Jason Heaser
DemocraticQ1 If elected, in what capacities would you refer to scientists when you are deciding how to vote on a policy?
“Science should be central to understanding the facts behind a policy decision. As a legislator, I would rely on scientists and subject-matter experts when evaluating policies involving public health, the environment, emerging technology, agriculture, energy, education, and other areas where decisions should be informed by evidence. That means hearing directly from researchers, state agency scientists, medical professionals, engineers, universities, and experts with relevant experience; reviewing peer-reviewed research and reliable data; and asking whether there is a genuine scientific consensus or meaningful disagreement that policymakers need to understand.”
KEYWORDS: Evidence, Expertise, Integrity
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?
“Minnesota can support good-paying mining jobs while also being thoughtful about where and how mining projects move forward. The Boundary Waters is one of Minnesota’s greatest natural treasures, and any proposal that could affect its watershed deserves especially careful scrutiny. I would listen closely to scientists, environmental experts, workers, local communities, Tribal Nations, businesses, and other stakeholders in the region before making decisions about proposed mining projects. We need to take potential risks to clean water seriously while also recognizing the importance of mining jobs and economic opportunity in northern Minnesota.
My priority would be making sure decisions are based on the best available science, strong environmental safeguards, and a transparent process that gives the people who live and work in the region a meaningful voice. Protecting the Boundary Waters, supporting local economies, and creating good-paying jobs should not be treated as mutually exclusive goals.”
KEYWORDS: Protect, Clean Water, Conservation
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?
“Minnesotans should be able to turn on their faucet without worrying whether their water is making their family sick. I support an aggressive approach to PFAS that focuses first on preventing contamination, while helping communities address pollution that has already occurred. Minnesota has begun phasing out nonessential uses of PFAS through Amara’s Law, and I support fully implementing and enforcing those protections. I would also support continued statewide testing, assistance for communities and private well owners, investments in treatment infrastructure, and holding responsible polluters, not local taxpayers, accountable for cleanup costs. We should also continue developing Minnesota health and water-quality standards based on the best available science, even if federal protections are weakened. The Minnesota Department of Health has identified community water systems exceeding federal PFAS standards, making this an immediate infrastructure and public-health issue, not a theoretical future concern.”
KEYWORDS: Prevention, Clean Water, 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 investment and jobs to Minnesota, but communities should not be asked to write them a blank check when it comes to electricity, water, infrastructure, or taxpayer subsidies. I support requiring developers to disclose projected water and energy use before approval, conducting meaningful environmental review, protecting local control, and ensuring the public has an opportunity to weigh in. Projects with enormous water demands should demonstrate that they will not threaten local aquifers or drinking-water supplies and should use conservation, water recycling, reclaimed water, and closed-loop systems wherever feasible. Minnesota has already begun establishing stronger water-use requirements for large data centers, and I support building on that framework. I also believe data centers should pay the infrastructure and energy costs they create rather than shifting those costs onto Minnesota families and small businesses. Any public incentives should be tied to clear, enforceable benefits such as permanent jobs and community investment.”
KEYWORDS: Transparency, Sustainability, Ratepayers
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?
“As a state representative, I would not have a vote on federal NIH appropriations, but I would be a strong advocate against federal cuts that threaten Minnesota researchers, universities, hospitals, and patients. At the state level, I would support strong funding for the University of Minnesota and other public research institutions, investments in research facilities and laboratories, partnerships that help bring federal research dollars to Minnesota, and STEM education that develops the next generation of scientists and researchers. Minnesota should also continue supporting scientific expertise within state agencies. Whether we are responding to emerging diseases, PFAS contamination, invasive species, agricultural challenges, or new technologies, weakening our scientific capacity hurts us all.”
KEYWORDS: 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?
“The decline in overdose deaths is encouraging, but we should not declare victory while hundreds of Minnesota families continue losing loved ones, especially when Indigenous and Black Minnesotans remain disproportionately affected. Minnesota’s own data show particularly severe racial disparities in overdose mortality. I support continuing broad access to naloxone, expanding medication-assisted treatment and same-day connections to care, supporting recovery services and housing, and investing opioid-settlement dollars in evidence-based prevention and treatment. Minnesota currently provides mechanisms for organizations to distribute naloxone, and those lifesaving programs should continue.”
KEYWORDS: Naloxone, Treatment, Equity