Skip to main content Skip to office menu Skip to footer
Capital IconMinnesota Legislature

Compromise in works over Iron Range unemployment benefits

A series of bills and amendments being discussed in the House Ways and Means Committee March 14 are part of the unemployment benefits extension for Iron Range workers. Photo by Paul Battaglia
A series of bills and amendments being discussed in the House Ways and Means Committee March 14 are part of the unemployment benefits extension for Iron Range workers. Photo by Paul Battaglia

(UPDATED WITH COMMITTEE VOTE)

An agreement could be in the works to bring financial relief to northeastern Minnesota iron workers who have exhausted their unemployment compensation.

Sponsored by Rep. Pat Garofalo (R-Farmington), HF2032, as amended, would provide 26 weeks of additional unemployment insurance benefits to “an applicant who was laid off due to lack of work after March 1, 2015, from an iron ore mining industry employer or from an employer that is a supplier of goods or services that are directly related to the extraction or processing of iron ore.”

House Ways and Means Committee - part 1 3/14/16

It would also ensure that the state’s unemployment insurance trust fund remain solvent, with new calculations put in place to better monitor the fund levels.

Garofalo suggested the new language came after talks between House and Senate leadership over the weekend.

The House Ways and Means Committee approved the potential agreement Monday and sent it to the House Floor.

House Ways and Means Committee - part 2 3/14/16

The issue became a political football with Republican demands that any extension to unemployment funds also address the financial levels of the state unemployment fund, which Garofalo has described as “morbidly obese.” The fund — financed through a tax on employers — has an estimated balance of $1.6 billion.

Last week, the Senate passed and sent to the House SF209, which only addressed the benefits possibly delaying action on the measure. The committee also amended this bill to conform to the House language and sent it to the House Floor.

Rep. Tim Mahoney (DFL-St. Paul) expressed concern about the lack of public transparency in the process. “The sad part is that this became such a political football that it had to go into the backroom to reach a compromise.”


Related Articles


Priority Dailies

Could 2026 retirements lead to record turnover in the House?
Twenty-six current Minnesota House members have announced their retirement from the chamber after the 2026 session. (House Photography file photo) In the final weeks of the legislative session, House members not seeking re-election to the body have taken a turn at gaveling in a floor session. It’s an opportunity to loo...
How short are the Legislature's short sessions?
The Minnesota House of Representatives in session Feb. 6, 2025. (Photo by Michele Jokinen) Rep. Ron Kresha (R-Little Falls) was ready to end the session March 25, making the motion to adjourn sine die. But not enough of his colleagues shared that sentiment, defeating ...