Minnesota Legislative Report, the longestr running public affairs show in the region, now in its 55th season.

Former state lawmaker Tony Certage speaks with legislators from northern Minnesota and answers your questions on the air.

Minnesota Legislative Report starts now.

Hello and welcome to the Minnesota Legislative Report.

I'm your host, Tony Certich.

The 2026 legislative session is moving forward with lawmakers at the capital working through the issues that matter most to motans.

From economic concerns to local priorities, we'll take a look at what's being discussed and what it can mean for communities across the state.

Joining us today is representative Roger Scrabba, a Republican from Elely representing district 3A.

And also with us is representative Pete Johnson, a DFLer from Duth representing district 8A.

Welcome, Representative Scrabba and Representative Johnson.

Thanks for being here.

So, this legislative session uh is off to a start.

We're actually getting actually towards the end of the session where issues are funneling through and I we just want to take a moment to get a sense of kind of where we're at and where we're going.

So, Representative Scraba, let's start with you.

What are your thoughts about where we're at thus far in the session?

Um it's it's a very interesting session compared to the other three that I've been in.

Um it because we're tied, everything has to be worked out before it gets to the floor, you know, for a vote.

So it's it's a um the committees that I sit on, we've closed out three of them.

Um the transportation committee finished the other day.

Um I finished housing and legacy.

Um and I I'll talk more about them later, but the dynamics on closing those committees out have been different in all three just and I and I I don't know if it's leadership or if it's just the dynamics of the co-chairs.

Yeah.

So, and just to let Yeah, go.

I was just say let people know I got my dog in the background.

Sky.

Yeah, Skye's your dog and in the backseat of the car and uh she may or may not uh make a more prominent uh entrance here during during the show.

So, Representative Johnson, kind of your take as well.

Now, we're we're in the legislative session where there are deadlines.

So, a bunch of bills get introduced.

This isn't a budget year.

Uh so, the budget isn't the main focus.

And then there are deadlines where if bills don't have hearings, they kind of fall to the side.

and we've made it through all of the deadlines now.

So, the universe of what y'all are discussing has shrunk significantly.

And so, your thoughts about where we're at in the session?

Yeah, to that point, our our committee deadlines have all uh but ended.

I think today is the final deadline um to get those things moving out of your committees uh and make sure that those bills that you really cared about get heard.

I there are still some committees that are continuing to uh have meetings, capital investment being one.

Um I'm also on pensions which uh that'll continue to have hearings but a bulk of the committees have wrapped up and sent um their policy or budget adjustment packages uh off to other committees whether it be ways and means or somewhere else.

Um so and to to uh kind of echo Representative Scraba's point all those committees wrapped up a little bit differently.

Um, and I think a lot of that does have to do with that tide dynamic and and the relationships between the different co-chairs and everything else.

But, um, I think we saw a lot of bills that had, you know, not massive changes, but some good bipartisan work into continuing to move forward and that is still an interesting dynamic.

uh the state house of representatives is at an equal tie and so there's this power sharing agreement where uh things have to be bipartisan uh because you nothing moves forward on a tie and the Senate is similar there's a one vote advantage for DFLers but let's talk one more second just to remind our viewers about what this tie means and you both mentioned co-chairs and so there's a power sharing agreement that has to happen represent Scraba can you just talk about just how things have to move forward bird when the when the Minnesota House of Representatives is in a tie and this hasn't happened actually since I think the year I was born about 50 years ago and so uh can you talk through those dynamics and and when that happened the last time it got resolved in the middle of the session so it was tied for a while um we're living through the whole thing which is all new territory um I I I can just as an example Uh I was looking at some u uh Facebook feeds of people uh wondering why all these tie votes in the committees.

You know that's not right.

How come they let eight and eight?

It's supposed to be an odd number.

It would be but we're in a tie and it's a power sharing agreement.

So you need that one vote to get out of committee or you need 68 votes on the floor.

So the controversial issues that are coming through um may not have been heard in or heard in committee may have gotten out but don't have the support maybe to pass or it got tied and it's trying to get to the floor and is there a member on the other side that wants to support it?

Um, are there political ways to make people vote for uh an issue they don't want to vote for because there's other um um bills in that package?

Uh all those dynamics are coming and they're different now because I shouldn't say too different.

Last night, we experienced some of that on the House floor where uh an issue came up uh to um pull pull a bill out just to talk on the floor and you have votes and you can show your constituents.

Um yeah, I work across the aisle.

I work on both sides and still not cause controversy within both groups.

So, um I know that's cryptic, but it's just that's how it works down here right now.

Um the tie itself, the laws that are being passed now, the bills that are being passed are almost unanimous.

Um it's they're that kind of legislating.

It's like I say, the controversial things, it's everyone gets to their side and nothing passes.

Um, we hope to have a bonding bill where I think we have the votes for it.

We just got to see what's going to be inside the bonding bill.

You know, and the scary thing about that is saying, "Yeah, we're all going to support a bonding bill."

