Category: Uncategorized

AFP Led Coalition Releases Letter to Legislators on Internet Sales Tax
23 Conservative Organizations Tell Lawmakers: Don’t Tax The Internet

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – Today Americans for Prosperity and a broad-based coalition of 23 conservative organizations are releasing a letter to lawmakers urging legislators to oppose the plan to force retailers to collect sales taxes on internet sales.

Americans for Prosperity is joined in signing the letter by Americans for Tax Reform, FreedomWorks, National Taxpayers Union, R Street Institute and 18 other free market organizations.

READ THE COALITION LETTER HERE

AFP-South Dakota State Director Ben Lee had the following to say:

“Our coalition letter today shows that taxing internet sales is not the conservative way forward for our state. Online sales began more than 30 years ago and after all these years, starting to collect taxes now would certainly feel like a tax increase to most people.”

“The bill picks winners and losers by favoring big businesses and online conglomerates who have the lawyers, lobbyists and resources to comply — against the small businesses, mom-n-pop’s and individual sellers who do not. If passed nationwide, the bill would require small businesses to comply with more than 9,000 tax codes while their brick-and-mortar counterparts would only have to comply with 1. Legislators should stand together to put an end to this proposal before it goes any further.”

The group said it will continue educating the public and engaging lawmakers on the issue. Its grassroots army of in-state volunteers and activists will continue writing letters to legislators, calling their representatives, and educating their neighbors about the impact of this proposal.

One of the most contentious and controversial issues I can remember in recent legislative history is coming up to be heard in House commerce committee tomorrow – House Bill 1067, a measure which is designed to turn back the vote held in 2014, which was commonly known as the patient choice measure or Initiated Measure 17.

Why is this measure being brought back to be fought over? As noted in an article on KELOland TV yesterday:

Peters says it was her own personal experience paying for health insurance, because she’s self-employed, that led her to co-author a new bill to amend the measure.

“For consumers of health insurance plans, we only get one choice.  You have to buy all panel of providers–that then drives up the cost of your insurance plan,” Peters said.

And…

It’s a change that Sanford Health is lobbying for, while physician-owned facilities like the Sioux Falls Specialty Hospital, whose CEO is state legislator Blake Curd, is against.

And…

But changing a law that was overwhelmingly voted into place can be a challenge for those also voted into office.

Read it here.

As I’ve noted before, this former ballot measure passed by the widest margin of any ballot measure voted on in 2014. Making it extremely hard to argue that somehow the will of the voters was misconstrued.

If voters didn’t know what they were doing to themselves, why did they do it in such incredible numbers? I’d argue that a lack of knowledge wasn’t really the case. They went into it with eyes wide open.

One of the things people were slapped in the face with in 2013/2014 was a president who told them distinctly and absolutely that under the president’s health care plan, Obamacare, “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.”   As he noted in 2013…

But then, just a few months later, in a sit down interview, the president was forced to admit that his prior statement wasn’t exactly correct…

“For someone who didn’t have health insurance previously, they’re going to have to make some choices. And they might end up having to switch doctors in part because they’re saving money.”

The electorate didn’t like it when Obama told them they couldn’t keep their doctor anymore. They really didn’t like it. And, that may have contributed to Initiated Measure17’s success at the ballot box.

But fast-forward 18 months later, and we’re now fighting this battle all over again.

House Bill 1067 has really come down to a battle of wills. On one side, we have the electorate who spoke with an overwhelming voice, and said people would be allowed to use and keep their doctor. Are there consequences? I don’t doubt there are, but can the added costs really be as high as the proponents claim, since the Doctors are required to accept the in-network rate?

Maybe. But, if that’s what the electorate voted to accept, voted as being what they wanted, that’s what they voted for.

IM 17, for better or worse, was the will of the electorate, and an example of prairie populism fully expressed.

House Bill 1067 has the will of the electorate butting up against the will of the Sanford Health Systems who has been aggressively pursuing the measure, as they have lined up an army of lobbyists, and an army of employees e-mailing legislators. (Although, the employees might not exactly be mentioning who they work for when they send those e-mails.)

Avera has kept a low profile on this, which is interesting, as it brings into question the systemic problems that the measure’s proponent’s claim. They have health plans too – so why aren’t they in the mix?

Clearly, House Bill 1067 is the will of the Sanford Health System, who wants to tell people that if they want to keep their doctor, they want to charge them more.  Or what was the point made earlier..?  I believe the direct quote was “they might end up having to switch doctors in part because they’re saving money.”

Not exactly a point for Republican lawmakers in South Dakota to campaign on.

If the measure is overturned in Pierre, it’s not like this fight is going to end in the legislature. I’ve already heard that if House Bill 1067 passes, petitions will be circulated to place it on the ballot as a referred measure. So, not only could this fight go on, it could drag on to November.

But for now, the will of the people and the will of Sanford are set to clash tomorrow in committee.   Time to grab some popcorn and to watch the fireworks.

Roll Call has an article this morning regarding the political atmosphere in South Dakota, and how Democrats have a difficult time breathing in it. So much difficulty, that US Senator John Thune is getting more and more likelier to be unopposed:

South Dakota Democrats are still looking for a candidate to challenge Republican incumbent Sen. John Thune, and don’t seem to be having an easy time recruiting one in the strongly conservative state.

and…

South Dakota Democrats aren’t ceding the race this time, said Michael Ewald, communication director for the party. But he also said he could not give names of potential candidates at the moment: “There are multiple people.”

Read it all here.

And I notice that political barf-bag Slick Rick Weiland didn’t pass up a moment’s chance to talk about himself.  But he’s not running, either.

Introduction/Explanation: Anytime you see a (–%) in parenthesis, it is the most recent realclearpolitics.com average. The first section is Iowa averages. The second section is New Hampshire averages.

I’ve been watching the movement and polls and tried to discern what is going on in the GOP Presidential Primary.   Nationally, since there has been so little movement, I can’t even discern a guess.   However, I think I’m ready to make some Iowa predictions. It is noon on Caucus day when I started writing this.

TOP THREE: While there are a few examples of people coming outside the top three in the polls and getting into the top three finishers, the Santorum phenomenon is a one-off (but even then, you saw surging at the end to tell you it was possible). And, the Thompson knocking McCain out of the top three happens on occasion but it was close before Caucus night so the movement wasn’t really that surprising (plus Thompson showed late momentum).

TOP THREE COMBINED (69.4%): This has always been surprisingly stable with maybe a few point uptick if the leader gets a bump (e.g. Huckabee in 2008). Historically, it appears that if people change horses late, unlike a lot of “bandwagon” examples, Iowans don’t jump to the leaders. I predict the total for the top three candidates will be 70%-72%.

TRUMP (28.6%):   While currently leading by 4.7%, the impact of not being in the final debate and having an Iowa organization that rivals Fiorina & Christie’s, I predict that Trump will finish around 20%-23%.

CRUZ (23.9%): As opposed to Trump, Cruz has the best Iowa organization and I predict Cruz will beat his current poll numbers and finish around 24%-28% (if turnout is low, he might even do better)

RUBIO (16.9%): His recent movement in the late polls shows real momentum, similar to Santorum, Huckabee, Thompson, and Ron Paul (2008 not 2012). Because of this, I predict that Rubio will also beat his current poll numbers and finish around 19%-23%.

EVERYONE ELSE: Carson (7.7%) is most likely to get a very distant 4^th. However, it is possible that Bush, Huckabee, or Kasich could get a mini-bump and get 4^th but I predict nobody but the top three will have double digits.

IMPACT ON NEW HAMPSHIRE: More than percentages, I think New Hampshire will be affected by order of finish.

MOST LIKELY IOWA ORDER: (Cruz, Trump, Rubio): I think then Trump will maintain his lead and New Hampshire will be a race for second between Cruz (11.5%), Kasich (11.5%), Bush (10.3%), Rubio (9.5%) and maybe Christie (6.5%).

2^nd MOST LIKELY IOWA ORDER: (Trump, Cruz, Rubio): I think this will be bad for Cruz. It is a state made for him demographically (50-60% of caucus goers are evangelicals) and he had the best organization. He will never find a better environment except maybe in South. It could cause him to fall to as low as 5^th in New Hampshire and give the perception he isn’t viable as the nominee because it will expose him as weak in the NE and Midwest which can be extended potentially to the Great Plains, and West. Finishing 2nd will force Cruz to finish in the top three in New Hampshire lest all the air goes out of his balloon..

3^rd MOST LIKELY IOWA ORDER: (Cruz, Rubio, Trump): I think this will be bad to Trump but not debilitating. Much of his support is based on “new voters” or formerly “low motivated” voters and the caucus is more intimidating/hard to navigate as compared to normal primary or general election voting. However, getting third will confirm the worst for him- his base isn’t reliable at the polls. Even so, he will still likely be able to win New Hampshire (26% lead) and he has the money to very quickly mobilize a traditional organization in South Carolina and beyond. One thing about Donald Trump is he has shown a great capacity to act and react.

LEAST LIKELY IOWA ORDER: (Rubio, Cruz, Trump): The chances of this happening are so remote that it is hardly worth listing except it is possible (5% chance?) Rubio could narrowly beat Cruz 24%-23% and Trump falls to lower than that. If this were to occur, this hurts probably Cruz the most. Trump will still win New Hampshire and say Iowa was in the past. Cruz however has no place to look for a victory until Super Tuesday.

P.S. If the order is Rubio, Trump, Cruz, Cruz will be devastated and possibly be finished as he could then fall down as far as 6^th in New Hampshire.

PEAKING TO EARLY/NEGATIVE MOMENTUM:  Finally, if either Trump or Cruz finish with less than 20% or Rubio less than 11%, they will be in big trouble as they will have lost over a third of their support from the poll averages and the narrative will be Cruz can’t perform in a state perfectly teed-up for him, Trump isn’t invincible and his supporters don’t vote, and Rubio looks good on paper and debates good but doesn’t connect.

Just to be clear, I don’t think the odds are very high that anything but Cruz winning Iowa, Trump getting 2^nd, and Rubio 3^rd. If this occurs, New Hampshire will be about who if anyone will join Trump, Cruz and Rubio as viable candidates.

But, if any of the other scenarios come to pass tonight, the week between now and New Hampshire will be wild with new life breathed into Kasich, Bush, & Christie as the air is sucked out of Trump, Cruz and/or Rubio.

Sidenote: My guess is Ted Cruz is the second most nervous candidate today. Hillary Clinton has to be first.   A guy at lunch said the other day, “Clinton loses Iowa and New Hampshire, she gets indicted the next day and Joe Biden announces.” I don’t know how true that is but the stakes are almost that high for her- No Democrat has ever gotten the nomination without winning either Iowa or New Hampshire and she isn’t going to win New Hampshire.

What was Democrat Congressional Candidate Paula Hawks’ response today to posting absolutely abysmal fundraising numbers?

Abysmal fundraising numbers? What abysmal fundraising numbers…….  Ummm….. Look at the monkey!

Coincidental timing of today’s event as Hawks holds a presser in response to a Noem meeting with the Argus Editorial Board last month, where Kristi spoke about her efforts with Indian Health Service (IHS) over the preceding months.

Because while the issue has been important for Noem, it wasn’t important for Hawks last month, and remained unimportant…… until her 4q/Year-end campaign finance report was sent in to the FEC.

Then *SURPRISE*  it’s time to hold a presser and talk about an important topic that wasn’t important enough for Hawks to hold a presser on 2 weeks ago…..

What a difference several days – and a negative report – makes.

Paula Hawks seems to be gearing up for a tough legislative race. Too bad it’s a state legislative race, and not a congressional one.

Hawks 2015 4q / year end FEC report

Hawks has posted $48,383.18 in total contributions, a significant drop from the $63k she posted in the last quarter. Spending is at $24,492, up from the $17,791, and her cash reserves are at $69,491 – an increase from the $45,601 of the last quarter, but still not enough to put her in striking distance of Congresswoman Kristi Noem’s 1.5 Million cash on hand.

What else did we learn from her report?

It looks like Hawks has started paying herself a salary off of the donations being made, which is allowable under the law. And we learned that former SDDP staffer Zach Nistler made $10,454 over the preceding months.

We also learned that Hawks has most of her donors running through ACT Blue, with $15,774 having been funneled through the organization set up for bundling individual on-line donations. They tend to be small dollar donations, but Hawks is tapping them hard.

Bigger dollar individual donors are paying the bills, but dinging people via on-line e-mail is still bringing it in from the greatest number of people willing to spend money on a Democrat, managing about enough to pay for Nistler and Hawks to campaign. And they manage to shield their identity somewhat on Hawks’ report.

Still, by this point, Matt Varilek was posting numbers over $104,000 in terms of funds raised. With Hawks unable to achieve half of that, she’s at the point where she might want to think about whether it’s all worth it.

