Kudos to the Argus Leader’s Jonathan Ellis and KELOland’s Kevin Woster for being recognized by the Washington Post as South Dakota’s Best political Reporters.
For our readers who have been to CPAC before – What did you like/dislike about the event?
I’m looking at arranging my schedule to go in about a month, and I’m wondering your thoughts. Is it worth it? What parts were a must see? What parts were “meh, don’t bother?”
Gov. Daugaard Names Kim Malsam-Rysdon As Secretary Of Health
PIERRE, S.D. – Gov. Dennis Daugaard announced today that he will appoint Kim Malsam-Rysdon as Secretary of Health.
Malsam-Rysdon has held the position in an interim role since last month. She will replace Secretary Doneen Hollingsworth, who retired after nineteen years as secretary.
“Public health has never been more important as we see the need to respond to emerging issues such as Ebola and a recent outbreak of contagious diseases like measles”, said Gov. Daugaard. “Kim will not only be able to lead our state’s response to these issues but also ensure we are doing all we can to address chronic diseases and access to quality health care services across our state”.
Malsam-Rysdon will continue to serve as senior advisor to the Governor and as a member of the Governor’s Executive Committee. She previously served as Secretary of the Department of Social Services.
“I appreciate the ability to serve the state of South Dakota in this role and look forward to leading our state’s health department,” said Malsam-Rysdon. “Public health issues and access to health care are critical issues that impact individuals and families across South Dakota. I look forward to working with stakeholders throughout our state to address these needs.
Donald and Michael London Indicted by Brule County Grand Jury
PIERRE, S.D – Attorney General Marty Jackley and Brule County States Attorney David Natvig announced today that Donald G. London, 42, Kimball and Michael J. London, 66, Chamberlain, were indicted last week by a Brule County Grand Jury. Donald G. London was indicted on two counts of attempted first degree murder, class 2 felony, punishable by up to 25 years in the state penitentiary and/or
$50,000 fine and 3 counts of aggravated assault on law enforcement officer, class 2 felony, punishable by up to 25 years in the state penitentiary and/or $50,000 fine. With the Habitual Offender filing, Donald G. London faces up to faces up to fifty years imprisonment. Michael J. London was indicted on 2 counts of aiding and abetting aggravated assault on law enforcement officer, class 2 felony, punishable by up to 25 years in the state penitentiary and/or $50,000 fine and 1 count of accessory to crime, class 5 felony, punishable by up to 5 years in the state penitentiary and or $10,000 fine.
Charges stem from the armed standoff in Kimball, South Dakota on January 7, 2015. Arraignment is scheduled for January 27, 2015 at 1:30 p.m. at the Brule County Courthouse.
The case continues to be investigated by the Division of Criminal Investigation and is being prosecuted by the Brule County States Attorney’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office.
Remember the minimum wage increase promoted by State Democrats and passed by voters? Democrats poo-poohed arguments that it mainly benefitted high school and college students who are working these low wage, part-time positions while they also go to school.
Well, here’s a real world example of exactly who the measure is hurting. In the January 14th edition of the SDSU Collegeian student newspaper, the top of the fold story is titled “New Minimum Wage Affects Union Hours” and discusses how the SDSU Student Union has been forced to cut hours so as to remain on budget directly as a result of the minimum wage:
Students learned this week that the Union will close at 10 p.m. daily. This cuts two hours off of the former hours in order to adjust, for the minimum wage increase that went into effect Jan. 1 according to this week’s Monday morning message sent out by Students’ Association President, Caleb Finck.
In order to compensate for the minimum wage increase from $7.25 to $8.50 per hour, Novotny along with other administration, including the Student Union Advisory Committee, had to make changes in the facility, Novotny said The. changes need to compensate for a total of $30,000 in student labor.
If The Union goes back to closing at midnight next year, funding for the facility will have to increase. This money will most likely come from a General Activity Fee increase, meaning that students will have to pay more to keep the building open later.
Cutting hours to remain on budget… and if they want those hours back, they’re going to face a general activity fee increase, pushing their tuition up higher.
Cuts in services and increased tuition fees. All I have to say is to remind them to remember who made this happen. The South Dakota Democrat Party.
Here is a set of six footed water glasses made by Fostoria for US Senator Larry Pressler, Republican, who represented South Dakota from 1978 to 1996. He was defeated in ’96 by Democrat Tim Johnson who retired this year, and Pressler ran for Johnson’s seat as an independent. During his career he was regarded as an iconoclastic, somewhat quixotic, quirky Senator, certainly one of the more interesting members of Congress at the time.
The glassware was made by Fostoria, and is marked on the bottom of each glass, shown in a photo. They are heavy high quality glass engraved with the United States Senate seal and Larry Pressler’s signature on the side. They are 5 3/4″ tall and 3 1/4″ diameter across the top. They show no wear, and have no chips or hairlines. You are bidding on the entire set of six.
Included as a bonus is a 1993 booklet welcoming Senator Pressler’s visitors to Washington. It is 46 pages long, filled with general information to help visitors locate interesting things to do and see, and to find their way around DC and vicinity. The booklet is in near mint condition.
Remember the dishes issued by supermarkets, where they’d sell the plates one week, and a serving platter the next?
It’s entirely possible that someone wanted to elect Larry Pressler to the US Senate because the “Larry Pressler” teacups hadn’t been issued yet, and well, they needed that to complete their set.
At taxpayer expense.
If you recall, Senate Bill 69, the measure which proposed to move the date to start candidate petitioning back to December 1, as well as remove the registered mail ability for candidates to mail petitions in, had it’s hearing in Senate State Affairs Committee on Wednesday, January 21st.
