Category: Uncategorized

Thune, Brown Reintroduce Bipartisan Bill to Simplify Income Tax Collection for Individuals Working in Multiple States 

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), members of the tax-writing Senate Finance Committee, today reintroduced the Mobile Workforce State Income Tax Simplification Act, legislation that would simplify and standardize state income tax collection for employees who travel outside of their home state for temporary work assignments. The bill would also help employers who must comply with withholding and reporting requirements. Under current law, individuals and employers face different state income tax reporting requirements in almost every state that vary based on length of stay, income earned, or both.

While some states require state income tax filing for as little as one day of work in the state, the Mobile Workforce State Income Tax Simplification Act would establish a common-sense 30-day threshold to help ensure that an equitable tax is paid to the state and local jurisdiction where the work is being performed while alleviating burdensome tax requirements on employees and employers. 

“In an increasingly mobile economy with an increasingly mobile workforce, the lack of consistent standards between states has become an enormous burden for taxpayers who try to comply with the law when they travel across state lines for business,” said Thune. “These compliance requirements cost time and money that could otherwise be spent growing a small business and creating more good-paying jobs. If enacted, this bipartisan legislation would create a clear and universal threshold that would help simplify state income tax filings and make it fairer for residents in states, like South Dakota, that don’t have an income tax.”  

“Filing a tax return can already be confusing enough – we shouldn’t make it tougher for folks who do business in multiple states,” said Brown. “With a simple fix, we can make filing taxes easier for workers who travel while also cutting burdensome red tape on businesses so they can focus on job creation instead of keeping up with dozens of state tax requirements.”

The bipartisan Mobile Workforce State Income Tax Simplification Act is supported by over 300 organizations and business groups nationwide, including the South Dakota CPA Society. 

###

The line in Field of Dreams was “if you build it, they will come.”  In politics, the phrase should be “If more than two gather, you’ll see politicos,”  as they’ve been thick at the Summit League Tournament this week. (All photos are from facebook:)

Don’t you hate it when you’re at an event, and that guy in front of you won’t sit down?

Date night with Congresswoman Kristi Noem & her husband Bryon.

Two Republican Constitutional officers together at an event? Someone must be serving a rubber chicken meal before the speeches!

In politics, you learn early on to hide your beer behind the other person when photos are taken.

Are there any I missed? Send them my way!

Here’s one for all of you who obsess over photography.

One of the things I’ve always prided myself on when it comes to Dakotawarcollege is the fact that this site is more oriented towards integrating graphics and photography into the site than some of the other political blogs in the state.

Over the years, I’ve felt it’s important to capture things in time, and I’ve accordingly invested time and money in my equipment.

After starting with a 5 megapixel Olympus C5050z Camera (that I broke a knob off of) with a add on telephoto attachment taking photos of John Thune up on the stage at the Republican National Convention in NYC, I moved to a Nikon D5000 which served me well for a number of years, until I decided to go with the best I could afford.

At that point, I moved to my current camera, My 36.3 Megapixel D800, which is an absolute workhorse. And it’s a major challenge.

While I was comfortable with what my D5000 could do, after 4 years I still feel I’ve barely scratched the surface of what my D800 can do.  There’s a newer model I wouldn’t mind (the D810), but I think it’s silly to consider another upgrade at this point.  Because I know even with an upgrade out there, it’s one of the best cameras out there… and I should be perfecting my technique with it, instead of thinking I’ll shoot better pictures with a better camera.

So, over the last year or so, I’ve invested into equipment instead. The Atomos Ninja, so I can use my camera for high end video. Various cages, and lighting systems. And most notably as of late – I’ve been putting it into my lenses.

I originally used the inexpensive cropped picture lenses that came with my D5000, but I’ve slowly been investing in full frame lenses, and am starting to see a bit of an assortment.

I generally do two distinctly different types of photography. My Real Estate Photos – where well lit interior photography is the challenge. I also have my political photography, where I might have anything from long distance photos to portraits of our state’s political leaders.

And in all cases, I’m using a variety of lenses to get the best shots.

For home interiors, my go to lens is my Rokinon 14mm/2.8f lens, which takes great photos of rooms. And I just added a Nikon 28mm/1.8 lens to complement it.

