At the Minnesota Legislature, disagreement within a party caucus is often treated as a weakness. Negotiations happen behind closed doors because “caucus unity” is prioritized. But something unusual happened this year. (OK, lots of unusual things happened this year). Specifically, legislative leaders allowed some of their ideological differences to play out in public spaces. And in doing so, they modeled a healthier, more transparent approach to governance.

Take the Senate floor debate over SF2300, an attempt to revise Minnesota’s earned sick and safe time law. Lawmakers openly wrestled with the complexities of balancing worker protections with concerns raised by small business and family farms. Republican members were all in support of the changes, possibly because they’d raised similar c

See Full Page