Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. (To contribute, click here.) This article is a response to Star Tribune Opinion's June 4 call for submissions on the question: "Where does Minnesota go from here?" Read the full collection of responses here.
•••
Progress — and Minnesota's future — must start with an honest appraisal. Amid the post-session victory or grievance commentaries, it can be hard to find a clear-eyed assessment.
The truth is, we are not One Minnesota right now. When we view each other primarily through the lens of red or blue, urban or rural, ''us'' or ''them,'' it is difficult to achieve our objectives across political, geographic, class or racial lines.
One objective that will define our future and require greater unity is our ability to navigate the transition to cleaner energy.
About 98% of Minnesota's landmass is classified as rural. Energy generation requires rural water, land and workers to meet the demands of a greener economy. Urban energy transitions are impossible without rural resources and people.
Yet rural communities and Native nations are too often sidelined in the conversations that directly impact them. Right now, these groups sometimes get an invite to the energy dinner but they are relegated to the kids' table in the corner when the meal is served. They should be full partners in the effort from the outset.
The failure to work as a cohesive state costs us all. Urban and rural areas are more interdependent than most people realize. A study by the University of Minnesota showed that our urban regions receive substantial economic benefits from the prosperity of their rural neighbors. Rural growth of $1 billion in the manufacturing sector alone grows urban jobs 15%, while a comparable decrease in rural manufacturing costs urban Minnesota 1,000 jobs and $207 million.