Gadisa Berkessa
DemocraticQ1 If elected, in what capacities would you refer to scientists when you are deciding how to vote on a policy?
“As an electrical engineer and project manager, I rely on facts, testing, and expert knowledge when making decisions. I would bring that same approach to the Minnesota Senate.
I would consult scientists when considering policies involving public health, clean water, energy, agriculture, education, emerging technology, infrastructure, and environmental protection. This would include reviewing peer-reviewed research, requesting testimony from qualified experts, consulting Minnesota universities and state scientific agencies, and listening to scientists who live and work in affected communities.
Scientists should help lawmakers understand the evidence, risks, costs, and likely outcomes of a proposal. Policymakers must also consider community experiences, economic effects, and ethical concerns. Science should not be ignored or manipulated for political convenience. I will support transparent, evidence-based policymaking that explains the facts and uncertainties to the public.”
KEYWORDS: Evidence, Expertise, Transparency
Q2 Recently H.J. Res 140 passed, overturning a 20-year mining ban in the National Forest System land surrounding the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. What is your position on mining projects in this region and what policies, if any, would you support to protect the surrounding watershed?
“I oppose mining projects that could permanently threaten the Boundary Waters watershed. The Boundary Waters is an irreplaceable source of clean water, wildlife habitat, outdoor recreation, tourism, and jobs. Once this interconnected watershed is contaminated, restoring it may be impossible.
I oppose the decision to overturn the 20-year mining protections. I would support strong state safeguards for the watershed, independent scientific review, meaningful consultation with Tribal Nations, and full consideration of cumulative environmental impacts. Mining companies must demonstrate that their operations will not pollute surrounding waters, and taxpayers must never be left responsible for cleanup costs.
Minnesota can support responsible economic development and good-paying jobs without risking one of our most valuable natural resources. Decisions involving the Boundary Waters must be based on long-term scientific evidence, not short-term political or corporate pressure.”
KEYWORDS: Clean Water, Protection, Accountability
Q3 Contamination from PFAS and other “forever chemicals” in 21 community water systems in Minnesota exceed national regulations, putting residents at risk of negative health impacts. What policies, if any, do you propose to protect Minnesota residents from the potential impacts of PFAS?
“Every Minnesotan deserves safe drinking water, regardless of their ZIP code or income. I support comprehensive testing of public water systems and private wells, transparent reporting of PFAS results, and prompt notification when unsafe contamination is found.
The state should help affected communities install effective treatment systems and secure available federal funding, with priority given to small communities and families that cannot afford these costs. Minnesota should also identify and control PFAS at its source, strengthen monitoring of industries that use or release these chemicals, and hold responsible polluters accountable for cleanup expenses.
I support continued investment in PFAS research, statewide contamination mapping, and assistance for communities to meet federal drinking-water standards. Prevention is less expensive and safer than allowing contamination to spread. The cost should not simply be passed to homeowners and local utility customers who did not cause the pollution.”
KEYWORDS: Safe Water, Prevention, Polluter Accountability
Q4 There have been multiple hyperscale data centers proposed throughout the state, including one currently under construction. What policies and regulations, if any, do you support to assess and act on the potential impacts of these data centers?
“Data centers can bring construction work, technology investment, and economic opportunities to Minnesota, but their benefits must be balanced against their significant demands on electricity, water, land, and public infrastructure.
I support requiring large data-center proposals to undergo transparent assessments of their water consumption, energy needs, backup-generator emissions, noise, and effects on nearby communities. Reviews should consider cumulative impacts when multiple facilities are proposed in the same region. Companies should pay the full infrastructure and energy costs created by their projects so those expenses are not shifted to families or small businesses.
I also support strong water-conservation and clean-energy requirements, responsible siting, public participation, and regular reporting of actual resource use. Any tax incentives should be transparent and tied to measurable benefits, including permanent local jobs, workforce training, and community investment.
Minnesota should welcome innovation, but development must be responsible and should not leave residents with higher utility bills or fewer natural resources.”
KEYWORDS: Responsible Innovation, Resource Protection, Accountability
Q5 In 2025 alone, the National Institute on Health (NIH) awarded over $700 million for research grants and contracts to Minnesota universities, which directly supported over 7,000 jobs and $1.79 billion of economic activity in Minnesota. What policies, if any, do you plan to implement or support regarding funding for continued science research either at the state or federal level?
“I support strong and dependable funding for scientific and medical research. Investments through the NIH and other public research programs support Minnesota universities, hospitals, businesses, thousands of jobs, and discoveries that improve and save lives.
This issue is also personal to me. My family saw how research and access to a trial medicine gave my brother additional years of life while he fought cancer. Families across Minnesota are depending on researchers to develop the next treatment or cure.
I would support state partnerships with Minnesota universities, research institutions, hospitals, and responsible private-sector innovators. I would also advocate for continued federal research funding and oppose politically motivated cuts or interference that weaken legitimate scientific work. State investments should encourage medical research, clean-energy technology, agricultural innovation, environmental science, and opportunities for students and early-career scientists.
Research funding is not simply an expense. It is an investment in lives, skilled jobs, new businesses, and Minnesota’s long-term competitiveness.”
KEYWORDS: Medical Research, Innovation, Investment
Q6 Fatal drug overdoses in Minnesota have significantly declined in recent years, representing a 28% drop from a record peak of 1,392 overdose deaths in 2022. However, compared to White Minnesotans, Indigenous Minnesotans are 7 to 15 times more likely to experience a fatal drug overdose, while Black Minnesotans are 2 to 3 times more likely to die from a drug-related overdose. What policies, if any, do you support to continue the downward trend of overdose deaths for Minnesotans?
“Minnesota should continue reducing overdose deaths by treating substance-use disorder as a public-health issue while holding illegal drug traffickers accountable.
I support expanding access to naloxone, including through schools, first responders, libraries, treatment providers, and community organizations. We must also improve access to evidence-based treatment, mental-health services, recovery programs, stable housing, and follow-up care after a nonfatal overdose.
The severe disparities affecting Indigenous and Black Minnesotans require targeted solutions developed with those communities. Funding should support Tribal Nations and trusted local organizations that understand cultural needs and can connect people with treatment before a crisis occurs. Minnesota should use overdose data to direct resources toward communities experiencing the greatest harm.
Prevention must begin early through honest education, responsible prescribing, and support for families. People in recovery should be treated with dignity and given a real opportunity to rebuild their lives. Our policies should be measured by whether they save lives and make treatment easier to reach.”
KEYWORDS: Prevention, Treatment, Equity