Author: @SoDakCampaigns

HB 1217 Style and Form veto resisted 67-2.. Where does the legislature go from here?

@SoDakCampaigns

This morning, the House of Representatives rejected the Governor’s Style and form changes to the measure on a 67-2 vote, with only Rep’s Tidemann and Anderson joining the Governor’s position on the vote.

The question remaining is now, is where does the legislature go from here?

The Governor has been pretty clear about what she believes, which seems to indicate little interest in being any outside group’s legislative guinea pig for testing out legislation and the resulting boycotts and lawsuits.  And as far as her style and form rescissions, she took a pretty hard swipe at the parts that expanded government.

And she apparently underlined that position with an official full veto after it went back to her.

So, now the ball is back in the House’s court.

Stand by.

KELO reporting House may reject Noem veto.

@SoDakCampaigns

From KELOLAND news comes a report that the Speaker of the House is at loggerheads with Governor Noem on her recommended style and form changes to HB 1217, and will be telling the House to reject them:

Noem’s changes aim to drop college athletes from those potentially impacted by the bill. She also seeks to drop a requirement that a student’s biological sex is verified every school year.

In a statement, Gosch said “I will be recommending that the House of Representatives rejects Governor Noem’s proposal as unconstitutional.”

Read it all here.

US Senator John Thune’s Weekly Column: It’s Time to Expose Big Tech Bias

@SoDakCampaigns

It’s Time to Expose Big Tech Bias
By Sen. John Thune

This Congress, I have the privilege to serve as the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Communications, Media, and Broadband. Among many other important issues, this assignment allows me to continue my work to hold social media platforms accountable, particularly in the news and information space. Consumers have become increasingly troubled about the way their information is used by social media platforms, and how these sites decide what news and information we see. And there are increasing numbers of anecdotes to suggest that some social media platforms are moderating content in a biased or political way.

Currently, content moderation on social media platforms is governed by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which was enacted into law 25 years ago, long before the advent of social media. Section 230 provides internet sites that host user-generated content – sites like YouTube or Twitter or Facebook – with immunity for the content users post on their sites. For example, if somebody posts a video on YouTube that contains illegal content, YouTube isn’t held legally responsible for that content.

Today, federal law does not require that social media sites be at all accountable to consumers for those content moderation decisions. That’s why I introduced the bipartisan Platform Accountability and Consumer Transparency Act, or the PACT Act.  My bill would preserve the benefits of Section 230 – like the internet growth and widespread dissemination of free speech it has enabled – while increasing accountability and consumer transparency around content moderation.

Content moderation is certainly not all bad. The problem is that content moderation has been – and largely continues to be – a black box, with consumers having little or no idea how the information they see has been shaped by the sites they’re visiting.

The PACT Act would address this problem by increasing transparency around the content moderation process. Until relatively recently, sites like Facebook and Twitter would remove a user’s post without explanation and without an appeals process. And even as platforms start to shape up their act with regard to transparency and due process, it’s still hard for users to get good information about how content is moderated.

Under the PACT Act, if a site chooses to remove your post, it has to tell you why it made that decision, and it must explain how your post violated the site’s terms of use. The PACT Act would also require sites to have an appeals process – so if Facebook, for example, removes one of your posts, it would not only have to tell you why, but it would have to provide a way for you to appeal that decision.

We’ve seen increased concern lately about news articles being removed from social media sites. Under the PACT Act, a newspaper whose article was posted on Facebook or Twitter and then removed by one of those platforms could challenge Facebook or Twitter, which would have to provide a reason for removing the article and allow the newspaper to appeal the decision.

My legislation would also help us develop the data necessary to demonstrate whether social media platforms are removing content in a biased or political fashion. The PACT Act requires detailed transparency reports every six months from large social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook, which will help to provide the data needed to determine whether and where biased moderation exists.

My bill is a serious, bipartisan approach to the issue of Section 230 reform. It would go a long way toward making social media platforms more accountable to consumers and increasing transparency around the content moderation process.

###

Congressman Dusty Johnson’s Weekly Column: The Next Big Thing

@SoDakCampaigns

The Next Big Thing
By Rep. Dusty Johnson
March 26, 2021

Over the last two months, Speaker Pelosi has passed one large bill after another. From the federalization of state elections to immigration reform, we’ve just about seen it all.

