Category: Uncategorized

As part of her rollout in her race for Congress, tonight Shantel Krebs did a tele-town hall, a tool often used by Kristi Noem, as well as Scott Munsterman when he ran for Governor.

The robo-dialed call rang in to my house at about 7:35…  and by the time I was connected, I got to hear Shantel express how she was against career politicians, in favor of term limits…. aaand then the call was done.

That was fast.  I guess somebody had to be called last. (Are they trying to tell me something?)

Hot off the FEC’s press, Per the FEC Filing, it looks as if the Krebs Campaign is being run out of Georgia Hanson’s shop:

Shantel Krebs for Congress by Pat Powers on Scribd

Come on in, the water’s fine! Dusty welcomes @shantelkrebs to the race. pic.twitter.com/TbKsHsNmYX

— Dusty Johnson (@DustyJohnson) March 13, 2017

Dusty Johnson Welcomes Secretary Krebs To Congressional  Race 

Congressional Candidate Dusty Johnson has released the following statement regarding Secretary of State Shantel Krebs’ U.S. House candidacy:

“These days it seems like candidates are supposed to attack each other. Well, not me and not today.  Shantel is a friend and I welcome her to the Congressional race.”

###

As I noted last week…

And the website I had teased is also up and running.

Hot off the press, apparently this letter went out to State’s Attorneys across South Dakota, where Deputy Attorney General Charlie McGuigan announced that he’s in the hunt for AG:

The Argus is reporting this AM that Governor Daugaard is leaning against HB 1156 (An act to allow a concealed pistol in the capitol with an enhanced concealed pistol permit), and definitely plans to veto this sessions’ big gun bill, House Bill 1072 (An act to repeal and revise certain provisions relating to permits to carry a concealed pistol):

Gov. Dennis Daugaard said social media campaigns and stacks of petitions aren’t enough to change his mind on proposals that would expand the state’s concealed carry laws.

and..

Daugaard reiterated his intention to veto the second bill, which aims to let qualified people carry a concealed pistol without a permit without fear of criminal charges.

and..

As for carrying guns in the Capitol, the governor feels security there is sufficient.

Read it all here.

Looking at the roster of the people who voted against the House Bill 1072:

.. I’m not seeing a lot of people who I suspect would roll over and change their vote against the measure to override a gubernatorial veto.

And while I don’t think it matters to the Democrats, the one thing I notice is that many of the Republicans who are opposing the measure have had primary elections in the last couple of cycles, with their opponents aggressively backed by one of the groups pushing the hardest for the bill, the South Dakota Gun Owners’ group.

(Yes, the same SDGO group that just leafletted area Sheriffs for testifying in opposition of the same bill.)

The opposition of permitless carry in 2017 has enough Republicans in the legislature opposing it that overriding the Governor’s veto is probably not possible. As a result, I suspect HB 1072 is going to be a large arrow in SDGO’s quiver as they start designing their fluorescent postcards for the 2018 primary.

Attorney General Jackley Joins Challenge to the
Consumer Finance Protection Bureau’s Structure

PIERRE, S.D. – Attorney General Marty Jackley has joined an amicus brief filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia by 15 Attorneys General. The brief challenges the constitutionality of a restriction on the President’s power to remove the director of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB).

“The State Attorneys General protect consumers and businesses through consumer protection divisions. Duplicating services with a federal agency that has been given an open checkbook and apparently answers to no one makes little sense,” stated Jackley. “We hope that the Courts continue to determine that the CFPB exists in clear violation of the Constitution and poses a direct threat on state interests.”

The brief was filed in the case of PHH Corporation v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. A three judge panel of the Court of Appeals, held that the statutory restriction on the President’s removal power violated Article II of the Constitution. The panel held that, unlike multi-member independent agencies, an independent agency under the control of a single director constitutes a violation of the separation of powers. The panel decision was vacated and the D.C. Circuit granted en banc consideration of the issue.

The brief argues the CFPB’s novel governance structure violates the separation of powers in a manner that poses a direct threat on states interests. The CFPB’s novel governance structure vests control of the agency in a single director who is not accountable to any elected official. As a result, CFPB’s action is not constrained by the “political safeguards of federalism,” which the Supreme Court has treated as an essential mechanism for preserving the role of the States within the federal system.

-30-

I had the chance to catch this great update from Congresswoman Kristi Noem yesterday via facebook. And through the magic of Al Gore’s Internet, I can bring it to you:

An Overly Regulated America
By Sen. John Thune

Many Americans are still reeling from the lingering effects of the Obama economy, and for them, it doesn’t matter that economists believe the recovery began (at least on paper) several years ago. For the last eight years, good jobs and opportunities for workers were hard to find. The labor force was at historic lows, inflation far exceeded wage growth, and the economy barely limped along. While some people predict this stagnation will continue for the next several years, there are steps we can take today to get our economy growing again, like by rolling back overly burdensome regulations.

