Category: Uncategorized

The Argus Leader has a report today on their efforts to release the records of teachers who have been sanctioned by the state for professional violations, and the herculean efforts they have to make to pierce the wall of secrecy & obtain the records from the State of South Dakota:

Unlike neighboring states, South Dakota does not post details of its investigations into instances of teacher misconduct, forcing parents and other members of the public to submit an open records request to learn more about past violations.

After making such a request, Argus Leader Media was told Friday it would cost $4,410 to get a full history of disciplinary cases involving teachers and school officials.

and..

Argus Leader Media found 36 cases of teachers who had their licenses revoked or suspended in recent years for making sexual advances toward students, for criminal activity, or for other — sometimes undisclosed — forms of misconduct.

Stories published last month would not have been possible without information released by the state Education Department, but the records were incomplete.

Names and case details were redacted in some cases, even if a teacher had received a so-called “public reprimand” from the state Professional Teachers Practices and Standards Commission, a seven-member board made up primarily of other teachers.

And the records only went back to 2008, including an open records response sent to Argus Leader Media as part of a 2012 investigation.

Because the timeline cuts off early, it’s unclear how many South Dakota teachers or school administrators have lost jobs or had their license suspended for breaking the state’s code of ethics.

Read it all here.

Unusually, the teaching profession is shielded from public disclosure while other professionals in the private sector are not. Professionals in Real Estate, Accountancy, Insurance, and others have some forms of readily available & researchable disclosure.

So, why shouldn’t information on discipline be available on teachers certified through the State of South Dakota?

I posed the question to State Representative Al Novstrup, who was the recipient of the 2012 Eagle Award for “Protecting the People’s Right to Know” from the South Dakota Newspaper Association for being a champion of open government.  And he agrees that South Dakota might need to open the door of accessibility a little further for people seeking this information.

Novstrup noted that he would “be willing to help draft and prime sponsor a bill for the 2017 legislative session, having worked closely with David Bordewyk and Justin Smith of the SD Newspaper Association. It would be my suggestion that we pick a state such as Nebraska or Iowa and pattern the bill after that chosen state.”

Expecting that Novstrup will be returned to the State Legislature in November with election to the State Senate, this might just be the beginnings of “Senate Bill 1” for January of 2017.

Here’s an interesting story in today’s Argus.

The Garretson School District is looking for more money for it’s operation, and is voting on an opt-out, despite the passage of legislation to increase teacher pay. And that they’re saying is that it helped, but it’s not enough:

Gov. Dennis Daugaard’s trio of education bills lessened the necessary tax increase for Garretson, Johnson said.

The bills, which Daugaard signed earlier this month, gave school districts additional funds to raise teacher pay through a half-cent sales tax increase. The sales tax revenue also gives the state $40 million to put toward property tax relief, which helps bring down the possible opt out increase in Garretson.

The opt out conversation began before Daugaard’s education proposal was signed, which has meant making sure members of the Garretson school district understand the differences, Johnson said.

“It has made it a little bit more difficult,” Johnson said. “Just because of people’s perception when they see headlines that there’s a new tax for schools or for teachers … there’s an assumption that that will solve our problem here.”

The majority of new money flowing into South Dakota districts from the half-cent sales tax increase must go to teacher salaries and benefits, which does not solve Garretson’s struggle to fund programming and services for students.

Read it all here.

Will there still be a gaggle of opt-outs in South Dakota’s future, in spite of the additional tax revenue?

Bob Mercer is noting this morning that two different parties are arguing over who is responsible for strengthening the state’s laws on precluding conflicts of interest for those having contracts with the State of South Dakota.

And it’s rendered more interesting, as the two parties are slated to be facing each other in the race for Governor in two years:

A deterrent stronger than a Class 1 misdemeanor is needed in state conflict-of-interest cases, Attorney General Marty Jackley said.

and…

Jackley said a stronger deterrent is needed. He said he would be open to “triggering factors” and “aggravated circumstances” that call for higher levels of punishment depending on the severity of the crime.

Sounds like quite a few petitions are in the pipeline waiting for review. According to SDWC contributor Mike Clark, he noted in a comment under a prior post:

When I turned my Petitions in yesterday I learned that a lot of petitions came in through the mail Friday afternoon, it might take away to get through them all.

