Author: @SoDakCampaigns

Former Senate Appropriations Chair Jerry Apa attacking GOP Leadership.

@SoDakCampaigns

Former Republican Legislator and Senate Appropriations Chair Jerry Apa has some harsh words for Republican Legislators, calling them greedy, lacking leadership, etc., and so on in a letter to the Editor in the Argus Leader:

The leadership, or lack thereof, of the House and Senate chambers of the state legislature has to be one of the most arrogant, tone deaf, greedy not needy groups to populate Pierre in a long time. Beginning with the majority leader in the Senate trying to subvert the initiative process to disregarding the voter’s directive on the minimum wage, the Republicans have said damn the voters full speed ahead.

Don’t forget the attempt to raise the legislative salary by 40 percent, while ignoring the plight of the average South Dakota teacher. This misbegotten bill was sponsored by the same senator who can’t eat lunch in an hour and expects the taxpayer to pay for a $23 catered lunch.

and..

The Republican super majority has shown that a majority corrupts and an absolute majority absolutely corrupts. The Republicans need to rebrand their party as the Taxandspendican Party.

Read it here.

“Taxandspendican Party?”  Well, that’s kind of harsh.  Especially since if memory serves, Jerry wasn’t immune to the temptations of proposing tax measures himself. From time to time. To time.

Jackley critical of Dept of Justice for lingering on EB-5

@SoDakCampaigns

This just popped up – The Argus is reporting that South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley is unhappy with the US Department of Justice lingering on their investigation of the EB-5 matter, which remains open with no apparent activity, and possibly may be open simply for political reasons:

Jackley’s investigation was completed in about six months. The federal probe, however, is now at least two years old.

“That was a long time ago,” Jackley said. “So I guess it begs the question of what are they looking at.”

Although the department indicated that it remains open, there doesn’t appear to be activity.

and…

“I’ll tell you, I’m less than happy with them,” Jackley said.

Jackley says he hopes to talk more about the Department of Justice’s role in the investigation, but he’s waiting first on a ruling from the state Supreme Court. The attorney general’s office is defending itself from a lawsuit brought by journalist Bob Mercer, who is trying to force the office to release more information about the Benda investigation. The hearing is later this month.

Jackley said that local federal officials did a good job, but he has different feelings for federal officials in Washington.

“I had expressed during the process concerns of how the Department of Justice was handling matters,” he said.

Read it all here.

Thune, others concerned NASA spending time on earth studies instead of space exploration

@SoDakCampaigns

From the Hill, it sounds as if the environmentalists have taken over everything, including making NASA about earth science instead of space exploration:

About $4.5 billion is requested for exploration, meanwhile, including development of rockets to be launched into deep space. Another $4 billion is slated for space operations, including support of the International Space Station.

According to Cruz, that represents a 41 percent increase in earth science funding since 2009, compared to a 7 percent decrease in funding for exploration and operations.

“Are we focusing on the heavens in NASA or are we focusing on dirt in Texas?” asked Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.).

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the head of the Commerce Committee and the Senate’s No. 3 Republican, is similarly concerned that some research may be “redundant with activities being undertaken at other federal agencies and may actually reduce the availability of funds for research related to the traditional sciences, aeronautics and space exploration,” his spokesman said.

Read it all here.

Does South Dakota need low taxes, or do we bring financial woes upon ourselves?

@SoDakCampaigns

I was reading an editorial from my local paper, the Brookings Register, where the publisher brought up an interesting point from a recent Crackerbarrel, when someone from the audience asked whether South Dakota’s status as the least taxed state in the nation was A. An Accomplishment, B. An Embarassment, or C. Other.   The publisher also brought up that legislators also bemoaned that state revenue projections were “likely to leave the state 10-15 million short” in the next two fiscal years.

If I were asked, I’d argue that it’s a good thing that our state is the least taxed in the nation. Why? In case someone missed it, we’re also 46th in population. There aren’t a lot of companies or employers who when determining where to locate are actively seeking “sparsely populated areas with sweltering summers, punishing arctic winters a plus.”  So, we need to capitalize on what we do have. And the ability to tax ourselves less is one of them.

The tradeoff is that yes, we run ourselves a little closer to the redline than some might like. We tend to be less spendthrift in word and deed. Some might call South Dakotans downright tight, or conjure up a cultural reference such as German frugality.

Whatever the cause, we tend to be tight with a buck, and are not terribly interested in handing it off to government to do as they please – which causes this give and take, or tug of war between taxpayers and taxspenders. Or you might say it’s a battle between our wants and not our needs but rather our “means.”

So, I pose the question to you, the SDWC reader: Does South Dakota need low taxes, or do we bring financial woes upon ourselves by them being low?

