American Experiment Podcast
Why are so many Minnesota high school graduates unable to read or do math at grade level? Does Tim Walz actually think he's going to be the next president of the United States? And why does he keep swearing so much?
These are the kinds of hard-hitting questions we get into every week on the American Experiment Podcast, where we unpack the week's biggest stories, interview Minnesota's movers and shakers, and "stop the tape" on clips of our state's most ridiculous elected officials.
New episodes drop every Tuesday afternoon and are available on every major podcasting platform.
American Experiment Podcast
Episode 119 - Minnesota's AOC WANNABE
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
Minnesota has its own AOC wannabe...
Check out the American Experiment Podcast
Welcome back! This week on the American Experiment Podcast…
Bill Walsh takes the reins while Grace and Kathryn are off on special assignment, with Isaac making an appearance on the producer cam.
The episode kicks off with a bill passed in the Minnesota Senate that would spend $40 million on rent assistance. The catch? Illegal immigrants would also be eligible for the program.
Then Bill breaks down Minnesota’s very own AOC wannabe, Erin Maye Quade, from the heated rhetoric to the Trump hatred, and the DFL’s broader strategy to shift attention away from their failures in Minnesota and toward Donald Trump heading into 2026.
Next, a new DFL representative says she wants to “raise revenue” to fund the things “we all deem worthy” which, of course, means raising your taxes to pay for things like $40 million in rent assistance for illegal immigrants.
On the back half of the episode, Grace and Kathryn sit down with Senator Andrew Mathews to discuss our latest energy campaign: “Nuke the Mandate, Free the Nukes!”
Remember to LIKE, SHARE, COMMENT, and SUBSCRIBE so you never miss an episode of the American Experiment Podcast. We’ll see you next Tuesday afternoon!
Find the full audio show wherever you get your podcasts including:
Apple Podcasts, and Spotify!
Check out our NEW legal podcast: The rationally Based Podcast
Follow The American Experiment on: Twitter/X, Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok
00:00 - Welcome back!
00:33 - Senate passes a bill spending $40 million on rent assistance
02:17 - Who came to testify for this?
08:22 - Will this strategy work in 2026?
10:29 - Erin Maye Quade is quite upset...
12:17 - Is EMQ Minnesota's AOC wannabe?!
15:42 - DFL Rep wants to "raise revenue" (i.e. your taxes)
19:15 - Sen. Andrew Matthews joins the show!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#minneapolis #governorwalz #walz #minnesota #legislature #capitol #mn #republicans #democrats #politics #gop #dfl #stpaul #culture #politics #fraud #corruption #committeemeeting #hearing #aoc #taxes
Hello and welcome to the American Experiment Podcast. Uh we are a little bit shorthanded today, but we're gonna pull it off with uh your host here, Bill Walsh, Center of the American Experiment, and uh producer Isaac will we'll we're gonna have to play a role. We got producer Cam going. Uh so Isaac and I, the guys are in charge of the podcast this week. Uh uh uh Grace and Catherine are uh off on special assignment, um, and they'll be back uh next week. So we're gonna dig right in, dive right into content. Uh this will be a kind of a short front end and then a great interview with Senator Andrew Andrew Matthews uh after after this segment. So last week at the legislature, uh the Senate uh passed a bill uh to provide forty million dollars in rental assistance to essentially poor families. That's the way they wrote it. Now they're they're trying to react to Operation uh Metro Surge, and so the the idea is that uh folks had to stay home, didn't have to, were scared into staying home, um, couldn't go to work, uh, or or owned a restaurant or worked in a restaurant, didn't go to work, um, and so now can't pay their rent. And so we're gonna provide rental assistance,$40 million of rental assistance. Um again, they they didn't really mention metro surge in the legislation. Here's who qualifies uh families that make less than 200% of the federal poverty guideline, and then quote, have experienced financial hardship after August 31st, 2025, including but not limited to loss of income or unemployment, or are at risk of experiencing housing instability or homelessness, including but not limited to risk of lease termination or eviction. So the idea is we scared everybody into staying home uh because of metro surge. Now they can't pay their rent, so the solution is to just do temporary rent relief,$40 million, uh, to help uh folks that are just gonna apply for this$40 million. Uh we're not even gonna get into the the fraud opportunities here uh in this. Well, maybe we'll get close to that, but uh in one of the questions that came up, I think we hit this on the podcast last week, is Senator Draskowski in committee uh asked the question, well, what about illegal immigrants uh living in Minnesota today? Would they be eligible for this program? The answer was yes, they'll be eligible for that program. So we're again trying to help our neighbors. We've we've used that phrase neighbors a lot, they use it at the Capitol all the time, um, who can't pay to rent because they were too scared to go to work and now can't pay their rent. So one of the interesting things we looked at is nobody came forward to testify in favor of the bill that maybe would qualify or would apply for rental assistance. So a lot of times at the Capitol, you you know, if you if you got a bill that helps a certain group of people, you have some of those people show up and testify and say, here's my story. I need the rental assistance. But we didn't get that in the in the hearing uh in the Senate uh leading up to this. We did get a parade of people testifying for the bill that work for nonprofits, that work for government agencies, um, the the usual uh uh round of suspects uh testifying for a bill, uh handing out money at the legislature. And we're gonna roll a little tiny clip of just some of the people that testified in beh in favor of the bill. This is a great um microcosm of what happens at the Capitol every day. Uh you've got all these groups, uh advocacy groups at the Capitol, prep lobbyists that are hired, ready to testify, ready to ask for stuff, and and you go to committee meetings and it's the same groups over and over and over asking for money uh to help people, um, and very few citizens asking for money or or citizens asking to not spend money. So I just thought we'd do a little quick montage. I think there were a dozen groups that testified. Again, no no individual person said, Hey, I stayed home, I was scared, I'm not gonna be able to pay my rent, this bill will help me. We had nobody say that. We had we had leaders of groups, lobbyists on behalf of groups, uh testifying in their behalf. Isaac, just roll a little clip that uh you prepared with a little quick montage. I think we did three or four of these, but there were there were a dozen at this hearing.
