Hey all – back on the air.. on a computer as opposed to a phone charged from battery packs and my truck.
I was out of power for about 30 hours, and there are friends and relatives who are still waiting. It has been crazy to say the least, from Derecho slammed Brookings. Thankfully, I’ve got a gas stove, and I ran over to Ace hardware in Volga to grab a small charcoal grill, after I had gotten rid of mine when I got an electric pellet smoker. The home of South Dakota’s largest University is nearly back up and running thanks to the diligent utility, emergency, and other crews who have been working hard.
While all the weather lunacy has been going on, the mail was delivering just fine, and postcards have been hitting across the state. I’ve got a sampling of them for you for your reading entertainment.
Several legislators took some lumps, and at least one this weekend took a huge bump from the state’s chief executive:
First off, Kaleb Weis took a hit for his opposition to Governor Noem’s freedom scholarship, pointing out that his home district would have benefitted from some of the enrollment opportunities.
Maybe not the smartest vote he’s ever taken. I’ll just stop there.
Speaking of Universities, Doug Post took a lump today regarding his testimony to the redistricting committee last year about how he wanted to see his area drawn.
I sense a trend about candidates and how their views affect universities.
Lee Schoenbeck, who is celebrating a birthday today, had a nice positive postcard pop into mailboxes with some bullet points on his background, as well as noting his support of Lake Area Technical College:
In strong competition for the title of worst legislator in Pierre, Julie Frye Mueller is finding that her vote in opposition of the general bill has some consequences along the lines of what she voted NO on, in this case the State Veterans Home, which had funding contained in the Bill:
Oops. That might be a challenging vote to explain to the residents of the southern part of her district.
Tom Pischke found himself being held to account for a story that broke on KELOland earlier this year, where he complained on the House Floor that a proposed increase in child support was going to hurt him personally:
You might have probably guessed that he was going to hear that comment again.
And while several members of the hard right took hard hits, District 3 Senate challenger Rachel Dix had a nice bump from Governor Kristi Noem who lent her support for the District 3 Senate Candidate challenging Al Novstrup in the Republican Primary:
And the election inches closer and closer…
Stay tuned. And if you get a campaign postcard, send it on over. We’d love to see!
Never been happier to be a South Dakotan, thanks Lee and Pat
Child Support is one of the hidden taxes that are placed on Families, and encourages divorce at much higher volumes cause most women know they can benefit from the State personally. It practically pushes out fathers from their child’s life by forcing them to pay a ‘tax’ above and beyond them wanting to be part of their child’s life by making them pay a tax regardless of the private investment they choose to make in their child’s life in Housing, Food, Clothing, Education, Lifestyle Activities, etc. Yes – Child Support laws must be reformed, we must help “Good Fathers” fight for equal rights to their Children, let alone support “Shared Parenting Rights” where both parents are involved in their children’s lives.
Let’s not forget, Child Support was the means to hold “bad parents” accountable. It was NOT originally designed to be a “profitably” trust for women, nor the state. It has since led to ‘good fathers” being chased from their child’s life all cause they can no longer afford to provide their child a home, clothing, food, a lifestyle outside the ‘mothers’ household.
Child Support laws must be reformed, they have led to criminalizing, sanctioning, and demonizing ‘good fathers’ while stripping the children of having both parents in their lives.
Yes, Child Support is an asset to be used by “parents” who become the primary caregiver, whereas the other parent is neglecting their responsibility to their children, however, it has become a financial means to profit from by both the mother and the state, while forcing good fathers from the lives of their children.
This is another example of the “RINO” Republicans attempting to demonize the ultra conservative members of the Republican Party, while voting to favor “progressive” more liberalized ideas of financing the state, let alone grooming a more Socialistic-Fascist type society long into the future.
As a proud Republican, I do not believe this is the course a true “Conservative” should take. “WE” should be supporting strong fiscal government, traditional families, keeping families together, NOT tearing them apart.