No matter where I traveled in South Dakota over the last few years, I almost always heard from people about the regulatory hurdles created by federal government agencies and the effect they had on families and businesses. The one example I heard most frequently was the now-infamous Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule. It would have amounted to one of the largest federal land grabs in history. The flawed rule was snagged in legal battles throughout most of the latter years of the Obama administration, and I’m glad President Trump took early and quick action to ensure this poorly crafted rule would never see the light of day.

Not all rules and regulations are bad, but it’s things like WOTUS that give the federal bureaucracy a bad name.

Congress and the administration have already started rolling back some of the burdensome regulations that were implemented during the Obama administration. Most recently, Congress eliminated a regulation that imposed unnecessary requirements for businesses that bid on federal government contracts and another that restricted energy production on federal land, among others. These aren’t the last regulations that we’ll eliminate either.

Obamacare and its pages of regulations, mandates, and taxes is another area where Congress is working quickly to provide relief for businesses and the American people. It’s a broken law that has failed to live up to its most fundamental goal of providing low-cost, high-quality care. I support repealing and replacing Obamacare because I believe we can implement better policies that can actually deliver where Obamacare fell so short. Not only would a new and improved system help families and individuals, but it would help small businesses that have been bogged down by Obamacare’s red tape, too.  

Regulations are like traffic lights in a busy town. If you don’t have any traffic lights, it’s difficult for people to get from one location to another safely. But if you add too many, you slow down people’s progress unnecessarily and make it difficult for them to get anywhere. It’s when you strike the right balance – some lights but not too many – that everyone moves effectively, efficiently, and safely. Right now when it comes to federal regulations, we’re like the town with too many lights. We need to focus on removing these roadblocks if we want to put our economy on a path to long-term health.    

###

A Better Plan for America’s Health Care
By Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)

When many of us ran for Congress, we promised voters that we would repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act—or Obamacare. With Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress and a president in office willing to work with us, we are finally able to make good on that promise. The House of Representatives recently introduced legislation to repeal Obamacare and replace it with a patient-centered plan to improve competition within the marketplace and help make health care more affordable for all Americans. This bill, the American Health Care Act, appears to contain many provisions we are in favor of, but it will need to be carefully reviewed, considered and possibly amended before it is approved.

Since being enacted in 2010, Obamacare has failed the American people. Millions lost the plan they enjoyed, health care costs continue to skyrocket, and new taxes and mandates have crippled the budgets of families and businesses. In South Dakota alone, the number of health insurance providers has shrunk from 17 to only two today because insurers lost so much money on Obamacare. Additionally, South Dakotans enrolled in Obamacare plans saw their premiums increase 37 percent just in the last year. We are watching Obamacare collapse under its own weight.

Americans shouldn’t be forced to pay for expensive health insurance that they don’t like, want or need. The replacement legislation calls for eliminating the individual mandate and the employer mandate. I support this provision, as it will protect Americans from having to purchase costly insurance plans that aren’t a good fit for them or their families. I am supportive of a number of other provisions in the American Health Care Act, including eliminating the Medical Device Tax, net investment tax and health insurance taxes.

Additionally, the American Health Care Act includes language to allow children to stay on parents’ plans until age 26 and allows for folks to contribute more money to Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). This is a great option for young people or healthy people who may choose to enroll in a high deductible plan, as they are more likely to utilize only the health care services that they need. The American Health Care Act would continue to allow individuals with preexisting conditions to keep their coverage as long as they stay insured. It is important that any replacement plan approved by Congress allows for a transition period, where people can move to different plans without losing health care coverage. Our intention is to also include assurances for guaranteed portability, guaranteed renewability and no lifetime caps on any health insurance policy. This is an important provision that will protect those individuals who need health care coverage the most.

The American Health Care Act allows for competition, choice and incentives to strengthen the insurance markets, promoting competitive pricing. 

I value the input of South Dakotans and other stakeholders as we continue to carefully review the American Health Care Act. The bill text can be found at www.readthebill.gop. I encourage those interested to read through it and share with me your thoughts, questions or concerns. Visit my website, www.rounds.senate.gov, to connect with me. Making significant changes to health care in the United States is a great undertaking, and we want to be sure we’re doing it correctly, which may take some time. We won’t be able to repeal and replace Obamacare overnight because we want to do it in a responsible manner. That means taking into account public input and being sure we know exactly what the bill contains before we vote on it.

###