SPEAKER_01My name is Stephanie L. Lewis, and I am the Associate Vice President, Advocacy and Community Impact at Greater Twin Cities United Way.
SPEAKER_02Nonprofit United Way, always at the Capitol.
SPEAKER_00My name is Juan Luis Iberas. I'm a coalition organizer with the Alliance for Metropolitan Disability and a member of the Equity in Place Coalition.
SPEAKER_02Coalition, uh uh, you know, what what was Obama? He was here, stop the tape one second. What was Obama? Community organizer. That was a real live community organizer you saw there. That's what these guys are all out. They're all community organizers. All right, sorry, keep going.
SPEAKER_08I'm Stamborski. I live in South Minneapolis, and I'm the co-founder of the largest mutual aid network in the metro area, neighbors helping neighbors.
SPEAKER_02All right, stop the tape. Quick. So this is as close as we get to a real person who needs the help. She's she pretends to be from a group, Neighbors Helping Neighbors. Um, mutual aid. They they they they title their stuff mutual aid as if it was official. It's just like you say, neighbors helping neighbors. So she was maybe as close as we got to somebody with a real life story about people that might need this help. Okay, good, keep going. We have one more.
SPEAKER_03My name is Nelima Setati Mulene. I'm the executive director of the African Korea Education and Resources Inc.
SPEAKER_02Okay, so that's just a quick example of the uh nonprofit groups that are gonna be first in line, applying for these grants on behalf of people, handing out the money, and here we go with the fraud and everything else. But I think it's just important to say that you know not one person came forward and said I would benefit from this uh from this thing. And you know, this it's it could be a tough conversation. Certainly uh families lost breadwinners in Operation Metro Surge. But there's there's kind of two types of breadwinners. If if your breadwinner was a criminal illegal alien um here illegally, and now you want the state of Minnesota to help you cover rent uh for because that breadwinner is gone, I don't think you're gonna get the sympathy of the Minnesota taxpayer. If your breadwinner wasn't a criminal illegal alien beyond the first crime of crossing the border illegally and however they entered the country and the state, that might be a more difficult challenge, but the result's the same. If we're gonna have a logical and ordered immigration uh policy in the country, we can't we can't cover rent for people that are here illegally because they're here, they've been here for a long time and we you have empathy for them. And this is kind of what's happened. Um the political left, I think, did these families a great disservice, and we've been doing it for a decade or more, where we allowed all these people into the country, especially during the Biden administration. We are just look the other way on their immigration status and just assume that no one would ever uh ask them or no one would ever hold them accountable or would never come back to bite them. And now when it has, when that when a president comes in and is actually enforcing immigration policy, the answer for Democrats is let's take money from other people,$40 million, and provide rent relief uh temporarily. It's not it's not even permanent, it's a temporary thing, it's a band-aid. But here's what does it get at the empathy argument. So this is this is setting up the election. Now we're always setting up the next election while we're in we're in the legislative session. So Senate Democrats are gonna characterize Republicans who oppose the bill, and they did this, and you'll see them in a minute, on the heartless and cruel. Why why do you want to deny these people money? Um, and then they rely on that empathy vote from swing voters in the state of Minnesota. Um and then they hope to win the next election. So the next clip, and I'm I'm talking too much here, Isaac, you gotta help me. You gotta you gotta jump in here, but any any reactions you have uh to the to the montage you did or to what's happening in the Senate right now, uh jump in anytime.