If Tom Pischke has a plan to adopt and support “True Child Support Reform” – lets seriously create the discussion, lets put families back together again, by adopting newfound policies such as “Shared Parenting” – that favors equal time for our children to share in the daily lives of their children. Lets stop punishing good fathers, and lets hold bad fathers accountable.
Women have taken advantage of Child Support for to damn long, profiting off of a “tax” that has punished good fathers who want to be part of their childs lives, but make it difficult to survive on their own due to an excess burden placed on them beyond the expense of providing a Home, Food, Clothign, Education, and Healthcare alone.
Stop the Hate, Support Families –
What rock did you crawl out from under?
where on earth did you get the idea that child support is intended to punish bad parents???
1/3 of single parent families are living below the poverty line, and almost all of them are mothers. That means the cost of supporting them has been shifted to public assistance programs. They are not “profiting” from the child support they receive from the fathers of their children.
The purpose of child support is to take care of your children so the taxpayers don’t have to. If the mother of your children qualifies for TANF, subsidized housing, food stamps and Medicaid, you aren’t doing your job. Don’t send the bill to the rest of us. We don’t care if you don’t think it’s fair: you fathered them and you should support them. What’s not fair is if we have to support your kids for you. We have enough to do supporting our own. They are your kids, pay up.
Interesting you use big words to place blame even on fathers who are part of their children’s life. There is NO need for child support where there are two parents in that child’s life. Both parents provide foe a jome, both parents contribute to feeding their children, both patents contribute to buying clothes, both patents contribute to providing for education and Healthcare expense. In a 50 50 shared arrangement, where. Oth parents provide foe a home for each child to live in, then rewarding one parent with additional funds called child support is just plain wrong. Women re in fact profiting where child support is not needed. Using your logic, I guess a Father who purchases a home, provides for his kids a room, shelter ,, food, clothes, lifestyle activities, education, and Healthcare while still providing childsupprt to the mother ON TOP of what the father is already providing, is a burden placed on a good father.
Mother’s should NOT be rewarded child support where the father is already pricing for all that to his kids.
Child Suport has become am unfair tax applied to fathers life where the father now begins to struggle to pay his half of tge expenses.
The manner of which you responded is a clear sign the system is broken and in ruins.
YOU use a FAKE NAME cause your either a state welfare participant willfully profiting from the system, or your simply ignorantly wish to blame fathers at all costs.
My dad provided me a place to live, clothes, paid foe my Healthcare, education ans still he was forced to pay child support. Yes, the system is broken.
MOTHERS ARE rewarded for unselfish cheating on their husband’s, terminating a marriage, while choosing a new man. It happens so much these days, the left wing faction chooses to ignore the real problem. That problem is a lack of morals, and easy women choosing bad rotten men them crying wolf cause the relationship did not work out.
I must have hit a nerve cause yoy want to twist my words all around.
Cause yoy use a fake name, I assuming your a woman who begged for a divorce to attack the father of your kids placing against him an unfair tax despite rhe fact he wants to be part of his kids life, proving his kids a home and good life. Your just a twisted liberal nutty person who wants to blame others foe your lack of responsibly.
Grow Up.
As a conservative, I will vote to put morals, values, responsibility back in searching foe a good house wife.
Thanks for confirming your gross unfitness to parent Mike. You and Tom are peas in a pod.
+1
Mike, in my experience women with children don’t leave perfectly good husbands. They leave the ones who are abusive, alcoholic or adulterous. Once a woman has children, she will put up with a lot, usually too much, to make sure they are provided for.
And if you purchase a huge house with a swimming pool and tennis court, but your children are living in subsidized housing with their mom, the value of your home is irrelevant. Nobody cares how much time they spend at your house. We care that we are supporting your kids because you won’t
“MOTHERS ARE rewarded for unselfish cheating on their husband’s, terminating a marriage, while choosing a new man.”
“As a conservative, I will vote to put morals, values, responsibility back in searching foe a good house wife.”
Um.. yeah.
Oofda. Your cultivated image is cracking, Mike.
Stick to the Topic, Notice, I have not attacked you, You seem to attack me.
Tell us more about good housewives, please. Can they keep their shoes?
It’s interesting that you continue to call child support a “tax.”
The Federal Child Support Enforcement program to assist states in enforcing child support started in 1975 as a welfare-recovery program because one third of custodial families were living in poverty and qualified for welfare. Public assistance
is a tax on the rest of us. Child support is a user fee.
I realize the Mad Dads and other wackadoodle “conservatives” don’t know the difference between taxes and user fees but the rest of us do.
Pay it.
I think you ate all mis representing my comments for one, cause you feel sorry that the mother for some reason.
Child Support is NOT needed nor necessary where the father agrees during the divorce decree to provide 50% equal time thus providing his kids a home, food, clothing, pleasure activities, pay for his fge education expenses, whole paying half the Healthcare expenses.
Good father’s providingvthat do not nor should not be forced to pay additional child support to the mother onto of what they are providing. It just becomes a burden on families..
To often child support is being uses as a welfare payment to mothers where the support is not necessary
Yes. Child Support laws need reformed, to account for 50-50 Shared Parenting between both parents which should ve the goal, keeping families strong, together, and fathers a part of their child’s life.
Child Support should only be rewarded for those times where one parent is careless , irresponsible, or absent.
To often child support is rewarded by judges outbof pitty for the mother, while lacking better judgemebt of character of both parents.
There are way more better fathers out there who do take pride in their children, thus providing housing, food, clothing, while covering 5o% of rhe education and health relates expenses of the children than bad fathers.
Divorce is already bad enough, in most situations unexpected thanks to financial stress, heartache, and other life factors that teardown a marriage.
Where there are two willing parents who agree to split ways, but remain in their child’s life, both agreeing to provide a goos life foe their children, there is no need for child support, it’s just a burden at that point.
When my mother asked for a divorce from my dad, despite the fact my dad provided us a home, a good life, took pride in helping in all expenses, the court rules he also needed to pay child support. It was not nessary, and it placed a burden on him. Not only did the divorce make him go bankrupt due to not being able to continue making out house payment, causing foreclosure, he had to start over while building up his business, buy a new home. Thus he remained committed to providing is a goos home, food, a goos life, helped I’m our education, and health care. I say he was not an absent father, but a good father.
Things happen that we can’t always control. Sometimes marriages go wrong, does not mean parents are bad parents.
If the goal is to always blame the father for all family matters that go wrong, then we really are not trying to really fix the problem at all.
The goal should be to keep families together, not year them apart.
The tax code both federal and state tend to favor these days broken famines, it seems to be more beneficial to government to create two family house holds, duel incomes, thus testing allies apart. With all the welfare programs for single parents, the goal today seems to allow Americans to profit from having ad many kids, while driving out one parent, whole allowing the primary parent to profit or gain from public taxes.
That is wrong. South Dakota is and always has been a conservative state, grounded in morals, values, faith. But yet, has allowed itself to become so overly progressive in nature, that it has led to becoming a strong welfare state of mind.
If the current replica party is so ashamed it can’t or chooses not to hear the truth, it to has become the problem, not the solution.
For all you attacking my xommebts for voicing my concerns for helping good fathers, who choose to be part of their child’s if, are also part of the problem of you only wish to attack people for your misdeeds.
Amen.
I have been a proud member of the Republican Party my entire life, mostly thanks to my families deep enrichment in business minded, family minded ideals. But what saddens me, is that the “party” really has gotten away from what made it such a well grounded platform of conservative principles.
“WE” know who the Democrats are. We do not know who the Republican Party is. I have often stated that the party today has become a progressive, liberalized platform, especially at the national level. The Republican Party loves to claim itself as this ‘grand old party” enriched in conservative politics, traditional morals, values, and beliefs, but yet at the same time, has pushed for expanded government, progressive minded acts, while separating itself from its true roots.
As I read these blogs today, I am reminded of the fact that the Democrat and Republican Platforms are really, not that far off from each other. Both love their ‘spending bills’s, both seem to push this progressive framework of government tax subsidies, while both wish to rely on the Federal Govt for monies, programs to enrich the state.
Gone are the founding conservative beliefs of Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, George Mason. Atleast for some of us.
Is there really any “true conservatives” out there today that choose NOT to be beholden to idealistic party principles?
Just on this “topic” alone – Child Support. Rather than fixing the problem, finding solutions to how to mold families, preserve families, enriching a strong culture of “morals, values, faith, and traditional family mindsets” – people like me are hated on, attacked for wanting to find ways to ‘reform’ our child support laws that are in the best interest of everyone.
I told the story of my mom and dad, and how they got divorced, that is one such example of good parents who simply chose to separate thanks to becoming divided in their manner of life goals, but yet, remained every bit committed to us children, each providing us a strong home, morals, values, childcare. It’s families such as mine, as reasons to reform our Child Support Laws. Both my mom and dad provided us kids with strong homes, kept us focused on our education studies, and participated in our healthcare, each providing us food, clothing, and a good life.
Divorce happens, yes. Sometimes marriages simply fail at no fault to neither parent, they simply choose to go separate ways, with no fault to the kids.
Yes, there are fathers who become distant, careless, ignorantly absent from their child’s life, there are also mothers who do the same. But yet, the court system rewards 99% of the mothers cause they feel sorry for them, or they are simply face more hardships then the men. Even I can admit, yes, mothers may have it tougher then fathers, but at the same time, I can also agree, that it goes both ways.
This whole sexist culture divide has to stop if we are to make the State a better place to live for all of us. We have to find common interests, morals, values, principles to reform our laws, especially with Child Support.
I think, legislators like Tom Pischke are trying to do just that. But the pushback from Long time republicans in Pierre are afraid to co-mingle old wounds, they are afraid to give up their long time benefits out of fear of losing their power.
Like I said above, “WE” have fallen in this steep trap of “Welfare For All” mindset today. Using Public Taxes to reward both good and bad people, allowing citizens to profit from public taxes, so much so, that it has led to such high rate of taxation, that none of us can survive. and those of us who want to fix the problem, are being unfairly attacked.
This is why I say, the Republican Party is no better than the Democrats, perhaps the party is NOT as far left as the Democrat Party, but…they are, have become a very progressive party for the most part.
A good friend once taught me, his name was Bill Nees – he ran for President in 2008 placing himself on the presidential ballot in Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, and Florida. No, he had no chance in winning, he did so to prove a point, he did so, to make his voice heard, he did so, to attempt to bring back common traditional principles to both parties, to help showcase the good in America, not the bad. He taught me, “IF it must be, if we want to change our ways, it must start with me:. Meaning, if you want to make a difference, then you my first fix yourself, and set the example, be the change you wish to become.
Growing up in a family, where my parents were divorced has taught me, things happen that you cant control. My parents remained friends even today, both played a 50-50 role in raising us, both used their own means of income to raise us, both provided us a home, clothes, toys, an education, healthcare, both took pride in making sure we had a good life. B oth set the example of what good parents should be, even in times of divorce. When you have two parents who actively participate equally in their chlds life, DO we really need to ‘charge’ any parent with childsupport? No.
I can guarantee you, there are more better fathers out ther than bad ones, lost in all this, thanks the hot topics of abortion, child support, arrogant politics, is that good fathers are out there, who want to actively participate in their childs life, but are driven away by forced child support payments even when they committ to wanting to provide for their kids, they get pushed out due to the burden of a hidden tax placed on their incomes.
We must find a common sense solution to reforming child support programs, before it is too late. Mothers should NOT be guaranteed childsupport where the dad’s actively choose to be part of their child’s life.
This 50-50 Shared Parenting Concept has to be strongly looked at, if we are to ‘save’ families tomorrow.
Mike Zitterich, if you truly believe every child deserves a stay-at-home-mom, you are talking about making men pay enough child support that their ex-wives don’t have to work.
That’s very generous of you, thinking every child’s mother should be a housewife, but most men can’t afford that.
Prior to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, the taxpayers agreed with you. But working mothers everywhere realized they were taking their children to daycare, going to work, to pay taxes so welfare queens could stay home with their kids. Welfare reform was a long time in coming.
Now, if a man wants his children to have a stay-at-home-mom, he will have to pay for it himself.
Your verbose excuses about how your kids spend 50% of their time with you so you shouldn’t have to support them the other half of the time are doing nothing but make me wonder why any woman would want to be married to you. If they spend the other half of their time living on public assistance it doesn’t matter if they are eating steak and lobster every night at your house. I don’t care. Nobody cares. Pay up.
Ann,
You, like most are totally misrepresenting what 50-50 Shared Custody of our children means, and what it does not mean. First and foremost, it is the requirement of “faithful” god-loving parents to love, cherish, and take care of their children above all costs.
What gets lost in this entire discussion is the fact that so many men and women choose to get married for all the wrong reasons, no longer grounded in the personal morals, values, responsibilities, and religious convictions
So many today have chosen to get married based on sex, money, and fame, then grow tired of each other when all that expires after a few short years of financial stress, heartache, and all the issues that come with life.
Fact is, good parents take responsibility for their children through thick and thin. Regardless of the expense, the tiresome workload, and stress.
Bad people tend to ignore all their responsibilities. Period.
Fact is – when two parents choose to take responsibility of taking care of their children even after divorce, and both parents choose to those a children a “HOME” a place the children can live with each parent, a place where each parent contributes equally – food, clothing, education, healthcare, a lifestyle, Childsupport is NOT required, nor necessary.
CHILD SUPPORT is a burden on both sets of parents whom both have agreed to provide for a home, and all the necessities required of them to provide for their children. So why then do some of you “women” choose to force your ex’s to pay childsupport on top of what they are already contributing to?
I will tell you why – Child Support has become to women, a financial loss of income stemming from the decision to end the marriage. Child Support becomes “welfare” paid mostly by ‘fathers’ cause it is seen as the men’s responsibility to make up the difference in “income levels” between man and woman.
The father should NOT have to pay child support where he provides a home where his kids can come live at, reside, providing to the kids a place to nourish themselves. For the father provides all the same things in his home, that the mother has provided in her home. That is essentually the meaning of 50-50 Shared Parenting.
You see, lost in all this hoopla, is the notion that “MEN” owe the woman. Honestly, NO ONE owes anyone, other than to play his or her equal role in providing for their children, taking care of their ‘shared responsibilities’ and playing their role in the relationship with their children.
I grew up in a family of divorced parents, I was very fortunate to have a mother who provided me a place to stay 5 days of the week, and a father who provided me a place to say 2 days a week, while every other week the roles were reversed in order to allow us children ‘equal time’ with both parents. Each of them, my mother and father provided us with clothes, toys, food, an entertainment lifestyle, helped guide us providing for education, and both equally provided us with healthcare. Yes – anytime one of us kids got sick, or needed medical treatment, both of our parents were there to take care of us, and help in paying the medical costs. That is the example of ‘parents’ remaining every bit a part of their children’s life, committed to the upbringing of their children.
While my mom provided us kids with the characteristics of instilling in us the common morals, values of life, teaching us how to take care of little babies, becoming role models to other children through her in-house daycare services; my dad provided to us the same equal characteristics of teaching us tough love, while teaching us how to run a successful business, wile providing to us a entertainment of being involved in the automobile racing family.
