The announcement of the Hawks for Congress campaign might be out in limbo at the moment, but in addition to their web site, they also have a twitter account up and running.
Except there’s a catch.
Has anyone ever heard of a candidate for congress screening their followers? As in, “we’re going to pick and choose who is allowed to monitor the campaign’s activities…”
Yeah, me neither.
It looks like the months-late announcement of Pauls Hawks being Democrats’ sacrificial lamb candidate to run against Congresswoman Kristi Noem is nigh.
Tonight I was able to grab these screen captures of her campaign web site (with logo) from http://www.hawksforhouse.com, which much like Hawks herself, is severely in need of substance to go along with her ambition:
(Just click to enlarge)
Hawks’ Bio notes:
Hello, I am Paula Hawks and I am running to represent South Dakota in the United States House of Representatives.
While growing up north of Flandreau, I was exposed at an early age to the hard work, dedication, and state pride that makes South Dakota such a unique home. My parents, Hugh and Jane Hagel, raised four children on our family farm. We learned early on that to keep the farm running we each had to share the workload. We raised hogs and cattle, and planted and harvested alfalfa, corn and soybeans.
Having grown up in rural South Dakota, I knew how transformative teachers could be to the students of their communities, so I attended college at South Dakota State University where I graduated with my Bachelor of Science in Biology along with my teaching certificate. While I was at SDSU, I was lucky enough to meet my husband, Steve Hawks, a young rancher from Faith South Dakota. We married in 1997 and are now raising our children in Hartford, South Dakota.
After teaching at West Central High School in Hartford for 10 years I realized that the life I had built with my husband and my career as an educator were being impacted greatly by the decisions taking place hundreds of miles away in Pierre. I decided to lend my voice to the process by running for the South Dakota House of Representatives.
– Just as an aside, I note that this paragraph is leaving out that she left her job as a teacher to become a training specialist for METAbank. But I suppose if you’re running for office, it’s more compelling to paint yourself as an educator of children, as opposed to someone telling bank employees how to use the latest update of their banking software.
I believe that the strength of America starts with hard working people and that our economy grows when hard working South Dakota families are given the chance to succeed. I have never been one to shy away from a challenge, and I firmly believe that for our state to prosper in the adverse conditions we are facing as a nation, we need a strong voice in our Nation’s Capital. We need a representative who is not afraid to be an independent voice for our state and we need a representative who is willing to cross the aisle to work for solutions, instead of working to secure political points for the next campaign.
Okay, who wrote this? Is there any originality to it?
So, when Hawks’ ghost writer she says we need a strong voice in Washington, is she going to tell us how as a brand new member of the Democratic minority, she would have a direct hand in the farm bill? Or how she’d get a seat on the ways and means committee, one of the most powerful committees in Congress? Because we’ve got that NOW.
I’d be interested in finding out how Hawks would envision herself getting anything done. By sucking up to Obama? Because I think we have enough Democrat sycophants in DC already.
South Dakotans have been telling me that our politics in Washington are broken, and honestly, I agree. But, when machinery was broken on our family farm, we knew that it was worth trying to fix before scrapping it all together. I am announcing to you today that I am ready to get to work and that I am prepared to give it my all to fix the mess. It may not be easy, and it may not be fun, but it is necessary. Join our team today. Working together we can bring much needed leadership to Washington D.C.
Washington is broken? Paula – a word to the wise: Mike Rounds called. He’d appreciate a writing credit if you’re going to use his campaign theme. (But a word to the wise, people might point out that it’s last years’ slogan, and they were referring to Obama’s policies when they said that. I’m just sayin’.)
Read the entire bio here, before they go back to the drawing board.
The rest of Hawk’s Congressional campaign web site is similarly devoid of content (Click to enlarge):
I think that’s a picture of kale… And a bunch of nonsensical gobbledygook to take up space while they get the rest of the campaign ready. At least the kale is nominally interesting. Something that won’t likely change when they post other content to it.
I’m sure Democrats had to have somebody to run against the popular Congresswoman Kristi Noem, who is currently standing with 1.2 million cash on hand to put into the campaign. Despite the fact that as we’ve noted here before, Hawks’ political resume is neither wide, nor deep.