I’m eager to move past the first 100 days of the session and hopeful we can move on to legislation that has a chance of passing in the Senate. So what’s the next big thing Congress will tackle?

At the beginning of the Congress, I was newly appointed to the Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee. T&I is known for its bipartisan work – every five years this committee tackles a highway reauthorization package, and this year will be no different. Both Republicans and Democrats have started to lay the groundwork for what’s to come.

Yesterday, I joined Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg in a committee hearing on the new administration’s priorities for the highway bill. Secretary Buttigieg highlighted the bipartisan approach the committee has taken in the past because “every citizen, regardless of political affiliation, shares the need for reliable roads.” I share that sentiment.

But actions speak louder than words. Nancy Pelosi and the Biden Administration have shown, through legislation and executive orders, that they prioritize “environmental justice” over small business owners and rural communities. I believe there is a lot of room for environmentally-sound policies in the transportation space, but Secretary Buttigieg’s plan will have a price tag of $3 trillion. Incredibly, that’s ten times the price tag of the last five-year highway bill.

Infrastructure is popular. So it worries me that like the last COVID package, the Biden Administration is using it to advance $2 trillion of the proposed spending is completely unrelated to roads, bridges and even broadband.

As I mentioned, the last bipartisan five-year highway reauthorization, which occurred under the Obama Administration, cost $305 billion. While hundreds of billions is by no means small, why can’t we move forward in the same, more appropriately sized manner?

I’m hopeful we can get on track and push forward a highway bill that meets the middle of the road. We need to ensure American infrastructure stays competitive and accessible, that our permitting process is fair and certain, and that rural roads receive the updates they desperately need.

President Biden promised unity and that he would work on behalf of all people, I hope he maintains that promise of bipartisanship as we begin our work on the reauthorization of the highway bill. It only happens every five years, we need to get it right.

###

Governor Kristi Noem’s Weekly Column: Fairness in Women’s Sports

@SoDakCampaigns


Fairness in Women’s Sports

By: Governor Kristi Noem 
March 26, 2021

Everyone knows that I am willing to fight for what I believe in. Some have even accused me of fighting too much! And one fight that I’ve taken on for years is fairness in women’s sports. And it’s a very simple fight: only girls should play girls’ sports.

This is very personal for me. I’ve been a 15-year-old girl in a locker room. Thankfully, I never had to worry about having a boy in that locker room next to me. My daughters, Kassidy and Kennedy, both played sports in college. If my girls had been playing against men, their ability to compete would have been dramatically limited.

Kassidy is pregnant with a baby girl right now. I want that baby – my granddaughter – to have the same opportunities that I had and that my daughters had.

And it’s a fight that I’ve taken on in the past. When the federal government tried to force boys and girls to compete against each other in 4-H rodeo, I stood up to protect fairness. Other leaders stayed out of that fight. But we won. We protected fairness in rodeo.

When we take on these important fights, we have to do so in a smart way. Throughout the COVID pandemic, I always made sure that I knew what my authorities were, and what they were not. We have to fight these important battles in smart ways, based on the authorities that we do have. We have to take actions that actually do good for the people of South Dakota, not just pick fights that feel good.

We have to do this right. If we lose, we could set back protections for our girls. And that’s not what anybody wants.

We are going to continue to protect women’s sports in South Dakota. We’re working to protect them at the K-12 level. And we’re building a coalition to take on the NCAA so that we can ensure protections at the collegiate level as well. To join that coalition, you can go to DefendTitleIXnow.com and sign our compact.

Again, the issue is very simple: only girls should play girls’ sports. Let’s take on this fight in a way that we can win, and let’s keep working together to build a coalition to make sure that the NCAA protects fairness as well.

###

Thank you Governor Noem for signing SB 182 and Senator Otten for bringing it and helping families of people with disabilities.

@SoDakCampaigns

In the Press Release that just went out, Governor Noem signed Senate Bill 182, brought by Senator Herman Otten.  While not a big or flashy piece of legislation, it’s a measure that will do some good for families who have children with disabilities.

What Senate Bill 182 does is to provide a modest and logical addition to the tax code for property taxes to help support parents of adult children with disabilities.

This bill seeks to add language regarding who can claim “owner-occupied” for property taxes to include an “adult child with a disability”. The current statute as written already includes “a parent.” This means, currently, I purchased a home for a parent, it would be classified as “owner occupied” and we would be taxed at that rate. What the bill did was to also include “adult child with a disability” so families like my own who might purchase a home to rent to their adult child with a disability would be categorized as “owner occupied” and taxed at that rate.

What the bill does is offers a slight bit of relief as families try to balance assisting their child with a disability, while helping to give them a sense of independence. In my own case, my wife and I have a 16 year old daughter with Autism and her future is always on our minds. Providing this small change in law will provide a much needed and appreciated support for families as we parent our adult children with disabilities and help them to reach their highest level of independence in their home communities.

Thank you Governor Noem for signing SB 182 and Senator Otten for bringing this measure to help families of people with disabilities.

Governor Noem Signs Remaining Bills into Law

@SoDakCampaigns


Governor Noem Signs Remaining Bills into Law

PIERRE, S.D. – Governor Noem has signed sixteen bills into law:

  • SB 17 authorizes the South Dakota Department of Corrections to purchase certain real property.
  • SB 95 provides protection for actions assisting an impaired lawyer or judge.
  • SB 144 makes an appropriation to provide for a crisis stabilization unit.
  • SB 167 establishes criteria for a regional nursing facility designation.
  • SB 182 revises provisions regarding owner occupied dwelling requirements.
  • SB 186 makes an appropriation for behavioral and mental health service support in crisis stabilization.
  • HB 1013 makes an appropriation to fund tax refunds for elderly persons and persons with a disability.
  • HB 1064 makes an appropriation for and the establishment of peer support and critical incident stress management training for first responder organizations.
  • HB 1065 adopts the emergency medical personnel licensure interstate compact.
  • HB 1139 requires that assisted living facilities create and post visitation policies.
  • HB 1154 prohibits employment contracts restricting competitive health care practices.
  • HB 1179 provides for physician wellness programs.
  • HB 1228 revises provisions regarding industrial hemp.
  • HB 1261 revises certain provisions related to the training curricula required of a person appointed as a guardian or a conservator.
  • HB 1263 provides price transparency for healthcare costs.
  • HB 1265 makes an appropriation for the improvement of the radio system in South Dakota.

Governor Noem has signed 247 bills into law this legislative session. There are no remaining bills awaiting action by the Governor.

Governor Noem Signs Pro-Life Bills into Law

@SoDakCampaigns


Governor Noem Signs Pro-Life Bills into Law

PIERRE, S.D. – Governor Noem has signed four pro-life bills into law, includingHB 1110, which bans abortions based on a diagnosis of Down syndrome.

“The Declaration of Independence summarizes what we all know in our hearts to be true: God created each of us and endowed all of us with the right to life. This is true for everyone, including those with an extra chromosome,” said Governor Kristi Noem. “I look forward to the day when the Supreme Court recognizes that all preborn children inherently possess this right to life, too. Until that time comes, I am pleased to sign a ban on the abortion of a preborn child, just because that child is diagnosed with Down syndrome, as well as several other important pro-life bills.”

The three other pro-life bills include:

  • SB 183 declares certain contract provisions regarding abortion as unenforceable.
  • HB 1114 provides a definition of abortion.
  • HB 1130 establishes requirements for the presentation of a written statement regarding the discontinuance of a drug-induced abortion.

Previously this session, Governor Noem signed HB 1051, which maintains the life of any child born alive.

Governor Noem has signed 231 bills into law this legislative session.

###

Governor releases letter on Medical Marijuana changes prior to final legislative day

@SoDakCampaigns

The Governor is offering some suggestions to legislators in advance of Monday’s return of legislators for Veto day advocating for a legislative fix for the mess that was the medical marijuana initiated measure:

Letter to Legislators on Medical Marijuana by Pat Powers on Scribd

As detailed in the letter, the Governor has offered the following as draft legislation:

Draft Legislation for Medical Marijuana by Pat Powers on Scribd

What are your thoughts? Will legislators fix this on Monday, or are we going to a special session?