5 questions with…… Lisa Furlong, Chair of South Dakotan’s for Fair Lending

lisa_and_pat

You won’t find this at KELOLAND or in the Argus Leader. This is the interview you’ve been waiting for. I had the opportunity yesterday to sit down and spend some time with Lisa Furlong, chair of South Dakotan’s for Fair Lending.

And as opposed to the type of person her opponents are making her out to be, guess what? She’s sweet, unassuming, and as nice as she could be. In other words, she’s your mom.

FIVE QUESTIONS WITH SOUTH DAKOTANS FOR FAIR LENDING CHAIR LISA FURLONG

I understand that this is the first time you’ve ever personally gotten involved in an effort like this. What made you decide to do this and is it what you expected it to be?

Well, this type of involvement is pretty new to me. I’m no politician or professional at this sort of thing. I just want to do what’s right for South Dakota.

I am a single mother of two teenagers, I work hard to provide for them. We attend church every week. I believe that everyone has a right to be treated fairly. People should have some sort of an expectation that there will be safeguards in place to protect them from unfair lending practices. At the same time though, there are those of us that might need somewhere to turn…you know…to cover things when times get tough – a kid’s broken arm or a car repair, for example. I don’t see why there can’t be some sort of compromise here. As a single mom I understand financial difficulties. I would hate to have families in a pinch have less options to help find a way to climb their way out.

What would your proposed measure do and how is it different from other payday lending measures being proposed?

Our measure strikes the right balance in protecting people from predatory lending and preserving free market principles to ensure their access to credit. In fact, many would say our measure goes even further than that of the proposed 36% cap. This is a constitutional amendment, so it will be harder for politicians to change down the road. It is also an 18% cap, which is half of what the other proposal is asking for. I think it is very important to point out that the 36% cap proposal is a change in state statutes, which the legislature can overturn. However, our measure places greater protections for borrowers in South Dakota by putting an 18% cap on interest rates right in the constitution – making it much more difficult for special interests and politicians to undermine or weaken it. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the 36% cap.

Is this a “phony” or “fake” petition as has been suggested by those pushing competing measures, as well as some in the press?

Frankly, I think that is offensive. Our measure is thoughtful, reasoned, and just as real, if not more so, than any others out there. I’m not an Obama operative or a politician like the ringleaders of the other effort. I’m just a working mom. We have as much right under our state constitution to put our ballot measure before the people of South Dakota as anyone else. For anyone to say otherwise is somewhat arrogant and just plain wrong. I have not questioned the motives of others circulating competing measures. It is the South Dakota way to stand up for yourself and I think that’s what I am doing here.

There have been news stories recently about a man, “Deacon Pete,” or also known as “Floyd Pickett.” Leaders of a similar measure to yours have made claims that this man has been sent in from out of state to disrupt the business of those seeking to cap payday loans. What are your thoughts on this situation and has Mr. Pickett attempted to interfere with the efforts of your group at all?

You know, I have seen news reports on all that…and if what they are saying is true I…I think it is very unfortunate. I think it is very important that South Dakotans make the decisions here, not folks from out of state. I don’t know much more than what’s been on tv, but I’ve watched the same circus that everyone else has. And I do know that our supporters have been heckled and made to feel intimidated when they were trying to collect signatures at the fair, but I have no idea if that was by the same people as this guy…Pickett or Pete or whatever…or even supporters of other committees. I really don’t think it is clear who is behind it all or what the point of it is, but the whole thing seems like a big distraction. A big…unfortunate…distraction.

I know that you have put out quite a few statements as issues have come up, I know this because I am on the press list and receive your statements as I assume the rest of the media in the state do, but it seems that you don’t get the same level of coverage or deference as the competing ballot committee does. Do you agree with this assessment and, if so, why do you think this is?

Look, I get it. The mainstream media wants to sensationalize this story because a good fight sells. It’s certainly a bit frustrating to see so many of the news organizations take the side of one loud voice and report it as fact, often times without even mentioning that there’s another side or a different view. I think we are all used to the liberal media bias that exists these days. I guess it’s just part of what comes with this sort of thing nowadays and is what it is.

I certainly appreciate you for giving us a chance to talk about this effort though, Pat!

And Thank you for the interview Lisa. And for those of you who would like to take a look at the measure that started circulation today – you can read below – PP:

18_paydayloan.pdf

As a state legislator, I call upon my magical state legislator powers, and banish thee…

The short term lending campaign is getting a bit silly at this point:

Hickey does not expect this kind of commotion to die down any time soon, but says these alleged efforts will not stop his goal of capping payday loan interest rates.

“As a state legislator, I call for North American Title Loan Company to leave the state of South Dakota,” Hickey said.

Read it here.

Is that like Kathy Tyler using her authority as a legislator to overturn the decision of a court?

How exactly does a state legislator call for a company to leave the state of South Dakota? Could it be magical state legislator powers that supersede time, space, the rules of evidence, South Dakota State Translation: Property of the Legislative Research Council. Law and the US Constitution?