Well, then the other side, whether it's a Republican or a Democrat, it's like, "Oh, what are they willing to uh give up to get that bonding bill?

We need this and we need that and will will they vote for this if the bonding bill?"

So, you know, um I don't know how to explain it, but in the tie, the dynamics are completely different completely because there is no fail safe of getting your bill across it, you know.

So, I'm I'm I don't mind working in this environment.

I wish it I I wish it was a a little less partisan.

Um, but I I I don't know that I want to keep doing it.

You know, it'd be nice to have in in the in my perfect world, we would have a a Senate or a House of one party and then the governor, whatever party it is.

That way, the check and balance works.

When you have a trifecta, you don't have that.

Um, and and I just I hope the voters of Minnesota recognize that in this next election and try to bring some parity back to legislating.

So, uh, let's let's just stay on this topic of of a divided government.

And so, Representative Scrabba talked about committees being equal, equal Democrats and Republicans on, uh, almost all the committees on the floor equal.

And if there's a tie, that means that whatever is proposed doesn't move forward.

So, you need more than a tie.

So, you need bipartisan support and you have co-chairs, so a chair of of each um each party on all of these committees.

Uh, Representative Johnson, can you talk a bit more about just the structure and how that all works and if you're seeing that being successful or the challenges of working in this divided government where it truly is a tie?

Yeah.

Uh as far as how the structure of it works in the committees, um like Representative Scraba said, there's equal numbers of uh members on the committees, you know, ranging from seven or eight to up to 12 or more on some of these different bigger committees.

And being a tie and with the co-chairs, um they would alternate who had control of the committee.

So, um, if your committee meets twice a week, let's say you're meeting Tuesday and Wednesday, uh, on Tuesday the DFL chair or co-chair would have control of the committee and be be able to set the agenda.

And then on Wednesday, the Republican would have control of the committee and they would set their agenda.

So, there was an opportunity for um each party to have bills heard in these various committees that were important to them or their members and the uh constituents and advocates and all those different things.

So, there were really no voices that were shut out of that process.

Um, this is all I know at this point is a tied house.

Uh, but I can see how if you were in the minority and you had bills that were important and you needed to have uh somebody from the other party, a chair from another party willing to hear your bill in committee, the difficulty in bringing that forward.

Um, hopefully uh you know, as we look forward, odds of us staying tied in the House are probably pretty slip.

Uh but what I hope does happen is as people move forward, they remember what it felt like uh to be not in control of what happened in that committee or in control and how it how you can have uh work with the other side on uh different bills and things like that.

But right now with that tie, it would alternate.

But in order for anything to move from that committee, it had to be bipartisan.

Um, I think one of the really good things that they put into that power sharing agreement was, uh, it had to have, you know, one more than 50% of the committee.

Not just a, you know, a a majority a majority vote, but one more.

And so, you know, if I'm in committee and I get up to go to the bathroom and it's the Republican day with the gabble, they couldn't say, "Okay, we're going to vote on this real quick because we have seven people and they only have six."

And uh so I think that really kept a lot of those games from being played.

Um but ultimately the stuff that you're seeing move out of committees is uh very broadly supported.

Um and the things that have uh successfully moved, especially some of the a little bit bigger or more impactful in nature, um is a really a testament to some of those legislators that were doing that bipartisan work on those bills and meeting and having the conversations and making changes that maybe if they didn't have to make those changes, uh if we had a majority, they wouldn't have.

But it was an important enough issue to them where they were, you know, getting that feedback and making those adjustments to those bills in order to get them across the finish line, which I think is what a lot of folks in Minnesota are looking for in governance right now.

So, we've talked enough process.

Now, let's get into the heart of the issues.

And the legislative leaders met with the governor this week uh to start talking about the end of session, which is about a month away.

And really what they focused on were three key issues that there is a general sense of agreement that need to happen this legislative session.

And those three issues are a bonding or capital investment bill, anti-fraud measures, and then some support for Henipin County Medical Center, the largest hospital uh in the state of Minnesota.

So we're going to take them right now uh issue by issue.

Uh but before we do that uh we asked Matt Bombgartner the president of the min uh the Duth area Chamber of Commerce what their priorities were for this legislative session and to give you a question.

So let's hear from Matt.

So uh Matt, what are your priorities for this legislative session?

Priorities for the Duth area Chamber of Commerce this legislative session including include funding for infrastructure at the 148th Fighter Wing where we have aging hangers that have been up there since we drug them across the tarmac.

Uh we are also strongly advocating for Union Gospel Mission to get some bonding funds to be able to move into a new location which would better serve our uh population that is transitioning out of homelessness.

It also opens up the first street corridor uh which is a regional exchange district for additional funding that could be leveraged for private dollars for muchneeded housing connecting it to the medical district.

Um and so we're very excited about those in addition to critical things uh such as heaper for UMD um such as uh money for lot D um for uh canyons project um and investments across the region.

uh what would you ask a legislator about this legislative session?

