From facebook, the Dusty Johnson for Congress crews were again out hitting parades across the state this weekend:

(I think I see a Schoenbeck or two in there…)

It was an honor to throw out the first pitch at the @canaries game tonight. pic.twitter.com/2oCYAdb3o4

— Marty Jackley (@martyjackley) June 24, 2017

In addition to the prior post describing the constitutional mess that they want to foist upon South Dakotans, it looks like the Samuelson/Weiland group is also taking two more possible runs at funneling millions into their pockets from out of state… ahem, I mean they have two more initiated measure proposals.

The first one is a measure that Samuelson titles the “South Dakota Voter Accessibility, Integrity, and Efficiency Act.” Unfortunately, you don’t get the impression that it provides any of those, especially from the Legislative Research Council’s memos, as well as the massive amount of corrections they make, as Samuelson tries to shoehorn another state’s measure into South Dakota Law.

In fact, it’s almost like he didn’t bother to even attempt to write it correctly, opting to have LRC do his legal work to point out what they need to change on the taxpayer’s dime:

2018 Im Lrccomments Vaie by Pat Powers on Scribd

….It appears that proposed laws were borrowed from another state and minimal  effort  was  made  to  revise  the document  to  the form and style used by the  State of  South Dakota. If  you are borrowing language from other states, it is requested that you follow the form and style for draft  legislation used in this state. The drafting manual  may be found on the website for the Legislative Research Council. If you need assistance  in  locating the manual, please contact our office. You could also review bills introduced in previous sessions to  provide examples for form and style…

 

Ouch.  If you scroll down, you’ll see that the corrections makes to this mess are almost endless.

And an alternative initiated measure isn’t any better – just longer, and trying to cram more crap into it:

2018 Im Vaieava Lrccomments by Pat Powers on Scribd

The proposed initiated measure has provisions that concern two subjects that address the conduct of elections by mail and provides for automatic voter registration. Each subject could easily be separated from the other and the combination of the subjects may not comply with the single subject requirement in S.D. Const. Art. Ill, § 21. Our suggestion is that the measure should be separated into two measures and our form and style comments reflect that separation. If you move forward with both subjects in one measure, you need to take care in the drafting of any cross references that may only refer to certain sections of the Act.

It appears that proposed laws were borrowed from another state and minimal effort was made to revise the document to the form and style used by the State of South Dakota. If you are borrowing language from other states , it is requested that you follow the form and style for draft legislation used in this state. The drafting manual may be found on the website for the Legislative Research Council. If you need assistance in locating the manual, please contact our office. You could also review bills introduced in previous sessions to provide examples for form and style.

and…

The second part of the initiated measure concerns automatic voter registration which establishes procedures for registering voters when a person is obtaining or renewing a driver license. The sections for this subject refer to this program being administered by the Department of Motor Vehicles. There is no Department of Motor Vehicles in state government. There is a Division of Motor Vehicles that is in the Department of Revenue, however, that division does not manage the driver license program for the state. The Department of Public Safety (DPS) administers the driver license program and pursuant to SDCL 12-4-6 the department already assists South Dakota residents with voter registration.

It’s pretty bad when they submit a measure that fails to accurately reflect the offices of state government on which they intend to impose the duties.

Of course, that’s inevitable when you’re taking laws from elsewhere and just sending them in for a possible ballot measure because that’s what the liberal think-tank proposing your next payday wants.

I guess they didn’t learn their lesson last time when South Dakotans told them they wanted full disclosure on the election ballot, not less.

Because former Tim Johnson staffer Drey Samuelson has submitted a possible Constitutional Amendment for circulation possibly to be placed on the South Dakota 2018 election ballot:

Supporter Drey Samuelson said Friday that they hope to start gathering signatures in August to put the proposed amendment to a vote. It would create nonpartisan primary elections for legislative candidates, remove their party labels from the ballot and establish an independent commission to redraw state legislators’ districts.

The proposal shares similarities with two constitutional amendments that voters rejected in 2016. Samuelson says the Legislature is unpopular among voters, who are ready for a change.