Interesting. That doesn’t count what likely arrived yesterday, when only three were approved, so it remains to be seen how many might have been rejected, and how many are left to be reviewed.

That list should grow considerably this week, so stay tuned!

Sorry for the light posting today, although I saw you made up for it in comments on the post about another candidate getting into it.   It’s been a crazy Monday, as a few City and School candidates across the state have been calling about things.

The political candidates are starting to get ready for the primaries, my dog needed shots, and oh, hey – there’s that darn day job! So, there was no free time before work, over lunch, and this evening until about now.

Luckily, there hasn’t been much by the way of new candidates from either side of the aisle.  Larry Tideman picked up a Dem opponent in his race, which he should be handily able to shrug off. Someone who I believed is a Sanford Executive also filed as a Dem in House 9. And Republican Dave Landry filed to run in the House Race in District 11.

Still kind of quiet. Almost too quiet for the filing deadline being 8 days away.

For $3, I had to have it because it made me laugh:

Now we can all say there’s proof the Bernie Sanders campaign has gone to the dogs.

I’d head rumors of it, but saw my first evidence tonight that District 35 Resident Tina Mulally plans to mount a primary challenge from the right to Terri Haverly of District 35.

What marks it as somewhat unusual is that Haverly isn’t exactly what most might consider liberal. Senator Haverly was noted by the American Conservative Union as receiving their award for Conservative Achievement for voting with the group 80-89% of the time. As the group noted in a January press release which cited Haverly for her work:

ACU researches and selects a wide range of bills that reflect a member’s adherence to conservative principles. We select bills that focus on former President Ronald Reagan’s philosophy of the “three-legged stool”: 1) economic: taxes, budgets, regulation, spending, healthcare, and property; 2) social and cultural: 2nd Amendment, religious freedom, life, welfare, and education; and 3) government integrity: voting, individual liberty, privacy, and transparency. The range of issues selected have been specifically designed to convey to voters the most accurate assessment of South Dakota’s elected officials who can be counted on to defend the principles of a free society: Life, Liberty, and Property.

Legislators who scored above 80% in ACU’s 2015 Ratings of the South Dakota Legislature will receive awards for their hard work toward passage of legislation that reflects conservative principles. As Reagan stated, “The person who agrees with you 80% of the time is a friend and an ally.”

Read that here.

Mulally recently posted the above campaign slogan on her facebook page.

What’s Mulally’s background? And why do I bring up the ACU? Mulally had been part of the wingnut group in Rapid City that in 2014 described it’s intent to push the Republican party further to the right:

Among a few of those candidates: Julie Frye-Mueller of Rapid City is taking on state Rep. Mike Verchio for District 30; Rip Ryness of Rapid City is challenging state Sen. Jacqueline Sly for District 33; George Ferebee of Hill City is contesting the Ward 1 seat of Pennington County Commissioner Ken Davis.

and…

Mike Mueller and Tina Mulally, both of Rapid City, are running for positions as directors of two West Dakota Water Development Districts – relatively obscure political entities that oversee drainage issues in Pennington County.

And, after primary ballots are counted next month, Napoli is expecting success.

I was speaking with a state legislator today about the latest on who is running, and who isn’t, and noticing the very limited number of candidates out there he asked “Do the Dems even have 15 people running  for the State Legislature yet?”

Thanks to my insomnia, I got about 4 hours sleep last night, and now I have to do math??  Dang it. 

But the question was put out there for me, so I had to look it up. What did I find? It’s more than 15, but not by many. There are currently 19 Democrats with petitions in for 105 legislative seats.

Delving into specifics, Democrats have petitions in for 9 people competing for the 35 State Senate Seats (25.7%) and only 10 for the 70 House seats (14.3%). For people out there counting, those numbers really suck.  (For those who will inevitably ask, Republicans currently have 23 people who have filed for senate seats, and 39 who have filed for house seats.)

With just over a week to go, that’s not leaving much time for Democrats to appear as if they’re legitimately competing for the State Legislature. Even doubling their current numbers does not, despite the boast of Ann Tornberg that she will fill all 105 legislative seats.

So, keep watching the SDWC candidate list which I’ll be updating with the latest and greatest until we hit March 29th, when the time for bluffing will be over, and everyone will have to show their cards.

