Category: Uncategorized

There’s a great column by Joseph Bottum in USA today on the unusual level of indifference that most of South Dakota is treating President Obama’s visit with.

It’s an unexcitement matched by the general reaction of the state. Part of that is cultural. “This is the Midwest,” explains Mary Bibby, a longtime Republican activist from Brookings, S.D. “What’s to get excited about?”

And…

“Locally, having a president visit is a big deal,” notes Lee Schoenbeck, one of Watertown’s representatives in the legislature. Still, although he offered the bland comment deliberately to avoid controversy, that diminishing qualifier “locally” adds, yet again, a curious sense of indifference to the presidential descent on the state this week.

Even Bernie Hunhoff, founding editor of South Dakota Magazine and an enduring Democratic figure in the state, couldn’t find much to say in praise of the visit. “Watertown is the right place for the president to shine light on workforce development,” he began — before launching into a diatribe about the failure of Washington to address the “150-year-old problem in South Dakota that was directly created by Washington.

Read it all here.

From Congresswoman Noem:

Today, I join millions across the nation in prayer and thanksgiving for the abundant blessings found within our great state and nation. I hope you’ll join me and my family in praying for those most in need, and for a future of prosperity and happiness for friends, neighbors, and loved ones.

National Day of Prayer

I am honored to serve you in Congress, and to have your support.

Have a blessed day.

Sincerely,

Kristi

Losing US Senate Candidate Slick Rick Weiland is out shilling for money again for his organization “takeitback.org.”  And in the latest edition of his “Send me money” e-mail, Weiland claims he’s going to introduce an initiated measure in South Dakota:

One of our favorite cartoonists is “Tom Tomorrow” who, once a week, delivers a cartoon that brilliantly satirizes current events, and was just nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. You can visit his website here: http://thismodernworld.com/, and be sure and visit Daily Kos on Mondays for his weekly cartoon.

Between the tragedy continuing to unfold in Baltimore, the gridlock and disarray of Congress, it sort of feels like our country is slowly coming apart at the seams.  People feel a sense of hopelessness and abandonment.

What happened yesterday, with the Senate passing their 10 year budget blueprint, the first joint congressional budget plan in six years is certainly worth a comment or two.

This new budget cuts 4.2 trillion dollars from benefit programs like Medicare, Medicaid and food stamps; it kicks 27 million people off of Obamacare and Medicaid, cuts Pell Grants, slices $600 billion from school lunch programs, nutritional assistance for poor mothers, and tax credits for the working poor.
Hmmmmm. It gets worse….

Medicaid is slated to become a block grant program to the states. Medicare will be turned into a voucher program to buy private health insurance policies. Obamacare will be repealed – not replaced, and there will be more tax cuts for wealthy.

As President Clinton was so fond of saying – “Give me a break!”

Balancing the federal budget on the backs of those who can least afford it is a cowardly act, one perpetrated by the powerful and privileged who have rigged our politics and now own our politicians and our government.

How about some tax fairness for starters by requiring that corporations pay their fare share of taxes? Repeal the tax law that allows them to hide their profits in offshore bank accounts before you start cutting food stamps and education? You can read about here: its call “Inversion.”

With Republican control of the House and the Senate, and a Presidential election around the corner, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

While the political process has been bought and paid for by ‘big money,’ TakeItBack.Org has a plan to fight back, to use populist ballot initiatives in the 24 states that allow them.

We will send a message, starting in South Dakota, that “We The People” have had enough! How? By passing our ‘anti-corruption/big money’ initiative which will be released at the end of the month and, when passed, will be proof that the public is mad as hell, pure and simple, and that we are not going to take it anymore.

Please contribute and join us in making this pledge: that working together, using direct democracy, we will take our country back, one state at a time!

Paid for in part by TakeItBack.Org-Political Action. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. Contributions to TakeItBack.Org are not deductible for federal income tax purposes.

All content © 2015 TakeItBack.Org, All Rights Reserved
P.O. Box 20‌17 Sio‌ux Falls, SD 57‌101

So, Slick Rick claims that “We will send a message, starting in South Dakota, that “We The People” have had enough! How? By passing our ‘anti-corruption/big money’ initiative which will be released at the end of the month and, when passed, will be proof that the public is mad as hell, pure and simple, and that we are not going to take it anymore.”

And don’t forget to send him money. Which seems to be a common thread in all the e-mails he’s sending.

If Weiland is going to release this ballot measure at the end of the month, that would assume that he’s  done their pre-clearance of the initiated measure through the Legislative Research Council and Attorney General. In the middle of all this fundraising.

But if you look at the Secretary of State’s web site on ballot measures, what do you see regarding what Weiland is proposing?  Nothing. No state ballot measure group. Nothing on potential ballot measures.

