SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
minnesota
Why Guaranteed Income Is the GOAT
Minnesota's three-year-old Guaranteed Income for Artists pilot program offers a small yet mighty payment that has unlocked creative freedom and opened new opportunities that ripple through our communities.
Nov 21, 2024
If you were driving by a remote stretch of Minnesota County Highway 210—connecting Wahpeton, North Dakota and Fergus Falls—you would see a massive billboard depicting a painting of three goats. It looks out of place—colorful and vibrant on a desolate stretch of highway mostly used by westbound truckers and locals. On the top left-hand corner of the billboard rests a stark reminder to anyone looking up: "In rural we tend to the herd."
My wife and I share a farm with Edith, Willa, and Milagro—our three goats and the willing subjects of the billboard—and 10 laying chickens, two inside dogs, and three outside cats. As a recipient of Minnesota's three-year-old Guaranteed Income for Artists pilot program, I was inspired to create the billboard as a tribute to the state's guaranteed income pilot, which tends to the community and is changing the lives of artists like myself.
Since moving to Otter Tail County in 2017, I've deepened my connection to the land and the rhythms of rural life. I am attuned to the changing of the seasons, and the serene landscape outside my windows becomes inspiration for paintings in my home studio. Living in a rural setting provides the space I need to get into the creative flow. And the quiet, slower pace of life has unlocked the creative freedom to make my large-scale narrative paintings.
As policymakers and community leaders consider implementing guaranteed income programs, I hope they look to Minnesota's example.
But making a living as an artist in rural Minnesota is no easy feat. It often requires having many different income streams to stay on top of student loans, car payments, and grocery bills. So, when I received an email telling me I had been chosen by lottery to participate in a new pilot providing guaranteed income for rural artists, I breathed a sigh of relief.
The program is set to expand, soon providing no-strings-attached $500 monthly payments to 100 artists for five years—far exceeding typical 12-18-month pilots. This growth cements its position as the nation's longest-running guaranteed income pilot focusing on both urban and rural creators. For me and my fellow artists, this small yet mighty payment has unlocked creative freedom and opened new opportunities that ripple through our communities.
As Minnesota finds itself in the national spotlight following Gov. Tim Walz's candidacy for Vice President, our state's innovative approaches to social and economic policy are garnering renewed attention. As of 2024, 10 states have introduced legislation attempting to ban guaranteed income programs. The misplaced fear stems from ideological and economic concerns about the effects of guaranteed income even though more than a dozen studies have shown that it leads to higher employment rates, housing and food security, and more family time.
When artists have the freedom to create and engage, we become catalysts for positive change that benefits entire communities. Take Jess Torgerson, a multidisciplinary artist and community organizer in Fergus Falls, Minnesota. Before the guaranteed income program, Jess was working 60 hours a week. Now, she has partnered with another artist to create sculptures from found materials, simultaneously making art and ridding her community of unwanted waste. Then there's Torri Hanna, a fiber artist. The program helped Torri and her daughter improve their living situation and stabilize her yarn store business. Torri, too, has expanded her community involvement, working with the local senior center to create art for downtown storefront windows.
Recent data from the program shows its remarkable impacts. Participants reported a decrease in financial stress, an increase in their ability to pay for basic needs, and an increase in their ability to take on creative and community projects they wouldn't have otherwise pursued. The success of Minnesota's program is part of a larger movement, with over 100 pilot programs across the United States testing the impact for different groups of people. Programs like the Works Projects Administration coming out of the New Deal made it possible for artists to make a living and beautified our nation's infrastructure. We have a history to look back on in guiding public investments in artists—we already know that investing in artists pays back manifold.
In my community, we understand the value of tending to the herd—and we've all taken an important lesson from Edith, Willa, and Milagro, who sit in formation with their backs to each other so that they can share body heat, and each can observe a different direction to keep an eye out for threats. Our communities are strengthened when we tend to each other with the same dedication. This, to me, is what guaranteed income does for artists. It says, "We've got your back."
As policymakers and community leaders consider implementing guaranteed income programs, I hope they look to Minnesota's example. Include artists in your pilots. Recognize the unique value they bring to your communities. Understand that by supporting artists, you're nurturing the creativity, resilience, and interconnectedness that make our communities thrive. In Minnesota, we know that the strength of the herd depends on how well we tend to each individual. We know our rural parts of the state enable our strong urban centers to thrive. As you consider the future of your own communities, look out for each other. Share your warmth. Face different directions, but always stay close and connected.
Keep ReadingShow Less
I Want What Minnesota Has for Michigan—Kamala Harris and Tim Walz Are Our Best Shot
I certainly do not agree with Harris and Walz on every issue, but since electing them is one step closer to climate progress, free school lunch, fast trains, and legal weed, I will be voting for them on November 5.
