNITY.

TOM BACH WAS TOCKING ABOUT IT ON THE FLOOR.

THAT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RUN FOR OFFICE.

NOT TOO MANY GET THAT OPPORTUNITY THAT WE HAVE ALL HAD.

IT REALLY IS -- BUT IT IS A SERVICE.

THERE'S MANY THINGS.

YOU KNOW, I CAN TALK ABOUT THE SENIORS THAT I HAVE HELPED A COUPLE YEARS AGO.

THE SENIOR HOMES THAT WERE SO, SO CHARGED AND HAVING A TOUGH TIME, WE WERE ABLE TO RECOVER THEM, I THINK, AND GET THEM BACK ON TRACK, AND I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER PRIORITY THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THIS YEAR.

HOPEFULLY THE ADMINISTRATION AGREES THAT THERE'S WINGS OUT HERE AND IN THESE BEAUTIFUL NURSING HOMES THAT ARE BEING CLOSED UP BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY TO BE THE HELP, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HOPE THIS NEW LEGISLATURE PAYS MORE ATTENTION TO.

WE HAVE GOT TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING SO HARD TO TAKE CARE OF US TO THIS POINT.

LET'S NOT FORGET THOSE.

I KNOW SENATOR ABELER TALKS ABOUT TAKING CARE OF THE MENTALLY CHALLENGED FOLKS.

AT THE VERY LEAST WE HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF THEM.

THERE ARE SOME HOMES THAT ARE BEING THREATENED TO BE SHUT DOWN.

I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AN ADVOCATE FOR THAT AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

OF COURSE MY PUBLIC SAFETY, I THINK I HELPED AN AWFUL LOT WITH THAT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I CERTAINLY STOOD AGAINST THE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA, AND HOPEFULLY I CAN GET TO MY 16th YEAR BY SAYING WE HAVE NOT YET MADE THAT FOOLISH STEP OF MAKING IT LEGALIZED HERE IN MINNESOTA.

FOR ME TO FIND OUT, GIVE YOU ONE, IT'S TOUGH.

BUT IT'S BEEN A TRUE HONOR TO WORK WITH THE GENTLEMEN WHO ARE SITTING HERE TODAY AND THE MANY THAT HAVE COME AND GONE, AND I WANT TO PUT A SPECIAL SHOUT OUT TO THOMAS OWNY WHO HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS PARTNER AND FRIEND OF MINE GOING THROUGH REAL MEDICAL ISSUES, WORKING WITH GUYS LIKE THAT, AND IT BECOMES A REAL FAMILY, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.

I APPRECIATE THE FOLKS ALLOWING ME TO BE HERE.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART.

>> WELL, SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN SAID IT SO WELL.

YOU KNOW, IT IS JUST A GREAT SENSE OF HONOR THAT I HAD SERVING 22 YEARS TO HAVE THE CONFIDENCE TO SEND YOU BACK TO ST. PAUL.

YOU KNOW, YOU DRIVE ON THAT ROAD WHERE YOU ARE GOING PAST THE ST. PAUL CATHEDRAL AND YOU LOOK AND THE CAPITAL IS ALL LIT UP, THE DOME IS ALL LIT UP.

YOU THINK I WORK THERE, AND I REPRESENT THE FOLKS BACK HOME IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.

IT JUST GIVES YOU CHILLS WHEN YOU WOULD KIND OF LOOK AT THAT, JUST TO SEE THAT.

PROBABLY THE PROUDEST THING THAT I FELT ACTUALLY ONE OF THE MOST ENJOYABLE I THINK I DID IN THE LEGISLATURE IS GOING DOOR TO DOOR, BECAUSE YOU GOT TO MEET SO MANY WONDERFUL PEOPLE, SO MANY FRIENDS AND REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT PEOPLE WERE THINKING ABOUT, BUT IT'S BEEN SUCH A HIGH HONOR, SENATOR INGEBRIGTSEN.

YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO THANK MY FAMILY AND CONSTITUENTS AND MY STUDENTS WHO I TAUGHT FOR 38 YEARS WHO KEPT ME SO OPTIMISTIC AND YOUNG AND SO FORTH AND ALLOWING ME TO SERVE NOT ONLY THE STATE FOR 22 YEARS BUT MY LOCAL COMMUNITY FOR ANOTHER 13.

I LOOK BACK AND THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT COULD I TELL LEGISLATORS INTO THE FUTURE?

YOU KNOW WHAT?

