The Senate recently passed two critical, but very different, bills: the Health and Human Services appropriation bill, and the Human Services appropriation bill. While these bills may have similar issue areas and the titles sound similar, these bills and the process behind completing each of them could not have been more different. In fact, the process leading up to the votes on each of these bills tells a very different story.

The first of the two we took up was the Humans Services bill, which included a number of highlights: increased funding for elderly and disability services, additional funding for a grant program to provide for state-funded home and community-based services (HCBS) in rural and underserved communities, and a new grant program for HCBS providers to recruit and retain direct support workers. This bill offers support and consideration to some of our state’s most vulnerable citizens, and works to provide the resources needed for disability and long-term care services. It was truly a bipartisan effort—the chair of the committee was willing to listen to Republican concerns and worked with us to address specific issue areas. As a result, we were left with arguably the most bipartisan omnibus bill we’ve had all session, proving good things happen when both sides work together.

That being said, though the efforts behind the bill were incredibly bipartisan in nature, it still failed to adequately address the severe workforce shortage facing nursing homes. Across the state, nursing homes have been closing down due to pressures created by state-level policies. The Chair has at least committed to working with Republicans and Democrats to address this valid concern, even if that happens later down the line. The bill may not be perfect, but it truly shows that work can get done in a bipartisan way.

After passing the Human Services bill, we took up the Health and Human services bill the following day. This bill tells a very different story… The legislation we were presented with focuses on costly mandates, controversial grants, growing welfare programs, and fails to assist patients struggling across the state. It amounts to a budget of over $12 billion between fiscal years 24-25 and 26-27. I’m incredibly concerned that this bill includes hyper-partisan provisions like the study on single-pay healthcare, the “Keeping the Nurses at the Bedside Act,” the creation of both a Healthcare Affordability Board and Advisory Council, and so much more. Despite how bad this bill was, Senate Republicans made a good faith effort to work with the committee Chair to make this bill better and more affordable for Minnesotans. As with nearly every other bill debated on the floor this year, Senate Democrats struck down nearly all of our offered amendments, demonstrating an alarming unwillingness to work across the aisle.

As I said—this is the tale of two very different bills. Because the Chair of the Human Services Committee was interested in bipartisan work, we were able to come together to support a bill that addresses concerns of folks across the state. The bill may not be perfect, but the door is open for negotiation, and that is all we have been asking for this year. That bill passed 63-4. The Health and Human Services bill on the other hand, only passed 35-32, and is a hyper-partisan bill that had no real Republican input on its creation. The contrast is clear. These two bills, passed just within 24 hours of one another, provide an excellent contrast of what we can do when we work together, versus the one-sided legislation we get when Democrats refuse to work across the aisle. With just a few weeks left in session, I hope bills start traveling down a bipartisan path, as the Human Services bill did.