The Importance of Staying Connected With You  
By Sen. John Thune

Representing the state of South Dakota in the U.S. Senate is one of the greatest honors of my life, but it wouldn’t mean anything without you: the dedicated and hard-working people who call South Dakota home. Those of you whom I’ve been lucky to meet and get to know over the years know that I try to escape the out-of-touch world of Washington, D.C., as often as possible. I take my responsibility of being your senator seriously and work hard for you every day I spend in Washington, bringing the common sense you expect and deserve to the capital city. But when the votes have closed, the committee hearings have ended, and the lights on the Senate floor start to dim, I head home to South Dakota for a fresh dose of reality.

The work doesn’t end when I leave Washington, though. As you probably know, I have busy offices throughout the state that are constantly hard at work for you. My offices in Sioux Falls, Rapid City, and Aberdeen are strategically located across South Dakota to make it easier for you to contact my staff who are always willing and able to help you with questions, problems, or concerns you might have with the federal government.

If you’re not able to travel to one of our physical Senate offices, we’re always open online at www.thune.senate.gov. It’s a great resource for all South Dakotans. I understand how quickly the Internet changes, so in order to remain at the forefront when it comes to the digital service we provide to you, we recently made some important updates to my website that will make it easier to navigate. Also, the website now has a responsive design, which means whether you’re viewing it on your desktop, mobile phone, or tablet, you’ll receive the same high-quality experience.

I’m also keenly aware that the way we communicate with one another has evolved, which is why I stay connected with you on social media. With just a few quick clicks or the opening of an app, you can send me a tweet or post a comment on some of my behind-the-scenes photos and videos. I try to share as much information as possible with you about bills we’re voting on or I have introduced, events I’m attending throughout the state, or my thoughts on the important issues of our time. I truly value your input, so please continue to send your thoughts my way on Twitter and Instagram at @SenJohnThune.

I look forward to seeing or hearing from you soon – maybe at a public meeting, local basketball game, or even in one of the aisles at the grocery store or hardware store. As we cross paths, please know that I will continue to listen, learn, and take our South Dakota values with me to Washington on your behalf. And if you’re visiting Washington for vacation or a conference, please stop in to say hello. It’s always nice to see some friendly faces in the marble halls of Congress!

###

Long-Term Budget Forecast: Debt Crisis is Here
By Senator Mike Rounds

While Washington, D.C., was digging out of nearly two feet of snow from winter storm Jonas last week, another kind of storm was unveiled to the American public: the federal budget outlook for the next ten years. The report, issued by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), forecasts a grim future for our country if we don’t begin to act now to rein in spending and address our country’s $18 trillion debt.

The report painted a picture of our economic outlook that is even worse than previously predicted. Deficits are projected to be more than 20 percent greater than the CBO previously calculated due to slower-than-expected economic growth. Additionally, the report confirmed that the federal government is headed toward record-breaking deficits in the next ten years, largely due to entitlement spending on programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and Obamacare.

Even more alarming: in 10 years, the cost of entitlement programs and interest on our debt will amount to 99 percent of all revenue coming into the federal government. That will leave little room to adequately fund other important programs such as education, national defense, transportation and medical research. This should be a wake-up call to all of us.

What happens if we fail to act? According to analysis done by the Joint Economic Committee, over time, our rising debt will prevent capital formation. Without savings, we lack the ability to invest in new technologies, which hinders productivity and bogs down the entire economy. The sooner we begin to address these issues, the easier it will be to fix them.

While it will take time to get out of this mess, there are tangible steps we can take to begin to reduce our debt. We must first and foremost address entitlement spending. We have to save Medicare, reform Social Security so it is sustainable, make systematic changes to the Medicaid program and repeal the Affordable Care Act before it crumbles under its own weight. This is confirmed by the CBO report, which found that next year alone, spending on Medicare, Medicaid, subsidies for health insurance purchased through Obamacare and the Children’s Health Insurance Program will be 11 percent greater than they were just last year – an unsustainable path.

In addition to reforming entitlements, we must also adopt pro-growth policies that will allow the economy to expand. This will lead to increased job opportunities, higher wages and greater profits that can be reinvested, which will result in more revenue to help reduce our debt. This can be achieved by reducing burdensome regulations and reforming the tax code so families and business owners can adequately plan for the future. This is why I continue to work on a number of measures to reform the regulatory process.

In order to turn our fiscal house around, it will require everyone in Washington to make tough decisions that aren’t always popular. But as the latest CBO report confirms – doing nothing is not an option.

###

Beyond the Game
By Rep. Kristi Noem

For potentially thousands of young women, the Super Bowl is anything but a game.  Instead, it’s another opening for exploitation.