I TALK TO MY GOVERNMENT STUDENTS, AND YOU HAVE GOT THE 10 STEPS, AND COME UP WITH AN IDEA THAT'S INTRODUCED AND SO FORTH.

WHEN I TELL THEM THAT THE TEXTBOOK NEVER MENTIONS IS THE PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS OF LEGISLATORS AND THE RESPECT AND THE TRUST THAT THEY HAVE AMONG LEGISLATORS THAT REALLY MAKES LEGISLATION WORK.

YOU DON'T SEE THAT IN A TEXTBOOK.

THAT'S REALLY WHAT MAKES IT WORK.

I REALLY LOOK BACK AT THINGS, AND I DIDN'T REALLY ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING, AND IT'S THE ENTIRE LEGISLATIVE BODY AND THE GOVERNOR WHO ULTIMATELY MADE THINGS HAPPEN FOR YOUR COMMUNITY.

I JUST -- I HOPE LEGISLATORS INTO THE FUTURE JUST REMEMBER THAT YOU ARE ONE BODY THERE, AND YOU ARE WORKING TOGETHER, AND EVEN THOUGH WE GET THE POLITICAL RIFTS, IT'S BEEN A GREAT 22 YEARS, AND I LEAVE WITH ABSOLUTELY NO REGRETS.

I'M VERY OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THE FUTURE, TOO.

IT'S A GOOD FUTURE.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MILLER, YOU HAVE GOT ABOUT A MINUTE AND A HALF OR SO.

>> I WILL BE BRIEF.

I REALLY -- I THINK REPRESENTATIVE MARQUART HIT IT ON THE HEAD ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIPS, AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD TELL PEOPLE.

POLITICS CAN BE ROUGH.

THE PARTISAN SHIP CAN BE ROUGH BUT IN OUR SOCIETY RIGHT NOW WE HAVE LOST TOUCH WITH EACH OTHER, AND WE WANT TO FIGHT BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING ELSE.

I REALLY HOPE THAT WE CAN CHANGE THAT, AND PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING INTO THIS LEGISLATURE BUILD RELATIONSHIPS, BUILD RELATIONSHIPS WITH PEOPLE THAT MIGHT SURPRISE YOU, WHO YOU WANT TO MEET WITH.

BECAUSE YOU WILL FIND COMMONALITIES THAT WILL SURPRISE YOU, LOOK FOR PEOPLE THAT SHOW YOU, RESPECT AND RETURN THE RESPECT BACK TO THEM.

I REALLY WANT TO PROBABLY FINISH THIS UP WITH WHAT I STARTED WITH.

WHEN I WAS FIRST ELECTED MY GOOD FRIEND STATE SENATOR, I WALKED INTO THE HOUSE CHAMBER, AND I'M A BLUE COLLAR GUY GROWING UP, AND I SEEN THIS BEAUTIFUL THING, AND HE SAID NEVER FORGET THE RESPONSIBILITY THAT YOU HAVE IN THIS ROOM.

IF I LEAVE ANY LEGACY FROM HERE, I HOPE THAT I SERVED THE LEGISLATURE WELL AND THAT I SERVED IT WITH THE HONOR THAT IT DESERVES.

>> VERY GOOD.

I WANT TO THANK ALL OF OUR GUESTS.

SENATOR FRENTZ, WE ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY, I GUESS.

15 SECONDS.

ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SHARE AS YOU GO OUT.

>> HONOR TO SERVE WITH ALL THREE OF YOU GENTLEMEN, AND HONOR TO BE ON YOUR SHOW.

WHEN YOU GIVE RESPECT TO ANOTHER LEGISLATURE, YOU GET IT BACK, AND YOU SHOULD ALL THREE BE PROUD.

WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL.

>> ALL RIGHT.

I'M AT THE POSITIVE AND UPBEAT NOTE.

I WANT TO THANK ALL FOUR OF OUR GUESTS THIS EVENING.

I WANT TO REMIND THE VIEWERS, THIS IS YOUR PROGRAM, CALL IN WITH YOUR QUESTIONS OR SEND THEM WITH AN E-MAIL, AND WE WILL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK'S PANEL.

I WILL REMIND YOU WE WILL BE BACK HERE NEXT WEEK AND EVERY WEEK THAT FOLLOWS UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE GOES HOME.

THANK YOU ALL AND GOOD NIGHT.

>> "YOUR LEGISLATORS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE MINNESOTA CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION FROM THE 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, LLCTESM