Nov 02, 2024
During my childhood, one consistent theme was bragging to family and friends out of state about Michigan’s lakes, great and small. I remember being horrified when I got to college in Chicago and met a Minnesotan who was equally proud of her lakes and believed they had more lakes and better hockey.
Eventually, I got over the lake contest to focus on protecting freshwater for everyone, but in 2023, I became green with envy for what Minnesota has anew.
Under Gov. Tim Walz, Minnesota passed one of the most impressive legislative packages in the United States, developed by a diverse coalition of climate experts, transit activists, union leaders, and racial justice organizers over years.
When I think of Minnesota today, I think of learning from them about the future we deserve.
I want to achieve what Minnesota signed into law with a one-seat Democratic majority in Michigan—and I believe it’s possible if we elect the Harris-Walz ticket on November 5.
Gov. Walz signed a renewable energy standard into law in Minnesota, even while supporting the best green bank law in the country, with strong labor and environmental justice standards, to implement and maximize the Inflation Reduction Act signed into law by U.S. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. As our air is sullied by Canadian wildfires and our water is threatened by agricultural runoff, Michigan needs stronger standards too.
Thanks to Walz’s leadership, no kid in Minnesota is hungry at school, with free breakfast and lunch guaranteed to students. Some don’t need it and bring their own lunch, but guaranteeing full bellies will keep kids healthy and help them learn. No student in Michigan should be hungry during math class either, and Harris has already put forward policy proposals. That would be an excellent start at reducing food prices.
Minnesota has also passed arguably the best transportation policy in the country, pushed by legislators and advocates for safe streets and celebrated and signed by the governor. This bill would prioritize projects that protect clean air, expand freedom of movement, and reduce traffic too.
Imagine if Michiganders could take a reliable train home from the bar or have the option to take a speedy bus to work if a car was in the shop. We need policies like this that benefit people in Michigan and across the country. Harris was inspired by these efforts and picked Walz in part to invest in clean transportation and safe streets.
Minnesota also legalized marijuana, and under Gov. Walz’s leadership, they didn’t stop there. They created an office to expunge records of people impacted by over-criminalization of weed and provided incentives and benefits for impacted families to get a head start in the legal marijuana business. Our state incarcerates far too many of our neighbors, and many more would be supportive of recreational use and growing the tax base. Vice President Harris has echoed that she would support legalization, and creative public policy work like that in Minnesota is what will be needed to do so in an equitable way in states like ours.
I certainly do not agree with Harris and Walz on every issue, but since electing them is one step closer to climate progress, free school lunch, fast trains, and legal weed, I will be voting for them on November 5.
I still brag about Michigan and Detroit-style pizza to anyone who listens, and I still play pond hockey in February with my siblings when I can. I’m even still riding our Lions’ win over the Vikings to be first in the conference.
But we all deserve healthy kids and safe streets, so when I think of Minnesota today, I think of learning from them about the future we deserve—and I believe it is within reach.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dems Are Afraid Gaza Will Cost Them the Election. They're Not Afraid Enough.
The ‘Gaza Effect’ may be much larger than anyone expects. Unless they change course, the Democrats are much likelier to lose in November than most people seem to realize.
Oct 18, 2024
It should be self-evident that genocide is bad because it’s genocide, but apparently it isn’t—at least, not to everyone. There is, however, another reason to demand an immediate ceasefire: Unless they change course, the Democrats are much likelier to lose in November than most people seem to realize. That thought should terrify anyone who dreads the prospect of another Trump presidency—potentially with control of both houses of Congress.
A recent poll from the Arab American Institute (AAI) 1received some much-deserved attention (if not enough) because it showed a massive decline in support for Democrats among Arab American voters because of White House support for Israel’s attack on Gaza. That decline could cost the Democrats several swing states.
The AAI poll has, it seems, gotten some Democrats’ attention. The Washington Postreports that this voter shift is a “huge concern” for a Harris campaign that, in the Post’s words, “sees the images of dead civilians as complicating her path to victory in key swing states ...”
Democrats could conceivably recover many of these votes, but it would require concrete action.
That’s a rather cold-blooded way for the Post to phrase it, but it’s certainly accurate. As an unnamed advisor to the campaign told the Post, “It comes down to people saying, ‘I can’t support anyone who supports a genocide.’”
The problem is even bigger than they think. The U.S.-backed violence in Gaza will also cost the Democrats votes in other groups—I estimate more than 60,000 total lost votes in Michigan alone—losses that could demolish Democrats’ chances in November.
Arab-American Voters in Swing States
The AAI poll showed Trump leading Harris by 46 percent to 42 percent among Arab American voters, a dramatic shift from Biden’s lead of 59 percent to Trump’s 35 percent at the same point in 2020. (This polling was conducted before Israel attacked Lebanon, where ongoing events may make these numbers even worse for Democrats.)
