Minnesota ranks No. 1 for youth voter turnout in 2024 general election

posted in: All news | 0

Minnesota took the top spot in the nation for youth voter turnout in the 2024 general election, according to a recent study by Tufts University.

The April 15 study by Tufts shows Minnesota voters ages 18-29 had a 62% turnout rate in November’s general election, surpassing other states in the study as well as the national turnout rate of 47%. Maine followed at 60% and Michigan came in third at 58%.

The study doesn’t have data for some of Minnesota’s neighboring states, but estimates Iowa at 54% and Illinois at 41%.

“Minnesotans have a long tradition of voting in sky-high numbers, and I’m thrilled to see that tradition continue in the next generation,” Secretary of State Steve Simon said in a news release on Thursday. “Here in Minnesota, we’re proud of the strong laws and culture that support civic participation for eligible voters and ensure that our elections are free, fair, and secure.”

Minnesota narrowly lost the No. 1 spot for overall turnout to Wisconsin, with Minnesota at 76.35% and Wisconsin at 76.64%, with national turnout at 64.04%, according to the University of Florida Election Lab.

Related Articles


Hegseth Said to Have Shared Attack Details in Second Signal Chat


Will the MN Legislature pass a bonding bill this year?


The ‘return’ of an extinct wolf is not the answer to saving endangered species, experts warn


Senate president faces scrutiny, MN lawmakers say ethics rules need a look


Anti-Trump protesters rally in Minnesota and across U.S. ahead of Earth Day

November’s general election marked the first election with an expanded pool of eligible voters in Minnesota after the new “Restore the Vote” law reopened eligibility for an estimated 55,000 to 57,000 Minnesotans with past felony convictions.

“While we’re disappointed to have barely come up short in our effort to stay #1 in overall voter turnout, we are proud we got so close even as we gained many new eligible voters in 2024,” Simon said in the news release. “I’ll happily take the trade of ceding the top spot so that more Minnesotans could regain the right to vote. Now, the work continues to regain our spot as #1 in 2026.”

Proposed NOAA cuts put Great Lakes research, safety at risk, experts say

posted in: All news | 0

ON LAKE SUPERIOR — Researcher Jay Austin and crew members of the Blue Heron used a crane to lower a weather buoy into Lake Superior off the shore of Two Harbors, Minn., earlier this month. Then they dumped a pair of steel train wheels overboard to anchor the maroon-and-gold buoy as it transmits real-time data to shore until it is retrieved in the fall.

The Blue Heron, a former Atlantic Ocean fishing boat repurposed into a research vessel for the University of Minnesota-Duluth’s Large Lakes Observatory, will return to the lake in a few weeks to deploy two more buoys that will, like the first, relay basic weather conditions. However, those two will also be able to measure water temperature down to a depth of 40 meters and measure waves.

The buoys are part of a network across the Great Lakes that provides the National Weather Service with offshore conditions, feeds data-hungry forecast models, gives researchers access to valuable data and allows anyone to check real-time conditions before they go for a swim or take out their boat.

“So much of the stuff I put out here will be available at the National Data Buoy Center — assuming they exist next week — for free,” said Austin, a professor at UMD’s Department of Physics and Astronomy and Large Lakes Observatory. “They don’t pay me anything to provide that data to them. I provide it to them as a service. I do that because the Great Lakes Observing (System), or (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), or Sea Grant, or whatever, funds me to do that.”

Professor Jay Austin checks data onboard the Blue Heron on April 11, 2025, before deploying a buoy that gathers weather data from western Lake Superior for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association. (Clint Austin / Forum News Service)

However, like anything receiving federal funding these days, the future of Great Lakes research is uncertain.

The Trump Administration’s Office of Management and Budget proposed slashing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s 2026 budget by 27% — from $6.1 billion to less than $4.5 billion — according to an internal memo obtained by the San Francisco Chronicle and other news organizations.