SPEAKER_05Well, it just seems like another example of these nonprofits coming in and funding a bill that ultimately punishes the people who did get up and go to work and is paying their rent when it's every no one enjoys paying rent. No one enjoys going to work to pay rent, but people do it. And now there's a bill to help illegal immigrants who were scared and didn't, right, rightfully scared because they are here illegally. I mean, it just it seems to me as an another example of the state and these legislatures punishing the people who do get up and do it the right way.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, and again, they're gonna they're gonna rely on the heartstrings, you know. Oh, why wouldn't you want to help people, you know? And they they talked all about um the struggles people are having to pay rent and to buy a house. All true, all real problems and challenges in Minnesota, but to tackle them with a$40 million band-aid based on metro surge is not the kind of leadership you need out of the Senate. But this is this is the first thing they're doing. This is the first bill they passed, their first big foray into this into the policy. And I'm gonna show the next clip is our our favorite. We've we've clipped her before. Senator Aaron May Quaid from Apple Valley. Um, this is the what we've been talking about a lot here in the podcast and in our writing about setting up election messages. And so the Democrat election messages mainly Donald Trump is bad. You you should hate him. And if you don't like Donald Trump, vote for our candidates for the legislature. So you're gonna hear a lot about that. And then and then secondly, we're gonna try to milk the surge and and the immigration issue um and how people retreated um for as much as we can, even though the the memories are fading and we're getting further and further away from the the height of that as we head towards the October or November election. So here is Senator Quaid uh um on the floor. Oh, what's the thing?
SPEAKER_05Just a quick question, Bill. You've been in the legislature a while. Was this a strategy by the Democrats during Bush, when Bush was in office, to attack the president and vote for our candidates instead at the state level, or is this a new thing we're kind of seeing with kind of the hatred and you know, Trump derangement syndrome, all that, or is this an old strategy?
SPEAKER_02No, I think I think this is new. I think Donald Trump is a unique, a unique uh American figure. Um I've said that before. Um there's no one like him, both in terms of um well, really just the people that really despise him and the Trump derangement syndrome. So I think I hope, and I'm an optimist, that when he's done with his three years here, the other three years of of Donald Trump, um and we elect somebody else, anybody else, a Democrat, a Republican, that we will have a bit of a return to sanity in the country. And um it's just I just can't believe they're gonna have the same kind of animosity to towards uh JD Vance or Marco Rubio uh or you know Ron DeSantis from Florida if another Republican wins the g wins the presidency. That kind of hatred is gonna be you know, yeah, sure they'll they'll oppose them politically. But no, I think um Trump is very unique in that way. I mean, we've had terrible elections. The 2006 election was really bad because Bush was president, we're in the middle of the Iraq War. It was it was just awful for for Republicans. But I don't remember legislatively the Democrats on the floor of the Senate taking on the Bush policies uh directly by name, like they're gonna like we're gonna see in this clip. Uh so why don't we run the first uh clip from Senator Aaron May Quaid?
SPEAKER_06All while gutting Medicaid, cutting SNAP, emergency rental assistance, emergency energy assistance, lie heap, rural hospital funding. We've had the net worth of millionaires go up 120 percent, while literally not one working family in my district can say that that's true. And then on top of that, we've seen Trump and Republicans withhold funds to counter terrorism for children's mental health grants, the DOJ stop violence and federal police grants, the local food purchasing assistance program. It's been an economic siege, Mr. President. And then they send the armed, masked, lawless paramilitary to terrorize our streets, kidnap our babies, and murder our citizens with impunity.
SPEAKER_02All right, stop the tape there. So we'll take the last part first. I mean, this is that heated rhetoric, that over-the-top rhetoric, you know, kidnap our babies, you know, um, just uh federal law enforcement doing their job. Um just we've we've talked about this on the show many times. So she uses the heated rhetoric, but before that, just a long list of federal policies that she's upset with Donald Trump and the administration in DC. So you're just setting it up. It's like we that that's what they're gonna try and run on. That's what this whole bill is about. You know, can we just have 40 million? I think she says that next time, can we just have all we want is 40 million? Well, you're not taking it from the feds, you're taking it from other Minnesota taxpayers uh to to to to do this rental assistance thing. But you know, you I think you're right, I think it is new that that we've got Senate Democrats on the floor um uh you know talking about the evils of the many times you go to call call it of order, a point of order on the floor and said, Hey, can we stick to the bill? You know, this is not Congress, and we're not talking about legislation that involves Donald Trump here. Uh, but they they kind of allow a lot of that now on the on the floor of the House and Senate. All right, let's run the next clip too. She kind of just keeps going on the same theme and and says some other all the greatest, newest talking points from the left on uh from out of DC. We can we can hit them all in one little hit here with Aaron Makewait.
