If only someone had tried to warn the State of Minnesota about its paid family leave bill.
Someone like, say, every competent economist and budget analyst in the state, and every single elected official in the party that represents half of the state's population (and way over half of the state's small business owners), and every pundit that doesn't shout "how high, sir?" when the DFL (Minnesotan for "Democratic Party") says "Jump", I mean.
Two years ago, during the "trifecta", when the DFL held the "Trifecta" (control of the House, Senate, and the Governor's office), among the raft of big-money social spending and (let's be honest) graft and fraud fodder they jammed down was a "paid family leave" law. It provides most Minnesota workers - full or part-time - 55% to 90% of their income up to a cap of a little over $1,400 a week, for 12 weeks of state-paid leave (up to 20 weeks for extra conditions) for a long menu of things; personal or family medical issues, maternity, bonding with a baby or adopted child, domestic violence or other safety issues, military deployment, and more.
It's financed by a .88% tax split between the employer and employee, which is the least of the costs. The law also requires reinstatement, and for the employer to see to covering the employee's job while they're out. It doesn't specify how many people can care for the same family member - literally dozens of people could get leave to "care for" a single person. And - in case you're not convinced yet - the law requires any collection actions for false claims be dropped after three years. Which basically makes fraud legal and impossible to prosecute.
And the list of people above - including David and I? We did try to warn people. I've personally seen small businesses pack up and leave the state.
And now, even the state's infamously tame media is noticing there just might be a problem
Minnesota businesses are facing significant hurdles with the state's new Paid Family and Medical Leave Act, just two months after its implementation. https://t.co/dhDv6yBKwp
— FOX 9 (@FOX9) March 11, 2026
The [Minnesota Chamber of Commerce] highlighted several concerns, including the program's complexity, slow execution, and disruption for small or seasonal businesses. There are also worries about potential misuse and long-term financial sustainability.
"Beyond just anti-fraud sentiments, employers are reporting a few concerning trends, a few examples. Providers are being pressured by patients for the full 12 weeks of leave, even if their condition does not require it. A number of respondents have shared that their employees are making more on paid leave than the wage replacement thresholds in law," said Lauryn Schothorst of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce. "Employees are going on vacation or to music festivals while supposedly on leave. These anecdotes don't necessarily reveal fraud or a lack of oversight by the department. They highlight concerns with the broad eligibility and limited employer recourse elements of the law. To employers, overuse is abuse," said Lauryn Schothorst with the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce.
In a note utterly related to the program's complete unsustainability, it's already running out of money, and talk has turned to raising the tax to support the program.
A couple of weeks ago, Program Director Greg Norfleet and Department of Employment and Economic Development Deputy Commissioner Evan Rowe testified before the Minnesota House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee and reported that: “As of Feb. 15, nearly 48,000 applications had been submitted, with decisions made on about 31,000. More than 20,000 have been approved.” That works out at an approval rate of 435 each day (20,000 / 46). This is 24% above the rate of 352 approvals dailt forecast by DEED when the scheme launched (128,338 / 365).
Of course, having people sign up for any program is considered success with these sorts of things, regardless of real-world sustainability.
If only someone had told them...
