Advocates warn proposed bill could increase veteran homelessness in Minnesota
Previous state leadership prioritized ending veteran homelessness. Now, lawmakers are looking at eliminating state-funded direct financial assistance that helps veterans.
"The House committee has, it was an 80% cut to the Department of Veterans Affairs housing line item in their budget," said Minnesota Assistance Council for Veterans CEO Neil Loidolt.
In 2024, 2,883 veterans walked through the doors of MACV looking for help.
According to Loidolt, proposed Minnesota House bill HF 2444 will dismantle the system designed to get veterans in a home and the care they need to be whole.
"The real progress over the last couple of years has come with the chronic and long-term homeless population," Loidolt said.
Loidolt testified in front of lawmakers that eliminating funding could more than double the state's homeless veteran registry.
"When I met MACV, I was in a very dark place," said Marine veteran Ramel Winston.
Winston is one of many veterans who say the state's MNVEST voucher program helped subsidize their rent. He is worried that veterans looking for help will not have the resources to find stability and live with dignity.
"A man that puts his life on the line for his country should be able to come home and have the help he needs to be where he needs to be," Winston said.
MNVEST is one of three programs that could end July 1 if funding is eliminated. Two hundred housing units throughout the state and financial assistance that supports more than 600 veterans' households are also on the chopping block.
"The greatest risk is there are 92 veterans that have one of those state vouchers, so if you are in that category, when your voucher comes up for expiration, it won't be renewed," said Loidolt.
Loidolt does not want the hard work MACV has done to end veteran homelessness to stop. He hopes concerned Minnesotans let lawmakers know this is not the way to honor our veterans.
"Send a note that says, 'Hey, we don't think the state of Minnesota should be abandoning homeless veterans right now, find the money,'" Loidolt said.
MACV says it sees new veterans needing its help to find a home every month.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
2 hours ago
- Axios
Miller and Pritzker's clash at House hearing could be 2026 preview
A recent House hearing over immigration policy turned into a political brawl — and quite possibly a preview of 2026 elections in Illinois. The big picture: Downstate Rep. Mary Miller is emerging as the MAGA favorite in the Illinois Republican Party and could be a challenger to powerful Democrats running for governor or U.S. Senate. The latest: Last week, Miller requested to join the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to grill Gov. JB Pritzker. What they said: "Your policies have been disastrous for our state, and would be disastrous for this country," Miller said during the committee hearing. Pritzker didn't take Miller's attacks lightly, hurling back, "I'm not going to be lectured to by someone who extols the virtues of Adolf Hitler." Context: The governor was referencing Miller's comments at a rally right before the Jan. 6 insurrection. Miller said, "Hitler was right on one thing. He said, 'Whoever has the youth has the future.'" Between the lines: The two continued to spar in the hearing, suggesting the start of a heated rivalry between two very different politicians. What they're saying:"I think Mary stands for the future of the Illinois Republican Party," downstate Republican state Rep. Adam Niemerg tells Axios. "The establishment Republican Party has left the state of Illinois. Now you have a working-class Republican Party. People are fed up with being left out." "I think she would be a great candidate to take on Governor Pritzker for the governor's mansion," Neimerg adds. Zoom in: Miller has been a lightning rod for controversy. She was recently condemned for posting about her dislike for a Sikh prayer at the beginning of a recent House session. She was also excoriated for saying that Roe v. Wade being overturned in 2022 was a "victory for white life," which her office later claimed was a misread of her prepared remarks. Yes, but: Miller is one of President Trump's biggest supporters in the majority-Republican Congress, having served since 2020 and been elected three times by her downstate district. She is a more popular Republican candidate than former state Sen. Darren Bailey, who lost to Pritzker in 2022. The intrigue: If Miller doesn't want to return from Washington, she may also be a strong candidate to take on Democrats looking to replace outgoing Sen. Dick Durbin. Another downstate Republican who could be interested in that seat is Rep. Darin LaHood. Reality check: While Miller is making waves, the Illinois GOP doesn't currently hold an elected statewide office. State Democrats also hold the supermajority in both chambers in the state legislature. Miller's right-wing views may clash with the more moderate (and populated) parts of the state, namely in Cook, DuPage and Lake counties. If Pritzker runs for reelection, he will be a strong candidate because of his fundraising and name recognition. Of note: Miller hasn't announced any plans to leave her downstate congressional seat.