The memo, a “passback,” is a response by the White House to NOAA’s initial budget request and is not final, but experts say the funding cuts it outlines would jeopardize the future of research on the Great Lakes and the safety of recreational and commercial users on the lakes.

Sea Grant programs, the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, Coastal Zone Management Grants are all not funded in the passback. All of those conduct work in Lake Superior, along its north and south shores, and in the estuary.

The passback also “eliminates all funding for climate, weather, and ocean Laboratories and Cooperative Institutes,” the memo said. That includes the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory in Ann Arbor.

Data from Great Lakes buoys are processed at the Great Lakes Observing System, or GLOS — a nonprofit organization housed in NOAA’s Ann Arbor lab — then made public on the Seagull website.

GLOS serves as the Great Lakes’ regional association under NOAA’s Integrated Ocean Observing System. However, the passback “provides no funding for the Integrated Ocean Observing System Regional Observations,” according to the memo.

“If that were to happen, we would have to pull instruments from the water,” said Jennifer Boehme, CEO of GLOS. “We would have to take a look at how much we can continue to support Seagull with live observations and Seagull could go dark because we would no longer have the funding to support that.”

Boehme said the organization received almost its entire $4 million budget from NOAA grants to cover basic operational expenses, develop flood models and install “cutting-edge sensors into different locations for monitoring purposes.” The grants, among other uses, also help the organization monitor harmful algal blooms and coastal flooding, she added.

Both Boehme and Deanna Erickson, director of the Lake Superior National Estuarine Research Reserve in Superior, said they expect cuts could take effect in 2025 and not wait until 2026.

The passback memo said the Office of Management and Budget expects the Department of Commerce, which NOAA belongs to, “will exercise all allowable authorities and flexibilities to align the 2025 operating plans with the 2026 Passback” and shift funds from what’s cut “to areas that are protected or increased.”

The Lake Superior Estuarine Research Reserve, a center of the University of Wisconsin-Madison Extension and part of NOAA’s National Estuarine Research Reserve System that is set to be cut under the passback, is appropriated $881,000 from NOAA with a 30% match from UW-Madison, Erickson said.

The research reserve also has $4.7 million in grant awards, primarily from NOAA, with some funding also coming from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

“That’s what enables us to track algae blooms, to track short- and long-term changes in water health,” Erickson said of NOAA funding.

Erickson said the Research Reserve, together with Sea Grant, the EPA, the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and other partners, “form an interconnected web that gets this work done, that brings economic benefits at a really efficient rate to our community and all of those pieces working together is really beneficial to Lake Superior, to the St. Louis River Estuary.”

John Downing, director of the Minnesota Sea Grant at the University of Minnesota, said during President Donald Trump’s first term, his administration “gave Sea Grant a zero budget every one of those four years.”

“And because Congress is charged with actually handing out funds, Congress put us back into the budget every one of those four years,” Downing said. “So it comes as really little surprise, and we’re aware that people are trying to cut costs in a variety of places.”

NOAA provides $1.5 million in funding annually to the Minnesota Sea Grant, and Downing is trying to make the case that every dollar spent with Sea Grant is worth it. According to Downing, for every dollar Sea Grant receives, it’s leveraged 35 times.

Sea Grant, like the other Great Lakes organizations receiving NOAA funding, works on Lake Superior buoys, water science and recreational safety. It also helps establish or boost industries like maritime tech and aquaculture in the state.

But Downing said, unlike the first Trump term, “things are more complicated now.”

Still, he said, everyone in Minnesota’s Congressional Delegation — both Republicans and Democrats — supports Sea Grant.

The Wisconsin Sea Grant declined an interview request.

Democratic U.S. Sens. Tammy Baldwin, of Wisconsin, and Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith, of Minnesota, signed a letter last month to Vice Admiral Nancy Hann, NOAA’s acting administrator, urging continued support for NOAA funding for the Great Lakes.

