Category: Uncategorized

Thune Launches Nationwide Broadband Oversight Effort  

“I’m committed to expanding access to broadband services and strengthening connectivity in rural areas in South Dakota and around the nation.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), ranking member of the Subcommittee on Communications, Media, and Broadband, today announced that he will be launching a nationwide oversight effort that will review numerous broadband programs spanning several federal agencies. The primary goal of Thune’s effort is to hold these agencies accountable and ensure that previously authorized broadband funding is being used in the most efficient way possible to protect taxpayer dollars. In a letter sent today, Thune seeks input on the current broadband regulatory structure from a diverse group of stakeholders, including broadband associations, public interest groups, and free market think tanks.

“I’m committed to expanding access to broadband services and strengthening connectivity in rural areas in South Dakota and around the nation,” said Thune. “In order to ensure rural communities have access to these services, it is critical for federal agencies to efficiently spend funds on the areas that need it the most. Every federal dollar that has been spent should go toward the stated purpose of expanding connectivity to truly unserved areas. Congressional oversight has been noticeably absent in these areas, and there is serious concern that the federal government would repeat previous mistakes where agencies’ gross mismanagement of broadband funds fell on the backs of taxpayers across the country. It is time for Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities and hold the government accountable to hardworking taxpayers.”

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress has allocated nearly $80 billion in federal broadband investments. Additionally, the so-called American Rescue Plan allocated $350 billion for state, local, territorial, and tribal governments that can be used for broadband infrastructure. Due to this unprecedented amount of funding for broadband-related services, Thune believes stringent oversight of how these dollars are being spent is necessary to avoid agencies misusing billions of taxpayer dollars.

Full letter below:

Dear stakeholder:

Fixed and mobile broadband services are vital to America’s communities. The expansion of these services has played a critical role in ushering advancements in health care, education, economic development, and much more. As you know, Congress has allocated billions of dollars with the intent to expand these services to unserved areas.

More than a year has passed since the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) was signed into law. As part of the IIJA, Congress provided a $65 billion investment in broadband services, the majority of it going to the Broadband, Equity, Affordability, and Deployment (BEAD) program administered by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA).

In addition to NTIA, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury), play a role in advancing broadband services across the United States. Additionally, multiple other agencies and states have adopted programs to help support the expansion of broadband services. In fact, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently found that broadband funding is spread out over 15 separate agencies and more than 130 separate programs.

The fragmented approach the federal government has taken to address the digital divide raises a number of concerns. As GAO noted, “U.S. broadband efforts are not guided by a national strategy with clear roles, goals, objectives, and performance measures.” This creates a serious risk of misallocating the broadband funding Congress has appropriated which may result in billions of taxpayer dollars being spent with little to show.

As a longtime member and former chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, which has jurisdiction over telecommunications services, I believe it is imperative Congress exercises its oversight responsibilities and seeks feedback on how to best expand broadband services in the most effective, efficient, and fiscally responsible manner so that we can close the digital divide once and for all. Absent such oversight, there is a significant risk the federal government will repeat the mistakes of the past where agencies misused billions of dollars and overbuilt networks.

In light of the importance of ensuring federal dollars for broadband services are implemented properly and broadband deployment more generally, I ask you to provide your organization’s comments on the current broadband regulatory structure and your organization’s priorities, as well as provide responses to the following specific questions no later than Friday, January 6, 2023:

Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act-specific Issues:

1. As part of the IIJA, Congress established a technology-neutral approach for the BEAD program. Do you believe NTIA followed Congress’ intent in establishing a technology-neutral approach? If not, should Congress consider amending the IIJA statute to make it more explicit that all technologies are allowed to participate? If so, how?
2. In the BEAD Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), there are detailed reporting requirements on subgrantees who do not use a unionized workforce or a project labor agreement. As a practical matter, do you think this favors certain providers over others? Does Congress or NTIA need to take further action to remove this requirement?
3. The BEAD NOFO promotes government-owned networks. Do you believe government-owned networks are an effective entity to deploy broadband networks? If yes, please explain.
4. One of the provisions of the IIJA requires products and materials used for broadband projects to be produced in the United States. Given the current supply chain issues, should Congress consider modifying this obligation or otherwise clarify this provision?
5. The Broadband Buildout Accountability Act, S. 3671, would remove the Freedom of Information Act exemption in the BEAD program. Should Congress enact this legislative proposal? If not, why?
6. Are there other technical issues in the BEAD program that Congress should address before NTIA announces funding allocations by June 30, 2023?

