IT'S FREE TO VISIT.

FEEL FREE TO COME ON DOWN.

>> Barry: THERE YOU GO.

ALL RIGHT.

WELL, LET'S MOVE ONTO THE NEWS OF THE DAY, WHICH NO DOUBT THERE ARE A VARIETY OF THINGS OCCURRING AT THE LEGISLATURE.

ONE OF THE TOPICS WE HAD DISCUSSION ABOUT IN THE PRECEDING WEEKS WAS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THERE WOULD BE A BONDING BILL AND WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE BONDING BILL.

SO I THINK THERE WAS SOME MANAGEMENT ON THE SENATE FLOOR TODAY.

I DON'T THINK IT'S THE LAST CHAPTER.

LET'S START WITH YOU, SENATOR RARICK.

WE WILL GIVE YOU THE FIRST GO AT IT.

TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE BONDING BILL.

WE WILL GO TO THE SENATORS AND FINISH UP WITH REPRESENTATIVE MUELLER.

THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

TELL OUR VIEWERS WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE BONDING BILL.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT, SENATE REPUBLICANS HAVE SAID ALL ALONG WE ARE IN FULL SUPPORT OF A BONDING BILL, BUT WE WANT IT TO COME WITH TAX RELIEF.

WE HAD SOME OF THAT DISCUSSION TODAY.

WE OFFERED AN AMENDMENT TO BRING THE SOCIAL SECURITY TAX CUT, HAVE THAT BE PART OF IT.

THAT'S KIND OF BEEN OUR NO.

1, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE FOR THAT.

DIDN'T COME TO AN AGREEMENT THERE.

THE VOTE DIDN'T TAKE 60%, DEPENDENT GET THE 60% VOTE NEEDED IN THE SENATE TO PASS IT.

I AM VERY HAPPY THAT IT WAS BROUGHT UP BACK FOR RECONSIDERATION, AND THEN TABLED.

SO THE BILL IS NOT DEAD.

WE ARE ABLE TO CONTINUE OUR CONVERSATIONS AND I'M HOPING WE WILL BE DOING THAT GLP.

>> Barry: SENATOR CWODZONSKI, YOUR TAKE ON THE BONDING BILL.

>> IT WAS INTERESTING.

AS HE POINTED OUT IT TAKES 3/5, ONE OF THE VIEW THINGS THAT THE SENATE THAT'S A SIMPLE MAJORITY.

WE DIDN'T GET THE 3/5, SO THE BONDING BILL KIND OF DIED TODAY FOR NOW AS JASON POINTED OUT, REPUBLICANS WANTED TO TIE IT IN WITH SOCIAL SECURITY TAX CUTS, AND WE WERE LESS THAN ENTHUSIASTIC TO WANT TO DO THAT.

WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE TWO SEPARATE BILLS COME THROUGH.

ANOTHER INTERESTING POINT OF VIEW ON THE BONDING IS SOME PEOPLE DON'T FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD BE BORROWING MONEY WITH THE SURPLUS.

DEMOCRATS IN THE SENATE WANT A BONDING BILL THAT IS BORROWED AND SO WE MIGHT HAVE TWO DIFFERENT BONDING BILLS COME ON THIS SESSION.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE FEIST.

HOUSE IS A SPECTATOR TO THIS CONVERSATION, BECAUSE IT'S OCCURRING IN THE SENATE, BUT OF COURSE THE BILL DID ORIGINATE THERE, AND MAYBE YOU COULD TELL OUR VIEWERS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE BONDING BILL.

>> YEAH.

SO THE HOUSE DID OUR PART, AND WE ACTUALLY DID FAST THE GO AND THE CASH BONDING BILLS SEPARATELY IN THE HOUSE.

I AM VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE BILLS THAT WE PASSED.

IMPORTANT INVESTMENTS IN INFRASTRUCTURE AND REALLY SPREAD OUT ACROSS THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.

THERE'S A REASON THAT WE WERE ABLE TO PASS IT WITH A SUPER MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE.

I KNOW FROM MY DISTRICT, ONE OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WAS GOING TO RECEIVE FUNDING IN THE HOUSE BILL, AND YOU KNOW, IT'S PROJECTS LIKE THAT THAT ARE REALLY SERVING IN THE COMMUNITY IN A UNIQUE AND ROBUST WAY THAT ARE THE PERFECT TYPES OF INVESTMENTS THAT WE SHOULD BE MAKING.

I'M EXCITED ABOUT THE HOUSE BONDING BILL.

WE ARE LOOKING AT THE SENATE TO TAKE IT HOME.

>> Barry: REPRESENTATIVE MUELLER.

>> YEAH.

SO YOU HAVE HEARD SEVERAL OF THE COMMENTS MADE FROM MY COLLEAGUES HERE.

THERE IS A LOT OF TALK ABOUT WITH THE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF SURPLUS, WHY DO WE NEED TO BE BORROWING ANY MONEY.

I WAS ONE OF THE LEGISLATORS FROM THE MINORITY PARTY THAT DID VOTE FOR THE BONDING BILL, AND ONE OF THE THINGS IS THAT I DON'T CONSIDER THIS AS A SUPPLEMENTAL BONDING BILL.

THIS WAS THE FRAMEWORK THAT WAS NEGOTIATED IN 2022 AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN PASSED IN 2022.

FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 10 YEARS, AUSTIN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT WAS INCLUDED IN THAT, AND IT WAS AN ASPECT THAT HAD BEEN CONTINUALLY BROUGHT BEFORE OUR LEGISLATORS FOR OVER A DECADE.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IT FINALLY WAS IN.

SO I HAD TOLD MY COMMUNITY BACK IN '22 THAT I WANTED TO VOTE ON IT.

THE MAJORITY PARTY DIDN'T BRING IT TO THE TABLE AND THERE ARE LOTS OF REASONS, AND I DON'T WANT TO GO IN THERE.

BUT IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THEY DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO VOTE ON IT IN '22.

SO I ALWAYS CONSIDERED THIS THE '22 BONDING BILL.

I HAD GIVEN MY COMMUNITY MY SUPPORT AT THAT POINT AND I COULDN'T UNDERSTAND CHANGING IT JUST BECAUSE WE WANT TO TEASE IT AS LEVERAGE.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SENATE IS DOING.

I KNOW WHY THEY ARE DOING IT.

FOR ME, THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS VERY PERSONAL.

I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS UPHOLDING THE PROMISE I MADE TO