 

A Basketball State of Mind
By Sen. John Thune

Second by second, time ticks off the clock as the senior point guard, knowing his team is about to clinch a spot in the pinnacle of all tournaments – NCAA’s March Madness – dribbles the ball past half court. As the buzzer rings, his teammates rush the court, and the team’s fans leap from their seats to celebrate the victory. A lot of hard work goes into these defining moments – the two-a-day workouts, the early mornings, all of the season’s wins, and even the losses. Every minute is worth it, if you ask these athletes.

Almost every South Dakotan who knows me, even a little, knows how much I love the game of basketball, specifically South Dakota basketball. When people talk about Indiana, Kansas, or other places frequently dubbed “basketball states,” I always make the case that South Dakota belongs in that category too. Take just this year as an example. Both the Jackrabbit men’s and women’s teams punched their tickets to the big dance, and the Coyote women are representing our state in the Women’s National Invitational Tournament. On both the men’s and women’s side, we had a handful of South Dakota teams selected for the NAIA and NCAA Division II tournaments, including Augustana who’s headed to the Elite Eight. I could go on and on – haven’t even mentioned all of our successful high school teams.

Not only do we have talented teams and players, but South Dakota has some of the best fans in the nation. At this year’s Summit League Tournament, I was impressed by the amount of blue and red in the stands supporting our state’s schools. It’s a pretty remarkable feat for a town the size of Sioux Falls to boast some of the top attendance numbers in all of Division I basketball. And no matter how fierce the competition may be, it’s always fun to see rivals in the stands trade stories and friendly banter, all while sharing in the accomplishment of our student athletes, because at its heart, that’s what this is all about.

I can’t help but think the reason we compete well at so many levels, especially on the national stage, is because of the intangible talent our kids possess – the things we in the Dakotas instill in our children at a young age. While we might not always have the height or speed that power-five teams possess, we will always have the hardest-working players on the floor. We have well-disciplined athletes that know the fundamentals. They understand teamwork and how to be humble, yet confident and poised in uniform. They are kids raised on the prairie who know that their effort and diligence will ultimately lead them to success.

To all the South Dakota athletes and fans, congratulations on an excellent season at all levels. Thank you for giving us all a reason to come together as a state to celebrate in your hard work and leadership.

###

Six Year Check-Up of Obamacare
By Senator Mike Rounds

Six years ago, President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) into law. Commonly called Obamacare, this law was intended to provide all Americans with access to quality, affordable, low-cost health care. Not surprisingly, we have found that the opposite is happening. Instead, health care costs are soaring, premiums have risen at record rates and access to care continues to challenge consumers.  And there is no sign of these damaging effects slowing down.

For many families across the United States, health insurance premiums are the biggest household expense.  I continue to hear from South Dakotans who simply cannot afford their new plans under the ACA, yet they are required by law to purchase the plans or face steep tax penalties. In one case, the premium for a healthy married couple in their 50’s now costs more than $15,000 annually. That doesn’t even include co-pays or deductibles that they pay when they go to the doctor. Another individual told me her premium increased 40 percent in 2016, so she now pays $1,270 each month for her health insurance. These are just a few of the many stories I continue to hear about rising premiums and higher out-of-pocket costs because of Obamacare.

According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the ACA costs American taxpayers more than $116 billion a year. In fact, on average, every household in the United States can expect more than $20,000 in new taxes over the next 10 years because of the ACA. And health care providers are being hurt by the law’s administrative costs. A recent survey of U.S. doctors found that many are struggling to handle growing paperwork demands. Even more alarming, their paperwork burden is getting worse, bogging down time and energy that could otherwise be spent on the patient. These are heavy burdens to place on the already over-taxed, over-regulated American public.

When Republicans took over the Senate last year, we made it our mission to repeal the ACA. In December 2015, the Senate for the first time passed a reconciliation bill that would have repealed major parts of the Affordable Care Act. Not surprisingly, it was vetoed by the president, and the House of Representatives was unable to override his veto. In order to fully get rid of the ACA, we need to maintain Republican control of both houses of Congress and elect a president in November who will commit to its repeal. We must also come together to create a real replacement plan that is patient-centered and truly affordable for all Americans.

After six years, we know that too many South Dakota families and businesses have been hurt by this poorly-written law. I will continue working in the Senate to repeal Obamacare and replace it with a market-based plan that is actually affordable and will drive down costs. Healthy competition within the private insurance marketplace would allow families and individuals to purchase the health care plan that best fits their needs and budget.

###