General Broadband Issues:

1. As noted above, there are over 130 programs supporting broadband access across 15 agencies.
2. To date, which of these programs do you believe has had the most success in delivering broadband services to truly unserved areas?
3. Should Congress consider eliminating any of these programs? If so, which ones?
4. Should Congress merge and combine any of these programs? If so, which programs would be best suited to be merged?
5. What specific reforms and constraints should Congress consider to ensure federal funds are not being awarded where providers are receiving other federal or state broadband funding support?
6. Should Congress take additional action in response to concerns that broadband funding may be used to overbuild existing service? If so, what reforms and constraints should be implemented?
7. Should Congress take additional action in response to concerns that broadband funding may be conditioned upon recipients imposing some form of rate regulation of broadband services, whether or not such requirements are explicitly denominated “rate regulation?” If so, what reforms and constraints should be implemented?
8. Should Congress take additional action in response to concerns that broadband funding may be conditioned upon recipients imposing some form of “net neutrality” mandates upon broadband services, whether or not such mandates are explicitly denominated “net neutrality?” If so, what reforms and constraints should be implemented?
9. How effective have the Memoranda of Understanding between the (1) the FCC, USDA, and NTIA, and (2) the FCC, USDA, NTIA, and Treasury been with respect to broadband coordination efforts? Are there additional reforms federal agencies should implement to better coordinate on broadband deployment efforts?
10. Should Congress take steps to increase the transparency of agencies when allocating and disbursing broadband funds? If so, what steps should Congress take?
11. What, if any, permitting regulations at the federal level are impeding broadband deployment?
12. Does the FCC presently possess sufficient authority to preempt state and local requirements that may unreasonably impede the deployment of broadband networks? If not, what steps should Congress consider to address the unreasonable impediments?
13. What specific steps can Congress take to reduce costs to broadband providers when deploying new networks?
14. Would updating pole attachment regulations spur more rural broadband deployment? If so, what actions should be taken?
15. How are federal broadband programs addressing cybersecurity challenges? Should Congress consider reforms to improve cybersecurity?
16. Are there other broadband policy issues that Congress should consider reforming during the 118th Congress?

###

Two and a half years ago, back in mid-2019, I charted out a timeline of how the top political races in the state looked for Republicans moving forward several years into the future.

Not that long after I wrote it, my thoughts on 2022 seem to have been largely thrown out the window when I predicted that 2022 would be “a quiet time.”  It was anything but.  However, I was looking at it with a crystal ball before Jason Ravnsborg’s accident which affected a lot of things, as it exacerbated the divisions and hostilities some members of House Leadership had against the Governor, as well as the Senate.

It also didn’t take into account the rise of, for lack of a better term, a wave of Trump-worshipping populism within the GOP which is less concerned with getting Republicans elected as a whole versus getting “their version”of a Republican elected to office. It’s an undercurrent that’s always been there, but this group, where a group of the hard-right is Republican in name only, preferring to identify themselves as “conservative” as opposed to Republican. They’re more dogmatic than pragmatic in their approach towards policy, and it shows.

Since the time of that 2019 column, Republicans have had two wildly successful elections under the leadership of State GOP Chair Dan Lederman, who has opted to pass on another run for chairman. The heir apparent to the State GOP Chairmanship, State Senator John Wiik, appears to be running with the blessing of the major officeholders, and at least at this juncture, is coming in with a clean slate and the opportunity to bridge gaps.

The party process is important in this equation, as there are fundamental changes coming up on how statewide candidates are selected.   Some might pooh-pooh the role of political parties, but governments don’t have the people or the resources for basic things such as informing people about issues, and turning out voters and engaging them in the process. Political parties do that messy work at the grassroots.  And one portion of that process is presenting and filtering choices for those who have chosen to affiliate with them.

That primary process has been a bit messy for State Republicans as of late. With a convention process that seems at least dented, if not damaged to the point some would call it broken.  The basic problem which has developed over several elections is that the party convention process has become less representative, and more a contest of who can recruit the most delegates to register en masse for precinct positions.. only for the recruits to never be seen again. And the mainstays of the GOP seems to be a bit weary of this.

As a result of the last Republican Convention, the SDGOP will be voting on bylaw changes which will affect how candidates are selected, which in turn will drive changes in state law in the next legislative session.

One leading proposal from the party I’m hearing about is to add Republican elected officials to the roster of voting delegates able to participate at the biennial Republican State Convention. Which has always been a little odd that they haven’t automatically been given that status. There are other proposals out there, but this is the one which is getting the most attention.  The belief is that this may temper the convention, and the candidates selected at it, and make it more representative of the GOP as a whole by bringing in people who actually answer to constituents on a daily basis.