Since the time of my D5000, my political photos were mainly done via my old Nikon DX 55-200 mm lens from WalMart. This past year, I added a Nikon FX 24-85 lens to it, as well as a nice Nikon 50mm/1.8 lens.   (Along the way, I picked up a Tamron 70-300mm lens because it was cheap, and I’ve got a Rokinon 85mm lens on the way as a treat to myself after a house closing today.)

I find myself facing a question of, given the varied uses I have to pull a camera out for, is there anything I should be looking to acquire to have the best tools available for the job?  I question whether a nice 35mm lens would round out my photography toolkit, or whether I’ve adequately covered my needs by my 28mm and/or 50mm lenses?

So, all you shutterbugs out there – give me a new perspective, and help broaden my horizons. Are there tools I’m ignoring as I work to be a better photographer?  Or is having the perfect lens for the job a common obsession?

I welcome your input.

NOEM: Delivering on a Promise to Repeal and Replace Obamacare

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. Kristi Noem today issued the following statement upon the release of the American Health Care Act:

“In the years since Obamacare was first passed, South Dakotans have called for its repeal and replacement. In the meantime, they’ve seen premiums skyrocket, deductibles soar, and choices become limited.   In gutting the Independent Payment Advisory Board and delaying some of the most burdensome elements, we were able to offer a degree of relief, but Obamacare is fundamentally beyond repair.  Tonight, we are taking the most significant steps to date in the repeal and replacement of Obamacare.  There is still plenty of public debate that must happen and I look forward to hearing South Dakotans’ feedback, but this is a critical step toward healthcare that is more affordable and accessible to all.” 

The American Health Care Act dismantles Obamacare’s onerous mandates and taxes (including Rep. Noem’s Health Insurance Tax repeal), expands and enhances the use of Health Savings Accounts, and offers individuals and families a monthly refundable tax credit to help purchase health insurance, among other things.  Additionally, the proposal continues protections for those with pre-existing conditions, allows young people to stay on their parents’ health insurance until 26, and maintains the policy of no lifetime caps.  To view a full copy of the bill, please visit www.ReadTheBill.gop. 

The House Ways and Means Committee, of which Rep. Noem is a member, and the House Energy and Commerce Committee have jurisdiction over the legislation.  The committees are expected to meet later this week to formally consider the bills.

###

As the legislative session winds to a close, I’m concerned that we don’t really have any over-arching themes of accomplishment. And maybe that’s a poor choice of words, and I should qualify that as that there seems to be no “big ticket items” we can point to.

You could say that the closest thing would be how the legislature took on the task of re-writing campaign finance laws to beef them up, in the face of Initiated Measure 22, which was declared unconstitutional by Judge Barnett. And yes, along those lines, we did look at some conflict of interest laws.

But other than that, it’s hard to point to any one overarching “theme” or item of accomplishment.

It might be as a result of the legislature seeming a little more persnickety, and seeking more independence when it came to Governor Daugaard’s wish-list. We just came off infrastructure renewal, and all the associated costs & spending. And we did teacher pay. Both big, big ticket items, that legislators had to bite their lips on when it came to tax promises. But they did “something.”

When it came to the next biggest big ticket item – Medicaid expansion – hard lines were drawn in the sand, and it was not going to fly with this new legislature, so it was dropped early on, as far back as last summer. Not that we would have been able to afford it anyway, come to find out.  The severely reduced tax revenues versus what was projected may have also thrown a wet blanket on any wishful thinking for “big ideas.”

Does the legislature need to pass large and significant packages of legislation every year? Well, no. But if they don’t, I feel they start wandering into dangerous territory.   It could be as big as raising teacher pay. Or it could be a large budget cut. But it’s hard to point to what “It” is this session.

It’s dangerous territory, because voters are fickle. If you can’t point to a recognizable accomplishment, it can be difficult to tell the people you want to vote for you “I did this!” and make the case for your re-election. In that case, especially in times of voter angst, they may look at legislators and ask “what did I send you to Pierre for?”

So, is the big theme this session campaign finance reform?  Or should we be thinking bigger? And if it’s campaign finance reform, can we, or have we convinced the electorate at large that it was the right step?

What are your thoughts?

As they have continued to run attacks against Congresswoman Kristi Noem, the attacks themselves have come under scrutiny and drawn attention, as outside media is beginning to take a look at the content of the criticism, and the entire tax reform package being proposed.

