A LOT OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN IT THIS YEAR.

>> Barry: WE HAVE HAD COMMENT ABOUT AN ISSUE THAT VIEWERS IN BELLE GLADE AND SWIFT COUNTY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT AND ASKED US TO INQUIRE THE PANEL ON THE STATUS OF THE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE TAXATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS.

SENATOR MCEWEN, WE DIDN'T GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

HAVE YOU START WITH THAT.

WHAT ARE THOSE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT, IF ANYTHING, SHOULD BE DONE RELATIVE TO THE TAXATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY.

>> YOU KNOW, THERE'S DIFFERENCES OF OPINION WITHIN MY OWN CAUCUS.

I THINK WE HAVE SEEN SOME OF THAT.

SOME PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN OUT AGAINST A FULL ELIMINATION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY TAX, STATE TAX, BECAUSE OVERALL WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHO THE GREAT BULK OF THAT MONEY WOULD GO TO, IT WOULD BE TO WEALTHIER RETIREES.

THAT SAID, THERE AREN'T MANY OF US WHO ARE VERY KEENLY AWARE THAT EVER SINCE THE PAWLENTY YEARS AND NOT HAVING A LARGE ENOUGH LGA ALLOTMENT FOR OUR CITIES AND MY CITY IN PARTICULAR OF DULUTH, WE HAVE SEEN THROUGHOUT THE STATE THAT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T KEPT PACE WITH TAKING THAT INCOME TAX REVENUE AND DISTRIBUTING OUT THROUGH THE STATES TO OUR MUNICIPALITIES, IN TURN, OUR MUNICIPALITIES HAVE HAD TO LEVY AND DO LOCAL FLAT TAXES AND PROPERTY TAXES.

THOSE PROPERTY TAXES ARE REALLY VERY HARD ON PEOPLE WITH FIXED INCOMES.

THEY ARE VERY REGRESSIVE AS OPPOSED TO AN INCOME TAX.

I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THE IDEA THAT PEOPLE WITH LOWER INCOMES AND MIDDLE INCOMES BECAUSE OF THIS REGRESSIVE TAXATION PATH THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN ARE BEING NICKELED AND DIMED AND IT INCLUDES TAXATION.

I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO GIVING RELIEF TO PEOPLE IN LOWER AND MIDDLE INCOMES.

HOWEVER, I'M NOT SYMPATHETIC TO THE TAX RELIEF BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY THAT'S A TAX CUT TO THE RICH.

WE NEED TO GO IN A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DIRECTION.

WE HAVE A LOT OF VERY IMPORTANT NEEDS IN OUR STATE.

THE SURPLUS ACTUALLY REPRESENTS THAT WE HAVE BEEN UNDERFUNDING ESSENTIAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES FOR YEARS.

EDUCATION, CHILD CARE, HEALTHCARE, SOCIAL SERVICES.

WE DON'T HAVE YET PAID FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE PROGRAM, WHICH WE SHOULD HAVE HAD DECADES AGO.

THERE'S A LOT OF CATCH-UP WE HAVE TO DO.

WE HAVE TO REPLACE ALL OF THE LEAD PIPES IN OUR STATE.

A PROJECT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE IF WE STARTED A DECADE OR TWO AGO.

WE HAVE A LOT OF NEEDS THAT HAVE BEEN NEGLECTED.

IT'S ABSOLUTELY APPROPRIATE THAT THOSE WITH THE MOST RESOURCES, WHO HAVE GAINED THE MOST FROM OUR SOCIETY, WEALTHIEST INDIVIDUALS AND CORPORATIONS SHOULD BE PAYING THE MOST.

SO I DON'T SUPPORT A FULL ELIMINATION.

I KNOW THERE ARE SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES IN MY CAUCUS WHO ARE FIGHTING VERY HARD FOR THAT.

I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THE IDEA WE WANT TO PROVIDE TAX RELIEF TO RETIREES.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE BULK OF IT, THE BULK OF THAT MONEY WOULD GO TO THE WEALTHY RETIREES.