SPEAKER_06Tariffs which have been ruled illegal taxes, taking at least one thousand four hundred dollars from every family. We don't like the tariffs in the country. While we have a war that nobody can explain why we're in it, costing us a billion dollars a day. War in Iran, 93 billion dollars for crabs and luxury goods to decorate the Pentagon, we don't like Pete Heggs.
SPEAKER_02We don't like Cash Patel.
SPEAKER_06All while we're trying to get$40 million out to the Minnesotans who have suffered under this absolutely cruel and unnecessary economic regime of this administration.
SPEAKER_02Stop the tape. So again, more heated rhetoric, but again, the laundry list of federal talking points that you're hearing if you watch CNN or any of the the national shows, you know, and we don't even have time. I mean, I I I I don't think any Republicans on the Senate floor stood up and said, Well, Senator Make Wade from Apple Valley uh asked a question about why we're fighting the war in Iran right now. Here are the reasons. Let me lay out the foundation for world peace that we're trying to achieve through uh crippling the Iranian regime and their ability to build nuclear weapons. And you know, it's it's insane. So nobody nobody bothered to do that. Nobody bothered to say the the the crabs for the military was for troops, which is a very normal thing to do when you're in theater, when you're fighting and you're away from home. They bring in dinners once in a while uh to make you feel like home for the guys that are suffering and dying uh for our freedom. They do steak and crab and lobster dinners for the troops. This is not Heg Seth in his office having uh crab dinners every every night or lobster dinners every night. But the but the town the the talking point sounds great, so she uses it. Uh just really, you know, and then and then the whole you know anti-rich, tax the rich um um rhetoric um that that they're so good at. And so that's this is what you're setting up for this for this debate. Uh they're still with their eye on October, absolutely.
SPEAKER_05And I wish she showed half as much passion about you know all these the laundry list of things as she did or as she would show for the Minnesota fraud that went on. I mean, we didn't hear a peep out of her, we didn't hear like half as much pet, we didn't hear a floor speech, we didn't hear any so much as a blue sky tweet from her about the about the fraud that happened in Minnesota that cost us nine, ten billion dollars, and all of a sudden uh it just it's just to me, she wants to be AOC so bad. And she might take that as a compliment. That probably was a compliment to her, but it's the overheated rhetoric, the exaggerations, the reckless abandon for what's true, not true, whatever. Um, it just it reminds me a lot of AOC.
SPEAKER_02I think you've stumbled onto something there. AOC wannabe. I think you're right. Um EMQ, that's if she goes by the C. I mean, I I think that might be the title of this podcast. I mean, uh we've found ourselves an AOC um wannabe here in Minnesota. That's that's a really good point. Uh all right, last clip. Uh this is a short one and not uh related to anything else we've been talking about, but this is this was all over the uh the Twitters, and so we have we had to deal with it during our podcast, even though it's a little bit old. It's from 1990 to see the video clip I'm gonna show you. This is from the newest member of the Legend of the House, representative Nicolai from St. Paul. She replaced Holly Herbu, who was elected to the mayor of the St. Paul. So they had a special election to replace her. She's brand new to the legislature. And this is a short clip that went everywhere because she's she's talking about quintupling vehicle registration fees or license plate fees. Um that's that's what got a lot of the attention, but I want to hit on a couple other points and why don't you say a short clip? Why don't you go ahead and roll it, Isaac?
SPEAKER_07Enable us all to agree on the importance of raising revenue. And so I at some point may offer an amendment to quintuple the rates of these registration fees so that we may find other projects in the state that everybody deems worthy.
SPEAKER_02All right, stop the tape. So yeah, quintuple license plate charges. That's that's gonna get the news, that's gonna get people excited. Sure, I get it. But she said a couple other things in that short little clip that are very kind of you hear this a lot at the Capitol. We all agree on the importance of raising revenue. It's like, oh, stop the tape. No, we don't. We don't all agree on the importance or necessity of raising revenue. So many legislators are so fixated on the revenue side and never on the cost-cutting side. They just say, Well, we need more money, we've got to find new creative ways to raise revenue. No, we don't. We have way too much revenue. Revenue has gone up every year in the state budget. That's whenever revenue problem, we have a spending problem. So she's kind of says that like everybody agrees. And then same thing at the end, at the end of her sentence, we've got to quentuple these rates to get money to spend on things that everybody deems worthy. So, well, hold on a second. That's the essence of the battle at the legislature is what things do we all deem worthy, or do we deem worthy and then fight with each other over what actually gets funded? But in her mind, everybody deems these things are worthy of funding, right? We all agree. By the way, Democrats say that, right? Right? You agree with me, right? She didn't do that, but a lot of them do. So there's just two like tiny little clip there. Uh we all agree on the importance of raising revenue. No, we don't. And we're gonna spend it on things that we all everybody deems worthy. That's that's the debate. There's not there's not a list of things that everybody agrees or deems that are worthy of spending, and that's the problem at the Capitol. Too many people have that list, and frankly, there's too much agreement on what that list is, and not enough people saying, No, stop spending on that. That's not the role of government, and by spending on that, you're actually wrecking things on the other side.