I would love to ask a legislator, will there be a bonding bill this year?

So there is Matt's question and so we uh there's a capital investment or bonding bill uh that generally happens this legislative session.

It takes a super majority of support uh and it invests in infrastructure all across the state.

We'll start with you Representative Scraba as you sit on the capital investment committee to answer Matt's question.

Do you think there will be a bonding bill?

And then we can talk a bit about what your priorities are and how do you get one over the finish line.

Yeah, I I think there will be one.

I do.

All right.

And what are some of your priorities uh within that bill?

Well, it'd be nice to get that 148, get that $3 million for them so they can get those hangers and the federal match and all that.

You know, I'm very supportive of that.

Um the Union Gospel, again, I've toured it.

Um I'm supportive of that for the the duth area.

Um in the lot D again sitting on capital investments I see all this stuff.

I see everything and my philosophy always has been uh what's good for Duth is good for the range.

Um and I'm part of the Iron Range.

So I'm hoping that what's good for the Iron Range is good for Duth.

you know, that we share those uh mutual let's help each other get these things across the finish line.

Um but my priorities um I've got several um large wastewater and water treatment issues in the district.

Um we got some bridges.

Um and and I I our senator is a a Democrat.

So between Senator Hoschild and myself, we share projects.

So we get to we get to we might get a little more than other legislators do.

And maybe not, but it sure feels like it sometimes, you know, because we work together and we try to get more.

I get my share for my party, he gets his share from his party, and neither of them know what we're doing.

So that's we like that.

All right.

Represent Johnson, we heard about some of the priorities of the Duth Chamber of Commerce.

Do you share those priorities?

Are there other projects you're looking uh to support in a capital investment bill?

Yeah.

Uh uh Matt's words are music by ears, right?

Like that the projects that he's talking about are critically important to our reef.

Um Union Gospel Mission is one that I'm the chief author on.

Uh that bill uh I that that project would would really change a lot of lives in and around that downtown area.

And I think it's really a a priority to get that across the finish line and that is um a would be a would be a gamecher for a lot of different reasons.

Um the canyon like when we talk about some of those regional projects uh you know the canyon uh landfill is an important one.

The 148th is important as well.

uh that type of stuff that building out it supports and and kind of anchors in some of those different things whether it be the 148th or uh when we talk about reducing expenses for people and not you know not having to ship uh household waste somewhere else and being able to do it at Canyon and build it in a way that it does protect the environment and we don't have to run into these issues where we're cleaning up all these different sites.

Uh, one of the things that is really has really been eye opening to me as a legislator is the amount of need for capital investment.

Um, the the need just in in my district which kind of covers central and western duth here is I mean hundreds of millions of dollars and they are they're not all big shiny fancy new projects.

They are uh wastewater treatment.

They are solid waste treatment.

Um it's shoring up things down in the port whether that be lot D or some of the things that the port authority is working on.

I mean this is critical infrastructure uh to our region and it's you know to Roger's point um I agree when the when greater Minnesota uh does well that's good for Duth and when you know the 7ount metro does well that's great good for all of Minnesota.

Uh and so when we look at these, you know, capital investment or bonding projects, it doesn't just have to fall within the boundaries of your individual district to have a huge impact on it.

And I think that's going to be something that's important for people to remember.

But um I agree, I would like to see, uh the biggest bond needle get across the finish line that we can we can possibly get moving.

Um Minnesota needs it right now and these communities aren't going to be able to afford it on their own.

So, uh, you both touched on the 148th hangers.

We know what those are.

Wastewater infrastructure.

We know what that is.

But represent Johnson, can you take another minute?

Folks might not be familiar with Union Gospel.

Represent Scrabble, you said you toured it, but this is addressing folks experiencing homelessness.

Can you talk a bit about what that project is?

Yeah, so currently they're they operate out of a really old building um down on First Street there.

This would move them closer to uh the St.

Louis County government services building.

Um, and it would really expand out what they're able to do.

Right now, I think they have, you know, seating for 75 or something like that.

They serve meals throughout the day.

Um, and they have often are trying to serve hundreds of people and those folks spill out onto the street um because there's not enough space for them in there.

They're, you know, trying to transition between the different um resources that are available, whether it be the Chum or Damiano.

Uh and one of the really neat things about this project coming to fruition the way that it is is the number of partners that got together.

It is not just Union Gospel Mission that said, "Hey, this is important to us.

Um we want to, you know, have this new vision that it provides housing.

It provides medical care.

It provides uh a safe place for these folks to be to stay warm in the winter, stay cool in the summer.

there's outdoor space uh so that they can be outside without, you know, being in that fishbowl of First Street and having people, you know, driving by and everything else like that.

It really uh really focuses on the human element of these folks and the experiences that they're having.

But it's not just Union Gospel Mission.

The CHUM is working with them on it.

Uh Damiano's working with it.

The HA is uh going to be part of that project.