Depending on what the SDGOP moves forward, the legislature as a whole will assess how they want to move forward with the candidate primary selection process for constitutional officers.

It is a given that Lt. Governor will move to a post-primary appointment by the Gubernatorial candidate.  That is nearly certain, and made little sense to split the ticket in such a manner.

What is also a strong possibility from speaking with members of the legislature is that there is movement to have Attorney General and Secretary of State join the Governor and federal candidates as being selected in the primary.  And leave the remaining positions to the parties.  Some who want to fix the process express that they will be happy just putting AG & SOS to voters.  And that actually works with the order of ballot, where you aren’t skipping over one race to get to another:

One thing that some don’t automatically notice is that Secretary of State is before Attorney General in the order of succession, so it would be challenging to put AG to the petition process and not SOS, unless they’re going to change the succession law as well.

But could they go farther?

There is also the possibility that lawmakers may choose to take the selection of all party candidates for all constitutional offices out of the hands of the convention process and leave it to party voters statewide through the petition process.  That may be less certain, but you never know what you’ll end up with once people start legislating.

How could delegates still have a voice if everyone went to a primary ballot? If there was a move in that direction, the party system in South Dakota could change even more.

In years past, when changes to the presidential primary process in the state has come up, there has been talk of moving the Republican convention significantly earlier in the year so the group could have a louder voice in nominating a Presidential candidate for State Republicans. Think of a caucus election process.

If all Constitutional Candidates were moved to the ballot, that would not preclude the GOP from changing it’s bylaws to allow an endorsement for constitutional candidates in a primary. The endorsement would be non-binding among voters, but it would hold significant weight in a primary election if one candidate had the endorsement, and others didn’t.  That could be in the cards if Legislators decided to go all the way with changing the process.

We still have a month and a half before we see what form that the convention reform process will take.

But, change very well may be on deck for the next election.

Gov. Noem to Deliver 2022 Budget Address Today

 PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem will deliver the 2022 Budget Address, unveiling her budget proposal for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2023 and Fiscal Year 2024.

Governor Noem will discuss South Dakota’s best economy in America and continued record revenues.

The address will take place at 1pm CT/12pm MT in the South Dakota House of Representatives. The address will be livestreamed on South Dakota Public Broadcasting, SD.net, and Facebook.com/GovNoem.

WHAT: Governor Noem to deliver 2022 Budget Address
WHEN: Tuesday, December 6, 2022, 1:00 pm CT/12:00 pm MT
WHERE: South Dakota House of Representatives
WATCH: SDPB, SD.net, and Facebook.com/GovNoem

###

From Twitter:

Thank you South Dakota for 4 great years in the SOS office! pic.twitter.com/VOAiFnU7aj

— Steve Barnett (@SteveJBarnettSD) December 5, 2022

 

Rounds Issues Statement on Former President’s Call to Terminate the United States Constitution

 

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) today issued the following statement after the former president called for the termination of the United States Constitution:

“Americans have a deep appreciation for the Constitution and our Founding Fathers who risked their lives to establish it.

“As elected officials, we take an oath to support and defend the Constitution. We should never dishonor that oath. No one is above the Constitution.

“As I’ve said before, there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud that would alter the results of the 2020 election.

“Anyone who desires to lead our country must commit to protecting the Constitution. They should not threaten to terminate it.

“In South Dakota, Mount Rushmore serves as an enduring reminder of that commitment and the stability our Constitution has provided for over 200 years.

“Despite their imperfections, our Founding Fathers crafted a Constitution that has stood the test of time and sets America apart from the rest of the world. We continue to strive for a more perfect union.

“I believe Americans want leaders, like those on Mount Rushmore, who will defend the Constitution and unite us in our belief that America is truly a shining city upon a hill.”

###

Gov. Noem and Gov. Gordon Tell Forest Service to Revise Assessments for Black Hills National Forest

PIERRE, S.D. – This week, Governor Kristi Noem and Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon urged the Supervisor of the Black Hills National Forest to produce another set of draft assessments for the Forest’s Plan Revision process. You can find their letter to Supervisor Tomac here.

“We request that the Forest Service produce another set of draft assessments with a public comment period, that those assessments include citations for factual statements, and that they contain discussion of why one authority was relied upon over another,” wrote Governor Noem. “We look forward to meaningful participation in the Black Hills National Forest’s Forest Plan Revision process.”

In recent years, timber mills in the Black Hills have struggled to keep the doors of their business. Under logging constraints, one mill has already closed in South Dakota.