SPEAKER_05So and it can't be said enough. Revenue is money out of your pocket. Revenue to them is money that you earned at work coming out of your pocket. To and let's not forget, what they deem worthy right now is$40 million to pay rent for people who are scared to go outside when IC was here. So it that's ridiculous. Yep.
SPEAKER_02Uh yeah, ref, yeah. Not enough people believe what you just said, Isaac, that work at the Capitol or that have election certificates down at in St. Paul. So, well, thanks. This has been a short version of the front end of our of our podcast uh today. Uh Isaac, you and I have not have not ruined it enough uh so that when Grace and Catherine come back, they'll be upset with us. I think we've uh comported ourselves well, uh, although be it short. Uh a couple of little stop the tapes uh for uh how to keep people going until we get the full team back next week. Um so thanks for for watching this, and then stay tuned for the interview uh that that Grace and Catherine did with Senator Andrew Matthews. He's the chief author of our of our Free the Nukes bill of part of our campaign, Nuke the Mandate, which is the renewable energy mandate that we're stuck in, that that everyone in the rest of the world is going away from. We're in it. Um and then uh free the nukes, meaning allow for new nuclear power to be discussed. Senator Andrew Matthews has that bill and he'll discuss it next with uh Catherine Grace. Stay with us.
SPEAKER_10American Experiment is supported by thousands of individuals like you. To join the movement, go to www.americanexperiment.org and click the yellow donate button. From all of us here, thank you. We are happy to welcome to the show this week Senator Andrew Matthews. Senator Matthews has served in the Minnesota State Senate since election in 2017. He represents SD 27, which includes communities in Benton, Cannebec, Malac, Morrison, Sherburn, and Wright counties. He is the Republican lead of the Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate Committees, and also serves on the Human Services, Elections, and Ethics Committees. More importantly, though, you are the chief author of FSF 2953, which would finally eliminate Minnesota's moratorium on new nuclear energy. Senator Matthews, welcome to the show. We're so glad to have you.
SPEAKER_04Thank you so much for having me.
SPEAKER_09We love to hear from people, first of all, of how you got to where you are now. So tell us a little bit about how you got into politics and what led you to run for office.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, uh, it was always a passion of mine to, since I was even a young kid, to know that in order to keep the freedoms that we have in this country means we have to keep good people getting elected into office. And so from a young age, I just jumped in, uh, was able to get involved locally, help my uh local legislators in parades uh with some campaigning. Started getting plugged in uh through my teens and twenties, and uh thought, yeah, maybe sometime down the road opportunities will come up. And uh that happened in for the 2016 cycle, a lot earlier than I was uh anticipating. Um there's an open seat in my area and and uh gathered my family around uh to pray about it. And long story short, was privileged to get elected uh at the age of 29 and have uh been serving this area for about 10 years now, and it's just an absolute privilege to represent my district down at the Capitol.
SPEAKER_10Now, how did you get interested in energy issues specifically? Because that's how we first got connected with you, uh, was your work on ending, finally ending Minnesota's moratorium on new nuclear power. Where does that interest come from?
SPEAKER_04Yeah, it was something that I learned quickly because my district includes the city of Becker, uh, which has the Shirco uh coal plants. And I've been through a number of uh energy related local issues that we've been working on. Um, ten years ago, it was they were going to retire the coal plants. Uh, my first bill that I actually worked on was to help them be able to put a gas plant. On that site. And that bill got through and signed into law, and then afterwards the company decided to go a different direction, make other plans with what they're going to do resource-wise on that site. And so just figuring out helping the local community working through what they're going to do as they're coming up to Shirko retiring over the next few years has been a really big local issue. And so just with how significant it is in my district, it's gotten me plugged in on a lot of energy policy issues. And I've been on that committee for my entire time. And then starting in 2023, I've been the GOP lead on the energy committee.
SPEAKER_09Yeah, tell us a little bit about what you're seeing in that committee so far and what you anticipate to come in front of the committee. Obviously, we want to focus in on that nuclear moratorium in a minute, but what else are you talking about this session?
SPEAKER_04Well, under the Trifecta, they passed a whole lot of really bad energy bills. Top of the list was the 100% mandate. We called it the blackout bill back in that term. Uh, that's going to require all energy being generated in Minnesota has to be from carbon-free sources. And it's an effort to continue uh the shutdown of a lot of legacy baseload energy plants like our coal plants. Um it's even winding down uh some gas plants. And the emphasis is going a lot towards uh more wind, more solar. Um lot of people think that uh this bill, the 100% law, means we won't have uh any more coal energy anymore. What it's actually going to mean because we're in a large like 14-15 state regional grid is we will still be powered by uh coal energy and a lot of the other uh baseload generating sources, and we'll still be powered it but quite a significant margin. We'll just have to be paying for it to be shipped in from other states uh instead of having the benefit uh and the jobs and the tax revenue of it being locally generated here.