I’m guessing it didn’t work since he’s resigning. (Steve must not have turned his magic ring back in to LRC, and thought it would still work.)

Businesses preparing for the perpetually-increasing minimum wage

Are businesses preparing for the impact of the perpetually-increasing minimum wage? Absolutely.  From the Argus Leader:

Sioux Falls McDonald’s customers will soon be able to order and pay for their meals from an app on their cell phone.

The technology will virtually eliminate the odds of some 16-year-old behind the counter messing up your order, checking “ketchup” when you wanted “mustard.”

As for that 16-year old, will their job be the next thing to go away?

Local restaurant owners insist the answer is no, but experts elsewhere predict a radical transformation is on the horizon for retail and restaurant workers as artificial intelligence, robots and other automation takes over many of the tasks humans perform today.

Read it all here.

Sorry local restaurant owners. If you disagree, you’re either kidding yourselves, or the article writer isn’t talking to many of them.  When it becomes cost neutral to install an automated system versus using a live employee, guess which one the employer is going to pick?

And as we experience the perpetually-increasing minimum wage for jobs that aren’t worth $10 or $15 an hour, that trend is only going to accelerate.

Ginning up the outrage because Businesses are there to lose money and go bankrupt.

I just caught this on facebook, and thought it brought up a few items worthy of discussion, especially taking a contrarian viewpoint just for the sake of it.

There’s been a bit of hullabaloo over the group, and as you might notice by Steve Hickey’s comment below, some demonizing/dehumanizing (see “the industry is slime comment) going on.  But, are their actions worthy of the coverage that former Obama Campaign manager Steve Hildebrand is trying to whip up by calling his buddies in the media to cover?

Noting the post:

saltandlight

First, regarding Steve Hickey’s comment implying there’s something wrong that the group is “in front of Target today collecting signatures and their petitions haven’t been approved by the Secretary of State.”  I think my reply would be “so what?”

There are lots of groups who informally gather names on petitions, with some trying to gauge support on an issue so as to determine whether or not there is support for the change. And I mean lots. If there weren’t, then I suspect change.org wouldn’t exist.

From a political organization standpoint, if you’ve got a group of people hired, and are waiting for the AG and Secretary of State to complete their process, do you really want them sitting on their butts getting paid for doing nothing?  Why not send them out to get signatures of interested people that you can easily go back to.  The people who signed before are clearly identified supporters who signed a preliminary petition of support. It should be child’s play to send people back to them to get a signature on a real petition.

It’s not like they can use them otherwise. They’re signed and dated.

And then, there’s the other part where the Reverend Hickey tries to “raise” the level of discourse – “The industry is slime, and they don’t care about anything but staying in business.

Pardon me, but how dare they try to stay in business!  Businesses: Steve Hickey believes you are now there to lose money and go bankrupt.  How dare you invest money, build buildings to house your company, hire and pay staff, and think you are allowed to earn a profit off of your efforts. What in the hell do you think this is, a society based on capitalism? We changed to socialism a long time ago, dammit!

And that’s the point. In our allegedly free society, you should be free to choose to patronize a legal business, and do business with them, Or, you’re free not to. No one is holding a gun to your head.

You know, there’s lots of things to get outraged about. Let’s save the shock and outrage for things such as a drug using parent (allegedly) killing their child. Or a government holding a pipeline project hostage for 7 years.

But someone signing up like minded people to support their cause? Or *gasp* thinking that the free enterprise system is alive and well in these United States?

I just can’t gin up the same level of umbrage that others with more time on their hands are able to.

AG Posts Explanations for Slick Rick Weiland’s attempt to rewrite election laws to hide the D label.

Attorney General Explanation Released for Initiated Constitutional Amendment Establishing Nonpartisan Elections

Marty JackleyPIERRE –South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today an Attorney General Explanation for a proposed Constitutional Amendment has been filed with the Secretary of State. This statement will appear on petitions that will be circulated by the sponsor of the proposed amendment. If the sponsor obtains a sufficient number of signatures on the petitions by November 9, 2015, as certified by the Secretary of State, the measure will be placed on the ballot for the November 2016 general election. This is a measure to change the Constitution, as opposed to changing state statutes (which requires 13,871), therefore the sponsor will need 27,741 signatures.

1. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution establishing nonpartisan elections
2. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution establishing nonpartisan elections and requiring secret ballot elections for certain legislative officers

Under South Dakota law, the Attorney General is responsible for preparing explanations for proposed initiated measures, referred laws, and South Dakota Constitutional Amendments. Specifically, the explanation includes a title, an objective, clear and simple summary of the purpose and effect of the proposed measure and a description of the legal consequences.