To explore the impact of this shift on swing states, I put the AAI’s new polling numbers into a spreadsheet, cross-tabulated them with the total number of eligible Arab American voters in swing states, and used past Arab American voter participation rates to estimate the shift in votes,
(Note: The AAI was kind enough to provide one data point for this effort, but the consultant in me demands that I point out a) that these are approximations based on available data, and that b) that any errors are mine alone.)
That said: There are more than 750,000 Arab Americans of voting age in swing states. Based on AAI’s polling shift, Democrats could lose between 115,000 and 130,000 Arab-American votes in these states.
If the losses were proportional to the voting-age population by state, Democrats could lose:
- 50,000 votes in Michigan
- 10,000 votes in Pennsylvania
- 50,000 more in other swing states
That’s 100,000 swing-state votes lost because of the ongoing U.S. support for carnage in Gaza.
But Arab Americans aren’t the only voters Gaza will lose for Democrats.
A surprising number of people, including some news staffers, tend to conflate Arab Americans and Muslim Americans. That’s a major mistake. Most Arab Americans are Christian, while only about one in four is Muslim.
Conversely, while Muslim-American census information is hard to come by, an analysis of immigration data suggests that most Muslim Americans are not of Arab descent. Among immigrants, who comprised roughly 60 percent of Muslims in that study, South Asians were the largest group, making up roughly one-third of the Muslim-American population, while approximately one in four came from Arab countries. That leaves many lost votes uncounted.
How many Muslim-American votes could Democrats lose over Gaza?
Many Muslim Americans strongly identify with the plight of the Palestinian people. How would that affect the vote?
In 2018m Pew Research reported there were 3.45 million Muslims in the U.S., a figure that was growing rapidly. To estimate Muslim votes at the state level, I extrapolated from a 2020 survey of religious institutions conducted by the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies (ASARB).
(I made sure not to double-count Arab-American Muslims and I subtracted people too young to vote. I can go through my methodology online if people are interested.)
Assuming Muslim Americans vote at the same rate as most Americans rather than at the unusually high participation rate seen among Arab Americans, that comes to approximately 40,000-50,000 additional lost votes in swing states.
And it matters where those votes could be lost. ASARB’s data includes state (and county) level totals. So, by my calculations, that means an additional 11,000 votes lost in Michigan, between 6,000 and 7,000 in Pennsylvania, 6,000 in North Carolina, and 5,000 in Arizona.
Other Vote Losses
There are other votes to be lost, too, most of them among Democrats’ core demographics.
Young voters? A University of Chicago survey found that “college students remain significantly more likely to support Palestinians than Israel, and significantly more likely to take action on behalf of Palestinians in the form of discourse or protest.”
Black voters? Another survey found over two-thirds of Black Americans (68 percent) “want an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, with a plurality (46 percent) strongly supporting the idea.” It also found that 59 percent believed conditions should be placed on U.S. military aid to Israel.
What about Jewish voters? There’s no sign they’re shifting to Trump on this issue. Seventy-one percent of swing-state Jewish voters say they plan to vote for Harris. Could a ceasefire cost her a chunk of these votes? There’s no evidence for that. Israel only ranks fourth in importance among these voters—behind “the future of democracy,” abortion, and “inflation and the economy.”
And some of these voters oppose Israel’s actions.
Besides, as the lead pollster noted (and which I repeat with a kind of familial pride), most Jewish Americans despise Trump. In his words, “Trump is as hated in the battleground states as he is hated in the general population among Jewish voters.”
Is It Too Late for the Democrats?
Here’s what won’t win these votes back: more empty words and rhetorical feints. Take, for example, a “stern” letter to Israeli Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant that became public after what looks like a calculated “leak” from the State Department. The letter, signed by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, asserts that the White House may invoke U.S. law against providing arms to Israel unless it eases its stranglehold on Gaza aid within thirty days.
Would the Democratic Party rather lose this election than end the U.S.-backed killing in Gaza? If not, there may still be time to stem its losses.
This move seems unlikely to win many hearts and minds, given that:
- As recently as August, “The top U.S. official working on the humanitarian situation in Gaza told aid groups in August that the U.S. would not consider withholding weapons from Israel for blocking food and medicine from entering the enclave”;
- the White House had issued empty ultimatums like this before; and,
- the deadline falls after the election, which understandably heightens skepticism.
Democrats could conceivably recover many of these votes, but it would require concrete action. The steps they could take include, for starters:
- an immediate halt in arms shipments;
- the delivery of food, medicine, and other humanitarian supplies within 48 hours—hand-delivered by the U.S. military, if necessary;
- a demand to end the IDF-backed settler violence against the people of the West Bank.
Would the Democratic Party rather lose this election than end the U.S.-backed killing in Gaza? If not, there may still be time to stem its losses. But the hour is late—and it grows too late every day for more of the innocent victims of Gaza.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular