Let’s all hope the Minnesota Legislature and the other leaders in state government finally realize that while rural Minnesota might not have the population that urban Minnesota has, it does possess the swing votes in the state Legislature.

That means the leaders of this state — if they wish to retain majority power — ought to not ignore or minimize the concerns of people, businesses and agencies from outside the state’s primary urban areas of the Twin Cities, Duluth, Rochester, St. Cloud and Moorhead.

Of the 11 House districts that changed hands on Election Day — all of the change was from DFL to GOP this time — 10 of them were in Greater Minnesota. Only one, 56B, was in a Twin Cities suburb. And of those 10 in Greater Minnesota, only one was in an urban area, 14B in St. Cloud.

In other words, nine of the 11 swings were places like Albert Lea, where voters ousted incumbent DFLer Shannon Savick in favor of Republican Peggy Bennett. Two years earlier, voters had removed Republican Rich Murray in favor of Shannon. Two years before, they ousted DFLer Robin Brown in favor of Murray. Statewide majorities in recent elections have been back and forth, too.

The reasons for voting them out are varied, but one general lesson the people in power in St. Paul need to learn is that while the urban core leans Democratic and the suburban rings lean Republican, much of the rest of the state is looking for a party that wants to cater to their needs.

That’s why they keep swinging. The political party that figures out it needs to cater to this segment of Minnesota is the one that can maintain a lasting majority.

What’s that mean? What are their needs?

Roads. Bridges. Equitable schools. A fair system for local government aid. Tools for economic development. Ways to compete with neighboring states. Quality of life amenities. Fair rules for water treatment. Pipelines to move oil and free up the rails. Help with getting broadband. Not getting the short end of the stick on grants and tax credits. Things like that.

Look, a lot of times it is the little things we see over and over.

For instance, five years ago the Legacy Amendment passed and people in Greater Minnesota thought there would be aid for the cost of parks. Then the funding rules came out, and the money went to a narrowly definition of regional park. And despite Albert Lea being a regional center for park use, much of our facilities are spread out over several lovely parks, instead of being bunched up at a single park, so it disqualified our system for funding. Again, the metro area steals the dough. Sneaky sneaky. This wrong still hasn’t been righted.

This year, Albert Lea’s Freeborn National Bank building failed to qualify for Minnesota historic preservation tax credits. Meanwhile, 75 percent of the credits were awarded to St. Paul — a direct slap in the face to the rest of the state.

In fact, in the past biennium, DFL state leaders nearly pulled a fast one on LGA percentages that would have cut the share for rural cities, despite a prior agreement, if Savick and other rural state legislators hadn’t stood fast.

Tax credits. Transportation. Bonding bill. Bike paths. State parks. Farm taxes. The list goes on. We read, hear and see cases like this time and again, from both parties, and many voters are old enough to recall when it wasn’t like this, when St. Paul legislators seemed to care about the entire state — because they viewed Minnesota as a single place.

When did this big metro-vs.-outstate thing arise? Why do we divide ourselves? Why does Greater Minnesota have to clamor so hard to get metro leaders to understand and grasp the concerns of the rest of the 12th largest state in the union? Minnesota leaders should already know it is a big state with a wide array of needs. They need to care about Red Wing, Worthington, Park Rapids and Brainerd as much as they care about Minneapolis, St. Paul, Apple Valley and Blaine.

Perhaps the Republicans who have gained the House majority in the election earlier this month will be the ones to figure it out. We look for them to not merely be the suburban Grand Old Party of past sessions but one looking to hear the issues and concerns of the entire state.