Category: Uncategorized

From Facebook:

The statement of organization is in, and Tim Bjorkman is running as a Democrat:

Bjorkman FEC Filing – Statement of Organization by Pat Powers on Scribd

I also notice that his website at timbjorkman.com is up and running (and he managed to secure it, instead of waiting around until the last minute):

Bjorkman seems to be running on a platform of personal responsibility….

So I’m curious to hear exactly what policy initiatives he intends to promote to achieve those ends. What entitlements would he like to see go away? What else does his platform contain?

We shall see.

Farmer and president of the South Dakota Farm Bureau, Scott VanderWal (Volga, SD)  will be testifying before the House Ways & Means Committee this morning to discuss tax reform’s impact on SD agriculture/small business.

Congresswoman Kristi Noem is the first South Dakotan in history to serve on the Ways & Means Committee and one of the few members that have a background in agriculture. And it’s somewhat historic for South Dakota agriculture to have a seat at this table as the group formulates a tax reform package.

The hearing begins 9:00 AM today. You can watch it live at this link: https://waysandmeans.house.gov/live/

Attorney General Marty Jackley is hosting a fundraiser in Sioux Falls on July 24th. And there’s a few names you might recognize on the list:

Today, on the Net Neutrality Day of Action being promoted across the Internet, John Thune has a written piece over at recode.net as to why we need a bi-partisan law to preserve Net Neutrality, as opposed to regulation by the FCC:

Too often, politicians and activists of all stripes prefer slogans over solutions. Today, Silicon Valley players, big and small, and many Washington, D.C.-based activist groups are leading a protest to “save net neutrality” from the Federal Communications Commission’s proposal to undo regulations the agency adopted two years ago. True supporters of an open internet, however, should demand more than another slogan. What the internet needs to end regulatory uncertainty and recurring threats of litigation is an enduring, bipartisan law from Congress to protect internet freedom by codifying widely accepted net neutrality protections.

Administrative rules, especially those affecting all internet users, need to have a broad consensus of support behind them in order to withstand future political changes.

Today, as we consider the future of the internet, we should also remember the history that got us here. Put in place after President Barack Obama pressured regulators to scrap efforts to find agreement, the FCC’s 2015 order regulating broadband internet under a Great Depression-era statute (“Title II” of the Communications Act of 1934) had support from just one political party. This action failed to embrace a self-evident reality — administrative rules, especially those affecting all internet users, need to have a broad consensus of support behind them in order to withstand future political changes. This reality has hit some activists too late, and others are still trying to ignore it — to the detriment of the very protections they claim to support.

Although President Obama tried to justify the use of unilateral administrative action as a remedy for supposed reluctance by Congress to work together, the FCC’s partisan proceeding actually advanced, despite pleas from myself and other Republican colleagues who wanted to work with the Democrats on a new bipartisan law.

The draft proposal we released more than two and a half years ago as a starting point for discussions would have outlawed the online practices of blocking, throttling and paid prioritization of legal content over broadband cable and wireless connections. It put forth a 21st century framework to protect internet freedom by ensuring that corporate owners of broadband infrastructure couldn’t use their role to manipulate the internet experience, and guaranteeing that the sometimes heavy hand of government wouldn’t itself disrupt the positive disruption that has allowed the internet to thrive for two decades. I called for a bipartisan legislative solution before the Obama Administration’s partisan actions, I pushed for it after them, and I continue to fight for it.

Read the entire thing here.

What are your thoughts?

Attorney General Ballot Explanation Released for Constitutional Amendment Establishing Open Primary Elections 

PIERRE, S.D. – South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today an Attorney General Explanation for a proposed constitutional amendment has been filed with the Secretary of State. This statement will appear on a petition that will be circulated by the sponsor of the amendment.   If the sponsor obtains a sufficient  number of signatures (27,741) by November 6, 2017, as certified by the Secretary of State, the amendment will be placed on the ballot for the November 2018 general election.

The amendment is entitled “An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution establishing open primary elections.”

Under South Dakota law, the Attorney General is responsible for preparing explanations for proposed initiated measures, referred laws, and South Dakota Constitutional Amendments. Specifically, the explanation includes a title, an objective, clear and simple summary of the purpose and effect of the proposed amendment and a description of the legal consequences. The Attorney General Explanation is not a statement either for or against the proposed amendment.