To view the Attorney General Explanation for the measure, as well as the final form of the measure submitted to this office, please click on the links:

http://atg.sd.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=4iP1eFfktCk%3d&tabid=442
http://atg.sd.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=lnmHEaGmj7k%3d&tabid=442

Slick Rick Election Rewrite

South Dakota Conservatives Lunch tomorrow in Sioux Falls

(I can’t make it, because I have a different luncheon to attend, but if you’re in Sioux Falls, and are seeking some great conservative camaraderie tomorrow, check out the SD Conservatives Lunch at the W 41st St Pizza Ranch in Sioux Falls. – PP)

South-Dakota-State-Flag

You are invited to attend the
South Dakota Conservatives Lunch
on the second Thursday of each month
from 12:00 to 1:00 P.M.
at the Pizza Ranch located at
2717 West 41st Street in Sioux Falls.

Please come share your opinions, voice your concerns, meet fellow conservatives, and learn about the efforts and events of various conservative organizations in South Dakota.

The cost of the buffet lunch and drink is $9.99. For more information, please contact Chad Krier
at (605) 370-2778.

Noem Urges Administration to Prioritize Sanford Lab Research

noem press header kristi noem headshot May 21 2014Noem Urges Administration to Prioritize Sanford Lab Research

WASHINGTON D.C. – In a letter to Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, Office of Management and Budget Director Shaun Donovan, and Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren, Rep. Noem urged the administration to prioritize the Department of Energy’s Long Baseline Neutrino Facility (LBNF) – a research project planned at the Sanford Underground Research Facility in Lead, South Dakota, along with other facilities across the country.

“The neutrino research to be conducted in South Dakota could lead to faster global communications, better nuclear weapons detection technologies, and a new understanding of how the world around us works,” said Noem.  “To accomplish any of this, however, the administration must see the Long Baseline Neutrino Facility experiment as imperative to our national interests and make the research a priority, as they have done in the past.  This is the future of scientific research.”

The Long Baseline Neutrino Facility experiment focuses on the study of neutrinos – one of the least understood particles in the universe.  It seeks to uncover their structure and behavior in the hopes of developing new technological advances as well as educating and training students.  To study the properties of neutrinos, the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois would produce an intense beam of neutrinos, which would travel 800 miles across the United States to the deep underground lab at the Sanford Underground Research Facility in South Dakota.

Earlier this year, the Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel (P5) outlined the 10-year strategic plan for high-energy physics experiments in the U.S.  The report specifically recommends research into dark matter and neutrinos, both fields of study the Sanford Lab is recognized for.

The Sanford Underground Research Facility employs 125 individuals full-time at its facility in Lead.

To read a copy of the letter, please click here.

###

Pro-pot Ballot group offering drinks for those who sign petitions. See 12-26-15 for what NOT to do in petition circulation.

Melissa Mentele’s pro-medical pot organization “New Approach South Dakota” is apparently out there in the field collecting signatures. And if you were quick enough the other day, you could get a free drink if you went down to the Longbranch in Pierre & signed their petition:

illegal_inducement

“Our volunteer is offering a free beverage to whoever comes down to sign!”  Yeah… the only problem with that is state law:

12-26-15.   Bribery of voter as misdemeanor–Acts constituting bribery. It is a Class 2 misdemeanor for any person, directly or indirectly, by the person or through any other person:

(6)      To pay, lend, contribute, or offer or promise to pay, lend, or contribute, any money or other valuable consideration, to or for any voter or to or for any other person, to sign any nominating, referendum, initiated measure, or initiated constitutional amendment petition;
(7)      To give, offer, or promise any office, place, or employment, or to promise to procure or endeavor to procure any office, place, or employment to or for any voter, or to or for any other person in order to sign any nominating, referendum, initiated measure, or initiated constitutional amendment petition; or
(8)      To make any gift, loan, or promise, offer, procurement, or agreement as aforesaid to, for, or with any person in order to sign any nominating, referendum, initiated measure, or initiated constitutional amendment petition.

Read that here.

Maybe it’s just me, but I’m thinking that saying “free beverage to whoever comes down to sign” might strongly be considered an offer to exchange a signature for a drink.

(Update – as you might have guessed, the post is gone from their facebook page. But luckily, we have it saved and displayed for posterity. – PP)

South Dakotans for Fair Lending Press Release on Attorney General Explanation

From my mailbox comes a press release from Lisa Furlong on the reason behind their measure as reviewed by the Attorney General today:

South Dakotans for Fair Lending Press Release on Attorney General Explanation

People have a right to be treated fairly.  By supporting this constitutional amendment, we will bring fairness to the lending process, while protecting the people of South Dakota’s rights as consumers.

Our measure places a strict 18% cap on interest rates, far more stringent than that of other measures being proposed.  Additionally, our measure takes the extra step of amending the South Dakota constitution, which will ensure that the cap placed on interest rates is not later removed or weakened. Other measures being circulated simply make changes to statutes, which can be easily altered and undermined.

Our supporters and volunteers are ready to get to work collecting the needed signatures to have this common sense measure placed on the ballot and we appreciate the work of the Attorney General and his staff in issuing the explanation of our measure in a timely manner.”

Lisa Furlong
Chair
South Dakotans for Fair Lending