Um, so all these different groups coming together and saying no, this is a priority and this is going to help reshape how all of us do our work to serve some of the most vulnerable people in our communities is really important.

And then to hear uh, you know, Matt Bombgardner at the chamber talk about how this is a huge priority for them too um is that's that's how some of these projects really kind of grow legs and grow that momentum is it's not uh, you know, one thing here.

It's it is a it is a bunch of people coming together.

So, um it it really is going to be a life-changing project in in that way.

Uh but and it has a lot of support.

It really it really will change the look of downtown and um I'm really proud of the work that's been done on it by all the different advocates.

Well, let's take a step back then uh on this bonding thing.

Uh so bonding um is the state borrowing money at a very low interest rate on behalf of local projects.

Rep.

Scraba, can you talk a bit about why that is necessary uh for the state to make investments in local and regional projects?

This might answer perhaps a question coming later.

Um the the I'll use the city of Elely as an example.

Um 3,200 people.

We have a sixmile water line from Burnside to Elely.

Uh it was built in the 1920s30s um and it needs repair.

If the 3,200 people of Elely were to pay for the whole thing, the water rates would be through the roof.

So what we do is we go to the state and we ask them if they can help us um um on the bonding.

And this is um grant money.

The bond money is grant.

So, it's there are other loans.

We're still going to borrow money.

We're still going to try to find federal matching money.

And again, we're still going to have to borrow.

But if we can get the bonding money, then that bonding money alleviates how much the rateayers have to pay and that in turn puts more money in their pockets.

Um, and that plays out throughout the state no matter where it is.

Um, like the Union Gospel Mission as an example, it's a $8 million ask.

I believe it's somewhere in there.

And it's not a I mean, it's not a lot of money because it's going to clean up a an area that has traditionally been just kind of no one's investing in it.

And if people invest in that park, uh, now you've got a better corridor and you put the services, the people that are using that in a in a different area and it enhances that area.

So, it helps communities.

Bonding helps communities not only in uh financial ways, but also in planning, setting up your your your next move.

What are you going to do?

Um and the water wastewater um are very important.

Uh but there's also infrastructure under the ground that you know uh some communities like Silver Bay for example, they they have all these pressure relief valves they need.

Um and they're a million dollars each.

So they need and the town got built on the same year.

So they're all going out at the same time.

Um, and there's I think there's 12 of them.

So, that's a lot to ask for a small town.

So, the bonding comes in and says, "Yeah, we'll help you."

Um, and and that bonding money also um we supply public finance authority uh agency in Minnesota uh money that they'll loan out at low interest loans.

So, it helps communities that way.

Also, um it it it's uh it's a very needed program in our state.

And I say it because if you didn't have bonding, the trails that you're using, if the all these little ancillary things you you take for granted in northern Minnesota, a lot of them were bonding money, you know, and that helps our our way of life.

that helps people coming up here, tourists.

The Gigami Trail, the Msabi Trail, um these are all um bonding projects.

So, uh it's, you know, it's a very needed.

I would love to see this year um a 1.2 billion dollar bonding bill.

That would be if if I had a wish list, I I would like that.

Um, so if if if we could do that, we'll be a I think we'll be better off as a state because most if not all of the work that's going to be performed will be done at um Davis Bacon wages wages.

Uh so everyone the workers are going to be paid a very fair wage.

A lot of union work will be done with this which again helps our communities, helps everything.

So bonding is is really a good shot in the arm for the state of Minnesota for projects.

And you know and again in my world I would love to see a bonding bill every year but uh technically it's every other year but I think we should be looking at you know a big bonding bill and then a smaller bonding bill.

So that's and these go ahead.

Yeah.

and these c and this capital investment bill is generally the one of the last bills of the legislative session.

So on this show, we'll be talking about it, I'm sure, every week and asking and answering questions.

And for you, the viewers at home, if you have questions you want your legislators to answer during this show, please email us at askpbsnorth.org.

U next topic I want to talk about is fraud and anti-fraud measures that the legislature is looking at.

We've certainly seen in headlines uh fraud happening in a number of programs across the state of Minnesota, but also in other states as well.

Uh this is an issue that uh folks want to address.

There's actually a committee that was developed last year uh to tackle issues of fraud.

So uh I'll start with you represent Johnson uh to talk a bit about what is being done to address uh issues of fraud and anti-fraud measures coming forward.

I think uh some of the biggest things that are are moving right now um we've heard a lot about the Office of Inspector General bill that's coming through.

There's a bill in the Senate.

Um there's a bill being worked on in the House.

I actually talked to the lead author on that yesterday and there's a few um sticking points yet that they're working on, but I think we're pretty hopeful that we'll get across the finish line um to create that up as kind of that independent overseer to help uh make sure some of those uh issues are caught and and managed.

One of the other things that we've talked a lot about are uh the expanding the attorney general's office fraud uh Medicaid fraud control unit.

Um that had been moving fine through committees.