The office of U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, the Republican congressman who represents Northwestern Wisconsin and the South Shore of Lake Superior, said in a statement Thursday that the impacts of the budget were unclear, noting it was still a proposal.

“Representative Tiffany recognizes the value of NOAA’s work in the Great Lakes region and is reviewing the proposed budget closely,“ his office said in an emailed statement.

U.S. Rep. Pete Stauber, a Republican from Hermantown, and U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., did not respond to the News Tribune on whether they supported the cuts outlined in the NOAA passback memo.

Larry MacDonald, the former mayor of Bayfield and chair of the Wisconsin Coastal Management Council, said he wants the public to reach out to U.S. senators and representatives “to encourage them to leave us alone.”

The Wisconsin Coastal Management Program provides funding for coastal wetland protection, trails, playgrounds, handicap-accessible facilities and other work along the state’s Lake Superior and Lake Michigan shorelines.

But NOAA’s passback would eliminate those funds.

“In another year or two,” MacDonald said, “it’ll be a very sad time if there’s no coastal management program dollars being distributed on Lake Michigan and Lake Superior.”

Austin, the UMD researcher, said without federal funding, there aren’t enough state and private funds to replace what would be lost.

Related Articles


10 Minnesota environmental nonprofits join forces for Earth Day fundraiser


The ‘return’ of an extinct wolf is not the answer to saving endangered species, experts warn


Hoping to install solar? You may have a harder time due to Trump tariffs


Law firms, universities and now civil society groups are in Trump’s sights for punitive action


As demand for AI rises, so do power thirsty data centers

“We do not have a culture of privately-funded research in the Great Lakes,“ Austin said.

As the Blue Heron sailed back to port and approached the Superior Entry, Austin gestured toward a handful of small fishing boats off the shore of Minnesota Point on a relatively calm Lake Superior.

“They’re out here today because they looked at an app yesterday that said it’s going to be a nice day … they’re probably looking at the wind off of our buoys in the morning,” Austin said.

Hegseth Said to Have Shared Attack Details in Second Signal Chat

posted in: All news | 0

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared detailed information about forthcoming strikes in Yemen on March 15 in a private Signal group chat that included his wife, brother and personal lawyer, according to four people with knowledge of the chat.

Some of those people said that the information Hegseth shared on the Signal chat included the flight schedules for the F/A-18 Hornets targeting the Houthis in Yemen — essentially the same attack plans that he shared on a separate Signal chat the same day that mistakenly included the editor of The Atlantic.

Hegseth’s wife, Jennifer, a former Fox News producer, is not a Defense Department employee, but she has traveled with him overseas and drawn criticism for accompanying her husband to sensitive meetings with foreign leaders.

Hegseth’s brother Phil and Tim Parlatore, who continues to serve as his personal lawyer, both have jobs in the Pentagon, but it is not clear why either would need to know about upcoming military strikes aimed at the Houthis in Yemen.

The previously unreported existence of a second Signal chat in which Hegseth shared highly sensitive military information is the latest in a series of developments that have put his management and judgment under scrutiny.

Unlike the chat in which The Atlantic was mistakenly included, the newly revealed one was created by Hegseth. It included his wife and about a dozen other people from his personal and professional inner circle in January, before his confirmation as defense secretary, and was named “Defense | Team Huddle,” the people familiar with the chat said. He used his private phone, rather than his government one, to access the Signal chat.

The continued inclusion following Hegseth’s confirmation of his wife, brother and personal lawyer, none of whom had any apparent reason to be briefed on operational details of a military operation as it was getting underway, is sure to raise further questions about his adherence to security protocols.

The chat revealed by The Atlantic in March was created by President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz, so that the most senior national security officials across the executive branch, such as the vice president, the director of national intelligence and Hegseth, could coordinate among themselves and their deputies before the U.S. attacks.

Waltz took responsibility for inadvertently adding Jeffrey Goldberg, editor of The Atlantic, to the chat. He called it “Houthi PC small group” to reflect the presence of members of the administration’s “principals committee,” who come together to discuss the most sensitive and important national security issues.