SPEAKER_09Aaron Powell But that's how the Democrats work. It's like the the bill has good vibes, so they're like, okay, like this fits with our narrative, but like we're not gonna tell them about the other part, you know?
SPEAKER_10Yeah, it's frustrating because it's the it's the kind of issue that, like you were saying, on its on its face value, surface value to so many Minnesotans, it sounds like a nice thing. Why would we not invest in renewable energy? You know, the wind and the sun are are free. But it comes at a much higher cost to consumers. And Minnesota is seeing that in higher electric prices than our neighboring states.
SPEAKER_04Aaron Powell That's exactly it. And we haven't even gotten to all of the mandates of the 2040 law kicking in, and we're already seeing our energy prices uh going up uh as some of the the wind down uh and some of these pieces are getting added to it. You know, I've even looked at my own energy bill uh about a year ago. I compared the January of that year to the January of the year before, and noticed that even my own per unit price for energy uh had gone up by quite a significant percentage uh just in a 12-month period. And that's what families are facing all over Minnesota. And uh I think those costs are only going to continue to go up as we wind down uh a lot more of the energy generating sources we've had in our state and have pushed us to the intermittent weather-reliant energy sources like wind and solar that are in our state, and then filling it in with um base load that will have to now be partially backfilled from other states.
SPEAKER_09Aaron Ross Powell Well, and it seems to me that if um we had nuclear energy, we would be more able to um accomplish that goal of clean electricity by 2040, but instead um it's gonna be really difficult with winter and solar, maybe even impossible. So let's talk a little bit about the nuclear moratorium because it seems totally counterintuitive to me. Tell us a little bit about what that means and uh why people are defending it.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, great question. Uh I have authored a bill to repeal the nuclear moratorium for quite a few years, even before the 100% law got enacted under the DFL trifecta. Uh but ever since it has, I have consistently given them the message that repealing the moratorium is now even more important today than it was prior to enacting the 100% law, because uh nuclear is about the only remaining baseload energy generating source that meets the 100% carbon-free criteria under that law. And so uh the reason we have the moratorium is because uh we have two existing nuclear plants right now in Minnesota, one in Red Wing uh at Prairie Island, and one in Monticello at the Monticello nuclear site. And in the early 90s, I think both those plants were about 10, 15 years at the time, the legislature decided to enact uh the nuclear moratorium to prohibit the construction of any new nuclear plants. And uh part of that was uh due to concerns with the relationship uh with the Prairie Island Indian community, uh which is still a really uh front and center issue as we're talking about uh the moratorium today. Uh but I know that that played a role in it, and uh I still have a couple members um that are serving with me that were back there in the 90s that voted for the moratorium and have continued to hold that position uh even today.
SPEAKER_09Um we've learned so much since then about nuclear, I feel like. I mean, there's so many of those old perceptions that still people hang on to after seeing some of the tragedies that came out of nuclear energy, but it's totally it's a totally different landscape today.
SPEAKER_04It is. Uh nuclear technology has advanced quite a lot. Um, the way that we uh protect ourselves, the way that uh they have safety protocols in play, the way that they comb over and check uh the sites that we have anytime there is any kind of um uh issue with a nuclear plant in another nation or things like that. They've gone and done robust checks to make sure that we have uh absolute certainty uh in the safety of the nuclear sites that we have here. Um and so some of the main objections are just some people just don't like nuclear. Some people have uh some level of fear about it, uh concern about it. Yes, it is nuclear energy, and there are uh, you know, there are they believe that there are some risks with that, uh, which uh is about as safe as we can have it, just with how uh technology and the safety issues have grown with that. And the other big thing is the question of what we'll do with uh nuclear waste. And right now we're basically just storing it on site uh near those um near the current existing nuclear plants. You know, hopefully there will be some federal solution that will have uh a large depository uh somewhere that people can transport their waste to to not have it uh on our land. I think that future generations of nuclear energy will look at how we can even repurpose some of that waste and reuse it again, extract more energy out of some of the fuel that's been used. Um all of that's still down the road. So uh I've seen I think the the biggest concerns right now is uh what we do with the waste, and then some that I think just continue to have fundamental opposition to nuclear energy.