It uh uh ultimately stopped yesterday on a a tie vote in one of the committees, but I'm hopeful that we will be able to move that or keep that moving as well.

that committee or not committee but that unit within the uh attorney general's office has been very successful in catching and prosecuting a lot of these fraud cases.

Um so I think that that is is critically important.

Uh one of the other committees that I'm on is the uh workforce labor and economic development committee.

Um and we've had a lot of conversations about about how we uh ensure that um those dollars that are going out in grants and things like that to these different organizations are are not accessed in a and used in a fraudulent manner.

Um, we were able to get some bipartisan legislation through that creates uh a department uh with Indeed called um the office of community investment and that will help with some of that grant administration and oversight and things like that.

Uh I think there's a few different ways that we need to continue to try and approach to tackle this.

There is the how do we stop it from happening in the first place?

um which is important to make sure those dollars don't get out the door.

Um but then how do we catch and prosecute those folks on the back end if and when that fraud does occur?

Uh as far as going out the door, a lot of these systems that we are operating here in Minnesota, these IT systems are ancient.

I mean ancient like from the 80s and 90s and those systems don't talk to each other.

They don't communicate.

Um, and that is one of the big discussions is how we modernize those IT systems that um, our state and county agencies are using to make sure that uh, those systems are not siloed and those systems are working together uh, to catch and flag any of those things uh, any of those things that could be fraudulent and then um, get investigated.

Repa, can you share with us your thoughts on the anti-fraud measures that are working their way through the legislature?

Yeah.

And to to piggyback there what Pete just said about the antiquated uh government computer systems, um it's in Forran and Cobalt and BASIC.

These are languages that don't exist hardly anymore.

And we're having people coming from learning how to use those systems, not those systems, but the new systems.

And then they get into this 1980s technology and they're like, "What is this?

What happened?"

So, normally the way fraud is the way you prevent fraud is if you take this, you're going to get that.

So, there's a consequence for your action.

And it's not working.

Society is not working on a deterrent like that.

And and I agree with Pete with Representative Johnson about we got to figure out how to stop it in the beginning.

Like just put a program or something in there that says we're not getting the same expected results.

I mean, when we give money, and I'm going to use the obvious one.

If we give money to an organization that's supposed to feed people, there should be some kind of matrix that shows that they're paying the food bills to a wholesale company that's providing the food and there should be some way of watching that, knowing that that is occurring.

And there's none.

We have nothing like that.

So, as easy it is to blame that person for doing the fraud, um, we are somewhat culpable in the fact that we don't have something in place to prevent them from doing it.

So, I'm not going to give them a pass.

I'm not saying they they're innocent.

Again, it goes back to we police ourselves.

So, when we wake up and then we decide, are we going to be good people or are we going to be bad people?

And if we are always good, we don't have to decide.

We just do that.

But there's people out there who are marginalized living in a different life and different world and they see opportunity.

They grasp it and it's not it it there has to be a way that we as government sets that up so those those kind of thefts don't occur.

the OIG bill, which I hope would pass to give the it passed the Senate last year, came to the House, the House wouldn't pass it.

And all it does is it gives the officer of inspector general law enforcement powers.

So, there's some bite.

So, that person when they're investigating something, instead of finding that uh the fraud occurred, we have the proof, that's all they can do.

They can't do anything with it.

So if we kept that as an independent group and they go out and prosecute that pro that fraud, they have all the evidence, they have all the everything, that is all we're asking for.

So we'll see what happens.

Um what kind of compromise comes out this year, but we have to do something.

Doing nothing uh the taxpayers are very righteous to be upset.

Um doing nothing's not an option.

So, it sounds like we have some proactive and reactive measures uh working its way through the process.

And I'm sure we will be continuing to talk about this in the weeks ahead with other legislators as well.

We're going to get to the third of the three points that the legislative leaders and governor really agreed to are the three main topics.

There'll be others of course that we'll talk about too.

Uh but the third one was Henipin County Medical Center, one of our largest hospitals in the state.

We know that hospitals, not just Henipin County Medical Center, but hospitals in Elely, hospitals in Duth and all across the state are really fi in financial struggles right now for a number of issues that I hope you all can touch on.

Why is it important for the state of Minnesota uh to potentially invest in Henipin County Medical Center andor other hospitals across the state uh to help them in this time?

Uh Representative Scrabble, we'll start with you on this one.

Yeah, I in in the rural sense um imagine uh when you were growing up in Chisum, you had access to a hospital in Virginia, you had access to a hospital in Hibbing, you had access to a hospital in Chis or a clinic in Chisum.

So you had the best of all the worlds.

now go 40 miles north of you or 60 miles north of you and they had they had sort of that same access and if you start taking out uh critical access hospitals um it makes it it makes it harder to live in a rural area.

It makes it more difficult.

Um the average turnout time for Northome Minnesota is 30ome minutes for an ambulance.

I mean most people are used to minutes.

Um they they know that they live in a rural area but imagine now when they used to bring them to a hospital that was closed.

