Minnesota Democratic Senate candidate and Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan has drawn scrutiny from political opponents after state records linked her to the announcement of $100 million in grants that included funding for a nonprofit distributing kits for rectal drug consumption.
In 2024, Flanagan joined Governor Tim Walz to announce grants aimed at assisting Minnesotans facing homelessness. The recipients included Southside Harm Reduction Services, an organization that provides services such as syringe exchange and naloxone distribution.
What the Right Is Saying
Republican opponent Michele Tafoya criticized Flanagan for attempting to distance herself from the administration's decisions. Tafoya argued that as lieutenant governor for nearly eight years, Flanagan was "second in charge" and should share responsibility for state spending and oversight.
"My goodness, she was second in charge in this state, and she’s just going to point her finger at Gov. Tim Walz when she demanded to be in the room where everything happened. But, suddenly, she has nothing to do with this. Again, sell it to someone else," Tafoya said in response to reports about the grant recipients.
Conservative critics have focused on the specific nature of some funded services, noting that Southside distributes "Booty Bump" kits, which contain supplies for consuming drugs through the rectum. They argue that these expenditures reflect a lack of fiscal discipline and oversight within the Walz-Flanagan administration.
What the Left Is Saying
Supporters of the administration emphasize the broader mission of the grant program, which focuses on preventing and ending homelessness. When the grants were announced, Flanagan stated that the funding would "ensure that everyone can access the supports they need to find and secure safe, stable housing."
The administration described Southside Harm Reduction Services as providing essential outreach to people experiencing unsheltered homelessness who use drugs, primarily in or near Minneapolis and St. Paul. Official announcements listed services including syringe exchange, education, rapid HIV testing, and referrals to social services, without explicitly detailing the specific contents of harm reduction kits in the press materials.
Flanagan has highlighted her leadership on other social issues, such as paid family and medical leave and child tax credits, positioning these as her primary areas of responsibility in state government.
What the Numbers Show
The grant program announced in 2024 allocated $100 million in state funds. One of the recipients, Southside Harm Reduction Services, received a portion of these funds to support its operations.
According to reports from the Washington Free Beacon, the "Booty Bump" kits distributed by Southside include syringes, sterile water, drug preparation supplies, lubricant, and an informational booklet. The term "booty bumping" is used to describe the consumption of drugs through the rectum.
Flanagan has served as Minnesota’s lieutenant governor for nearly eight years. Her tenure includes participation in numerous budget and grant announcements alongside Governor Walz. The administration's official press release for the $100 million package listed "syringe exchange" and "naloxone distribution" among the services provided by grant recipients but did not mention the specific rectal consumption kits in the initial announcement text.
The Bottom Line
The controversy centers on the scope of state oversight and the specific allocation of funds within large social service programs. As Flanagan campaigns for the U.S. Senate, her record as lieutenant governor is under increased scrutiny, particularly regarding her role in approving or promoting state expenditures.
Flanagan has maintained that the Governor holds ultimate oversight responsibility, stating, "The governor has been very clear that the buck stops with him. He was the one who had oversight here." This stance contrasts with her campaign efforts to highlight her own legislative priorities, such as child tax credits and school meal programs.
Voters in Minnesota will decide whether to view these grant allocations as necessary harm reduction measures or as evidence of lax fiscal management. The debate is likely to continue as the election approaches, with both campaigns leveraging the funding details to define their respective narratives on government responsibility and spending.