In recent years, there has been a lot of conversation about the possible connection between the Super Bowl and human trafficking.  To be clear, there is no hard evidence showing that trafficking spikes surrounding the big game.  What we do know is that the laws of supply and demand apply to trafficking too.  In other words, traffickers are likely to transport victims to areas where there is increased demand – such as the Super Bowl host city.  Nonetheless, the sad reality is that human trafficking happens in the U.S. every single day.  While we should use opportunities like the Super Bowl to build awareness, we can’t allow ourselves to put the issue aside once the final whistle is blown.

Here are some numbers to consider.  As many as 300,000 children are at risk of becoming victims of sex trafficking in the U.S. every single year.  Most of the victims are young girls and, on average, they are just 12-14 years old when they are first trafficked.  If the victim is a young boy, they are only 11-13 years old, on average.  The most heart-wrenching statistic out there, to me, is that these young kids can be forced to have sex as many as 25 to 50 times a day.

Most of the transactions – about 76 percent by some estimates – are conducted online. Some of those online transactions have happened in South Dakota.  As an example, South Dakota law enforcement placed undercover online ads in February 2013.  The ads targeted folks in the Watertown area and offered underage girls for sex.  There were no significant events surrounding the timing of the ad.  Over the course of two days, more than 100 individuals responded. This isn’t just a problem happening overseas or in big U.S. cities.  It’s happening around the corner from us.

The girls in our area being trafficked can be recruited at local schools, area malls, or online.  Sometimes they are transported to other states, but in many – if not most – cases, they are being sold in South Dakota.  It has to stop.

In 2015, Congress passed and the President signed a sweeping anti-trafficking package.  It included resources for law enforcement officers, protection for victims, more enforceable laws against websites that allow for the sale of kids, and a provision I wrote allowing more resources to support shelters that house survivors.  We’re hopeful these provisions will help.

Still, one of the most important things I or anyone can do is build awareness around the fact that human trafficking is happening – and it’s happening in our backyard.  We all have a responsibility to keep an eye out for it in our community and speak up if we see anything suspicious.

One of the resources I like to share is the National Human Trafficking Hotline.  If you believe you have information about a potential trafficking situation, I encourage you to call 1-888-373-7888.  You can also text “HELP” or “INFO” to 233733.  The hotline is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.  Don’t be afraid to use this resource.  It may save someone’s life.

###

Update On The USS South Dakota
A column by Gov. Dennis Daugaard:

When thinking about South Dakota, naval prowess might not be the first thing to come to mind. Still, our state has a strong and proud naval history – from the men and women who have answered the call to serve to the ships that have borne the name USS South Dakota.

In the twentieth century, two naval battleships were named after our great state: the USS South Dakota (ACR-9) commissioned in 1908 and the USS South Dakota (BB-57) commissioned in 1942. The BB-57 was one of the most decorated warships of World War II.

Now, our state is being honored a third time. The U.S. Navy has commissioned a new USS South Dakota, the SSN-790. This Virginia-class submarine is already under construction and is expected to be completed in August of 2018. It will be the first submarine to bear the name USS South Dakota.

This namesake will be more than a fleeting, ceremonial connection between the new submarine and our state. A commissioning committee has been brought aboard to support events surrounding the submarine’s keel laying, christening and commissioning. Perhaps more importantly, the committee will work to forge a relationship between the state and the submarine for the duration of its service.

This coming week, we will start to build that relationship when the USS South Dakota’s commanding officer, Commander Ronald Withrow, and four members of the boat’s crew will be visiting South Dakota.

They won’t be able to make it to all of the great places in South Dakota, but they are doing their best to fit as much as possible into a few short days.

On Wednesday, Feb. 3, they’ll be visiting the USS South Dakota Battleship Memorial, meeting with veterans groups and stopping at a school in Sioux Falls. The next day they’ll stop in Pierre where Commander Withrow will address both houses of the Legislature and the group will visit the Cultural Heritage Center.

Then on Friday the group will travel west to spend time at the Ellsworth Airforce Base, go to the Black Hills Stock Show, and experience America’s “Shrine of Democracy.”

I look forward to meeting Commander Withrow and the crew members. It is sure to be a good visit, and it won’t be the only visit. I also look forward to supporting the commissioning committee as they work to raise funds, talk to people across the state about the USS South Dakota and develop long lasting ties with the crew of the boat.

The SSN 790 represents more than just a submarine. It offers an opportunity to continue the USS South Dakota’s history of protecting our nation.

-30-