The Hill
3 hours ago
- The Hill
Impasse over SALT cap deepens as House moderates stand firm
The impasse over the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap is deepening as Senate Republicans and House moderates from high-tax blue states remain at a loggerheads, a stalled state-of-play that is threatening to thwart leadership's goal of enacting the party's 'big, beautiful bill' by July 4. Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) — a former House member and key liaison between Republicans in both chambers — spoke with a group of House GOP lawmakers in the SALT Caucus on Wednesday to discuss the issue, two sources familiar with the matter told The Hill, as top lawmakers hunt for a consensus on the cross-Capitol debate. Reps. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.), Young Kim (R-Calif.) and Tom Kean Jr. (R-N.J.) were present, according to one of the sources. Leaders are trying to bridge the gap between the House's $40,000 SALT deduction cap for individuals making $500,000 or less and the Senate's proposal for a $10,000 cap, which matches the number in current law. SALT Caucus members have deemed the Senate's offer a nonstarter and are demanding that the House deal — which was the product of months-long negotiations with Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) — remains in the final product. After Wednesday's call, progress appeared elusive. 'We're still working on a deal. We're still running numbers on things. … A little premature, and I hope [the leaks] didn't damage us moving forward,' Mullin told The Hill on Thursday. 'We're not there. … We're in a good spot. We're not in a final spot.' The leak Mullin referred to was a report from Punchbowl News that the senator and SALT Caucus Republicans discussed keeping the $40,000 deduction cap in place but decreasing the income threshold from $500,000 — which would still allow filers a larger SALT deduction but limit it for higher-income earners, bringing down the price tag for the provision. Key SALT Caucus Republicans, however, are rejecting that idea, showing zero appetite for tampering with the deal they landed last month. 'The bottom line here is the Senate has a position of $10,000 — we're not accepting that,' Lawler told The Hill on Thursday. 'That's the reality. Never gonna vote for that bill.' Asked if he was open to negotiating to bring down the $500,000 income cap, Lawler responded: 'No, look, we negotiated our deal, this is the deal.' 'They need to just accept that this is the deal,' he added. 'This is the deal that we negotiated, and they should abide by it.' Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), another vocal member of the SALT Caucus, sounded a similar note, telling The Hill that the compromise the group closed in June 'shouldn't be touched.' 'It earned the votes of Republicans with very different world views and to change it is to risk losing votes and tanking the whole bill,' he added. The New York Republican shut down any chance of changing the $500,000 income cap: 'I am done negotiating,' he said when pressed on if it was open to discussion. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), to be sure, has said that the $10,000 cap in the Finance Committee's part of the megabill is a 'marker' for negotiations going forward, noting that the House and Senate will 'figure out a landing spot.' But moderate Republicans from high-tax blue states — including New York, New Jersey and California — are showing no interest in more talks and instead want the Senate to stick with their deal. The group is warning that they will vote against a bill that contains a $10,000 deduction cap — enough opposition to sink the entire package full of President Trump's legislative priorities. 'Restoring SALT is not about New Jersey alone. It is about fixing a flaw in the federal tax code that stifles growth, undermines local control, and violates the conservative belief in fair, limited taxation. $40k is the right compromise,' Kean Jr. wrote on X this week in response to the Senate's proposal. 'No SALT, no deal.' The current dynamics do not come as a surprise. House Republicans in the SALT Caucus for years have pushed to increase the $10,000 deduction cap in current law, decrying the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act for implementing the limit in the first place. They saw deliberations over the 'big, beautiful bill' as their time to deliver for their constituents, and negotiated the $40,000 deduction cap for individuals making $500,000 or less. But with no Senate Republicans from high-tax blue states, SALT does not have a champion in the upper chamber — and Senate Republicans, as a result, are trying to change the costly provision. 'There's not one Republican in the United States Senate who gives a s— about SALT,' a former House member, said last month. 'Having said that, what does matter is 218 votes in the House, and we want to be cognizant about that.' The deadlock, however, is dragging on into dangerous territory for Republican leaders on Capitol Hill: Top lawmakers are under heavy pressure to enact the 'big, beautiful bill' by July 4, a deadline the administration has gotten behind. White House chief of staff Susie Wiles told Senate Republicans during their weekly lunch this week that the president wants the megabill on his desk by Independence Day. Despite that due date, SALT Republicans are showing no signs of relenting on their demand for the House deal. In fact, the calendar is on their side: If the 2017 Trump tax cuts expire without a deal on SALT, the deduction cap snaps back to being unlimited — a reality they would be elated with. 'The Senate's choice is simple,' LaLota said. '[A]dopt the House's $40,000 SALT compromise—or risk blowing up the [One Big, Beautiful Bill Act], letting SALT go back to unlimited, and watching the Trump tax cuts expire.' Lawler echoed that sentiment, arguing that the House deal is the only agreement that will land the SALT Caucus's support. 'By agreeing to a cap we are providing our colleagues the ability to pay for other provisions including the doubling of the standard deduction, the no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, the enhanced child tax credit. So this is the deal,' he said. 'This is what was agreed upon.' Al Weaver contributed.
