Dem AG Candidate upset about South Dakota fighting government overreach in regulation of ditch water, and implementation of Obamacare

If there is any doubt over Dem AG Candidate Randy Seiler being an Obama appointee to US Attorney, let that doubt be removed. Because Seiler is in print today bemoaning those times when Marty Jackley stood up to the Federal Government.

Seiler just came out in opposition of when South Dakota joined lawsuits fighting both Obamacare, and the EPA power grab over the water in farm ditches and ranch stockponds:

For Seiler, the road to an A grade goes through a review of public corruption statutes like those found in Initiated Measure 22 and a more transparent standard for involving South Dakota in other state’s lawsuits.

Seiler cited South Dakota’s role in lawsuits to overturn the preexisting conditions provision of the Affordable Care Act and an effort to find the Clean Water Act unconstitutional.

“I don’t know what factors were made or taken into consideration in making that decision,” Seiler said. “It obviously should not be political. There should be standards based on what’s in the best interest of the people of the state of South Dakota.”

Read that here.

So Randy Seiler, the Dem’s Attorney General Candidate, does not think the Obama WOTUS rule should have been “political?” And “there should be standards based on what’s in the best interest of the people” because Marty Jackley was somehow deficient in standing up for South Dakota this way?

Let’s take a closer look at the WOTUS rule that Seiler is crabbing at South Dakota for fighting. Here’s what US Senator Mike Rounds had to say about it:

As finalized by the Obama administration, the WOTUS rule would have been one of the largest federal land grabs in our country’s history, giving the Army Corps and EPA control of nearly all water, including farm ponds and drainage ditches. It would have caused farmers, ranchers and landowners to spend hours filling out paperwork just to procure permits to conduct normal agricultural activities or spray for weeds along country roads.

Read that here.

And here’s what Senator Thune had to say about it:

“The Obama EPA’s WOTUS rule is one of the largest federal land grabs in recent memory,” said Thune. “It will drive up compliance costs for farmers and ranchers and expose homeowners and property owners across the country to massive new fines. The recent ruling by a federal district court in North Dakota shows that the Obama EPA is not only defying common sense, but is also defying the original intent of the Clean Water Act. The EPA should immediately suspend the enforcement of this regulation across the country. The ruling is yet another reason we need to enact a permanent stop to EPA’s overreach.

Read it here.

When Marty Jackley joined the WOTUS suit, he cited the following reasons:

“The EPA and Corps of Engineer’s failure to timely respond to the States’ request to delay the implementation of the Rule has unfortunately necessitated the need to seek further court intervention,” said Jackley. “Our concerns continue to be that these agencies are overstepping their Congressional authority and that our State will be losing considerable decision making control over our waters and land use. The new Rule is creating uncertainty for our agriculture and business community that needs to have fairness and a degree of common sense in federal regulation.”

Read that here.

And according to Seiler, fighting federal overreach of that nature (and Obamacare) are areas he differs from the current Attorney General on?  Good lord. How was that political? It was plain common sense. Does he actually think South Dakota ag producers want MORE overburdensome and unworkable regulations?

That’s how Democrats intend to stand up for South Dakota’s rights as a state. By not fighting federal regulation.

6 thoughts on “Dem AG Candidate upset about South Dakota fighting government overreach in regulation of ditch water, and implementation of Obamacare”

  1. Seiler is a far left liberal , I think the most liberal of him, Sutton and Bjorkman, he must be defeated.

    Waters of the United States is something any AG should fight and Marty was right to do so…Seiler is just plain wrong on this one.

    1. Ravnsborg has always been the candidate talking about ideas and solutions, his opponents keep talking about themselves and that is why I think he will win easily…

      People want to hear what you are going to do for them, not how great you think you are–Randy’s “solutions” would have led to more government overreach..NO THANKS!

  2. Seiler is far-left in his ideology, so he would run the AG office based upon his ideology and what he (and Obama, Hillary, Schumer, Pelos, et al) think is good fro the state and the country. He needs to be defeated; surely we don’t want a liberal determining when our state takes a stand against an over-reaching federal government. However, if you as a Democrat think that a centralized, all-powerful government is best, go ahead and vote for this guy.

    1. Agreed, Seiler would waste his energies on trying to sue trump or something like that which would not benefit South Dakota.

      I for one would rather have Ravnsborg as he is campaigning about what he would like to do to help and asking others what they need or what he could do to help them.

Comments are closed.