Sorry Dems. As you surely know after the last congressional election’s drubbing, if this is what you’ve got. this is what you’ve got. And you just have to play that hand you’re dealt.
Even though you know you’re going to lose all your chips on this one.
Why the Iran Nuclear Agreement Is a Bad Deal for America
By Senator John Thune
There has been a lot of recent coverage in the news about the Iran nuclear agreement. For many South Dakotans, this agreement may seem far away. However, the danger this agreement addresses – that of a nuclear-armed Iran – is not only a threat to our allies, including Israel, but also to the United States. The agreement will help finance Iran’s terrorist activities, allow Iran to acquire conventional and ballistic weapons, and advance Iran’s nuclear program – resulting in a more dangerous and unstable world.
For this to be a good deal, full access for inspectors is essential. However, instead of the anytime, anywhere inspections that the United States initially sought, the agreement only allows for inspections of Iran’s currently known nuclear facilities.
If Iran is suspected of violating this agreement, inspectors must request Iran’s permission to examine other sites. If the Iranians object, the resulting appeals process could take almost a month, winding through various levels of bureaucracy at the United Nations before inspectors are finally allowed access. For a country that has a long history of doing things in secret, that’s a lot of time.
“Breakout time” is a phrase that has frequently been used during these negotiations. The “breakout time” is the period of time from which we know Iran has started building a nuclear bomb to the time they are able to use it. Unfortunately, as part of this agreement, even if Iran does not cheat on the deal, they can still modernize their nuclear infrastructure and continue research and development on advanced centrifuges. That means 10 years from now, Iran’s “breakout time” will be almost zero.
In addition, this agreement discontinues the ban on conventional weapons after five years and on ballistic missiles after eight. In the future, if Iran wanted to pursue a nuclear weapon, not only would their breakout time be very short, but they will likely have the means to defend themselves against a military strike. If they acquired a nuclear bomb, they could also have a ballistic missile capable of hitting targets far beyond the Middle East.
For these reasons, and the fact that lifting the sanctions will help fund Iran’s continued support of terrorism, I have expressed my strong concern about this agreement and skepticism that Iran will actually hold up their end of the deal.
Just last week, the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei, echoing the chants from his people, said, “You heard ‘Death to Israel,’ ‘Death to the U.S.’ … we ask Almighty God to accept these prayers by the people of Iran.”
While I am sure not all Iranians want death to America, it is clear that their leaders still do.
As Congress reviews this agreement, I hope the president will listen to the concerns that have been raised by both Republicans and Democrats in Congress. A nuclear armed Iran is a threat to the United States, and an agreement that allows Iran to retain all the components necessary to build a nuclear bomb is not a good deal for America and should be rejected.
###
Dodd-Frank: Five Years Later
By Senator Mike Rounds
July 24, 2015
We recently marked the five-year anniversary of the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act. At the time, supporters of Dodd-Frank said it would improve our economy and protect taxpayers from “too big to fail” financial institutions. Instead, our economy remains stuck in a rut and the law has plagued our country with burdensome new federal mandates. The 456 final rules enacted since the passage of Dodd-Frank have so far unleashed a bureaucratic nightmare, the cost of which is being handed down directly to the American people.
According to the American Action Forum, these rules have cost Americans $24 billion in compliance costs and burdened job creators with 61 million new hours of paperwork. It would take close to 30,000 Americans working 40-hour weeks for an entire year to finish that much paperwork, and the salaries of more than half a million Americans to pay for those compliance costs.
South Dakota’s banking industry has been hit hard by this, spending too much time and money on regulatory compliance. Smaller banks may not be able to survive and may simply have to sell to bigger banks. At a Senate Banking Hearing, we heard from one bank that because of Dodd-Frank, now employs more compliance employees than actual loan officers. This is not only costly to the banks themselves, but also to the customers who do business with a bank. Compliance costs have to be made up somewhere, so banks have been reducing the interest rates on deposits and have increased fees for previously free services like checking accounts and online banking. Literally everyone who has a bank account is feeling the negative effects.