AG Statement for Initiated Constitutional Amendment (Open Primary Elections) by Pat Powers on Scribd

To date the Attorney General has released Attorney General Explanations for the following:

1. An initiated measure requiring students to use rooms designated for the same biological sex, and requiring public schools to provide a reasonable accommodation for students whose gender identity is not the same as their biological sex
2. An initiated measure authorizing a South Dakota-licensed physician to prescribe drugs that a terminally ill patient may take for the purpose of ending life
3. An initiated measure to legalize marijuana for medical use
4. An initiated measure to legalize certain amounts of marijuana, drugs made from marijuana, and drug paraphernalia, and to regulate and tax marijuana establishments
5. An initiated measure requiring people to use certain rooms designated for the same biological sex
6. An initiated measure to legalize all quantities of marijuana
7. An amendment to the South Dakota Constitution regarding initiated and referred measures
8. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution changing campaign finance and lobbying laws, creating a government accountability board, and changing certain initiative and referendum provisions (VERSION #1)
9. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution changing campaign finance and lobbying laws, creating a government accountability board, and changing certain initiative and referendum provisions (VERSION #2)
10. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution changing campaign finance and lobbying laws, and creating a government accountability board (VERSION#3)
11. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution changing campaign finance and lobbying laws, and creating a government accountability board (VERSION#4)

-30-

Well, that’s Ironic.

Mitch Richter, a Republican former legislator from Sioux Falls, and Darrell Solberg, a Democratic former legislator also from Sioux Falls, are the co-chairmen for the group seeking signatures on the proposed amendment to the state constitution that its supporters say would fight corruption in South Dakota.

They need at least 27,741 valid signatures from registered South Dakota voters by Nov. 6, 2017, to qualify the proposed amendment for the 2018 general-election ballot.

Read that here.

Former State Legislator Mitch Richter, who has lined his pocketbooks as lobbyist by representing groups such as the pro-abortion group “Campaign for Healthy Families,” the Anti-ag group “Humane Society of the US,” the Anti 2nd Amendment group “Every Town for Gun Safety Action Fund,” and the pro-labor union group “South Dakota State Federation of Labor,” among others, is now going to be co-chairing the Constitutional Amendment re-write of Initiated Measure 22, which seeks to ban any number of things, including Lobbyists (like Mitch Richter) taking Legislators (like Mitch Richter used to be) out for dinner.

Since the group in the past has tried to portray that legislators have taken massive gifts from lobbyists, it’s unknown if Richter will disclose how many of these massive gifts he’s attempting to ban that he’s been offered or may have taken as Legislator, or may have offered as a Lobbyist in an attempt to influence legislation.

You see, that’s the problem. There’s lots of rhetoric, but nobody can come up with an example of it ever happening here. And somehow, I doubt that the people chairing it who have been involved in the process directly are going to be forthcoming with any themselves.

If you recall the unconstitutional chaos that Initiated Measure 22 caused before a group of legislators and their spouses took the matter to court, you have to scratch your head and wonder why they’re coming back for another bite at the apple?

And with a constitutional amendment, nonetheless?

From Morning Consult, South Dakota is noted as having two of our nation’s most popular US Senators:

I don’t understand the Bernie thing, but John Thune and Mike Rounds are neck in neck at the #7 most popular US Senator and the #9 most popular US Senator in the country… which doesn’t bode well for any potential challengers to Rounds in 2020.

Thune’s popularity has translated into an inability for Democrats to challenge him with any serious candidate candidates… if at all.

With Rounds’ popularity nearly at the same level, Democrats may be forced to just give the Senator who is in the middle of his first term “a bye,” and not challenge him for office as they did with Thune.

I received an unusual call last night… unusual, in that it landed on my rarely used landline.

Answering it, I was on the receiving end of a telephone poll on wind energy in reference to a new project or possible project expansion in the area. They polled extensively on wind power and land use for wind turbines, as well as awareness of the percentage of power was being drawn from renewable sources.

They also hit briefly on the Dakota Access pipeline, as well as the 2018 race for Governor. Although in the race for Governor they included Billie Sutton along with Noem, Jackley, LaFleur and Hubbel in the question about who I would vote for in the Republican Primary.

I stopped them and asked again on that one, making sure they were asking about the primary. The woman at the end of the line assured me they were.

We’ll see if we hear how that one comes out.

Rounds Supports USDA Decision to Open CRP Acres for Haying

WASHINGTON – Showing support, U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) today made the following statement regarding the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) decision to open up Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) acres for haying in all South Dakota counties from July 16, 2017 – August 30, 2017.

Last month, Rounds and Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) wrote to USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue urging him to provide timely assistance to counties currently facing extreme drought conditions. Since then, USDA has opened up all South Dakota counties for CRP grazing until September 30, 2017.

“Once again, I thank Secretary Perdue for acting quickly to give ranchers additional flexibility to feed their herds,” said Rounds. “Opening up CRP acres early for emergency haying will provide South Dakota producers with additional relief from the ongoing drought.”

To learn more about the CRP program, click HERE. To find your local FSA office and learn more about drought relief benefits available, click HERE.

# # #