Thune continuing efforts to keep EPA from regulating ditches

@SoDakCampaigns

According to today’s Argus Leader, US Senator John Thune is continuing his pursuit of legislation to prevent the EPA from regulating water in rural ditches as being a navigable body of water subject to the strictures of the Clean Water Act:

Despite assurances from the EPA, agricultural groups contend the Waters of the U.S. rule would expand the scope of “navigable waters” protected by the Clean Water Act to include not only rivers and lakes but ditches, stream beds and self-made ponds that carry water only when it rains.

Farmers say they would face higher costs for environmental assessments and need to apply for permits to allow them to till soil, apply fertilizer or engage in some conservation practices.

A bill last year to ban the EPA from enacting the rule garnered support from almost three dozen Senate Republicans, a number that bodes well for similar legislation in the GOP-led Congress this year.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said there remains strong, bipartisan opposition to the proposal.

“Any federal regulation that could make farmers and ranchers legally liable for fines and penalties for conducting normal farming practices would be an overstep of authority and an infringement on their rights,” Thune said.

Read it all here.

You are more likely to be eaten by dogs than struck by lightning in South Dakota.

@SoDakCampaigns

In case you missed the story today, a second person has been killed by a pack of wild dogs on an Indian Reservation within months of another horrific incident:

A 49-year-old woman on the Rosebud Indian Reservation has died following an attack from a pack of wild dogs.

Mellette County Sheriff Mike Blom tells KELO-TV he found 49-year-old Julie Charging Whirlwind surrounded by dogs around 6:30 a.m. Saturday morning. He says he shot and killed two of the dogs so emergency responders could reach the woman.

Read it here.

As you likely recall, the first attack involved an 8-year old girl on the Pine Ridge reservation in November.

Just out of curiosity, I looked up how many had been killed by lightning strikes in South Dakota in the last year in comparison. What I came up with was a somewhat shocking ten-year statistic.

lightning_strikes

Two people in the last decade have been killed by lightning. Two people within 4 months have been killed by packs of dogs.  You are more likely to be eaten by dogs than killed by lightning in South Dakota.

Not a statistic to take pride in.

Open Forum: What did YOU think of session?

@SoDakCampaigns

Having been more involved on a couple of issues that I had been in a few years, I joked to a few as I darkened out halls of government that “Every time I spend time in Pierre, I tend to get my butt kicked, so I want to get out of here as soon as possible.”  Basically, I was more interested in winning on my issue than going to war with anyone, as I might have been tempted from time to time. So I was glad to be successful, and on my way out the door late last week.

And that might sum up much of session. People were more interested in getting work done than posturing. On the surface this session seemed pretty low key. Not a lot of conflict between individual legislators. And there wasn’t any open warfare I noticed between political parties.

But there was the fact that we had more conference committees than ever before.  Where what little conflict came up was more between the House and Senate than anyone else.

That’s my 2 cents worth.  As a broad open topic – What did YOU think of the 2015 State Legislative session?

The 411 on 69 – The practical guide to South Dakota election changes coming in 2016.

@SoDakCampaigns

Senate Bill 69, the package of election reforms from the Secretary of State’s office has been amended, spindled, folded and pressed multiple times – and it has finally passed both houses and awaits the Governor’s signature.

But what changes in South Dakota’s election laws does this bill offer as a result of passage should the Governor sign it as expected?  Well, that’s why we’re here. To offer the practical guide to election changes in 2016 that party activists and candidates can expect as a result of Senate Bill 69.

The SDWC practical guide to the Big Changes in South Dakota election laws for 2016.

#1 – Petition circulation will now begin December 1, 2015 for the 2016 election.    According to changes in state law..

…no candidate for any office to be filled, or nomination to be made, at the primary election, other than a presidential election, may have that person’s name printed upon the official primary election ballot of that person’s party, unless a petition has been received in the office of the person in charge of that election on that person’s behalf not prior to December first of the year preceding the election, and not later than the first Tuesday of March at five p.m. prior to the date of the primary election.

This means that you have from December 1, 2015 through The first Tuesday in March 2016, in this case March 1, 2016 at 5 P.M. to have your petitions into the Secretary of State’s office.

** Special note for precinct people. This also counts on your candidacies for precinct committeeman and precinct committeewoman.

#2 – THERE IS NO MORE REGISTERED MAIL TO MEET THE DEADLINE.   Noticeable by it’s omission is arguably the worst, and most unfair change to the new law. Those in outlying areas may no longer mail by 5pm of the deadline day. They have to be in the Secretary of State’s office by 5pm 3/1/16, or you are out of luck.

What this means is that if you live in Pierre, you can circulate until about 4:30 that day. If you’re in Harding county? You’d better be mailing it a week beforehand. In a state as geographically large as South Dakota, it’s a real sin of omission.