Read that here.

Here’s the proposed party-hiding amendment as reviewed by the Legislative Research Council. Just as previous amendments were proposed by Slick Rick Weiland and Drey Samuelson’s organization leading up to the last election, it’s just a mess, awash in a sea of red-ink corrections by the State Legislative Research Council:

2018 CA NonPartisanElectionsRedistrictingLegis LRCComments by Pat Powers on Scribd

Ignoring the policy issues that were rejected by voters in the last election, the Legislative Research Council’s letter does a good job in pointing out the many, many technical flaws that the measure contains:

The proposed constitutional amendment includes elements from two previous constitutional amendment proposals considered in the 2016 general election . The combination of the subjects from the two proposed amendments may  not comply with the related subject matter as required in S.D. Const. Art. XXIII, § 1.

The draft of the initiated constitutional amendment submitted to this office is not  written  in a  clear  and  concise manner and does not conform to the form and style of other sections of the constitution. Parts of the proposed amendment are better suited for statute.

and..

Furthermore, section 7 conflicts with section 8 of the proposed constitutional amendment as submitted to our office. Section 7 proposes to amend S.D. Const. Art. Ill, § 5 and section 8 proposes to repeal the same section.

and..

Section 37 appears to require redistricting in 2019 and 2020 and does not  provide  for  redistricting  in  2021. Redistricting is a time consuming and costly use of resources. The redistricting requirements for 2019 and 2020 would be based on 2010 census data and would only apply to one election. This requirement appears to be an unnecessary use of state resources. Since there would not be an appropriation to fund the commission in FY 2019, the commission may have to wait FY 2020 to begin the redistricting process. The commission  must  purchase  redistricting software  and comply with the Voting Rights Act requirements. You should consider eliminating the 2019 redistricting requirement. The requirement  to redistrict again in 2020 is nonsensical. Redistricting should be required for 2021.

Oy. Like the prior proposals coming out of the Weiland/Samuelson shop, it’s just a mess.  Or we might term it just the first pile of manure to hide their party that Democrats are trying to shovel on to South Dakota Voters.

My senior who just graduated and her mother went to Washington DC this week as a graduation gift to my daughter, who had never gone, and wanted to see how things work in our Nation’s Capitol.

Below, my #4 hams it up for the camera….

What did they do while they were there? In addition to a few museum visits, a Lincoln High classmate of my wife’s – I believe a Brigadier General in the office of the Surgeon General –  took them on a tour of the Pentagon, and Congresswoman Noem’s staff was kind enough to take care of the wayward travelers, taking them on the Capital tour, as well as helping them visit some other locations in Congress.

My wife wanted me to give a special shout-out to one of the interns in the Noem office, Chesney Garnos, who was kind enough to take them on the tour.

If you don’t know of Chesney, you might remember her father, Cooper Garnos, who served 13 years in the State Legislature from the Presho area; from 1999-2006 in the House of Representatives, and from 2007-2011 in the State Senate.  Obviously, Chesney shares a similar interest in politics with her father.

Brittany, Kristiana, Chesney, and Kristen (And Kristi, of course) as well as other staff members were all terrific in helping Michelle & Sydney enjoy their visit, and my wife wanted me to make sure I thanked them all profusely.

A special thanks to the Noem Staff on behalf of my wife & daughter!  They had the time of their lives!

Thune Statement on USDA Decision to Release CRP Acres to Grazing in Hardest-Hit Counties in Wake of Severe Drought

“I’m glad to see USDA take these important first steps that will give our farmers and ranchers additional pasture as they cope with these tough conditions.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), a longtime member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, issued the following statement after the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that it would release Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)-enrolled acres to grazing in counties reaching the D2 (severe drought) and D3 (extreme drought) categories in the U.S. Drought Monitor in South Dakota, North Dakota, and Montana.