I HOPE AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE ARE GOING TO FIND SOME KIND OF COMPROMISE THERE.

>> Barry: SENATOR WEBER, SOCIAL SECURITY TAXATION.

>> WELL, MINNESOTA IS ONE OF ONLY 11 STATES THAT TAXES SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS.

IT'S TIME THAT WE GOT OUR NAME OFF OF THAT LIST.

NOW, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE WEALTHY GETTING A TAX BREAK WITH THIS, BUT AT SOME POINT WE ARE GOING TO START SEEING A GREAT REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF THOSE WEALTHY PEOPLE.

QUITE FRANKLY, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE PAYING INCOME TAX ON THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS WHO ARE NOT WEALTHY PEOPLE AT THE END OF THE DAY.

SO WE NEED TO PROVIDE A TOTAL ELIMINATION OF MINNESOTA STATE TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS.

THESE PEOPLE WORKED FOR THAT MONEY HARD.

THEY CONTRIBUTED INTO THE FUND.

THEY PAID INCOME TAX ON THE MONEY THEY EARNED ON WHICH THEY PAID SOCIAL SECURITY TAX.

NOW WE ASK THEM TO PAY IT AGAIN.

QUITE FRANKLY, THAT IS WRONG.

AND SO WE NEED TO DO THAT.

IN ADDITION, WE NEED TO ALSO LOOK AT THE RATES THAT WE ARE CHARGING FOR OUR TAXPAYERS.

A REPUBLICAN PLAN THAT WAS ROLLED OUT LAST WEEK BASICALLY DEALT WITH A ONE PERCENT CUT IN THE FIRST TWO TIERS OF TAX RATES, DEALT WITH A REFUND TO ALL MINNESOTANS, DEALT WITH CHILD CARE -- CHILD TAX CREDIT, AS WELL AS PROPERTY TAX REFORM, INCREASING THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION FOR RESIDENTIAL, AG, RESORT PROPERTIES.

ALL OF THESE THINGS NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.

WE CAN TALK ABOUT SAYING THAT THE SURPLUS IS A RESULT OF US BEING UNDERFUNDED, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT OUR BUDGET IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, IT HAS INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE LAST 10 YEARS.

QUITE FRANKLY, AS WE LOOK AT THE NUMBER OF DOLLARS THAT WE HAVE BEEN SPENDING, WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT NOT EVERY -- EVERY PROGRAM TAKES MONEY BUT NOT EVERY PROGRAM ACHIEVES SUCCESS AS A RESULT OF THE EXTRA MONEY THAT WE PUT INTO IT.

IT'S TIME THAT WE TOOK A STEP BACK AND SAID WE CAN'T KEEP SPENDING AT THAT KIND OF A RATE.

PARTICULARLY WITH AN 11 BILLION-DOLLAR PROJECTED INCREASE IN THE STATE BUDGET.

IT IS TIME FOR US TO PROVIDE THAT TAX RELIEF TO THE PEOPLE OF MINNESOTA.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE BALKER.

>> I WOULD HAVE TO ECHO WITH A LOT OF WHAT SENATOR WEBER HAD TO STAY.

WITH 11 STATES LEFT, PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THE BRAND AND THE IMAGE OF MINNESOTA.

WE ARE IN THE HIGHER END OF MOST TAX RATES, MOST TAX INDEXES WHEN YOU LOOK AROUND.

WE ARE LOSING TOO MANY OF OUR MINNESOTANS OUT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.

THEY ARE VOTING WITH THEIR FEET.

THEY ARE LEAVING THE STATE BECAUSE THEY CAN GO ELSEWHERE.

I TOLD THIS MANY TIMES OVER.

I CAN SAVE $40,000 ON DIFFERENT THINGS.

IT MIGHT NOT JUST BE THE MINNESOTA INCOME TAX, BUT IT'S THE THOUGHT OF US STILL CHARGING ANY KIND OF INCOME TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY INCOME THAT THEY REALLY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO DO ANYMORE.