That hospital is closed because the bigger regional one is taking the business away.

So I I think it's a very uh a discussion and it hasn't happened yet there we're we're not at that but it's getting close and we'd be remiss not acting on it on this issue and I mean doing a deep dive trying to how do we save these rural hospitals that provide uh obviously life-saving service and and keep them whole even though the the number of people and the money flowing through isn't making it whole.

So that that's a challenge.

The HCMC issue, you would think, right, in the big city, lots of people, lots of money, everything's flowing, it should be good.

But it's the symptom of healthcare and it's not a profitable area.

So where's all the money going?

I think that's another um opportunity for us to follow the money and talk about it publicly instead of, you know, having lobbyists saying, "Well, we don't want to talk about that.

We want to talk about this."

No, let's talk about where the money really is going and what's happening.

And uh I I like HCMC when it first came up, you know, a lot of rural legislators were like, "That's their problem."

And I'm like, "No, it's our problem.

It really is our problem.

It's all of ours problem because it's a it it is a symptom of the whole system.

If a system that big is failing, what about the little ones?

And and again the solution um I think it's 330 million what they need if if they closed then everywhere in the metro area are going to get all the folks that went there and the the metro area that these rural hospitals on the edge rings are going to get people and that they like what are these folks doing here?

This isn't this isn't our this isn't their hospital.

this is, oh, now you're starting to understand what healthc care is all about.

It doesn't matter where they're from.

Just take care of them.

So, um I I look forward to having this this discussion more.

Um I don't know how far it's going to go this session.

Um but I and I know they've talked to us about bonding, but I think they got a better plan on trying to find the funding for that.

And uh I I'm not haven't heard it officially, but I've heard some anecdotal how they're going to try to do it.

But it'll be interesting to see how we solve.

And I say we because I want to be part of this problem solving on this one.

This one's going to be a a good deep dive into seeing how healthcare is working.

represent Johnson, can you talk a bit uh specifically about this Henipin County proposal uh if you support it and just uh the tenuous state of the nature of hospitals in Duth and across our state?

Absolutely.

Um I think this conversation really kind of has to start where that conversation on fraud should start as well and that's the people that are impacted on the very end of the line, the people that are getting services.

And when we talk about fraud, those dollars that are getting stolen or misappropriated, that means services are not happening to those most vulnerable people that were supposed to get it.

And that is the same conversation um that we have around HCMC and hospitals in greater Minnesota.

We have a broken health care system.

We have a a a health care system that is dominated by insurance companies.

It is becoming harder and harder and harder to access.

Uh it is the the pay rates for Medicaid and Medicaid Medicaid and Medicare are not keeping up with what the costs are.

Um you continue to see that downward pressure on people in our society.

And when you look at Minnesota as a whole, our population is aging.

We're not that far away from having a a huge number of pop of our population uh in that above 65 category where they're going to need more and more of that care.

And as we have this conversation around uh HCMC, you know, it's easy to say kind of what Representative Scra has said for some folks to look at that and say, "Oh, this is a metro thing.

This does not impact us."

One of the things that I continue to see more and more through lines on is those needs of some of our our urban core in Minneapolis and St.

Paul are very very similar to the needs in rural and greater Minnesota around access around whether it be housing, whether it be health care, whether it be transportation.

They have more things in common in the needs of their communities than I think a lot of them from either of those sides would really want to admit.

And with HCMC, they are they are providing care to some of the most vulnerable people in our state.

Um, a lot of that is people who are underinsured.

A lot of that is people who are that that care is uncompensated.

Um, and to Roger's point, if HTMC goes away, those people do not they will still continue to need that care.

Uh, and folks like myself who, you know, we live in Duth, we have two great hospital systems up here.

Um, in theory, we should have all kinds of access to everything that we need.

The trauma center at HCMC takes people from all around the state when they are in their most dire situations.

Um, car wrecks in greater Minnesota get flown in.

Uh, burn victims get brought in.

Uh, you know, they have, uh, one of the I think they have one of, if not the only hyper bear chambers in the state.

um that hospital is critical to not just the folks that are immediately surrounding it, but that ripple effect continues and continues to go out.

Um and we have to figure out what how to um how to make sure that they don't have to close their doors or eliminate services just like we have to do that in our greater Minnesota hospitals to make sure that they can keep their doors open and they can continue to operate the services that the people in those communities need.

Whether that's oncology care, whether that is obstetrics and labor and delivery.

Um I was born in the Two Harbors Hospital.

They no longer deliver babies up there and they haven't for years.

Uh that that need is continuing to uh grow and the access to care like that is continuing to shrink and that is a thing that we have to figure out how to address as a state um and you know more broadly as a country.

Uh, one of the bills that's out there is, uh, has to do with the 340B provisions.

Um, this is, uh, where hospitals can buy drugs at a, uh, get access to drugs at a reduced rate.

Um, and then they can bill, uh, for the full rate and then use those extra dollars to continue to provide services to continue to meet the needs of their communities.