And as leading national conservative blog RedState talks to tax reform groups, they’re wondering what the heck the Club for Growth is thinking? Because they’re not seeing the forest through the trees:

We need to rewrite tax law – that has for decades incentivized a mass American business exodus. This America Last, “Made In America Tax” code – is terrible policy.

The tax reform currently proffered by Congressional Republicans – is several HUGE steps in the right directions.

and..

This is the “Border Adjustment Tax (BAT).”  Which is drawing some fire – from normally friendly people: “The Club for Growth has begun an advertising campaign aimed at pressuring Rep. Kristi Noem, R-S.D., a tax writer, to oppose a contentious House GOP proposal to tax imports and exempt exports, the latest salvo in the battle to shape lawmakers’ attempts to overhaul the tax code.”

And they are firing – with some seriously faulty numbers: “The group said that the border adjustments proposal would increase an average family’s annual expenditures by about $1,700.”

Thankfully, Club for Growth is engaged in highly flawed tax reform analysis.  They’ve unilaterally taken the BAT out of the entire Republican reform package – and assessed its cost as a stand alone proposal.  Thankfully, this is ridiculous.

Yes, a 20% tax on imports – all by its lonesome – costs money.  But that’s not all Republican tax reform does.  As Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist recently noted on CNBC: “(W)hat you’re looking at is we’re going to take the corporate rate to 20, we’re going to do full expensing, get rid of the death tax, the AMT, cut the capital gains tax.  These things are all consensus issues. The whole package fits together.  In it, is border adjustable.”

Thus, in totality, Republican tax reform will SAVE average families about $4,600 per year – per, again, The Tax Foundation.

Read the entire article here.

When Club for Growth hits Noem, it is being done with severely cherry-picked numbers, and conveniently overlooks the fact that families will save an average of $4600 a year.  Which is a world of difference between what the out-of-state groups are telling us on our TV and the truth.

A good lesson to remember from this past election.

A New, Innovative Program to Help South Dakota Farmers
By Sen. John Thune

Ask any member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, of which I’m a long-time member, and they’d tell you that work on the farm bill never really ends. It doesn’t matter if it’s a farm bill year or not, I’m always listening to farmers’ and ranchers’ ideas about how I can provide assistance so they can run their operations more efficiently, earn a better living, and ultimately pass their farm or ranch on to the next generation.

Today’s sluggish agriculture economy means it’s more important than ever for policymakers in Washington to find new, innovative ways to help present and future generations of farmers and ranchers stay on their land. We can work toward achieving that goal by providing reasonable alternatives to growing crops on land that produces the least, which would make family-run farms more profitable.

After months of collecting feedback from farmers and other agriculture stakeholders, I’ve introduced a new farm bill program that’s intended to protect farmers’ income in these tough economic times. My bill, the Soil Health and Income Protection Program (SHIPP), is an economic assistance tool that offers several conservation benefits. SHIPP will not compete with or replace the popular Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), but would be a voluntary alternative for farmers who don’t want to tie up their land for long periods of time.

Most farmers are familiar with CRP. It’s a good, common-sense program that provides a long-term benefit to farmers, wildlife, and the environment. It creates a safe and healthy habitat for South Dakota’s pheasant population, which has an exponential impact on the state’s economy. But in order to enroll land in CRP, farmers must be willing to commit to a lengthy contract of up to 15 years. SHIPP, on the other hand, would give farmers the flexibility they need to plant their least productive cropland to a soil-enhancing, low-cost perennial conserving use crop for three, four, or five years. In return, they would receive an annual rental payment and additional crop insurance assistance.

Every farmer knows exactly which portion of his or her land produces the least. Technology, like yield maps, for example, can help many farmers identify their poorest producing land. Other farmers know certain areas of their fields are less productive than others because of consistently excessive wetness, dryness, or other yield-reducing factors. 

Under SHIPP, farmers could enroll up to 15 percent of a farm’s least productive acres as long as they were planted or considered planted to a commodity crop for three consecutive years prior to enrollment. Once enrolled, the acreage must be planted to a perennial conserving use cover that can be hayed or grazed outside the designated primary nesting and brood-rearing season in the county in which the land is located. And SHIPP would be a low-cost program because it would encourage the removal of poor land from taxpayer-subsidized crop insurance premium subsidies and indemnities. 