“We are concerned about the apparent desire of the Forest Service to drastically reduce the timber program in the Black Hills National Forest,” continued Governors Noem.

The Governors pointed to flawed statements “not backed by scientific material” in the Black Hills National Forest Plan revision assessments. These flaws included errors in both the data analysis and assumptions in the Black Hills Timber Sustainability General Technical Report.

“If the inaccuracies are not addressed, it will be difficult for our states to have confidence in the outcome of the Forest Plan Revision,” wrote the Governors.

###

Gov. Noem Appoints Monae Johnson as Secretary of State

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem appointed Monae Johnson as Secretary of State, effective Monday, December 5, 2022. The current Secretary of State, Steve Barnett, is resigning from the role to pursue employment in the private sector.

“Monae Johnson has the confidence of the people of South Dakota,” said Governor Kristi Noem. “She was elected because of her promise to focus on election integrity, and I look forward to working with her on those efforts.”

Monae was elected Secretary of State in the November election, earning 64% of the vote. She will take office for her full term on January 2.

“I am truly grateful to Governor Noem for the opportunity to finish the current term as Secretary of State, and to the people of South Dakota for trusting me to serve in the role for the next four years,” said Monae Johnson. “Tom Deadrick, my new Deputy Secretary of State, and I will immediately get to work for the citizens of South Dakota to finish up the year-end duties. Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!”

You can learn more about the Secretary of State’s Office here.

###

Johnson Introduces Bill to Protect Tribal Members Second Amendment Rights

“A tribal ID is just as valid as a driver’s license – tribal members deserve equal access to their Second Amendment rights – the Tribal Firearm Access Act ensures that.”

Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) introduced the Tribal Firearm Access Act to clarify that tribal governments are eligible entities to issue identification documents for the purposes of obtaining a firearm.

“Under current law, foreign passports are acceptable identification documents for individuals to purchase firearms, but tribal IDs are not, Congress should right this wrong.” said Johnson. “A tribal ID is just as valid as a driver’s license – tribal members deserve equal access to their Second Amendment rights – theTribal Firearm Access Act ensures that.”

“The fundamental right to keep and bear arms is dependent on the ability to lawfully acquire firearms. TheTribal Firearms Access Act would ensure Native Americans can use identification issued by federally recognized tribal governments to transfer a firearm under federal law. On behalf of our millions of members and supporters across the country, we thank Rep. Dusty Johnson for defending the rights of law-abiding Native American gun owners and offering this important legislation,” said Jason Ouimet, Executive Director of NRA-ILA.

“The NAIV, Inc. supports what Rep. Johnson’s bill would do and that is to put Indian tribal governments on an equal footing with other governments when it comes to issuing identification papers for purposes of firearms transactions,” said Don Loudner, enrolled member of the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe and National Commander of the National American Indian Veterans, Inc.

 “NSSF supports this no-nonsense measure that will ensure fair and accurate background checks for the purchase of a firearm at the point-of-sale,” said Lawrence G. Keane, Senior Vice President & General Counsel, National Shooting Sports Foundation. “The Firearm Industry Trade Association consistently advocates for improvements to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to confirm that only those who can be trusted to possess a firearm are able to purchase one from a firearm retailer. Our members rely on that system to be accurate and providing a means for tribal members to use their tribal identification cards will safeguard their ability to exercise their Second Amendment rights while ensuring firearms remain out of the hands of those that cannot be trusted to possess them.”

“The National Native American Law Enforcement Association (NNALEA) supports the commonsense approach to allow Photo Tribal Identification/Membership Cards to be utilized to purchase firearms. Many of Indian Country Tribal Members lack easy access to other forms of government approved identification. NNALEA realizes the importance of properly identifying purchasers of firearms. NNALEA believes the government approved Photo Tribal Identification/Membership Cards of Federally Recognized Tribes would be an important tool to achieve the lawful purchase of firearms. On behalf of our membership, we would like to thank you for your commitment to Indian Country issues,” said Gary L. Edwards, CEO, NNALEA.

U.S. Reps. Tom Cole (R-OK), Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), Don Bacon (R-NE), Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.), and Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) are original cosponsors of the legislation.

Background:

The Tribal Firearms Access Act would declare that identification documents issued by tribal governments are generally accorded the same treatment under federal criminal law as identification documents issued by the Federal Government or by a state or local government.

