Presidential elections always have trickle-down effects for states, but never has Minnesota seen a bigger potential change to state government than in this election. If Vice President Kamala Harris wins, Gov. Tim Walz will become vice president, and Minnesota will get a new governor, the current Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan.
Walz is trying to become the third vice president from Minnesota, something put in motion by his summertime selection by Harris to be her running mate.
But two very different scenarios await Walz this week; he could either move into position to be sworn in Jan. 20 as vice president or he could return to Minnesota to finish out his second term — and decide about a third term — should Donald Trump win the election.
Depending on what happens in the legislative races, Walz could once again lead a DFL trifecta with complete party control over legislation. Or he could return to the days of his first term with a divided Legislature.
In contrast, Walz could set off a game of falling dominoes by resigning as governor, turning over the office to Flanagan to be the state’s first woman governor and the first female Native American governor in the U.S. Flanagan’s ascension would trigger the swearing in of Senate President Bobby Joe Champion as lieutenant governor and, depending on the timing of Walz’ resignation, trigger a special election for Champion’s north Minneapolis and downtown Senate seat.
Timing is crucial, because if the DFL wins a special state Senate election in District 45, the above described dominoes could leave the Senate tied, 33-33, until that special is concluded. Walz could possibly wait until after the Legislature convenes Jan. 14 to allow the Senate to organize with a DFL majority before Champion’s own resignation.
Incumbents safe, but what will Congress look like?
Control of Congress is at stake in Tuesday’s elections, with the strong possibility of a historic “double flip.” That would mean Republicans would lose control of the U.S. House and Democrats would lose control of the U.S. Senate.
A double flip would mean the next U.S. president would face a divided Congress, something that has stymied President Biden when Democrats lost the U.S. House in 2022, hurting his ability to advance his agenda.
Democrats’ majority in the Senate is functional at 51-49, while Republicans’ margin in the House is also slim. Democrats need to keep all of their seats and win five more to take control of the chamber.
That is not a given, but it is within the party’s reach. A Cook Political Report analysis of U.S. House and U.S. Senate races released Friday projected a GOP gain of between two and five seats in the U.S. Senate, which would give them a majority of between 51 and 54 seats.
While Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar is well positioned to defeat GOP challenger Royce White, a flip of the Senate would plunge her, and Sen. Tina Smith, into the minority, reducing their political clout.
In the U.S. House, the Cook Political Report projected a wider range of possible results – from a Republican gain of five to a Democratic gain of 10 seats, giving the party a 224-211 majority.
A flip of the U.S. House would hurt Donald Trump’s chances of pushing through legislative priorities if he wins back the White House. It would also demote Minnesota’s GOP House members to the minority, including Rep. Tom Emmer, who is serving as GOP whip.
Minnesota’s House incumbents are all favored to win and former state Sen. Kelly Morrison, a Democrat, holds an advantage over GOP rival Tad Jude in the race for the 3rd District seat that will be vacated by retiring Rep. Dean Phillips.
The Cook Political Report also predicted Democrats have a better chance of keeping Rep. Angie Craig’s 2nd District seat, moving its rating of that seat from “lean Democratic,” to “likely Democratic.”
Trifecta hangs in the balance
Since winning the majority at the 2018 election, the DFL caucus has controlled the Minnesota House. That election saw a reversal of a 20-seat GOP majority and gave the DFL its own 16-seat majority, which it saw shrink to six after the 2020 and 2022 elections.
But the difference between the 2018 and 2020 elections and the aftermath of the 2022 election is that the DFL won the majority in the Senate, crafting the first DFL trifecta — House, Senate and governor, in a decade. The legislative agenda of that trifecta is well known with sweeping legislation including paid family leave, gun safety measures, an expanded child tax credit, universal school lunch, abortion rights and more.
This election, both the House and Senate is at issue — the House with all 134 seats on the ballot and the Senate with a single special election but with the Senate currently tied 33-33. The party that wins the 45th Senate District race controls the Senate for the next two years.
Despite the breadth of the House races, only a handful are truly competitive with most attention and money focusing on about a dozen. The math is simple: If the GOP gains four seats, it controls the House, if it gains three seats, the body is tied, and if the DFL prevents that much turnover, it stays in control.