SHIPP is just the first of several individual farm bill proposals that I’ll unveil throughout the year, and I look forward to hearing from South Dakotans about how we can improve this or any existing farm bill program, for that matter. By laying the groundwork for some of these key issues early in the process, we can make sure we’re doing all we can to meet the needs of today’s farming community.

###

Upholding our Responsibility to our Native Population
By Senator Mike Rounds

Our tribal population is amidst a government-induced health care crisis as a result of decades of mismanagement and poor leadership at the Indian Health Service (IHS). In South Dakota and across the country, IHS facilities consistently fail to meet basic benchmarks of providing proper care to Native Americans. Headlines frequently tell the tale of emergency rooms closing down, lack of adequate health care professionals and blatant corruption among IHS administrative employees.  Too often, my staff hears horror stories of dirty or broken medical equipment, poor record-keeping, and in one case, a woman who gave birth to her baby on a bathroom floor with no nurses or doctors around to help her. This is unacceptable.

The first step toward fixing the crisis is understanding where the problems lie within the IHS itself. I recently introduced legislation requiring a full audit of the IHS. Despite the agency’s well-known and well-documented history of failing the people it is meant to serve, there has never been an independent, broad, thorough review of IHS. I have requested a systemic review of the agency’s structural, financial and administrative problems so that the federal government, working in close consultation with tribes, can make the changes necessary to live up to its trust obligations.

IHS is tasked with providing health care for approximately 2.2 million American Indians and Alaska Natives across the country. But one does not have to look beyond the agency’s own website to see that it is failing in its core mission. According to www.ihs.gov, tribal members continue to die at higher rates than other Americans in a number of categories, including liver disease and cirrhosis, diabetes, suicide and respiratory diseases. In the Great Plains Area, which includes South Dakota, Native Americans have a life expectancy 10 years less than the U.S. population. 

Why this is happening can be found – at least in part – in the structure and culture of IHS itself. For example, my office has uncovered an alarming imbalance of staff: of more than 15,000 total IHS employees, only 725 are doctors. More than 10,000 IHS employees are administrative professionals – with nearly 4,000 dedicated to billing alone.

Additionally, there is no financial accountability or even a formula for how to allocate funding among the 12 IHS regional offices. IHS officials themselves can’t explain their own budget. This is particularly troubling in places like the Great Plains Region, which has one of the worst health disparities of all IHS regions despite being one of the largest and fastest-growing populations. Even if IHS is underfunded, we cannot responsibly spend more taxpayer dollars on this broken agency without increased transparency and financial accountability.

My legislation would allow us to fully understand the dysfunction at the agency so we can take the necessary steps to fix it. It is supported by the Great Plains Area Tribal Chairmen, officials within the Department of Health and Human Services, the South Dakota Association of Healthcare Organizations and, most recently, the South Dakota legislature, which passed a resolution in support of an IHS audit earlier this year.

Our ultimate goal is for the federal government to live up to its trust obligations of providing timely, quality care to our tribal members. IHS will never be able to accomplish this without broad reforms. But first we need to understand where the problems lie. In the meantime, I will continue working with my colleagues in Congress, tribal leadership, IHS administrators, Health and Human Services officials and others to identify key areas of reform and identify potential solutions to provide better health care to our tribal members.

###

21^st Century Cures
By Rep. Kristi Noem 

Almost two years ago, my nephew Gage learned he had Type 1 diabetes, a disease his older brother Hunter had been diagnosed with a few years before.  Shortly after the family got home from the hospital in Sioux Falls where Gage had learned to give himself shots and test his blood sugar levels, he was talking with his mom about what the diagnosis would mean.  At one point, he told her, “If God is going to heal me or Hunter, I hope he heals Hunter.  He’s had diabetes a lot longer than me.”  

What an incredible display of brotherly love!  Just a few months ago, another one of my nephews, Mitchell, was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes as well.  It’s my hope and prayer that one day, because of the incredible research currently underway, we’ll be able to tell Hunter, Gage, Mitchell and young people like them that there is a cure; they can be healed.

On February 28, in observance of the 10^th annual RARE Disease Day, people around the world turned their attention to diseases like this.  Throughout the day and the week that surrounded it, my team and I met with many South Dakotans whose families were forever changed by rare conditions. 

