Category: Uncategorized

Congressman Dusty Johnson’s Weekly Column: Don’t Just Put Lipstick on a Pig

@SoDakCampaigns

Don’t Just Put Lipstick on a Pig
by Dusty Johnson
January 7, 2022

Earlier this week, the White House held a roundtable to discuss the meat and poultry supply chain. Farmers, ranchers, and independent processors from across the country shared their experience and expertise with this Administration. I hope their firsthand account isn’t used to score political points – the White House has the opportunity to take what they heard and implement a real fix.

Unfortunately, the White House is attempting to put lipstick on a pig. South Dakotans already know that over the last few decades, a handful of packers have controlled the market for beef, poultry, and pork, which has left us with a system with less competition for producers and increased vulnerabilities for consumer disruption.

Despite this well-known fact, the Administration is using political spin to say this packer concentration is the reason for inflation. They are totally ignoring the trillions of dollars they spent that’s wreaking havoc on our economy and instead, blaming private businesses. While we can acknowledge the structural challenges to the meat industry, placing complete blame on the industry for higher prices is an oversimplification.

I want to give credit where credit is due – I do agree with the White House that the meat and poultry industry is far too concentrated, and it’s a good first step to bring attention to the industries concentration. That’s the reason I have been focused on legislation to achieve those goals like the Cattle Contract Library Act that passed the House in December, the PRICE Act, Butcher Block Act, and Small Processor Overtime Fee Relief Act. In fact, the implementation of the Small Processor Overtime Fee Relief Act was highlighted as part of the White House announcement this week.

Some shared goals and concepts in the plan that I have previous included in my legislation include:

  • Increasing competition and creating more options for producers and consumers by starting small independent processing projects through grants.
  • Strengthening the financing systems for independent processors by increasing the amount of capital available to them for credit.
  • Supporting workers by building a pipeline of well-trained workers and supporting fair wages.
  • Promoting innovation and lowering barriers to entry through publicly accessible expert contract knowledge.
  • Increasing price transparency.

While all of this sounds good, the devil will be in the details and this White House announcement lacked enough details to set me at ease. I’m cautiously optimistic but with these market investments there will be a huge need for congressional oversight. In my role as Republican Leader on the Livestock Subcommittee, I remain committed to leading and supporting legislation that will benefit producers, consumers, independent packers, and processors. Press releases and attention to the issue is fine if there is follow-though – we must remain committed to pragmatic, long-term solutions that foster competition, transparency, and fairness throughout the industry to improve the market for Americans.

Gov. Noem to Deliver 2022 State of the State on Tuesday

@SoDakCampaigns

Gov. Noem to Deliver 2022 State of the State on Tuesday

PIERRE, S.D. – On Tuesday, January 11, Governor Kristi Noem will deliver the 2022 State of the State Address. The address will take place at 1:00 pm CT/12:00 pm 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 State of the State

WHEN: Tuesday, January 11, 2022, 1:00 pm CT/12:00 pm MT

WHERE: South Dakota House of Representatives

WATCH: SDPB, SD.net, and Facebook.com/GovNoem

###

US Senator John Thune’s Weekly Column: Razor-Thin Democrat Majority Wants to Change the Rules in the Middle of the Game

@SoDakCampaigns

Razor-Thin Democrat Majority Wants to Change the Rules in the Middle of the Game
By Sen. John Thune

 

Our Founders recognized that it wasn’t just kings who could be tyrants. They knew majorities could be tyrants too, and that the majority party – if unchecked – could trample the rights of the minority party. And so the Founders combined majority rule with both representation and constitutional protections for the minority. They established safeguards – checks and balances – throughout our government to keep the government in check and ensure that the rights of the minority party were protected. One of those safeguards was the Senate.

The Founders made the Senate smaller than the House of Representatives and senators’ terms of office longer, with the intention of creating a more stable, more thoughtful, and more deliberative legislative body to check ill-considered or intemperate legislation and attempts to curtail minority party rights. And as time has gone on, the Senate’s legislative filibuster has become perhaps the key way the Senate protects those rights.

