Infrastructure package is dead this year, Minnesota legislative leaders say

Photo by.
A bill to fund critical public works projects — including upgrading the state's roads, protecting Minnesota's drinking water and expanding city sewers — is dead this year, legislative leaders said Thursday.
The Minnesota Legislature in even years typically passes an infrastructure package — known as a 'bonding bill' around the Capitol because it's funded with borrowed money — that costs hundreds of millions and sometimes billions of dollars. But partisan tensions appear to have won out this year and killed the bill's prospects.
Bonding bills require a 60% supermajority in both the House and Senate to pass, meaning it needs robust bipartisan support.
Legislative leaders and Gov. Tim Walz are working to button up budget bills in hopes of convening a special session next week to pass the biennium budget, after failing to complete their work before the constitutionally mandated May 19 adjournment. If lawmakers fail to pass a budget by June 30, the government will shut down.
The DFL-controlled Legislature passed a $2.6 billion infrastructure package in the 2023 session, including $1.5 billion in bonds, following three legislative sessions without an infrastructure deal.
The 2023 package included more than $317 million for upgrades to college buildings in the University of Minnesota and Minnesota State systems, $9 million for security upgrades at the State Capitol and $443 million for economic development initiatives, much of which went to Twin Cities metro nonprofits that assist people of color.
Last year, the Legislature failed to pass a bonding bill. Democrats at the time blamed Republicans for making their necessary votes contingent on Democrats killing the Equal Rights Amendment.
House DFL caucus leader Melissa Hortman on Thursday told reporters that Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson, R-East Grand Forks, is trying the same tactics this year.
'Johnson has a price tag that includes lots and lots of other things far outside the bonding bill, and so I think he's going to overplay his hand, exactly as he did in 2024 and there will again not be a bonding bill,' Hortman said, laying the blame on Senate Republicans.
Asked what kinds of demands Johnson is seeking, Hortman said, 'He just wants to rewrite every other bill.'
In a statement, Johnson said Democrats refused to compromise.
'Democrats are the only ones unwilling to work together to pass (a) bonding bill and are playing political blame games to appease their activist base,' Johnson said.
A lack of bonding bill this year could also cost Minnesota more money in the long run. Republicans in Congress are considering eliminating a tax break that lowers the cost of public infrastructure projects across the country, as they try to gather savings to pay for a major tax cut that would especially benefit the wealthy.
If passed, the cost of borrowing for state and local governments would increase, meaning taxpayers would foot the bill.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

34 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Circle Internet (CRCL) Soars 20.4% as Firm Gets 'Buy' Reco

Circle Internet Group (NYSE:CRCL) is one of the Circle Internet jumped by 20.39 percent on Friday to end at $240.28 as investor sentiment was boosted by an investment firm's upgraded rating. On Friday, Circle Internet Group (NYSE:CRCL) earned its first 'buy' recommendation from Seaport Global following the Senate's passage of a legislation that would allow the wide usage of Stablecoins by banks, fintech, and retailers, among others. The news followed Circle Internet Group's (NYSE:CRCL) announcement earlier this week that its USDC stablecoins are being adopted by retail giants Amazon and Walmart, as well as e-commerce operator Shopify. According to Circle Internet Group (NYSE:CRCL), Shopify began rolling out its feature that enables merchants to accept USDC stablecoins—a cryptocurrency founded by its founders Jeremy Allaire and Sean Neville—for payments and order fulfillment flows. Circle Internet Group (NYSE:CRCL) also said that it partnered with blockchain firm Ripple to bring USDC stablecoins to the latter's XRP Ledger blockchain as well as with digital identity company World for the addition of USDC and CCTP V2 (Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol) on World Chain. Circle Internet jumped by 20.39 percent on Friday to end at $240.28 as investor sentiment was boosted by an investment firm's upgraded rating. On Friday, Circle Internet Group (NYSE:CRCL) earned its first 'buy' recommendation from Seaport Global following the Senate's passage of a legislation that would allow the wide usage of Stablecoins by banks, fintech, and retailers, among others. The news followed Circle Internet Group's (NYSE:CRCL) announcement earlier this week that its USDC stablecoins are being adopted by retail giants Amazon and Walmart, as well as e-commerce operator Shopify. According to Circle Internet Group (NYSE:CRCL), Shopify began rolling out its feature that enables merchants to accept USDC stablecoins—a cryptocurrency founded by its founders Jeremy Allaire and Sean Neville—for payments and order fulfillment flows. A wide angle view of a bustling cityscape, capturing the potential of the consumer internet. Circle Internet Group (NYSE:CRCL) also said that it partnered with blockchain firm Ripple to bring USDC stablecoins to the latter's XRP Ledger blockchain as well as with digital identity company World for the addition of USDC and CCTP V2 (Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol) on World Chain. While we acknowledge the potential of CRCL as an investment, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an extremely cheap AI stock that is also a major beneficiary of Trump tariffs and onshoring, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: 20 Best AI Stocks To Buy Now and 30 Best Stocks to Buy Now According to Billionaires. Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey. Sign in to access your portfolio