Both my parents had agreed during their divorce decree, child support was not necessary, but my dad provided my mom some capital to help buy the clothes, as she was better at shopping than he was, while both parents had agreed, to not move further away, remaining in Sioux Falls until we graduated highschool as to remain close to us kids, while providing for us, their resposibilities of raising us.
You like most on this blog, totally misrepresent the meaning of ‘true’ shared parenting between both parents, cause in the end, you all seem to think – that one parent owes you, when in fact, no one owes you a dime.
Unless there is a parent that chooses to be neglectful in their duties, their responsibilities, becoming an absentee parent, where the “STATE” has the obligation to protect the children, no child support should be forced, nor required on any such parent who chose to remain every bit a part of their child’s life.
Yes, Child Support is a “TAX” on a parent who is already willing to participate, invest his life, his time, and capital in his or her children. It becomes a burden on good parents, whereas it now opposes the best interests of the State itself. And that best interest of the State is to keep “Families” together.
I get it, going thru a divorce is ugly, but where two parents choose to place their kids first, and remain involved in their life, providing their children with all the things they need in life, CHILD SUPPORT is no longer required.
And this coming from a guy who grew up in a family of divorced parents.
We need to be instilling morals, values, responsibilities, discipline in our children today, enough so they become much better parents in the future, so much so we instill the concept of NO SEX before marriage, and stress of choosing the RIGHT partners.
I always thought the Republican Party was a party of morals, values, responsibility, but yet they want to condemn my comments, my beliefs, my thoughts on how to create better policy related to parenting.
“Your verbose excuses about how your kids spend 50% of their time with you so you shouldn’t have to support them the other half of the time are doing nothing but make me wonder why any woman would want to be married to you. If they spend the other half of their time living on public assistance it doesn’t matter if they are eating steak and lobster every night at your house. I don’t care. Nobody cares. Pay up.” Ann Beal
according to Ann, a woman can beg for a divorce, find a new life, separate from her ex- then force her ex- to pay child support on top of him providing a home, food, clothes, healthcare services, education on his time. She says “PAY UP” to pay the mother for the time ‘she has the kids’ …. That is the wrong mentality. Where both parents choose to end hte marriage, they both must then decide to provide a HOME for their Children each. In those homes, the children need clothese, food, and toys. According to Ann, I guess she demands the FATHER provide all that not only in his home, but the mothers home even where the Mother has a new “bo”
I am sorry, that is not how life works, YOU must be responsible for your actions,. if you beg for a divorce cause you no longer love your man, then you better have the means to pay for your children. Period.
This society has gone to the wind, today it seems people want others to always pay for them, cause they lack the responsibility to fend for themselves. That is just wrong in so many ways.
Again, I admit, where one parent is just gone, then the STATE should get involved to help the children, but where two parents each provide 50-50 everything, the STATE shall NOT get involved.
Why in the world is Gov. Noem supporting Rachel Dix??? Rachel isn’t a conservative. She’s a one issue candidate.
Dix is not conservative.
And what one issue might that be?
What is her single issue?
Stop talking out your ass if u have no source or facts to back it up
What did Al Novstrup do to earn the Gov’s opposition? Genuinely curious
He thinks for himself and is conservative.
He thinks about himself and worries more about making “connections” then serving his community.
100%. Him and Mary F are the two most self-serving legislators we’ve had in quite a while.
At least Mary voted to impeach the corruption out of the AG’s office.
Not give two sh*ts about the people he serves. He’s self serving and if you disagree with him, he will be a condescending jerk on why he thinks you are wrong.
I’m am absolutely fine with this endorsement.
At least he’s not a thief though so he has that going for him.
Support for Dix is a bit far in the purging of conservatives.
Wait? I though Sneve was fake news and the gov wasn’t helping in the primaries? She had a change of course in the last week? That has to be it, the only answer, bc her comms team would NEVER feign indignity for purposes of issuing a press release.