Hegseth created the separate Signal group initially as a forum for discussing routine administrative or scheduling information, two of the people familiar with the chat said. The people said Hegseth typically did not use the chat to discuss sensitive military operations and said it did not include other Cabinet-level officials.

Hegseth shared information about the Yemen strikes in the “Defense | Team Huddle” chat at roughly the same time he was putting the same details in the other Signal chat group that included senior U.S. officials and The Atlantic, the people familiar with Hegseth’s chat group said.

The Yemen strikes, designed to punish Houthi fighters for attacking international cargo ships passing through the Red Sea, were among the first big military strikes of Hegseth’s tenure.

After The Atlantic disclosed that Hegseth had used Waltz’s Signal group to communicate details of the strikes as they were being launched, the Trump administration said he had not shared “war plans” or any classified information, an assertion that was viewed with tremendous skepticism by national security experts.

In the case of Hegseth’s Signal group, a U.S. official declined to comment on whether Hegseth shared detailed targeting information but maintained that there was no national security breach.

“The truth is that there is an informal group chat that started before confirmation of his closest advisers,” the official said. “Nothing classified was ever discussed on that chat.”

Sean Parnell, chief Pentagon spokesperson, did not respond to several requests for comment before this article was published.

After it was published, Parnell responded on social media. “Another day, another old story — back from the dead,” he wrote. “There was no classified information in any Signal chat, no matter how many ways they try to write the story.”

The “Defense | Team Huddle” Signal chat until recently included about a dozen of Hegseth’s top aides, including Joe Kasper, Hegseth’s chief of staff, and Parnell.

The chat also included two senior advisers to Hegseth — Dan Caldwell and Darin Selnick — who were accused of leaking unauthorized information last week and were fired. Caldwell and Selnick were among three former top Pentagon officials who proclaimed their innocence in a public statement Saturday in response to the leak inquiry that led to their dismissals.

On Sunday, another former Defense Department official, John Ullyot, who left the department last week, said in an opinion essay for Politico that the Pentagon “is in disarray under Hegseth’s leadership” and suggested that Trump should remove him.

When Goldberg released details of what Hegseth put into the Signal chat created by Waltz regarding the upcoming strikes in Yemen, Trump defended him and said he had done nothing wrong.

In a statement, Anna Kelly, a White House spokesperson, did the same after the latest revelation. “No matter how many times the legacy media tries to resurrect the same nonstory, they can’t change the fact that no classified information was shared,” Kelly said.

Some congressional Democrats said it was fresh proof that Hegseth should be removed.

“Every day he stays in his job is another day our troops’ lives are endangered by his singular stupidity,” said Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., a combat veteran.

Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the senior Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, added: “If true, this incident is another troubling example of Secretary Hegseth’s reckless disregard for the laws and protocols that every other military service member is required to follow.”

While the Signal chat created by Waltz for senior officials was criticized for sharing details of a military operation on an encrypted but unclassified app, the participants — other than Goldberg of The Atlantic, who appears to have been added accidentally — were senior government officials with reason to track the progress of the attack.

But some of the participants in the group chat created by Hegseth were not officials with any apparent need to be given real-time information on details of the operation.

Jennifer Hegseth has drawn attention for the access her husband has given her. Pete Hegseth brought her into two meetings with foreign military counterparts in February and early March where sensitive information was discussed, a development first reported by The Wall Street Journal.

Parlatore, who has been Pete Hegseth’s personal lawyer for the last eight years, was commissioned as a Navy commander in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps about a week before the Yemen strikes were initiated.

In an interview before rejoining the military, Parlatore told The New York Times that he would work with Hegseth’s office to improve training for the military’s uniformed lawyers.

Hegseth’s brother Phil works inside the Pentagon as a liaison to the Department of Homeland Security and as a senior adviser to the defense secretary.