Hamilton Spectator

an hour ago

• Hamilton Spectator

Bill C-5 passes in the House, as Carney vows to consult Indigenous groups

OTTAWA — Facing concerns and warnings of Indigenous resistance against a key part of his governing agenda, Prime Minister Mark Carney acknowledged Friday that 'more fulsome conversations are needed' to choose the development projects his government wants to fast-track through controversial new legislation, Bill C-5. Speaking moments after the bill passed third reading in the House of Commons, Carney pledged to hold meetings in the coming weeks with First Nations, Inuit and Métis leaders and experts in a series of summits to 'launch the implementation of this legislation in the right way' in 'full partnership' with Indigenous communities. This will be the 'first step' in the process to choose which projects will be chosen through the new legislation for the fast-track to approval within the government's goal of two years. The Liberal government's major projects bill has passed the House of Commons thanks to help from the Conservative Party. Prime Minister Mark Carney calls the legislation the core of his government's domestic economic response to U.S. tariffs (June 20, 2025 / The Canadian Press) Carney also repeated pledges earlier this week, as the Liberal government rammed the bill through the House over the objections of some Indigenous , environmental groups and opposition parties, that the new process will respect Indigenous rights to consultation and 'free, prior and informed consent' under the United Nations Declaration to the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The government House Leader said this week they expect the bill to pass in the Senate next week. 'These projects will be built with Indigenous nations and communities. This is not an aspiration. It is the plan embedded in the bill itself,' Carney said Friday. 'We all agree that more fulsome conversations are needed to select the nation-building projects and to determine the conditions that they must fulfil. In other words, the real work begins now.' In the April 28 election, Carney's Liberals won a minority government while promising to fast-track development projects like mines, pipelines and ports to boost economic growth, make Canada a 'superpower' in clean power and fossil fuels, and reduce reliance on the United States that has imposed a series of tariffs on Canadian goods. Carney acknowledged the bill sailed through the Commons quickly, but argued Friday that speed was needed to confront the 'crisis' of the American trade war. 'This is the response. This is us being in charge of our destiny. That's why we pushed it,' Carney said. Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty — a former grand chief of Eeyou Istchee in Quebec — said the promised summits are a 'serious signal' that Indigenous communities are going to be 'at the table' in deciding how projects will be chosen under the new process. 'There have been more projects selected. It is something that we will define together,' she said. The bill passed through the House of Commons Friday in two votes, after House Speaker Francis Scarpaleggia ruled to split the legislation into two parts. All parties supported a less contentious section to lift federal barriers to trade and labour movement inside Canada. The other, more controversial part dealing with major projects also passed with Liberals and Conservatives voting en masse in favour, and Bloc Québécois, NDP and Green MPs voting against. Toronto Liberal and former cabinet minister MP Nate Erskine-Smith also voted against the national projects part of the legislation . The version of the bill now moving to the Senate came with a suite of amendments, including some that the government supported, aimed at increasing transparency and restricting some of the powers the legislation would create. This includes a provision to obtain the written consent of affected provinces and territories before the government chooses to fast-track a given project, and to ensure the new process that the law would create respects ethics rules and can't override legislation like the Indian Act. The changes also created a new requirement for the government to publish a suite of information about the projects — from the contents of any studies and assessments about their impacts, to all recommendations about them from the civil service — at least 30 days before it officially puts them into the fast-track process. Business groups like the Canadian Chamber of Commerce have also supported the legislation, arguing that a thicket of government regulations has delayed major projects, and that there is now an urgent need to build new infrastructure for energy, critical minerals and other sectors. But Bill C-5 remains controversial, including with predictions this week from some Indigenous leaders that it could inspire resistance and protest like the 2012 'Idle No More' movement because of a lack of consultation on the new powers. MPs have also condemned the national projects part of the legislation as a troubling expansion of power that risks trampling environmental protections and Indigenous rights. After the amendments Friday, the bill retained its proposal to allow the cabinet to choose projects to fast-track based on 'any factor' it considers relevant, and to skirt laws like the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and Species at Risk Act when reviewing projects to speed up. 'This legislation is an abomination and one that will be a stain on the reputation of this government and of our prime minister. As a first effort to lead this country, it's a bad effort,' said Green Leader Elizabeth May. Bloc MP Sébastien Lemire accused the government of reproducing the 'condescending and colonialist spirit' of the last century towards Canada's Indigenous Peoples. And Don Davies, the NDP's interim leader, alleged the bill creates 'Henry VIII' powers that allow the government 'to override laws by decree. 'It guts environmental protections, undermines workers and threatens Indigenous rights,' Davies said. 'This bill will end up in court.'

