Want to get Sandy Jerstad to yield to your cause? File a lawsuit.
Sioux Falls Democratic Senator Sandy Jerstad exhibits something intestinal, because it isn’t fortitude this morning on KELOland, as she points out how in her view legislators need to strike a deal right away on education this session because of the pending lawsuit against the state.
Regardless of the fact that one court has basically said that school funding is up to the legislature, the Attorney General believes such lawsuits to be without merit, AND the legislature traditionally shies away from matters that are set to be heard in a court of law:
Democratic Senator Sandy Jerstad is hopeful the education lawsuit brought on by parents and their children will move education to the front of the line when it comes to deciding who gets more money this legislative session
“I’m hoping that we can strike a deal right away,” Jerstad says.
and…
“I do believe that if the districts knew that they were going to receive the bill that we did last year I think they would cancel their lawsuit,” she says.
Jerstad says because of it’s price tag, lawmakers are paying attention to the funding lawsuit. She just hopes they’re paying enough attention to make education funding a first priority.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
PP is right. It is better to continue the trend of passive aggressiveness that the legislature is so good at.
If she wants to fund education, then make an argument that actually carries some weight, and get more funding. That’s what she’s there for.
Somebody needs to translate for Sandy what the first court said. We’ll all be watching you closely, Sandy, to see what you get accomplished.
More good material for Hal & Bill to use in the campaign.
Alright 3, name something that Hal or Bill accomplished. They both had several years in Pierre and got nothing done.
Lawsuits are settled all the time prior to trial. And the states where these lawsuits have been successful have put more money in the schools pockets but after considerable time and trouble and acrimony. I think Sandy is absolutely correct in this.
Bob,
Sandy didn’t spend one minute on the abortion ban other than saying “nay”
Do some of you people really think that nobody talks about education in Pierre? The whole session starts with how are we going to fund education and how are we going to make it better. A substantial increase in funding to education will take a tax increase which the people of this state don’t want. We are running on a shoestring budget (contrary to what some people on here think) and these huge increases are not possible. The Dems say we just need to limit growth and take more from the reserves but for the people that can do math and also care about other important areas like economic development, medicaid, and higher education to name just a few realize those are just pipe dreams.
So Sandy, what tax(es) are you going to raise first?
4)
I think the point of 3) is that she doesn’t understand the circuit court’s position on the lawsuit. This is all but over and Sandy is still talking like it has legal weight. Which it does not.
Ala, somebody needs to translate for Sandy. Thus, good bullets for Hal & Bill (to point out her obvious weaknesses). This doesn’t have anything to do with what Hal or Bill have done for k-12. Which is squat.
I’m sure Epp sees the value since #1) he’s a lawyer (fees); and 2) increased k-12 funding is nice red meat for the democrats even though they don’t have the burden of identifying a revenue source.
# 7 sounds like a typical liberal. Spend the trust funds!! What happens when the trust funds are spent? Cut funding for education then? Or raise taxes to make up where the trust funds left off?
Do you actually think the trust funds are just doing nothing. The interest and proceeds from those funds are used for ongoing programs such as education and long-term care for the elderly.
Those trust funds did not come from the SD taxpayer. They were one-time payments such as the Tobacco Settlement, Cement Plant Sale or Internal Governmental Transfer from the Feds.
Spend it all on one time projects when we got it or stick most away and use the proceeds for ongoing programs? That’s one big difference between Dems, spend it, and Reps, use the proceeds forever.
#9
You are spot on. The state recieves thirty some MILLION $ per year in revenue from those trust funds. The Dems would have us kill the goose that lays golden eggs and eat him for supper.
10. Eat “him” for supper? Some goose! Reminds me of the old trick riddle, “If a rooster laid an egg on the peak of a roof, which way would it roll.”
If the state is only getting 30 million from the 1 billion in the trust funds we need to fire our investment officers. We should get closer to 100 million. I guess we could spend about 70% of the funds before we endanger the state budget a single dollar.
Our trust fund laws have no teeth, they are just slush funds for the governor to use. How many years have they taken funds raised by the horse racing trust and actually used it for what it was set aside for? Our laws need to be changed so that any attempt to use trust fund revenues for any purpose other than what it was set up for would be a major felony. Get rid of this “it’s an emergency” bull crap that lets you skirt the law. If people were upset because Hunt found a loophole in the campaign finance law they should be really upset with this loophole.
Other than the rainy day fund which is about 100 million, the rest is locked up by the vote of the people. The Governor can’t use those funds just willy nilly as it has to go through the appropriations process. Other than futures funds which are used for economic development only, that is the only “slush fund” as you call it and those are very limited at that.
You need to remember also that the trust funds are to grow with inflation to keep their purchasing power. The funds are in a semi-conservative portfolio to make sure that they are relatively safe, but much better than say what social security earns. So if the funds earn 8% in one year, 3% stays in to make sure they grow with inflation. The trust funds are not 1 billion by the way, they are 800 million and change.
Seems funny that when Janklow was governor he always seemed to have a few bucks laying around to use once the legislature ruled it an emergency, even if it was the first week of the session. Looking into it back then, it sure looked like the funds were borrowed against the earnings of one trust fund or another. I don’t mean to imply that they are touching the principle, just the earnings.
Gee, how about that. A legislator thinking that education is important and needs to finally be addressed by the legislature.
We can’t have that as it might take time away from working on another abortion ban, shame on her!