One person familiar with the chat said Hegseth’s aides had warned him a day or two before the Yemen strikes not to discuss such sensitive operational details in his Signal group chat, which, while encrypted, is not considered as secure as government channels typically used for discussing highly sensitive war planning and combat operations.

It was unclear how Hegseth, a veteran and former Fox News host who before his confirmation in January had never previously served in a high-level government position, responded to those warnings.

Many of those in Hegseth’s inner circle during his first months in the Pentagon were combat veterans with deep experience in the military but little firsthand knowledge of how the government operates at the highest levels.

Several of these staff members encouraged Hegseth to move the work-related matters in the “Defense | Team Huddle” chat to his government phone. But Hegseth never made the transition, according to some of the people familiar with the chat who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

The Pentagon’s acting inspector general announced earlier this month that he would review Hegseth’s Yemen strike disclosures on the Signal chat that included top Trump aides.

“The objective of this evaluation is to determine the extent to which the secretary of defense and other DoD personnel complied with DoD policies and procedures for the use of a commercial messaging application for official business,” the acting inspector general, Steven Stebbins, said in a notification letter to Hegseth.

It’s not clear whether Stebbins’ review has uncovered the Signal chat that included Hegseth’s wife and other advisers.

Stebbins started the review in response to a joint bipartisan request from Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the Republican chair of the Armed Services Committee, and the committee’s ranking Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island.

Beyond the controversy of the Signal chat, Hegseth’s office has been shaken by the sudden firings of Caldwell, Selnick and Colin Carroll, all top advisers to the defense secretary. They were escorted from the Pentagon last week after being accused of leaking sensitive information.

The dismissals and turmoil around the inspector general’s investigation have raised tensions and prompted talk of more resignations, according to current and former defense officials.

Among those considering leaving are Kasper, Hegseth’s chief of staff, who helped lead the leak investigation that resulted in his colleagues’ dismissal but has not been implicated in wrongdoing, according to senior defense officials.

In the wake of the report in The Atlantic disclosing the first Signal chat, Hegseth and other senior administration officials repeatedly denied that any classified information was shared among the participants.

Related Articles


The ‘return’ of an extinct wolf is not the answer to saving endangered species, experts warn


Andreas Kluth: The US has Greenland (and foreign policy) exactly upside down


Other voices: Judge Boasberg is right to seek contempt against Trump officials


States push Medicaid work rules, but few programs help enrollees find jobs


Republicans in Congress are eyeing cuts to Medicaid. But what does Medicaid actually do?

“Nobody was texting war plans, and that’s all I have to say about that,” Hegseth told reporters. At a Senate hearing, Tulsi Gabbard, director of national intelligence, echoed Hegseth’s assertion that no classified information was shared.

But other former senior defense officials said texts describing launch times and the type of aircraft being employed before a strike would be classified information that, if leaked to the enemy, could have jeopardized pilots’ lives.

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

Foul play not suspected in deaths of 2 in vehicle at St. Paul shopping center

posted in: All news | 0

Police are investigating the deaths of a man and a woman found in a vehicle in St. Paul’s Highwood neighborhood on Sunday, which they said do not appear suspicious.

Officers responded to the Shamrock Plaza shopping center at McKnight and Lower Afton roads about 5:25 p.m. on a report of two people who were in a vehicle and possibly deceased, said St. Paul police Sgt. Toy Vixayvong.

St. Paul Fire Department medics pronounced both people dead at the scene. “Officers on scene did not see any signs of foul play,” Vixayvong said in a statement.

The Ramsey County Medical Examiner’s Office is assessing the situation, according to Vixayvong.

Related Articles


Authorities asking for help finding woman believed held against her will


Four-alarm fire destroys multiple buildings on Renaissance Festival grounds


Ramsey County to pay $3.6M to family of hemophiliac who died after 2022 arrest, jailing


After fire at St. Paul church, owner wants to secure steeple, return to ministering


Steeple fire at historic St. Paul church likely sparked by lightning