I just noted on Facebook that former GOP legislator Ken McNenny of Sturgis passed away today.
McNenny served in the house from 1987-2000, and the Senate from 2005-2008 for a total of 18 years.
Very sad news, as he was a really good guy. I’m told the funeral will be in Sturgis.
From my mailbox:
South Dakota needs your help. With the passage of Measure 22 last election, South Dakotans will be forced to fund political campaigns with their tax dollars. That’s why Americans for Prosperity-South Dakota is calling state legislators to Repeal 22 and enact meaningful campaign finance and ethics reforms.
Measure 22 was passed thanks to big spending by out-of-state interests. Supporters promoted it under the guise of campaign finance reform, but Measure 22 will actually take taxpayer money to fund political campaigns-to be used for things like TV ads-away from necessary budget items such as education, public safety, and transportation infrastructure.
These are not ethical ways to approach campaign finance reform. In fact, a judge has already suspended Measure 22, stating that it is unconstitutional! Taxpayers should not have their money spent promoting the ideas of political candidates they might not agree with or support. Individuals should not have their private donations to charities exposed to people who could use that information to target and intimidate them for supporting certain causes.
Ask your legislators to repeal 22. You can make your voice heard by clicking here to call your state representative and senators.
Encourage them to pass constitutional reforms that will address campaign finance and political ethics without putting people’s privacy at risk or using tax money to fund political campaigns.
In Liberty,
Ben Lee
State Director
Americans for Prosperity-South Dakota
From Facebook:
South Dakota Gun Owners are on a pre-emptive attack against Governor Daugaard for constitutional carry legislation that has yet to be introduced, much less be facing a Gubernatorial veto just yet, as noted by Jordan Mason on facebook, who was handing out orange SD Gun Owner postcards at Daugaard speaking events yesterday.
Senate Bill 59 has been filed – one of the first initiated measure reform measures from individual legislators to try to fix the grand mess that we’ve been going through over the past several cycles.
This first reform bill gives the legislature and state government a chance to prepare for the impact of such measures, such as through rule-making authority and changing law to comply with the measures (especially poorly written ones), by making them effective on July 1 of the following year, and not at the time the canvaSs is completed:
Thoughts?
State Representative Don Haggar is prime sponsor of a measure to create a system of whistleblower protections under state law for government employees who report misuse of funds, as well as other affronts to the public trust:
What do you think? Does this tie the hands of State Government in the case of a malcontent employee, or does it provide a protection that isn’t there now?
There’s a bill which is part of the Attorney General’s package of legislation which is causing a minor bit of controversy in the halls of the legislature. Senate Bill 25 would allow for the release of booking photos – or mugshots – to the public, as an open government/open records measure. As noted by KDLT news:
South Dakota is one of only two states in the nation that does not allow for these mug shot photos to be released to the public or the media. The only exception is when someone is considered a fugitive. In that case, law enforcement has the authority to release a photo of the suspect.
But a bill in the state legislature could change that.
Senate Bill 25, requested by Attorney General Marty Jackley, would give authorities permission to release criminal booking photos.
and..
“I’m supportive of being open, I’m not resisting public access to our mugshots, I wish there was some way to better control mugshots of people in particular who end up not convicted or charges dismissed, because that thing could count them for the rest of their lives,” he said.
The measure blew through the Senate, but it wasn’t unanimous. It was a 20-12 split, with the opposition coming from some conservative Republicans, along with a smattering of the few Democrats in the chamber.
I suspect it’s that part about the mugshots being released regardless of innocence or guilt having yet to be determined.
If someone has been tried by a court of their peers, and determined to have done something against the law, it’s a lot easier to say “that’s ok,” than it is for someone who might have inadvertently gotten caught up in a bad situation who was arrested but later exonerated. Should that bad photo taken at 2AM now follow an innocent party for the rest of their professional careers? That’s a tough burden for someone to shoulder.
It’s a lot like the laws on civil forfeiture (which are slowly being reformed across the country), where the police or government seize cash under the auspices of it being part of a criminal enterprise without having to go through the formality of a conviction. I understand and sympathize with the “why”…. but there’s something that just doesn’t seem right.
We’ve always been taught that in this country since the time we were small children that under the American system of Justice that we are “innocent until proven guilty.” Either we accept that as Gospel, or we don’t. And if we don’t, then what do we believe?
Tough questions to ponder when we consider how Government should treat the innocent in the face of an open system of government.
The Argus just posted this story, which has the Governor poking back at legislators who would like to see fewer blue badges (government lobbyists) on the 3rd floor as the Senate prepares to make a decision tomorrow whether to banish them from their midst:
“If they differ from my attitude with something, let the ideas win the day. Let the best idea win the day,” Daugaard said. “If those who are afraid to have my attitude or my employees’ attitude be aired then I would say if you can’t defend your ideas, maybe they’re indefensible.”
and..
Sen. Ryan Maher, R-Isabel, brought the rules change last week that would restrict state employee lobbyists from the Senate chamber and adjacent hallway during working hours. He said lobbyists who enter the chamber or look on from the hallway to one side of the chamber have become too much of a distraction to lawmakers that don’t have offices at the Capitol and often work at their desks.
and..
“You don’t learn more by talking and listening less. So I don’t understand the rationale behind the feeling that they should not interact with the executive branch. It doesn’t make sense to me,” he (Governor Daugaard) said.
Senate Majority Leader Blake Curd, R-Sioux Falls, has said lobbyist presence on the Senate floor and in one of the hallways adjacent has at times been “destructive and a distraction” to the legislative process.
What do you think about the war against 2nd floor lobbyists on the 3rd floor? And as I’ve already weighed in on, what do you think about their proposal to shield themselves against lobbyists of all types?
A month or so back, someone was advertising this set of pins made for the Hillary Clinton election night victory party. They just struck me as a bit too cocky, and I love ironic humor, so I had to have them:
I’m surprised I didn’t know about this earlier (not that I’m a $1000 a couple fundraiser attendee LOL). But a friends passed a postcard my way that they had recieved for Attorney General Marty Jackley, who quietly held a big dollar fundraiser in my town of Brookings on January 3rd.
No word on sponsors, attendees, or what kind of haul they made at the event towards Jackley’s gubernatorial campaign.
If you get a postcard or invite for any campaign related events, send it to me. (names will be redacted)
A reader pointed this out from session this week.
What do you see Senator Rusch doing with his left hand that no one else is doing?
It might be a habit from his days as a judge, but the Senator has placed his left hand on the Bible for swearing his oath of office.
Statewide officials usually do this at the time they are sworn in, but as a matter of custom it’s kind of hit and miss with the legislature.
Should this become a custom for the state legislators as well? What do you think?