The filibuster ensures that the minority party – and the Americans it represents – has a voice in the Senate. It forces compromise. It forces bipartisanship. It encourages a greater level of stability and predictability. Even in the rare case when a majority party has a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, the filibuster still forces the majority party to take into account the views of its more moderate or middle-of-the-road members, thus ensuring that more Americans are represented in legislation. Removing the filibuster would erase this protection and allow the majority – including an incredibly narrow or merely technical majority, as Democrats have now – to trample minority party rights.

In the words of one former senator, “We should make no mistake. … It is a fundamental power grab by the majority party … Folks who want to see this change want to eliminate one of the procedural mechanisms designed for the express purpose of guaranteeing individual rights, and they also have a consequence, and would undermine the protections of a minority point of view in the heat of majority excess.” That former senator of course was Joe Biden – one of the many Democrats who has opposed abolishing the filibuster.

Because, of course, Democrats were singing a different tune on the filibuster just a couple of years ago. When President Trump urged Republican senators to abolish the legislative filibuster – dozens of times – Democrats were strongly opposed. In 2017, 32 Democrat senators – including now-Vice President Harris and a majority of the current Democrat caucus – signed a letter urging that the legislative filibuster be preserved. Republicans agreed and refused to abolish the legislative filibuster despite the former president’s repeated urging.

Now, however, many Democrats who not only supported but actively and repeatedly used the filibuster during the previous administration to block major coronavirus relief legislation and police reform legislation have apparently decided that rules protecting the minority should only apply when Democrats are in the minority. Apparently Democrat minorities deserve representation, but Republican minorities do not.

I urge my Democrat colleagues to think about what abolishing the filibuster would mean for ordinary Americans. Of course it would mean decreased representation for any American whose party was in the minority. But it would also mean highly unstable government policy (and a resulting lack of confidence in government) as well as a sharp increase in partisanship – which I venture to say is not what we need right now.

Abolish the filibuster, and policy will shift sharply with it. Social policy – on abortion, religious freedom, and other issues. Regulatory policy. Tax policy. Foreign policy. The list goes on. And such incessant changes of national policy would unquestionably heighten partisanship in this country. As the laws became more extreme, the tension between Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, would only heighten. Here in Congress, yes, but most importantly throughout the country.

When Republicans were repeatedly faced with the prospect of abolishing the legislative filibuster during the previous administration, we said “no.” Not because there wasn’t important legislation we wanted to pass, but because we knew that the best thing for our country – and for our future representation in the Senate – was to preserve this essential protection for the minority party. I urge my Democrat colleagues to think of their future and our country and make the same decision.

###

Third candidate in D33 announces, triggering likely House Primary

@SoDakCampaigns

A third candidate has emerged in the House District 33 race, adding another likely primary election to the tally.

Curt Massie, a Republican from Rapid City, has announced his intention to run for election in South Dakota House District 33.

The district includes mostly rural portions of Pennington County surrounding west, north and south Rapid City. It also includes and a portion of Meade County from Summerset to just west of Black Hawk.

District 33 is currently represented in the House by Taffy Howard and Phil Jensen. Howard has announced her candidacy for South Dakota’s Congressional seat.

Read it here.

Phil Jensen is expected to run again, and Rapid City resident Dean Aurand has already filed paperwork for the race.

Pro-Life Rule Blocking Telemedicine Abortions Approved

@SoDakCampaigns

Pro-Life Rule Blocking Telemedicine Abortions Approved

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem and the Department of Health’s rule blocking telemedicine abortions was approved by the South Dakota Legislature’s Interim Rules Review Committee.

“Chemical abortions are four times as likely to cause a woman getting an abortion to end up in an emergency room – and we have a duty to protect the lives of those women,” said Governor Noem. “I look forward to the day when the life of every unborn child is protected in South Dakota. Until then, South Dakotans will know that if a mother uses abortion pills to end her unborn child’s life, she will not get those pills from a stranger over the internet.”

In September, Governor Noem signed Executive Order 2021-12, directing the South Dakota Department of Health to establish rules preventing telemedicine abortions in South Dakota. The rule does the following:

  • Requires that no medical abortion by use of mifepristone and misopristol take place except in a licensed abortion facility, with an observation period;
  • Requires in-office visits for the taking of the mifepristone and separately for the misopristol. This provision makes South Dakota the only state in the nation to protect the life of the mother to this extent;
  • Ensures that South Dakota law is properly followed by requiring that the mother be informed that, after administration of the mifepristone, it is possible to rescue the unborn child and stop the abortion from occurring; and
  • Requires abortion facilities collect and maintain certain information.