I’m double checking, just in case something hasn’t been posted yet. But barring that, I’m not thinking we’re going to see anything from Weiland this month. Outside of more fundraising e-mails.

There are days I wonder why I have Gordon Howie’s blog in the feed on the right, as I read his latest manifesto advocating discrimination and bigotry?

Should Muslims be allowed to occupy public office in America?

The very question itself will bring accusations of racism, bigotry and prejudice.  I can handle that.

and…

At a time when radical Islam openly screams “death to America”, and most Muslims are noticeably silent when it comes to condemning that agenda, can our country really afford to trust Muslim-Americans with the sacred responsibility of preserving and protecting our freedom and Christian heritage?

I, for one, need to have some reassurance.

Read it here.

Clearly, he recognizes that his question might “bring accusations of racism, bigotry and prejudice.” Well, no kidding. Because the very question is IS UTTERLY RACIST, BIGOTED and PREJUDICIAL.

Why is Gordon Howie utterly full of s**t past his shoes this morning?

There are a few pieces of paper kept in a vault across the country that would disagree quite strongly with him. Collectively, they’re called the US Constitution, and in particular I point you to a couple of passages contained within the Bill of Rights.

The First Amendment, guaranteeing the free exercise of religion: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The Fourteenth Amendment, providing equal protection under the law: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction there of, are citizens of the United States and of the State where in they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

What those passages mean are that there is no “one” religion that is held above any other, and conversely, no law prohibiting the practice of a particular religion. And when it comes to the free exercise of that religion, no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. Meaning you can’t be punished for exercising your religion, even Islam, as Howie is directly advocating for.

When Howie asks “Should Muslims be allowed to occupy public office in America?” and claims he needs “some reassurance” to consider that notion, he is directly expressing the same mentality that gave rise to literacy tests to discourage black voting, and other “jim crow” laws to discourage civil participation.

Gordon might be starting with Muslims, but how long until he extends that to Jews, Catholics, and other religions he disagrees with?

You know what they say about the road to hell, which he seems to be heading down. Once you start down that slippery path, we’re all in a lot of trouble.

If you recall last week’s Robocall from that one guy asking that we all pray for Annette Bosworth, I had noted that the unsolicited call could run afoul of South Dakota’s Do Not Call List, based on the PUC’s complaint material.

However, as you can see in the response I received, they’re now claiming that it isn’t so:

Good Morning, Mr. Powers.

Thank you for contacting our office regarding the unwanted phone call you received from Peter Waldron, representing a group in Sioux Falls encouraging those they contact to pray for Annette Bosworth. While receiving the call on your home phone may be frustrating and an unwanted interruption, the call itself is not a violation of the Do Not Call rules. Because the person calling was not attempting to sell you a product or service, the call itself does not fall under the protection of the law. The definition of a Telephone Solicitation Call is as follows:

SDCL 49-31-1. (30) “Telephone solicitation call,” any call made to a South Dakota consumer by a telephone solicitor, originating from South Dakota or elsewhere, for the purpose of soliciting a sale of any consumer goods or services to the person called, for the purpose of soliciting an extension of credit for consumer goods or services to the person called, or for the purpose of obtaining information that may be used for the direct solicitation of a sale of consumer goods or services to the person called or an extension of credit for such purposes;

I appreciate you contacting the commission and making us aware of your concerns.

Deb Gregg, Consumer Affairs Manager
South Dakota Public Utilities Commission

And in looking, while the definition of an Unsolicited telephone call under 49-31-1.5 doesn’t require a sale be offered, they are correct in that 49-31-1 (30) does.

You’ve got to love South Dakota’s contradictory laws!

Although when the PUC claims that the Pro-Bosworth Robocalls were legal because they weren’t selling anything, I still might disagree.

Because if you listen to them, it sure sounded like they were selling a steaming pile of BS!

S&P Upgrades South Dakota To AAA Issuer Credit Rating

PIERRE, S.D. – Gov. Dennis Daugaard announced today that Standard & Poor’s has upgraded South Dakota’s issuer credit rating to AAA with a stable outlook, an improvement over the previous rate of AA+.

“This is great news for South Dakota! We now join a very exclusive group of states to which Standard and Poor’s has given a AAA rating, which is the highest rating possible,” said Gov. Daugaard. “We’ve worked hard to place our state on a firm financial footing, and that stewardship has paid dividends.”

Credit ratings give potential bond purchasers a measurement of state performance and credit worthiness. Upgrades typically allow issued bonds to carry a lower interest rate, providing interest savings to issuers like the Building Authority.

Universities, state parks and taxpayers may save money because of the upgrade. The rating comes as the South Dakota Building Authority prepares to issue $11.5 million in bonds for the phase two improvements in Custer State Park.

In their release of the rating, S&P confirmed their confidence in upgrading the state to AAA, highlighting the state’s consistently strong financial position and rainy day funds, a historical record of conservative budgeting, and new improvements in the state’s financial planning processes and long-term budget forecasting.

