KELO AM Radio hosted South Dakota Speaker of the House Mark Mickelson and Slick Rick Weiland, who the Republican Speaker called out for his group’s poorly written measure which was enjoined because Circuit Court Judge Mark Barnett found that it was unconstitutional, and would likely not survive a court challenge on that basis:
“You guys screwed up,” argued House Speaker Mark Mickleson in a debate Tuesday with Democratic Activist Rick Wieland over Initated Measure 22.
On KELO Radio’s It’s Your Business Show, Mickleson claimed the ethic overhaul package was poorly written, full of unintended consequences and needs to be replaced. Weiland countered that the courts have yet to rule on IM 22. and that the Republican controlled State Legislature is moving too fast.
and..
Mickleson took Weiland’s point personally.
“For me to take incoming from a guy like you who has been paid by Represent Us, to be their paid spokesman, I’m offended by it,” Represent Us is an out-of-state activist group pushing hard for IM 22 and against the effort to repeal and replace it.
I don’t think Represent Us ever gave a damn or not if it was constitutional. They actually likely didn’t care if it passed, or not. They operate just like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. You have to rile up the base in order to raise money. If people aren’t stirred up, they’re out of business!
Where does Americans for Prosperity get there money from?
They did not bring the bill so not relevant.
Who did then??
My understanding is that they get a good chunk of THEIR money comes from local donors.
Do you have an axe to grind with AFP? They are a good group helping to promote American ideals, and I don’t mean the ideals that Obama and the other left-wingers claim are American ideals.
Also, where they get THEIR money from isn’t relevant to the point that Ricky Weiland is a toady of out-of-state, leftwing, socialist groups.
Mr. Weiland, who talks like a slick liberal hoity-toity bistro owner, is just in this to get money. He was lying on the radio recordings on the internet about what The IM #22 would do right to Mr. Belfrage’s face.
Absent IM22, does any one really think that we would be talking about an ethics commission, lobbying reforms, and campaign finance reform in Pierre, right now?
How come hardly any of these concerns over IM 22 were aired prior to the election? All we heard from the Republican leadership before the election was “Vote ‘NO’ on Everything”……. Well, that strategy sure worked well in preventing Marshy’s Law, too, didn’t it?…..
What I do not understand is why the AG accommodated the law enforcement community when it came to making Marshy’s Law work for all, but when it came to IM 22, he was never mutually accommodating to both sides through AG opinions to make it work….. He could have at least issued an AG opinion on free donuts from lobbyists, so that the legislators could continue to feed their faces for free….
Oh, I know, he is currently defending IM 22 in the courts some will say in his defense, but that is his inherent constitutional duty to do so, however.
The AG claims publicly he likes the ethics commission part, but publicly it is his duty to defend all of it and not dismiss publicly part or parts of it. In so doing, the dismissing that is, how is he any different than an acting US AG who ignores a Presidential directive?……. What does President Trump like to say? Oh yah, “You are Fired!”
If the 22 people really cared about ethics reform, they would be saying without 22 these changes wouldn’t be forthcoming and actually applaud what is happening. Clearly they don’t!
What? Please elaborate…..
How can it be said any more clear.. If IM22 sponsors wanted an ethics commission they should be happy that they will now likely get one through proposed legislation. As your own post pointed out, IM22 got the conversation started.. However, the sponsors aren’t happy about the proposed ethics commission, they are indifferent. They are simply using this media frenzy to raise money through Represent.us… They purposely went ahead with an initiated measure that the LRC said had constitutional flaws. They knew it would get hung up in the courts and they could whip up a frenzy and raise money..
Way to take him on Mr Speaker
Mark is very smart and knows his stuff. It wasn’t a Weiland family dinner at Parkers arguing over liberalism or socialism in what’s better for their family. It was another prospective armed with facts. Something Weiland’s know little about. Read the families rantings on Facebook to view into who they are. Rumor has it that their son is running for mayor. I hope Rick gives him advice.😂
Two comments:
1). This summary doesn’t do justice to the whipping Weiland took by Mickelson. I had always assumed Weiland was smart but deluded. I know longer think he is smart. If this had needed sanctioning like a boxing match, Weiland wouldn’t have been allowed in the ring by reason of mental infirmity.
2). I think the GOP is being excessively generous by trying to fix IM22 before the Supreme Court summarily trashes it. If the repeal it and replace it, we will never get the public rebuking this POS deserves. Since Weiland hasn’t asked for an expedited ruling from the Supreme Court, the Legislature should ask for it and cease all work on the multiple subjects until the have clarity on IM22.
Well said, Troy!
Agreed
Voters are angry and don’t care where the money came from to support IM 22. I’m angry because the voters were lied to, and they should be too.
Call Weiland and RepresetUS out on their lies. Rigorously tear apart their narrative. Point out that the folks manipulating our voter initiative process for political gain are assholes.
Call out these lying propagandists. After all, what kind of cynical snakes knowingly, and repeatedly lie to the public, in order to push through a patently unconstitutional measure in a deliberate and calculated political ploy, designed to disrupt the legislative and judicial process?
Wish Mark was still running for governor!
IM 22 included many things that Represent Us and their radical allies in South Dakota wanted, but the most important part of it in the minds of those behind it is the suppression of free speech and the violation of the privacy of donors to advocacy groups. The other parts were included in the bill in order to hide in a 34-page bill the violations of free speech, privacy, and free association and allow Weiland, Solberg, Frankenfeld, et, all to highlight the supposed corruption instead. Their deceptive advertisements and attacks on our legislators have been absolutely despicable.
The gop should be careful because given that IM 22 passed on the november ballot, that means many republican voters must have voted yes.
It doesn’t help the gop to be so angry seeming. It’s fine to criticize IM 22 but geez tone it down.