Newsweek
3 hours ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows States That Don't Tax Social Security
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Ending taxes on Social Security income has made headlines as the Trump administration looks for ways to reduce financial burdens on older Americans. But although federal changes may be on the way, several states are still taxing retirement income. Why It Matters President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act is being considered in the Senate, after passing in the House in a 215-214 vote. The Senate's version includes a temporary enhanced tax deduction of up to $6,000 per eligible person age 65 and older. A similar provision appears in the House's proposal, where it's referred to as a "bonus," but the deduction would be capped at $4,000. Even if the bill is passed, it will not impact state-specific income taxes, which are separate from federal levies. What To Know Under federal rules, up to 85 percent of Social Security benefits are currently taxable for individuals with an income of more than $34,000, or a couple with a combined income of $44,000 or more. The majority of Social Security recipients do not pay state taxes on their retirement income. As it stands, only nine states still tax Social Security benefits: Colorado, Connecticut, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont and West Virginia, the last of which is phasing out taxing Social Security income in 2026. The rules also vary by state regarding who pays and how much, with several states offering partial or full exemptions on Social Security income based on age and income levels: Colorado exempts all federally taxable Social Security income for residents 65 and older. Starting in 2025, those aged 55-64 can exclude all such income if their AGI is under $75,000 ($95,000 for couples). exempts all federally taxable Social Security income for residents 65 and older. Starting in 2025, those aged 55-64 can exclude all such income if their AGI is under $75,000 ($95,000 for couples). Connecticut offers a full exemption below $75,000 (single) or $100,000 (joint); above that, up to 25 percent of benefits may be taxed. offers a full exemption below $75,000 (single) or $100,000 (joint); above that, up to 25 percent of benefits may be taxed. Minnesota grants full exemptions for incomes under $82,190 (single) or $105,380 (joint), with partial exclusions above those thresholds and full taxation at higher levels. grants full exemptions for incomes under $82,190 (single) or $105,380 (joint), with partial exclusions above those thresholds and full taxation at higher levels. Montana taxes benefits the same as the federal government. taxes benefits the same as the federal government. New Mexico exempts federally taxable benefits for incomes below $100,000 (single) and $150,000 (joint). exempts federally taxable benefits for incomes below $100,000 (single) and $150,000 (joint). Rhode Island exempts benefits once full retirement age is reached and income is under $104,200 (single) or $130,250 (joint), with partial exemptions if only one spouse is of retirement age. exempts benefits once full retirement age is reached and income is under $104,200 (single) or $130,250 (joint), with partial exemptions if only one spouse is of retirement age. Utah taxes Social Security income above $45,000 (single) or $75,000 (joint) but offers tax credits. taxes Social Security income above $45,000 (single) or $75,000 (joint) but offers tax credits. Vermont provides full exemptions for incomes under $50,000 (single) or $65,000 (joint), as well as partial exclusions up to $60,000/$75,000, and full taxation above those levels. What People Are Saying President Donald Trump, on Truth Social in May: "It's time for our friends in the United States Senate to get to work, and send this Bill to my desk AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!" Karla Dennis, a tax adviser and CEO of the tax strategy firm KDA Inc., told Newsweek: "Getting rid of taxes on Social Security would make things a lot easier for retirees. Many seniors don't expect to owe taxes in retirement, and this would help prevent surprise bills. In the end, we need real change that lasts, not just one-time payouts. Seniors deserve long-term relief they can count on." What Happens Next The bill faces scrutiny in the Senate before returning to the House for a final vote.