Um, that is a bill.

It is not big enough to solve all these problems.

um we already with this bill in effect.

Uh but if something if we're able to eliminate the sunset on the 340B program, um at least those dollars don't go away and continue to create more and more downward pressure on our hospitals, especially especially in greater Minnesota.

Well, thank you uh both for talking about that topic.

Uh we're going to change gears here and talk about another topic that is timely for this week.

We know and you all spoke to on other issues, how sometimes things that happen in Washington uh can impact the state legislature and the people in the Northland and certainly an issue that has been big and controversial in our region is mining uh in the Boundary Waters uh watershed.

And we saw this week uh passed by the Senate and it was passed by uh Congress before that uh a resolution that would potentially open up mining in the Boundary Waters Canoeer Area Watershed District.

Um and so the question to you and we'll start with you represent Scraba.

This is happening in your legislative district.

Uh your thoughts about that and will we see any impact in state policy uh based on this decision?

Uh and should there be either if you're for or against this year?

Well, it's the Rain River Watershed District.

That's what it's called.

Um and it's a it's a vast area.

Um there's mining in it now on our side and the Canadian side.

Uh again, responsible mining of today's stature is way different than in 1902 when mining was copper mining.

So I I think we have to look at the science.

We have to look at the technology uh and ask ourselves is it good enough to move forward?

And if it's not then don't go.

If it is, then let's proceed making sure that the checks and balances are there.

Motans don't want that.

The jobs aren't worth polluting.

That's just who we are, what we are.

But we also know we can do um responsible um stewardship of the natural resources and we and the technology out there now is phenomenal.

It's I mean you can run through AI you can run scenarios what happens if this what happens if that and it it's only as good as the information you put in but if you put in good information you can find out whether it's going to do what people say or it's not in both ways and I'm not saying that's what we should count on and that's what we should judge it because the the human mind and the human feelings can't be in my opinion replicated on a computer.

But to to hear some of the things that the people are opposed to the bill that just passed in the Senate, it's for me it's ludicrous.

I mean, I'm like, it's pretend land.

It's going back in time and saying, "Oh, they're going to do the same thing."

Um, no, it's not.

It's they're mining in Michigan now and water rich area and it's successful.

uh not not polluting uh Wisconsin.

It was done.

So, and and is there more to risk where we are?

Uh sure.

But that should make it where we pay more attention and we do a better job.

Um so what happened when uh um the we'll call it the Stabber bill passed the Senate?

Um, uh, it basically allows this, uh, federal government to reissue leases in an area that always had leases.

And then presidents, different presidents were playing tennis with it.

You know, we want this, we want that, we want this, we want that.

So, let's just change the law.

And either way, if the law didn't pass, then it was done.

if it law passed, which it did, it allows these leases to be reissued.

And whether or not the state of Minnesota decides to mine uh allow mining there, that that's going to depend on uh the group of people that are there that that um can can move this forward or stop it.

That's that's going to be the will of the people, you know, un whether you'd like it or not.

It's that's the way it is.

But um I I I think that our constitution says, you know, if there's minerals in the ground, it's our duty to use those minerals.

So uh this was this was just a how do I say it?

Everyone's passion to not make it pass um was guided on feelings, just pure feelings.

And and I mean some of the posts that I was reading was like after it passed I'm like that's criminal.

What they were doing is criminal.

You can't say those things and expect not to get a knock on the door.

You know a congressman is a congressman whether you like it or not.

If you start threatening them what are you doing?

you're so passionate about the woods and the and that doesn't give you rights to to uh say you well we'll give them we're going to show them we're going to put them in the water and make them you know and it's like why do people do this?

I don't understand it.

It's frustrating.

I try not to get caught up in that rhetoric.

I don't legislate with it.

I just kind of listen to it.

But this time it got to a crescendo so high it was like it's hard to ignore.

Um, will the state of Minnesota Yeah, there's all kinds of bills trying to ban everything.

And uh, I'm not a no person.

I'm a yes person, but I'm a yes person with conditions.

Not a yes, go ahead.

But yes, proceed with caution.

What are we going to do?

So that's that's kind of the stances that I'm going to I'm taking as I as I look at these issues because again the district I represent isn't a duth where you've got 100,000 people where you got economies creating economies.

I've got 14,800 square miles of land.

I don't have a hospital in any of it that you can have a baby in anymore.

We don't have big metropolises or economies.

We have a tourism economy.

We have a logging economy.

We have a mining economy.

Two two legs of that stool are natural resource-based.

And if we keep saying no to natural resource extraction and use, what do we have left up north?

So, I I'm very cautious and I'm and I'm listening to all these bills coming in trying to ban ban ban ban.

Um h how how are we in northern Minnesota supposed to function?

Um let's let's pass some rules that are fair.

Represent Johnson, do you foresee uh this the state responding uh to what passed in Washington?

I I do.

I really do.

Um that vote that happened yesterday is super disappointing for a lot of different reasons.

