Minnesota Democrats are on a public relations blitz.
After an unusually productive legislative session, party leaders have made multiple trips to the White House and enjoyed victory laps in the national media. They've consistently used the shorthand "Minnesota Miracle 2.0" to describe their work, comparing it to the landmark policymaking years of the early 1970s.
"For the next 50 years, I hope people will benefit from and be able to brag about the benefits of this session," DFL House Speaker Melissa Hortman told the Star Tribune in May.
But how does this comparison hold up to scrutiny?
The "Minnesota Miracle" was coined to describe the 1971 session and subsequent special sessions tackling rising property taxes and massive disparities in education funding. What resulted was an overhauled government financing system that increased income taxes and the state's share of school operating costs while more equally distributing that funding to school districts.
Like DFL Gov. Tim Walz, then-Gov. Wendell Anderson was a Democrat who had just been comfortably elected to a four-year term. But back then, Anderson was battling to strike a deal with a Legislature completely controlled by the conservative caucus (essentially the Republicans, although the parties didn't use the same labels they do today).
Compromise was hard fought between the two sides, which spent months and multiple special sessions trying to come to an agreement. Walz worked this session with a DFL-controlled Legislature, although the party held the Senate by a single vote and could only lose two votes in the House. Work wrapped up on time — even slightly early.
"One of the truly miraculous aspects of the '23 session was the DFL leadership's ability to hold together their razor-thin majorities to achieve almost all of their initial objectives," said Dane Smith, who started a decadeslong career in the 1970s as a journalist writing about Minnesota politics and government.