This bill amends Section 1028(d) of Title 18 to include tribal governments as eligible entities to issue an identification document, highlighted below:

(3) the term “identification document” means a document made or issued by or under the authority of the United States Government, a State, political subdivision of a State, a tribal government, a sponsoring entity of an event designated as a special event of national significance, a foreign government, political subdivision of a foreign government, an international governmental or an international quasi-governmental organization which, when completed with information concerning a particular individual, is of a type intended or commonly accepted for the purpose of identification of individuals;”

###

I don’t think there’s anything more likely the week after Thanksgiving than re-heated leftovers that have been lurking around the fridge, but provide meals of diminishing quality. Which is why it’s not unexpected to see Joe Kirby of Sioux Falls is in the news, yet again. Pushing the concept of a jungle primary ballot measure. Yet again.

A campaign committee calling itself South Dakota Open Primaries filed paperwork with the South Dakota Legislative Research Council Wednesday that seeks to place a constitutional amendment on the 2024 ballot.

and..

If successfully placed on the 2024 ballot and adopted by voters, all the candidates would compete in a single primary open to all South Dakota voters. The two candidates that receive the most votes would advance to the general election. Party affiliation of candidates, or lack thereof, would be indicated on the ballot, according to the organization.

Read about Joe’s reheated leftovers here.

Oh, for crying out loud. Can these guys not take a hint?

They tried it in 2016. It was defeated 55% – 45%

They tried it in 2018. They gathered signatures, but could not get enough valid signatures to put it on the ballot.

They tried it in 2022. They could not get enough signatures to even bother turning it in.

I sense a trend.

As I’ve noted before.. several times now.. this is a solution in search of a problem that no one has been asking for. Going back to when the measure was first proposed in South Dakota, while the proponents have all these noble goals, in practice, the solution ends up being worse than the problem:

We’ve seen this same phenomenon before, but this is the first single-party statewide election ever to take place in Washington. That’s just terrible for democracy. California also uses a top-two primary, and there, polls show that many Republican voters simply plan to sit out this year’s Senate race between Democrats Kamala Harris and Loretta Sanchez. But at least we know that California, a very blue state, would likely have elected a Democrat to succeed retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer anyway. Washington, by contrast, almost certainly would have voted in another Democrat as treasurer, so the situation here is particularly perverse.

Supposed “good-government” reformers naïvely believed that eliminating partisan primaries would somehow crank down partisan gridlock by forcing office-seekers to moderate their views in order to win. Not only has that not happened, but voters have repeatedly been denied the opportunity to vote for the party of their choice thanks to debacles like these. It’s long past time for proponents to acknowledge their mistake and advocate for a return to proper primaries—and proper democracy.

Read that here.

And that’s coming from the Democrats.

Jungle primaries – providing diminished participation in elections, cutting candidate choice in the November election, and even more polarized candidates. That’s what Joe’s ballot measure would provide.

A menu choice that no one was looking for when it was fresh. And it has just gotten less appetizing as time goes by.

Attorney General Mark Vargo announces hiring of a Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons Coordinator and a Human Trafficking Coordinator

PIERRE, S.D. – Attorney General Mark Vargo announced he has filled two new positions at the Attorney General’s Office: Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons Coordinator and Human Trafficking Coordinator.

Allison Morrisette assumed her duties as the state’s inaugural Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons Coordinator on Monday, Nov. 28. An enrolled member of the Oglala Lakota Sioux Tribe, Morrisette last served as Adult Diversion Coordinator for the Pennington County State’s Attorney. “I am excited to begin this work,” said Morrisette. “A lot of my relatives feel they are overlooked. My job with the Attorney General’s Office is to ensure that is not true. In my culture we live by the words, Mitakuye Oyasin, which means ‘all my relations’ or ‘we are all related.’ I carry that belief with me into this new role.”

Mary Beth Holzwarth began her new job as South Dakota’s Human Trafficking Coordinator alongside Morrisette on Nov. 28. For the past 13 years she has served as the CEO of Endeavor 52, a grassroots organization dedicated to child sexual assault prevention. “Joining the Attorney General’s Office in this new role gives me the opportunity to carry on my work combatting childhood sexual abuse and widen my focus to address other manifestations of exploitation including sexual and labor trafficking,” said Holzwarth.

Vargo said he was looking forward to seeing the positive impact these two Coordinators can make for the citizens of South Dakota. “I am thrilled to welcome the breadth and depth of expertise Allison and Mary Beth bring to the Attorney General’s Office and am confident they will help the Office live up to its motto of ‘Equal Justice Under the Law,’” he said.

Attorney General-elect Marty Jackley agreed: “Allison Morrisette’s proven ability to work with different law enforcement agencies and Native communities will be a powerful asset furthering our commitment to serving all South Dakotans,” he said. “Mary Beth Holzwarth’s long track record of advocating for children will be a needed and powerful tool in our fight against human trafficking.”