Statewide ballot measure
A constitutional amendment on the statewide ballot provides a couple of quirks that might confuse voters. Because it would extend a measure approved in 1988 that dedicates 40% of lottery proceeds to the Environmental and Natural Resources Trust Fund, some voters might think they have already voted on the issue.
Also, due to the way Minnesota’s constitution governs amendments, not casting a vote on the measure is the same as voting no. That’s because amendments must gain a majority of the voters taking part in the election, not just a majority of those voting on the amendment itself.
Backers therefore are working to assure that voters are aware of the issue in a crowded election year and know they need to vote yes if they want to give it the best odds of winning. When it passed during the same election that the lottery itself was created, it received 81% of the votes cast on the amendment itself and 77% of the total votes in that election.
The fund has raised $1 billion since its first funding round in 1991 for projects ranging from trail construction to invasive species research.
Minneapolis and St. Paul ballot initiatives
In Minneapolis, voters will be asked to approve a Minneapolis Public Schools levy increase. The district is asking for a $20 million increase to its technology levy. If passed, voters would increase the current levy by $20 million to a total of $38 million, over the next 10 years.
School officials say the original levy does not cover all of the district’s technology expenditures and that the district has pulled from its general fund in the past to offset that. With an expanded tax, the district says it can use the general fund dollars otherwise used on technology for other purposes, including operations. If approved, taxes on a $350,000 house would increase $96 per year.
In a Q&A with MinnPost earlier this year, Superintendent Lisa Sayles-Adams said, “I cannot talk enough about the tech levy ballot question,” noting that it will be a “big part” of the district’s budget strategy.
In St. Paul, voters are looking at two ballot questions. One is the approval of the mayor’s ability to employ an early child care tax that could ramp up to up to $20 million per year. This could amount to a total of $110 million over a decade. However, the mayor has said he will not employ this tax even if voters approve giving him the power to do so.
Also in St. Paul, voters are considering a referendum that would end St. Paul’s odd year elections and move those elections to even years. The idea is this would capture more voters during higher voter turnout years while also eliminating some city spending related to off-year elections.
But this second question has also received pushback. On Friday, a coalition of elected officials, faith, labor, voting rights, and community advocates urged Saint Paul residents to vote “no” on city question 1 and city question 2 on the November ballot. Opponents of the first question largely match the sentiments of the mayor. They oppose the second ballot question because, under current state law, the proposal to move these elections to even-numbered years would eliminate ranked-choice voting. They also say it would dilute these elections’ focus on local issues.
State Supreme Court
A year ago when Gov. Tim Walz made two appointments to the state Supreme Court, he also set up two elections for the state’s top court. The timing under which he promoted Justice Natalie Hudson to chief justice and his chief counsel Karl Procaccini to associate justice meant both would have to face voters this election.
Stephen A. Emery is challenging Hudson and Matthew R. Hanson filed against Procaccini. Neither Hanson nor Emery campaigns have filed campaign finance reports with the state Campaign Finance Board which means they have no activity.
The third justice on the ballot is unopposed Anne McKeig. Repeat challenger Michelle MacDonald, who is currently suspended from practicing law, was blocked from filing against McKeig and her appeal to the state Supreme Court was denied by a panel of special justices.
History might explain the lack of challengers. Herbert Kritzer, a professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota law school who has written extensively about judicial selection in the U.S., has found that a state Supreme Court justice hasn’t lost since 1946, and historians have to go back to 1916 to find another incumbent defeat. The code of judicial conduct also makes campaigns against incumbents awkward, as it prevents candidates from most direct fundraising activities or taking positions on issues that could come before their court if elected.
Peter Callaghan
Peter Callaghan covers state government for MinnPost. Follow him on Twitter @CallaghanPeter or email him at pcallaghan@minnpost.com.
Ana Radelat
Ana Radelat is MinnPost’s Washington, D.C. correspondent. You can reach her at aradelat@minnpost.com or follow her on Twitter at @radelat.
Winter Keefer
Winter Keefer is MinnPost’s Metro reporter. Follow her on Twitter or email her at wkeefer@minnpost.com.