I have introduced amendments and legislation to take apart provisions of Dodd-Frank. One of my amendments, included in this year’s budget resolution, would provide help for people in rural areas seeking a mortgage to purchase a home. Additional legislation would repeal the so-called “pay ratio” rule in Dodd-Frank. This redundant provision requires companies to recreate already available public information on employee salaries. These are examples of why the entire law needs to be re-examined and changed so that we can truly recover from the financial crisis of 2007 and 2008 and not continue to bog down our job creators with overly burdensome federal mandates.
As a member of the Senate Banking Committee, I have been working with others to change our banking regulations. Earlier this year, we passed S. 1484, The Financial Regulatory Improvement Act of 2015, that would provide much-needed regulatory relief to the financial services industry and the consumers they serve. I also recently introduced S. 1816 with Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) to help strengthen community banks, particularly those in rural areas.
Dodd-Frank has many flaws which are limiting American growth and productivity. In the five years since Dodd-Frank was enacted, it has placed undue burden on our economy, failed to protect taxpayers from future bailouts of the financial industry and unfairly punished South Dakota consumers who bear the brunt of the increased compliance costs. I will continue to work with my colleagues in the Senate to promote legislation that helps reduce red tape and overregulation. These regulations are hurting our economy and adding costs for consumers.
###
A Disturbing Deal
By Rep. Kristi Noem
July 24, 2015
Days after the Obama administration announced it had reached a nuclear deal with Iran, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei told supporters that “even after this deal, our policy toward the arrogant U.S. will not change.” His uncompromising and menacing remarks were accented by chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” in the background. Even Secretary of State John Kerry – one of America’s staunchest supporters of the deal – called the scene “very disturbing.” The Secretary’s words are the same words I’d use to describe the deal the Obama administration has proposed with Iran – very disturbing.
First and foremost, the administration’s proposed agreement with Iran fundamentally fails to eliminate Iran’s pathway to a nuclear weapon. In fact, Iran will be allowed to keep its centrifuges and many of its nuclear production facilities intact.
What’s more, access to inspect the facilities will be limited. It was President Reagan who advised us to “trust, but verify.” We cannot trust Iran and under the President’s proposal we still can’t fully verify their nuclear activities either. Rather than anywhere-anytime access, Iran will get as much as 24 days notice before inspectors will be allowed in. A lot can be concealed in 24 days.
While America’s primary objective was not reached, Iran’s was. In addition to maintaining their nuclear infrastructure, the economic sanctions on Iran will begin to be lifted by the end of 2015. That could produce a windfall of up to $150 billion almost immediately. The administration argues the sanctions could “snap back” if Iran violates the agreement, but it will take time for those sanctions to be reinstated. By the time they are, Iran will be infused with cash, meaning we will have lost our diplomatic leverage.
Moreover, there are no restrictions on how Iran – the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism – can spend this influx of cash, an idea that is extremely concerning to our ally Israel and others in the region. With the arms embargo eventually lifting as a result of this deal too, there is little doubt that Iran will be directing some of that cash toward a stronger, better equipped military. In fact, Iran is already in negotiations with Russia for the purchase of military aircraft.
We need to walk away from this agreement. While it’s a good deal for Iran, it’s a bad deal for America, Israel, and our allies.
Congress now has 60 days to review the agreement. After that, we can vote on whether it moves forward or not. While the President has already promised to veto congressional action against the agreement, we do have options to override him with enough congressional support.
A bad deal with Iran will jeopardize the security of America, the safety of our ally Israel, and peace around the world. I’m gravely concerned the President’s proposal puts us in this jeopardizing position.
###
Fighting Diabetes with Research
By Rep. Kristi Noem
July 17, 2015
Earlier this month, I met Maddie. Maddie is 14 years old and from Sioux Falls. She’s an incredible singer and a dedicated dancer with dreams of appearing on Broadway someday. And she, like 42,000 South Dakotans, lives with diabetes.
Maddie has lived with Type 1 Diabetes for half her life. She was only seven when she was diagnosed. Her parents had noticed a significant uptick in the amount of water Maddie was drinking, and even with the increased water intake, Maddie seemed dehydrated. It turns out the dehydration came because her kidneys were working overtime and still couldn’t quite keep up. It was a classic symptom of diabetes.
Maddie has handled her diagnosis incredibly. When she isn’t singing or dancing or acting, she’s advocating for increased diabetes research. It was in her role as an advocate – a delegate to the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Children’s Congress, in fact – that I had the chance to meet her. Maddie told me that she hopes one day we can find a cure so kids like her don’t have to go through the needles and the poking and the feeling sick that she’s had to go through.