Governor Noem plans to work with the South Dakota legislature to pass legislation that makes these and other protocols permanent in the 2022 legislative session.

###

Party without candidates for Governor, Congress canceling big event citing COVID

@SoDakCampaigns

The South Dakota Democrat Party is announcing today that they’re canceling their big New Year’s Gala event citing COVID.  But I can’t help but notice that they’re also the party without any candidates as well…

Might just be a coincidence.

Republican Matt Doyle files to run in D7 House, possibly triggering primary. Roughly 15 or so GOP primaries so far.

@SoDakCampaigns

Republican Matt Doyle of Brookings has filed paperwork to form a campaign committee in support of a race for District 7 House, making him the third candidate in that race and triggering yet another primary election in this already busy season.

And it’s just plain getting crazy as I’m counting over 15 primaries so far, and we’re not through the first week in January. What primaries are out there/strongly rumored so far…

D2 House – Sjaarda, Schoenbeck & Kull
D3 House – Weis, Perry, Rylance, Possibly Dennert, and I’ve heard another may also get in.
D4 House – Deutsch, Grimm, and I’m told another.
D5 House – Bartels, Callies & Kobat
D7 House – …As mentioned
D9 House – Milstead, Soye, Fonkert.. possibly one other
D11 House – Karr, Mulder, Bonynge
D12 House – Jamison, Schuster, Heisey
D16 House – Jensen, Vasgaard and Karla Lems. Lems announced before redistricting, so we’ll see if she moves forward.
D25 House – Gross, Hansen, Pischke
D30 House – Watch for a primary in some configuration.. this district is somewhat fluid at the moment.
D34 House – Derby, Olson, Twiggs

D1 Senate – Rumors are flying that Current D3 State Rep. Dennert may abandon District 3 for District 1, and challenge incumbent Senator Mike Rohl, who was one of the Senate’s hardest-charging giant slayers in the last election, where he took out long-time Dem Legislator Susan Wismer in a traditionally Dem District.  You would think that this would be dumb on Dennert’s part, but with the crowded D3 House field, neither path is attractive, so rolling the dice might be an acceptable risk for him.

D2 Senate – Spencer Wrightsman is the lone ranger in the race right now, but rumors are that the field may get crowded, as there are a lot of people interested.

D3 Senate – Long-time legislator Al Novstrup is being challenged by newcomer Rachel Dix. Dix has strong community involvement for her age, so this could be one to watch.

D12 Senate – Arch Beal is running for the Senate, but there are rumors that an insurance executive might be jumping in to run for that seat as well.

D24 Senate – Incumbent Mary Duvall has a challenge from the right in former Pierre City Commissioner & current state employee Jim Mehlhaff

D25 Senate – Incumbent Marsha Symens is being challenged by former legislator Kevin Crisp.

D26 Senate – Newcomer Republican Christian Skunk and return Republican candidate Joel Koskan will be going head to head for the seat being vacated by Democrat Troy Heinert.

D31 Senate – With incumbent Tim Johns stepping back, Ron Moeller had already been in the race, and I’ve heard rumors of a strong contender also stepping up to run for the race as well.

Did I say 15?  OK, we’re at 20 already at the legislative level.  Plus there’s a few more rumored, and more that I’m sure will develop, which I’ll keep to myself.

Don’t forget that at the statewide level, we have primary elections for US Senate, Congress and Governor. And prospective convention fights for Attorney General, School and Lands, and as of this week, Secretary of State.

Since the last election there have been several advocacy group who have popped up with plans to run their own candidates for various offices.. but most of those don’t come with any money, so we’ll see if that have any measurable effect or to what extent they get involved (or try to take credit).

On the D side of things, so far Democrats have one primary for D15 House with incumbents Linda Duba & Jamie Smith being challenged by (Current? Former? ACLU employee) Kadyn Wittman… and that’s about it. Forget primaries for statewide office, as they sort-of have one candidate for the US Senate race, and that is it. They have yet to field a candidate for Congress or Governor, and Constitutional Candidates for many years have been those they can talk into it.

And that’s what I know this morning.