S&P also cites the state’s recent improvements to its pension program funding and the elimination of unfunded liabilities and post-employment benefit liabilities.

“The upgrade of our bond rating will give the financial markets affirmation of our state’s exceptional credit worthiness and save the state substantial amounts in future interest payments,” Gov. Daugaard said.

-30-

New Prescribed Burn Policies Would Ensure Collaboration

By Senator John Thune

 

One of the most satisfying aspects of my job in the Senate is working to help South Dakotans cut through the bureaucratic red tape of the federal government. I know it is often frustrating for constituents to weave through the maze of federal agencies and programs that have become far too large and no longer serve people as intended. Far too often, federal agencies act alone rather than coordinating with state and local governments, resulting in the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing.

The lack of common-sense collaboration between federal agencies and other levels of government is often frustrating, and can result in reckless actions by federal officials placing lives and property at risk. One recent example of this type of reckless action was the out-of-control prescribed burn, known as the Cold Brook Fire, at Wind Cave National Park. On April 13, the National Park Service (NPS) initiated a prescribed burn of an intended 1,100 acres, which burned out-of-control consuming 6,500 acres in Wind Cave National Park.

This is not the first time federal agencies have disregarded imminent fire danger, putting lives, land, and property at risk. It was just over two years ago that the Forest Service (FS) started a prescribed burn in northwest South Dakota, known as the Pautre Fire, which resulted in extensive property losses. Landowners impacted by the Pautre Fire still have not been reimbursed by the Fire Service, nor has the Fire Service accepted liability more than two years after the fire occurred. 

The fires started by the NPS and FS are prime examples of federal agencies taking questionable actions without first collaborating with adjacent landowners and local and state officials. To better prevent future out-of-control burns and to ensure the agencies responsible assume liability for the damage caused by these fires, I introduced the Prescribed Burn Approval Act of 2015.  

My bill would prevent federal agencies from starting future prescribed burns on federal lands without first collaborating with state government and local fire officials. My bill would also require that when a prescribed fire burns out-of-control, that the federal agency responsible accepts liability for resulting expenses and damage to private property. Finally, my bill stipulates that damages are to be paid within 120 days of receipt of a substantiated claim.

As a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I will continue working with my colleagues to hold our federal agencies accountable, make common-sense changes to our federal prescribed burn policies, and do my best to ensure that Washington’s right hand finally starts working with its left.

 

###

The Water Quality Protection Act

By Senator Mike Rounds

May 1, 2015

 

In 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed a rule to expand the definition of ‘waters of the U.S.’ This power grab would dramatically expand the federal government’s jurisdiction under the Clean Air Act, beyond what the Act intended. The proposed rule, commonly known as WOTUS, has the potential to be one of the most burdensome and overreaching regulations in history for South Dakota’s farmers and ranchers by requiring onerous and unnecessary new permits.

 

I’ve heard from a number of South Dakota farmers and ranchers, who continue to tell me the WOTUS rule would bog down productivity. Our Ag producers should be focused on growing crops and caring for their herds, not wasting time filling out paperwork or waiting around to get a permit to spray weeds in their ditches.  In the Senate, I recently joined my colleagues in a bipartisan effort to prevent WOTUS from taking effect.

 

Our bill, the Federal Water Quality Protection Act, would protect traditional, navigable waters as well as the livelihood of farmers and ranchers by requiring EPA and the Army Corps to completely abandon their current WOTUS rule. Instead, it directs the administration to go back to the drawing board, following principles and procedures we set forth in our bill.

 

We clarify that the definition of ‘waters of the U.S.’ does not include things such as groundwater, sheet flow, agricultural water and temporary ponds formed from rainwater, floodwater and wastewater because they do not have a connection to navigable waters. We also recommend grandfathering systems that may have been created by converting a stream into a water management system before the Clean Water Act was enacted. These commonsense ideas help set clear limits on the federal regulation of water. 

 

Farmers and ranchers know their land better than anyone. Often times, it is handed down for generations. They make their living from the land, and have a vested interest in preserving and protecting it for their children and grandchildren. As such, they are inherently good stewards of the land. They deserve a voice in any rule that would dramatically affect the way their property is regulated and managed by the federal government. Our bill would also require EPA and the Army Corps to work with the Ag community and state and local governments when determining which water features should be under federal jurisdiction and which should be left to local governments. 

 

Freeing Americans from burdensome regulations such as WOTUS has been a priority of mine since taking office. Our Federal Water Quality Protection Act would stop this unnecessary, burdensome and intrusive rule from getting in the way of our farmers and ranchers. It is another step toward reducing regulatory burden being handed down by unelected bureaucrats in Washington. I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues in the Senate to get this bill to the President’s desk before a final rule is published. 

 

###