San Francisco Chronicle​

2 hours ago

• San Francisco Chronicle​

Less than 20% of troops deployed to L.A. are on the ground. A former commander calls that ‘awful'

Less than 20% of the nearly 5,000 National Guard and Marine troops deployed to Los Angeles were actually on the ground in the city as of earlier this week, according to text messages by a state official with direct knowledge of staffing. That level is so low a former National Guard commander called it 'awful' in an interview with the Chronicle and questioned whether the $134 million deployment is justified. Of the 4,946 National Guard members and Marines deployed by President Donald Trump to Los Angeles in response to protests of immigration raids, just 978 were in the city, the state official with firsthand knowledge of National Guard staffing levels wrote Wednesday in the text messages obtained by the Chronicle. 'Federalized National Guard and USMC forces are grossly underutilized,' the state official wrote to another state official. 'That's at 19.77% utilization rate. Insane.' The officials were discussing how the deployment was pulling soldiers away from the National Guard's wildfire mitigation work. The Chronicle is not naming the officials in accordance with its policy on anonymous sources. The former National Guard commander, Brig. Gen. Peter Cross, told the Chronicle that the less than 20% rate is consistent with what he's heard in his role as president of the National Guard Association of California. Even accounting for soldiers working in shifts, he said, soldiers should be working at a rate much closer to 100%. 'It's awful. … So far as I understand, we're not even approaching, under that shifting model, full utilization of the soldiers,' he said. 'That's extremely concerning to me as a former military commander." Democrats have been saying for weeks that the deployment is a waste of money. 'You really have to use the National Guard as a last resort,' said Cross, a retired military police officer who was deployed to the 1992 Los Angeles riots and has served in Iraq and Afghanistan. 'This is literally the most expensive option we as a society, as a country, can utilize.' Many of the troops deployed in Southern California in response to the protests are stationed at the Joint Forces Training Base in Los Alamitos, where the military has constructed massive tents to house them. The base is about 30 miles from downtown Los Angeles in Orange County. It typically is used for the National Guard and Army Reserves. Trump began federalizing National Guard troops, who are normally under governors' control, nearly two weeks ago in response to protests over aggressive immigration raids in Los Angeles. Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass opposed the deployment, saying that local and state police were sufficiently staffed to handle the protests. Trump argued that the protests had gotten out of hand. 'If Governor Gavin Newscum, of California, and Mayor Karen Bass, of Los Angeles, can't do their jobs, which everyone knows they can't, then the Federal Government will step in and solve the problem, RIOTS & LOOTERS, the way it should be solved!!!' the president wrote in a post on his social media website on Saturday, June 7. Shortly after the post, Trump issued an executive order federalizing 2,000 members of the National Guard for 60 days to respond to protests. The order does not specify that the troops be deployed in California or Los Angeles. Trump has since called up additional National Guard members and has also deployed 700 Marines to respond. The protests in Los Angeles, which grew after Trump deployed the troops, have since calmed significantly. Earlier this week, Bass lifted a curfew she had imposed last week for the area of downtown that has seen the most protests. Newsom has sued to regain control of the National Guard troops. He argues that Trump's federalizing of the troops is illegal and amounts to a dangerous overreach by the president. On Thursday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Trump could retain control of the Guard troops while legal challenges proceed in lower courts. 'This brazen abuse of power by a sitting President inflamed a combustible situation putting our people, our officers, and the National Guard at risk,' Newsom said in a speech several days after Trump deployed the troops. 