I THINK WE NEED TO BE TAKEN OFF THIS LIST.

IT'S COSTING US MORE MONEY WHEN WE LOSE MINNESOTANS THAT ARE NEWLY RETIRED, STILL HAVE SOME DESCENT INCOME GOING ON, YET THEY PAID THEIR MORE THAN FAIR SHARE OVER THE YEARS TO HELP US WITH OUR SERVICES HERE, TOO.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT MOST STATES HAVE FIGURED OUT.

IT IS A LOSING ISSUE.

IF WE DON'T FIX IT, WE ARE GOING TO LOSE THESE PEOPLE.

I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT THIS.

I THINK IT SHOULD BE A FULL REPEAL OF SOCIAL SECURITY TAX.

IT'S REALLY WHAT MOST FOLKS CAMPAIGNED ON LAST FALL.

I DO HOPE WE CAN FIND COMPROMISE.

LIKE THE SENATORS HAVE SAID, I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT AREA.

I HOPE IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN GET OUR ARMS AROUND.

IT SHOULD BE ONE OF OUR TOP PRIORITIES THAT WE DO THIS YEAR.

I'M PUSHING HARD, MY COLLEAGUES IN THE HOUSE, I HOPE IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN AGREE TO.

FINISH UP, AND THEN WE WILL MOVE ON.

>> BARRY, IF I COULD ADD ONE COMMENT THERE.

THE COST TO PROVIDE THIS TYPE OF TAX RELIEF IS 1.26 BILLION, AND WHEN WE HAVE A $19 BILLION SURPLUS, IF WE CAN'T PROVIDE THAT TAPE OF TAX RELIEF TO THE SENIOR CITIZENS OF MINNESOTA, WHEN ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT?

IT IS TIME.

>> Barry: SENATOR MCEWEN, YOU WANT THE LAST WORD ON THIS, OR SHOULD WE MOVE ON?

>> WE CAN MOVE ON.

BUT I HAVE ONE QUICK WORD OR OBSERVATION.

MY OBSERVATION IS FOR ME IT REALLY IS A QUESTION OF WHO ARE WE FOCUSING ON SERVING IN OUR STATES.

AGAIN, IT GOES BACK TO THAT WEALTH INEQUALITY PIECE.

WHEN I TALK TO MY CONSTITUENTS, I DON'T TALK TO MANY PEOPLE WHO TELL ME THEY COULD SAVE $40,000 IF THEY MOVE OR DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

I TALK TO PEOPLE WHO SAY I DON'T KNOW HOW I'M GOING TO PAY MY HEATING BILL.

I DON'T KNOW HOW I AM GOING TO CONTINUE TO PAY FOR MY CHILD CARE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THESE TWO OR THREE JOBS ARE GOING TO GET ME BY.

SO WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PROVIDING RELIEF TO PEOPLE, TO WORKING MINNESOTANS, LET'S GET SERIOUS ABOUT THAT.

WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE?

IT MEANS MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE'S BASIC NEEDS ARE MET.

IT MEANS RELAXING THE BURDEN OF PROPERTY TAXES ON PEOPLE WHO ARE ON FIXED INCOMES.

IT DOESN'T MEAN ANOTHER CUT OF TAXES FOR THE WEALTHIEST MINNESOTANS.

IT JUST DOESN'T.

I THINK IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF FRAMING, THE QUESTION OF BRANDING.

I GET IT.

BUT I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT PEOPLE MOVING FROM MINNESOTA BECAUSE THEY ARE WORRIED THEY ARE BEING TAXED TOO MUCH.

I'M WORRIED ABOUT MINNESOTANS BEING ABLE TO LIVE AND GET BY.

>> Barry: I THINK WE HAVE EXPLORED THIS ISSUE PRETTY THOROUGHLY.

I'M GUESSING FUTURE PANELS IN THE WEEKS AHEAD WILL HAVE THE