I spoke with one father, for instance, whose son had both Type 1 diabetes and Celiac disease, which our family has learned is a somewhat common combination as they are both autoimmune diseases (one of our nephews also has Celiac disease). The whole family has now gone gluten free to accommodate his son’s Celiac disease and with new technological advancements, he can monitor his son’s blood sugar levels almost minute-by-minute through an app on his phone. 

We also met with two inspiring moms of children with cystic fibrosis and a father whose son has been living with a severe genetic disorder.  The disorder causes intellectual disability, behavioral and learning challenges, and various physical characteristics. Ongoing research offers more insight into how to manage life with the disease, but there is currently no cure. 

While the syndromes and diseases take many different forms, I am consistently inspired by the resilience of those who live with these diagnoses and the caregivers who offer support.  It was with these families in mind that I helped pass the 21^st Century Cures Act last year.  The bill was also approved by the Senate and eventually signed into law by the president.

The 21^st Century Cures Act provided new support for research and biomedical innovation, specifically incentivizing the development of drugs and medical countermeasures for pediatric diseases.  Additionally, the legislation removed regulatory burdens that slow the pace of scientific advancement, modernized clinical trials, put patients at the heart of the regulatory review process, and streamlined processes that made it difficult to translate discoveries into FDA-approved treatments.

For more than a century, the United States has been on the leading edge of medical innovation and I’m committed to protecting this tradition for a century more.  With the 21^st Century Cures Act now in place, I’m hopeful we’ve cleared a space where innovation can thrive and new forms of healing can take hold. 

###

South Dakota’s Seat At The Table
A column by Gov. Dennis Daugaard:

“Action is not a choice, it is a necessity.” Those were President Trump’s words on Obamacare to Congress. As the President mentioned in that speech, one-third of America’s counties now have only one insurer. A number of insurance companies have left the market. Others have been forced to raise premiums or narrow their networks, leaving South Dakotans and consumers nationwide with fewer options, which for many, are unaffordable.

Prior to Obamacare, as many as 17 separate insurance companies were offering individual health insurance plans in South Dakota. As Obamacare was adopted in 2010, companies began leaving the market. Last fall, one of South Dakota’s largest carriers, Wellmark, announced that it would no longer offer individual health insurance plans in South Dakota. This affected 8,000 South Dakotans, whose plans were terminated on Dec. 31. DakotaCare has also ceased offering health insurance plans. The company could no longer sustain the costs. Avera, which now owns DakotaCare, and Sanford are now the only two insurance options for individuals in South Dakota today.

Governors know that as Congress and the President consider the repeal and replacement of Obamacare, they will be reconsidering the expansion of Medicaid. This also offers an opportunity fundamentally to reform the Medicaid program. If Medicaid is to be sustainable, attention must be given to controlling Medicaid cost growth, for both the federal government and the states. As Medicaid cost control is considered, states should neither be rewarded nor penalized for having expanded or not expanded Medicaid eligibility under Obamacare.

Many states want the authority to require Medicaid beneficiaries, if they are able, to work, look for work or be trained for work. States also want the flexibility to require beneficiaries to engage in preventative care and wellness behaviors.

I recently traveled to Washington, D.C., to attend National Governor’s Association meetings, where I heard from Republican and Democrat congressional leaders. Republican leaders shared their belief that repeal and reform will take place on three fronts: a reconciliation bill, requiring just 51 votes in the Senate; administrative acts by U.S. Health & Human Services Secretary Tom Price (using existing authority); and a further bill, which will require at least 60 votes in the Senate.

While in D.C., S.D. Secretary of Health Kim Malsam-Rysdon and I joined state Senate Majority Leader Blake Curd at a private meeting with Secretary Price. At that meeting, we discussed South Dakota’s concern over IHS failures and the shift of Native American healthcare costs onto the state.

Thanks to Sen. John Thune’s office, we also had the chance to discuss IHS problems with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s chief health policy advisor. We also met with House Energy and Commerce Committee staff members, and with the chief counsel for the Senate Finance Committee. These committees will have jurisdiction over healthcare reform legislation.

It is clear that much work remains to determine how Congress will move forward on Medicaid and health care reform. Although I have no vote in this process, I am working to educate Congress and the Trump administration about South Dakota’s particular circumstances. As the debate continues, I will remain engaged. I will work to ensure South Dakota’s Medicaid program can meet the needs of the most vulnerable people in our state. I will also do what I can to bend the future cost curve so the program is sustainable over the long term.

-30-