'When Donald Trump sought blanket authority to commandeer the National Guard, he made that order apply to every state in this nation. … California may be first — but it clearly won't end here. Other states are next.' Most of the 300 National Guard members who had been working on a vegetation management team called Joint Task Force Rattlesnake have been taken off the wildfire prevention work as part of the Los Angeles deployment, according to Newsom's office. Newsom has also criticized the deployment for moving National Guard troops who had been doing drug interdiction work at the border. 'You just pulled National Guard I placed at the border who were stopping fentanyl smuggling,' Newsom wrote on social media in response to a post from a Trump administration official. 'Now they're twiddling their thumbs in LA.' Lt. Carl Trujillo, a spokesperson for the California Military Department, referred all questions about the deployment to U.S. Army North Public Affairs. He said that when National Guard troops were deployed to assist with wildfire recovery in Los Angeles earlier this year, they were stationed at the Rose Bowl and a base in Malibu, not the training base in Los Alamitos. He said the base is not typically used to station large numbers of troops for extended periods of time because it is relatively small. U.S. Army North Public Affairs declined to respond to questions about staffing levels and whether it was typical that less than 20% of the deployed troops would be used in Los Angeles on any given day, citing security concerns. The office said that the National Guard troops are being housed at Los Alamitos, while the Marines are located at Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach, also in Orange County. Photos posted online by the military show the tents at the base in Los Alamitos, with some housing rows upon rows of cots and folding tables set up like a cafeteria. Images taken by a Chronicle photographer from a helicopter that flew near the base show multiple massive tents and other temporary structures that have been erected on the base. Other photos obtained by the Chronicle from inside the base also show soldiers in fatigues walking around the area as well as construction projects with cranes and wooden pallets. A nearby resident, who declined to give his name, said he has a good view of the base from his backyard. He said it's common for troops to stage there for training. He said troops had camped in smaller tents when they arrived, but now are staying in a massive tent that he estimated is longer than a football field but about the same width. The resident described the National Guard troops as 'wonderful neighbors' even if they make noise early in the morning. Reached by phone Thursday afternoon, he said he could hear troops marching down the middle of a road near his home. Cross said it's not surprising that National Guard soldiers would be stationed at the base in Los Alamitos and that it's normal protocol to build massive tents to house soldiers. But he noted that the activity at the base underscores why deploying the Guard is also the most expensive option available in a situation like this. It also takes a personal toll on the soldiers who are deployed, who must leave their families, their jobs and their educational pursuits behind. Typically the Guard should be deployed only when all local law enforcement options are exhausted. That doesn't seem to be the case here, he said. 'This melodramatic talk about people worried about the military shooting someone or being more violent than is necessary — I'm just not worried about that because of the training we have,' he said. 'I'm just skeptical whether we were needed.' In his current role with the California National Guard, Cross oversees the Youth and Community Program, which runs educational programs for struggling teens. The programs have continued to function, he said, even as many of the soldiers who work on them have been deployed. But if the deployment is still happening in a few weeks when the new school session starts, he's worried he'll have to turn more troubled teens away. 'When you're called up, you're pulled up from your employer, from your life,' Cross said. 'You want it to have value, you want it to have purpose, and if you're sitting in your armory, not tasked, that will erode your morale.'