Fact-Checking Myron Koets: Breaking Down the Myths in His Letter to the Editor
In a recent letter to the Pipestone County Star, Myron Koets — Chair of Senate District 21 DFL — responded to Rep. Michelle Fischbach’s comments on extending certain provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
While political disagreements are healthy in a democracy, Koets’s letter contains a number of sweeping claims that are either exaggerated, misleading, or entirely unsupported by credible data. Let’s break them down one by one.
1. “The top 1% will benefit the most at the expense of the bottom 50%.”
The problem: This paints a zero-sum picture — as if the bottom half of earners will literally lose money because the top 1% gain. In reality, nonpartisan analyses from the IRS and Congressional Budget Office show that all income groups received a tax cut under the 2017 law, though the top earners saw the largest dollar amount savings.
For example:
Bottom 50%: Average cut between $60 and $500.
Top 1%: Average cut over $30,000.
Yes, the wealthy got a bigger slice — but it didn’t come directly “at the expense” of the lower half.
2. “ACA premiums will increase from 15% to 75%.”
The problem: That’s a massive number — and there’s no recent law or nonpartisan projection to support it.
Here’s the reality:
The Inflation Reduction Act extended expanded ACA subsidies through 2025. If Congress fails to renew them, premiums could increase for some households. But reputable estimates (Kaiser Family Foundation, CBO) don’t predict anything near 75% — that’s an extreme outlier scenario, not a baseline projection.
3. “Congress has cut $1 trillion from Medicaid, with only $50 billion to offset rural losses.”
The problem: This claim is not grounded in current federal legislation. There has been no enacted law with a $1 trillion cut to Medicaid.
The “$50 billion Rural Transformation Program” Koets mentions isn’t widely recognized as a standalone federal program. This appears to be a conflation of various rural health initiatives with past (failed) GOP proposals to slow Medicaid growth. Comparing a fictional $1 trillion cut to a small funding program makes for dramatic math, but it’s built on sand.
4. “Michelle Fischbach is a reverse Robin Hood.”
The problem: This isn’t a fact — it’s rhetoric. It contributes to polarization instead of engaging with the actual legislative record.
In truth, Fischbach has worked over the past five years to:
Push for stronger oversight in federal and state spending.
Support accountability measures in response to Minnesota’s Feeding Our Future scandal ($250 million in COVID aid fraud).
Advocate for rural interests in Congress, including broadband expansion and agricultural support.
The Minnesota DFL’s Track Record Matters Too
If Koets wants to discuss how “federal funds should benefit the most people,” we also need to look at how his own party has managed massive sums of taxpayer dollars here in Minnesota:
Feeding Our Future fraud – $250M stolen from a child nutrition program.
Medicaid overpayments – $50M in improper or fraudulent payments.
Housing & childcare assistance fraud – Tens of millions in abuse and mismanagement.
Nicole Mitchell scandal – A sitting DFL senator convicted of felony burglary in 2025, refusing to resign until pressured by leadership.
Governor Tim Walz’s expenses – $430,000 in taxpayer-funded legal prep for a congressional hearing, plus undisclosed out-of-state travel costs for political messaging tours.
Why Accuracy Matters
When party leaders make public statements with big numbers and bold accusations, they have a responsibility to back them up with credible, verifiable sources. Koets’s letter fails this standard.
Without facts, the conversation shifts from debate to distortion. And when that happens, voters lose trust — in both parties.
If the DFL stands behind these claims, they should publish the sources. If not, they should correct the record.