SPEAKER_10Can you explain a bit more about the opposition to nuclear that has existed in Minnesota, you know, like you were saying, since the nineties. Why it to me it doesn't make sense. Why would very specific small communities have such uh an outsized impact on whether or not Minneso the state of Minnesota as a whole can have nuclear? I mean, because that it's a statewide, uh it's a statewide moratorium. It's not a moratorium just for the you know the configuring prairie island community, for example.
SPEAKER_04Correct. Yep. Uh it is a statewide moratorium. Uh I think a lot of my colleagues on the DFL side still uh point to the Prairie Island relationship uh as a deciding factor for them. And so uh in talking about trying to get the nuclear moratorium lifted now, uh like I've been in negotiation uh and and several of us have talked with them, like can we work out uh some deal that will have whatever protections they might want to have for their own community that's in place? And I've been urging them, like I think you're in a really good position right now with a 50-50 house, with a very closely divided Senate, uh, that they could get uh a deal that would be really good for their community, uh, that would have protections in place, whether it's maybe some uh some geographic uh protections around uh their the the tribal lands that they own or control. Um, you know, that's what I've been asking them to think through. What would it look like that would be good for you guys? We just quite haven't gotten there yet. Um I know that many of my Democrat colleagues deep down agree with this and know that we need to uh remove this moratorium and have all the tools available in the toolbox, uh, but they keep pointing to this one. I keep urging them like there's even a growing number of left-wing groups and environmental groups and all of that that are stepping forward saying we absolutely need to repeal this and have this available uh for energy planning and generation into the future. Um and I I keep nudging uh Senator Frentz, who's the chair of the committee right now, like you have a whole bunch of your friends that are saying do it, and you're still waiting for uh this one other group uh before you're deciding to move forward.
SPEAKER_09That's so interesting. So, what is their fear with the the storage of the waste? Because I've heard that's pretty safe too. Is there their what is their fear exactly?
SPEAKER_04I think it's not wanting to end up being an extra storage site for nuclear waste from other locations.
SPEAKER_01Okay.
SPEAKER_04Uh which I completely understand from their perspective and I think could be easily taken care of in the planning process of any new nuclear facilities that we would uh potentially build in this state. Um so I'm li I've I've tried to talk through like, hey, let's come up with language or a plan where we can have that in writing and make sure that that uh is taken care of. So that's what I'm trying to work towards uh and see if uh we can get to some agreement. You know, I th I think we're we're that agreement away from I believe this passing both the House and Senate by probably a good strong bipartisan margin.
SPEAKER_09Wow, that's incredible. Yeah, and and what kind of impact would that have on consumers if this did pass? Because it seems like I I think it's sometimes hard for people to understand, you know, like, well, where does my electricity come? Where does my energy come? What what what's the impact that consumers would see if we got rid of that moratorium? And would it take a long time for people to see that impact?
SPEAKER_04Yeah, it does take quite a while. Um the energy planning life cycle is quite a bit of time. So uh I keep I keep urging our committee members, 2040 is 14 years away from where we're sitting now, but it's almost getting too late to make an impact by the time all those mandates kick in if we don't get this done really soon. Uh and so yes this this would not be mandating or requiring energy plants, but it would allow uh energy companies, our utilities, uh uh sometimes even our co-ops to look at what they want to do or maybe buy into. It would give them the option of presenting a plan to the Public Utilities Commission of here's what we're looking at, here's what a proposal would be. Still has to go through all the rigorous um requirements for making these plans uh with the regulators at the Public Utilities Commission. Um but and and I know that uh a nuclear plant's uh not necessarily a cheap plant to build, but the advantage that nuclear will have is it is um it is clean, it is reliable, it is basically max generation for what you build, you get basically that full capacity. And I've you I've used the analogy this way. It's like going to the grocery store to buy a gallon of milk, and if if the jug being the source of energy that you're using, and so nuclear, the jug will always pretty much be full because it will have that consistent uh full energy generation. Wind and solar is like going to the store and you buy a gallon milk jug, but it's only about 25% full in there because the amount that you build, it's weather dependent, um, so you don't get the full amount of energy generation uh on the capacity you build. And so that's an advantage with nuclear uh that I want to see have the option to grow here because we do need uh that strong foundation of base load generation for full power, uh consistent generation day or night, not weather dependent, all of that. That's what uh the grid needs as a foundation. And then if you like renewable energy, that is all fine and good. You know, it is very easy to add on some wind, add on some solar, have that be able to supplement uh when the weather conditions are good for that. Um but having uh that solid baseload foundation is important here locally, and if we're not generating it here, then we're having to pay the price of having it shipped in uh from other states.