#3 – Independents are now on a level playing field with party candidates for filing nominating petitions. This was long overdue.  Under the law in front of the Governor for his signature, Independent candidates start circulating December 1, and have to have their petitions in by March 1, 2016. According to the enrolled measure:

If the election is conducted with a primary election, each party nomination and independent petition shall be received by the first Tuesday in March. Each nomination shall be certified in a like manner as any other nomination for the purpose of a general election. The election shall be conducted, canvassed, and the results certified as in a general election. If the election is conducted with a general election, each party nomination and independent petition shall be received by the second Tuesday in August.

So, if the office is subject to a primary such as for US Senate, Congress, or state legislature, Indy’s have to have petitions in by March 1, 2016. If it isn’t subject to a primary, such as for Public Utilities Commission this next year, they have until August 9, 2016.

#4 – Petition signature requirements are going to change somewhat.  So pay attention.  The impending law says….

The petition for party office or political public office shall be signed by not less than one percent of the voters registered for the candidate’s political party at the last general election in the county, part of the county, district, or state electing a candidate to fill the office.

and…

Notwithstanding the provisions of § 12-6-7 a nominating petition for a candidate for office in the State Legislature, county political public office, and county party office shall be signed by not less than fifty voters or not less than one percent of the voters registered for the candidate’s political party at the last general election, whichever is less. The petition shall clearly designate the senatorial or representative district for which the person is a candidate.

and for Indy’s…

The number of signatures required may not be less than one percent of the number of registered voters having no party affiliation or voters registered as other, at the last general election within the district or political subdivision.

So, what are the numbers that candidates will have to work with?  I have a chart!

2014_Chart

As noted, it’s a minimum of 50 or 1% for each legislative or other district. Statewide, here are rough guesstimations based on the immediate pre-general election numbers. For Statewide candidates, my Republicans will need a minimum of 2405 signatures. Dems will need 1762, and Independents 1023 to qualify for the ballot.

I believe Libertarians and Constitutional candidates may have to get recertified as parties first, but that’s a post for a different day.

#5 – Independent candidates for Governor can now have their Lt’s withdraw without going to court. I’m not sure I really care, but whatever.

#6 – Presidential Primary candidates must be certified by March 1, 2016.

#7 – New political parties also have until March 1 2016 to certify. According to Senate Bill 69:

A new political party may be organized and participate in the primary election by submitting to the secretary of state not later than the first Tuesday of March at five p.m. prior to the date of the primary election, a written declaration signed by at least two and one-half percent of the voters of the state as shown by the total vote cast for Governor at the last preceding gubernatorial election

If I’m reading that correctly, (2.5% of the voters of the state as shown by the total vote cast for Governor) with 277,403 total votes cast for governor, that means new political parties need would need 6935 people to sign on to certify as a political party, which is defined in state law as:

“Political party,” a party whose candidate for Governor at the last preceding general election at which a Governor was elected received at least two and one-half percent of the total votes cast for Governor;

So, according to the vote and the chart above, since I believe Libertarians may have been de-certified as an organized political party since they didn’t have a Gubernatorial candidate, that would mean they need to add about 5558 more people to sign on to become a political party again. Constitutionalists have even farther to go.

Ouch. Better get moving boys.

#8 – Everyone else’s deadlines move up. See the proposed law, but everyone’s deadlines are changing as well for school board, county races, etc.

#9 – NO MORE PLACEHOLDERS TO GAME THE DEADLINE. Read it and weep Dems. You can’t game the deadline on purpose anymore:

If a party candidate for public office withdraws after filing petitions with the secretary of state, the appropriate party central committee may make a replacement nominee only if:

(1) The party candidate: (a) Withdraws because of personal illness or illness of an immediate family member and the illness prevents the candidate from performing the duties of the office sought; and (b) Submits with the withdrawal request a form signed by a licensed physician verifying that the provisions of subsection (a) apply to the candidate;

(2) There is no other nominee for the office sought by the withdrawing candidate as of the time of the withdrawal;

(3) The party candidate has been elected or appointed to fill a vacancy in another elective office which duties conflict by law with the duties of the office sought, has become the nominee for another elective office, it has been determined that the party candidate’s employment conflicts by law with the duties of the office sought, or is deceased; or

(4) The party candidate permanently moves from his or her physical address stated in the nominating petition filed with the secretary of state, and requests in writing, subscribed and sworn to by the candidate before any officer qualified to administer oaths and take acknowledgments that the candidate has not resided in the district for a period of thirty consecutive calendar days and has no intention of resuming residency in the district.

So, no more running just to fill a slot with the intention of being replaced later. If you’re in, you’re in.

#10 – New political parties need a minimum of 250 signatories for statewide candidates. If the libertarians can meet their new quota of 6935 people, they only need 250 of them to sign a petition to run a candidate for statewide office, or 50 for a legislative office.

Want to read all the coming changes for yourself? Here is the law being presented to the Governor for his signature.