During that hearing, the South Dakota Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, claimed they had an amendment for the measure….. but, oops. They didn’t bring it with them, because they didn’t have it prepared. So, they planned on getting it to legislators later that day.
Later that day came and went. And no amendment. So, it was delayed until Friday, January 23rd.
December 23rd came. And, wasn’t there supposed to be an amendment to be dealt with? Apparently the ACLU (See 2:30 here) JUST had the amendment for the legislators at the start of that meeting, giving them no time to review the proposed change to legislation. Which makes you wonder if the ACLU in South Dakota is as utterly disorganized as it appears to be.
This morning, it sounds as if that we have more amendments to the measure. Which was pushed back once again.
It’s possible that by the end of this legislative session we could see a bill cleaning up some messiness in State Election Law. But at this rate, that date may not too far from the mark.
Powerful Politician Silenced?
…One in particular is Annette Bosworth, who is facing 12 felony charges over alleged “petition violations”.
BWAAA HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
I’m not sure what’s funnier, Howie’s continued embrace of former Sado/Masochism pornographer Lee Stranahan as a valid news source, or calling Annette Bosworth a powerful politician?
A legislative measure has been presented to the state legislature with regards to the conduct of legislators acting as delegates to a national constitutional convention. It says in part:
Section 2. No delegate from South Dakota to an Article V convention has the authority to vote to allow consideration of or vote to approve an unauthorized amendment for ratification to the United States of America Constitution. Any delegate casting a vote to allow consideration or approval of an unauthorized amendment shall be immediately recalled by the secretary of state and replaced by an alternate chosen by the Executive Board of the Legislative Research Council.
Section 3. Every candidate for delegate or alternate from South Dakota to the Article V convention shall take the following oath:
“I do solemnly swear or affirm that to the best of my abilities, I will, as a delegate or alternate to an Article V convention, uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States of America and the State of South Dakota. I will not vote to allow consideration of or to approve any unauthorized amendment proposed for ratification to the United States of America Constitution.”
This legislation is coming on the heels of proposals for the states to call a constitutional convention for the purpose of amending the US Constitution in a non-traditional manner, which is allowed by law. Instead of the state’s ratifying amendments directly, they’d send delegates to a convention.
Not a bad thought at all, but as more time goes by between the time when this was first brought up, and a time when states are going to be able to pull it off, paranoia is apparently setting in.
“I do solemnly swear or affirm that to the best of my abilities….. I will not vote to allow consideration of or to approve any unauthorized amendment proposed for ratification to the United States of America Constitution.”
Um. Yeah. Is it just me, or is that kind of a dumb thing to put in an oath? If they’re going to put that type of proviso onto what the delegate is going to vote for, why don’t they tell him how he’s going to cast his ballot? And if they’re going to do that, why hold a convention of this type, as opposed to amending the constitution in the traditional manner?
The best part?
Section 5. Any delegate who violates the oath contained in section 3 of this Act is subject to a civil fine of not more than five thousand dollars to be levied by the secretary of state and deposited in the state general fund.
What!?! And we’re going to attach a weird civil/criminal penalty to it as well?
First off, The obvious way around it is to simply attach unrelated acts to the main amendment (just like Congress does), leaving the original title and intent. It would allow participants for such a convention to cast their ballot in compliance with.
Secondly, you have to consider who we’re sending to this type of convention.
The people elected to the legislature have been elected by the people of their respective legislative districts to represent their voice in the state Capitol. So, they’re entrusted with doing the right thing by taxpayers to start. The people selected to go to this type of constitutional convention would be chosen by this august group, the South Dakota State Legislature, by those people we chose to send to Pierre.
So allegedly, the ones going to this type of convention are not our best. They’re ‘the best of the best.’
Shouldn’t we be able to entrust them to discuss, debate and amend amongst their peers from other states in this incubator of Democracy? Shouldn’t we be able to entrust them to conduct the types of discussions and formulate policies, the likes of which haven’t been seen since the Bill of Rights?
Putting this kind of limitation on delegates seems…. small. And in direct opposition to the reasons we’d conduct a grand experiment in Democracy such as a constitutional convention.
President Obama is planning to do something that Rick Weiland wanted no part of during this past election. Traveling to South Dakota.
President Obama’s visit to Boise, Idaho on Wednesday leaves him just three states in the entire country he hasn’t been to as president: South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah.
Now, Obama lost all these states — big time – as he noted in his speech at Boise State University: “Of course, in the general election, I got whupped. I got whupped twice, in fact. But that’s OK. I’ve got no hard feelings.”
But the president has visited plenty of states where he lost badly. (He only got 28 percent of the vote in Wyoming in 2012. Though, to be fair, he only visited there once in 2009.)
No doubt Obama will want to check all 50 off his bucket list before his presidency ends – though including his travels as a candidate in 2008 he’s already hit them all. Press Secretary Josh Earnest confirmed as much, saying he wouldn’t call it a “bucket list” … “But I do think the president would like to have the opportunity to visit all 50 states as president of the United States. So hopefully we’ll be able to get that done in the next two years.”
And his last three remaining states have a good bit to offer. South Dakota has Mount Rushmore and roaming buffalo, South Carolina has charming Charleston and some solid golfing in Hilton Head, and Utah (where Obama had his worst showing in 2012 with only 25 percent of the vote) has the Great Salt Lake and Park City skiing.
I’m really looking forward to all the photo-ops that the state’s few remaining Democrat officeholders will have to be pictured arm in arm with President Obama.
Especially at election time.