Uh I think that everybody that you talk to understands uh how precious the boundary waters are and how fragile they could be with a mining operation like this and if and when something goes wrong.

Um you know some of my frustration around this also is around the specific mine that would be impacted.

um for mind they've talked about anything that they are able to mine is going to get shipped off overseas uh and then be sold off after it's processed over there I I asked myself how do motans benefit from that um in the long term in the short term uh how do we benefit from that it's it's schemes like this using a a joint resolution um to bypass the normal process that really caters public creaters public trust.

Uh and that public trust is critical for projects like this to ever move forward.

Um so I'm I am very disappointed.

I think you will see uh legislation at the state level that tries to uh shore up um the the protections that were lost.

And to the folks that are celebrating this decision right now, this message, this vote, and how it was done through a joint resolution, um, not through the normal legislative process shows to me and to a lot of other folks that these companies and the folks that are pushing really hard, um, these corporations and things like that aren't willing to follow the regular rules because they can't do that.

So, they find loopholes.

They find other ways to do it that to me that shows that they can't do it the right way.

And because they can't do it or it's harder to do it the right way, they are going to find the loopholes and bend the rules to the best that they can to do it the way that they want.

And that in the long run is going to impact our environment.

That in the long run is going to impact any workers that are going to be on these sites.

Um it it's disappointing to see how it went and and I think in Minnesota we will see uh legislation come forward that tries to address and shore up those protections again.

Well, certainly more to come on this topic and uh we've been deep on many topics.

There's one more uh that's really impacted primarily the metro area but the entire state and that was operation metro surge and this is where we saw significant increase and ICE agents and other federal uh agents uh into our state uh over most of the winter.

Uh there's been a lot of conversation about uh the state responding to that as well and especially the economic impacts that h that had primarily in the metro area but then in several other rural communities.

We didn't see as large of an ICE or federal government uh occupation or otherwise uh surge in our region.

Uh but certainly there are proposals out there to respond.

We only have really about four minutes left on a very big topic.

So I want to focus this really on the uh proposals that were economic responses.

Uh represent Johnson, can you talk a bit about what those are and uh if you support that back?

Yeah, I' I'd love to.

Those are some of the things.

We heard some of this in the our workforce labor economic development committee about a relief package for those businesses impacted by Operation Metro Surge.

Not just metro businesses, but businesses across the state.

Um there's language in there to make sure that businesses that weren't impacted by Metro insurance that were maybe struggling wouldn't qualify for this.

This is to target a specific um those specific businesses that were doing okay before this happened and then they were impacted.

But when we talked about that economic piece, I I want to be super super clear on this.

Uh Minnesota is an ecosystem um that relies on all parts rely on other parts.

And you know, to your point that we didn't really see the direct impacts up here in certain parts of the state like they did in Minneapolis or St.

Paul.

Um the fact is the revenue that is generated in the 7count metro feeds all of those other things that we want to do.

Um St.

Louis County uh in the research that I did is like a neutral budget uh as far as how many tax dollars we send to the state versus the number of tax dollars we get back from the state.

Most of greater Minnesota sends in less tax dollars than they receive.

Uh except for the seven county metro.

They send out a lot more tax dollars than they receive.

So having that vibrant economy, um those high-paying jobs, those those increased wages, things like that in the seven county metro really help us do all the things, whether it be bonding, whether it be helping our hospitals, whether it be any of the other things we've talked about today, help us do that in greater Minnesota.

So the economic uh success and viability and the resol the bills that were passed to help make sure those businesses don't close their doors forever is critical to not just those individuals but our entire state.

Well, we only have about a minute left, Representative Scraba.

So big big issue, but just focusing on the economic piece of this, what are your thoughts about uh support potentially going towards businesses impacted by Operation Metro Surge?

Um they they I sit on housing and uh uh two bills, one for 50 million, 40 million uh to um pay the rent of people that didn't go to work because they were afraid they were going to get caught or whatever their reason was.

Um it didn't pass.

And in our housing bill, we had some money.

Um and I didn't see any money in that for those folks.

So uh I know it's an issue.

I think we need to I I again I respect people.

Uh I'm hoping someday our federal government wakes up and says if you're here illegally, uh come out.

Let's give you a path to citizenship.

Let's work together.

If you're producing already, you and you're working here.

Yeah, what you did was wrong to come here the way you did, but correct it and stay here with these solutions.

So, I I I I'm optimistic that we're going to find something.

Uh I hope we can find that common ground.

Well, we didn't get to all the topics today, but certainly some big uh hairy ones that uh we thank you for addressing.

And uh we are out of time, and I'd like to thank Representative Scrabba and Representative Johnson for joining uh us this evening, answering questions, and sharing your thoughts.

We we'll be back again next week to speak to even more members of the Minnesota State Legislature and answer more of your questions.

Thank you for watching and to you at home for writing in your questions.

You're playing a vital part in our representative government.

For the team here at PBS North, I'm Tony Certich.

Have a great evening.