SPEAKER_10That's so silly. Yeah, right. It's almost comical how advantageous nuclear is compared to other energy sources, especially wind and solar. I mean it's um it's not just clean, it's not just reliable, it's not just more affordable, but it's also takes up so much less land when you look at land use uh compared to like wind and solar. Um and it's the lifetime uh it has a much longer lifetime of operation than wind or wind and solar. Wind and solar, you have to constantly be maintaining and recommissioning and decommissioning. And nuclear, it's it's it's not even close. Yeah, it's just it's just not even close. So it's so it's so funny to me and it's so frustrating that it's taken people on the left, more broadly, not just in Minnesota, but you know, in America as a whole, to come around on this issue. It seems like in their minds it's only been wind and solar are the option for years.
SPEAKER_04I agree. Um couple years ago we had uh a nuclear professor come and present uh to the energy committee, and this is before um back when the Republicans had the majority uh in the in the chamber, and uh he made a phrase that I've never forgot. He said, if you are if you are serious about uh clean energy and you're concerned about climate change, but you have a nuclear moratorium in your state, then that shows that you're actually not serious about those issues. Yeah, so that you need to have that. And so to have a hundred percent mandate in our law and also have a nuclear moratorium in our law just makes no sense.
SPEAKER_10There is also such a lack of understanding, I think, from Minnesotans to this day of like how strict, how overly strict our state's regulations for a safe environment are. I mean, we truly have some of the we have some of the highest standards in the country for protecting our environment and protecting our natural spaces. And if nuclear was to new nuclear was to be built in Minnesota, it should be built in Minnesota almost more than any other state because we would do it so safely here.
SPEAKER_04There's very strict state regulations uh and state oversight, very strict federal regulations that it would all fall into and the whole plan and the costs and all of that need to be basically worked on and proven ahead of time. Uh and so uh I am confident, like I I've I keep using the analogy, we need all the tools in the toolbox. And right now we just have this arbitrary law that says, well, you can have some of these tools, but you can't have this one, and now the 100% law, you can't have uh all of these other ones either. Um so this is just an effort uh for an all of the above strategy, have every tool available in the toolbox, and then uh our energy companies can figure out which one is the cheapest for each part of the state and how we can deliver uh the demand that customers and consumers across the state will need to use.
SPEAKER_09Well, Grace, if I was uh just a normal person who wanted to learn more about nuclear and maybe take action, maybe you know, support nuclear somehow, how would I go about doing that?
SPEAKER_10I am so glad you asked, Catherine. We have launched a new campaign called Nuke the Mandate, Free the Nukes here at Center of the American Experiment. If you want to learn more about that initiative and take action, contact your legislators, contact Governor Walls. You can go to freethhenukes.com, freethenukes.com and learn more and take action.
SPEAKER_04I love that slogan. I wish I had thought of it. So that is awesome. That's exactly uh the way we need to go. We won't tell Bill Walsh, she said that he has his head's too big already.
SPEAKER_10We wanna let him know. That was a pretty good one. Of course, the nuclear moratorium is not the only thing you're working on at the session this year. Are there any other initiatives you want to uh highlight before we wrap up today?
SPEAKER_04Yeah, um you know I will put in a bill for uh repealing the 100 percent law. It's unfortunately not gonna go anywhere uh under our current climate uh and our current political environment. Uh but there's gonna be a lot of growing concerns as we get closer to 2040 uh that some uh energy utilities either the big utilities or I think even our small uh munis or co-ops in rural areas are either gonna have trouble meeting that standard or it will be extremely expensive for them to meet that standard. Uh so that's gonna be a concern. Uh we'll also be looking at uh some of the data center law fixes that we didn't quite get through last year. I went from authoring uh the first data center bill to help uh in my district where we need to build things with the retiring coal plant, and uh the left just came and intercepted it and made a whole big mess out of it, and the final bill had a lot of, you know, a few good pieces and a lot of bad policy that was in that. I ended up voting against it. Uh, and we'll be back at that to try to help make it uh better for communities, especially host communities that have retiring energy plants. Uh this could be extremely important uh to help backfill the revenue loss, some of the job loss, some of the the economic support that it gives those communities. So uh we'll definitely back at that again and then uh trying to fend off more bad energy policy that they keep wanting to push from the left.
SPEAKER_09Wow, we might have to have you back to talk about data centers because uh we have talked about this a lot internally and just the pros and cons, and there's obviously a lot of pros, but I personally I'm also I see a lot of cons, and and I think you need the correct um regulations in place to make sure that it is just a benefit to the people of that community and not a negative. So we don't have to get into it now. But in the future, that's something for everyone to watch because we should have you back to talk about it.
SPEAKER_04I'd love to.
SPEAKER_10Thank you so much for coming on, Senator Andrew Matthews. We would love to have you back sometime.
SPEAKER_04Thank you. Thanks so much for having me.
SPEAKER_02Well, thanks for watching the American Experiment podcast this week. Uh stay tuned next week for the whole crew to return. And make sure you like, share, comment, subscribe, uh, like all the things uh and all the places that you get your podcast. Thanks.