“Portions of South Dakota are in the midst of one of the most severe droughts we’ve seen since the disastrous 2012 drought,” said Thune. “I’m glad to see USDA take these important first steps that will give our farmers and ranchers additional pasture as they cope with these tough conditions. While today’s decision is good news, there’s more than can be done, including opening up these lands to haying. I will continue to work closely with USDA to ensure all that can be done is being done.”

Last week, Thune and Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) sent a letter to USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue requesting that emergency haying and grazing on CRP land in eligible counties be accelerated and that more than 484,000 acres of land enrolled in CRP considered environmentally sensitive be made eligible for emergency haying and grazing in eligible counties.

Counties in South Dakota eligible for emergency grazing of CRP include: Perkins, Meade, Pennington, Corson, Ziebach, Haakon, Dewey, Stanley, Campbell, Walworth, Potter, Sully, Hughes, McPherson, Edmunds, Faulk, Hyde, Hand, and Brown.

###

Rounds Supports USDA Decision to open CRP Acres for Grazing

WASHINGTON – Showing support, U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) today made the following statement regarding the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) decision to open up South Dakota CRP acres for grazing in areas categorized as D2 (severe drought) or D3 (extreme drought) until September 30, 2017. Last week, Rounds and Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) wrote to USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue urging him to provide timely assistance to counties currently facing extreme drought conditions.

“I thank Secretary Perdue for acting quickly to give ranchers additional flexibility to feed their herds,” said Rounds. “Opening up additional CRP acres for grazing will provide South Dakota producers with much-needed relief from the ongoing drought. It is a great first step, and I will continue working with my colleagues to make certain our producers are equipped with all the tools possible to manage these difficult conditions.”

Counties in South Dakota eligible for emergency grazing of CRP include: Brown, Campbell, Corson, Dewey, Edmunds, Faulk, Haakon, Hand, Hughes, Hyde, McPherson, Meade, Pennington, Perkins, Potter, Stanley, Sully, Walworth and Ziebach.

# # #

Apparently South Dakota has been added to a list of states now banned in California. From Red State Watcher:

KCRA Reported: Democratic Attorney General Xavier Becerra added Texas, Alabama, South Dakota and Kentucky to the list of places where state employee travel is restricted. Lawmakers passed legislation last year banning non-essential travel to states with laws that discriminate against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. North Carolina, Kansas, Mississippi and Tennessee are already on the list.

And…

It’s unclear what practical effect California’s travel ban will have. The state law contains exemptions for some trips, such as travel needed to enforce California law and to honor contracts made before 2017. A spokesman for Becerra couldn’t provide an example of travel that would be blocked. Becerra’s office also couldn’t provide information about how often state employees have visited the newly banned states.

And..

A request for a legal opinion on whether public university sports’ travel is exempt from the ban has been filed with Becerra’s office, but no ruling has been issued.

Read that here.

Thoughts?

Noem Urges USDA to Act Quickly in Delivering Livestock Forage Program Relief

Washington, D.C. – Rep. Kristi Noem today issued the following statement after the U.S. Drought Monitor indicated six South Dakota counties had been categorized as D3 (extreme drought), triggering the Livestock Forage Program (LFP).  Ranchers in Campbell, Dewey, Walworth, Potter, McPherson, and Edmunds are eligible for three months of LFP payments.

“This year’s drought conditions have led to extremely poor grass growth, resulting in feed shortages and limited grazing,” said Noem.  “Ranchers are being forced to sell yearlings and cow-calf pairs just to make ends meet.  It’s because of years like this that I fought so hard to preserve the Livestock Forage Program during the 2014 Farm Bill debate and why I’ll continue to do so as we prepare for the next Farm Bill.  With LFP now triggered, I urge the USDA to act quickly to provide producers relief.”

Noem has also urged USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue to immediately release all South Dakota CRP acres for haying.

Noem served on the 2014 Farm Bill Conference Committee, which negotiated the Livestock Disaster Programs.  The 2014 Farm Bill reauthorized and strengthened the Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP), the Livestock Forage Program (LFP) and the Emergency Livestock Assistance Program (ELAP).

###

Read it here.