I was glad to tell her that Congress agreed and that we had made funding for diabetes research a priority. Just this last March, we extended a special program for Type 1 diabetes research as part of H.R.2, which passed Congress and was signed into law by the President. With more than 1.25 million Americans living with Type 1 Diabetes today – a reality that is costing the U.S. economy $245 billion annually – it’s important we do all we can to fight for a cure.
Just a few weeks ago, Gage – my 10-year-old nephew – was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes too. His older brother Hunter had been diagnosed with it a few years back. A few days after Gage got way home from the hospital in Sioux Falls where he learned how to give himself shots and test his blood, he told my sister-in-law: “If God is going to heal me or Hunter, I hope he heals Hunter. He’s had diabetes a lot longer than me.” It was an innocent phrase from an incredibly sweet and selfless boy, but I want so badly to be able to tell him one day that because of the incredible work of researchers, he and Hunter can both be healed.
We have a long ways to go before Maddie, Gage, and Hunter can be cured of this disease, but I’m glad we are at least getting closer every day.
Noem Meets With Maddie McElroy
June 15, 2015
###
Thune Discusses Importance of Prescribed Burn Approval Act at Senate Hearing
“I’ve introduced a bill that very simply would require collaboration with the state and local entities before these prescribed burns are initiated.”
WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) today discussed his Prescribed Burn Approval Act of 2015, legislation that would require federal agency employees to collaborate with state and local officials before starting prescribed burns on federal lands. Thune’s remarks were made during a Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee hearing that reviewed pending Forest Service and forestry-related bills, including his bill, S. 1100.
Thune’s bill also would also make federal agencies liable and expedite the payment process for damages when federal employees start fires that damage private property.
Excerpt from Thune’s remarks:
“I’ve got a bill that addresses a situation that we’ve faced in the last couple of years in South Dakota. We’ve had two fires that have burned out of control … It happened two years ago up in Northwestern South Dakota and then more recently here in the Black Hills near Wind Cave. I’ve introduced a bill that very simply would require collaboration with the state and local entities before these prescribed burns are initiated.”
Click here to watch Senator Thune’s full remarks and Q&A with U.S. Department of Agriculture Under-Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment Robert Bonnie.
###
Rounds Alarmed by Obama’s DoD Nominee’s Response to Nuclear Deal with Iran
WASHINGTON—U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today at a hearing questioned General Paul Selva, Pres. Obama’s nominee to be Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, regarding the Iran nuclear agreement announced early this morning. Just hours after the agreement was announced, Selva confirmed that Iran is still the leading sponsor of terror and that sanctions relief could be used by the Iranians to sponsor terrorism if they choose to do so.
Transcript of the Exchange:
Rounds: “You identified as one of those four existential threats, the country of Iran. In your view, is Iran still the leading state sponsor of terror?”
Selva: “Yes, sir, they are.”
Rounds: “With the proposed nuclear [agreement], which was announced this morning, if Iran is provided economic sanctions relief, do you believe Tehran would use some of these funds to enhance its nuclear capabilities and support for terrorist organizations?”
Selva: “Senator I haven’t yet had the opportunity to study the entire agreement, but on its face from what I’ve heard from the press, the immediate lifting of sanctions, or the sequential lifting of sanctions will give Iran the access to more economic assets with which to sponsor terrorism should they choose to do so. I think we need to be alert to that possibility…”
In response, Rounds issued the following statement:
“Now that an agreement has been reached, Congress will carefully consider the deal based on its merits,” said Rounds. “I’ve said all along that anything short of stopping the Iranians from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon is unacceptable. Based on what we know so far, it appears this deal not only fails to meet this essential goal, it emboldens the Iranians, who will receive $150 billion in sanctions relief, a phased out lifting of a UN arms embargo and be allowed to test more advanced centrifuges over 10 years. Today’s testimony from General Selva confirms that under this deal, Iran will have the ability to continue funding terrorism, thereby increasing terrorist activity throughout the world.”
Top Preliminary Areas of Concern regarding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA):
As the world’s leading country of state-sponsored terrorism, if Iran receives the sanctions relief outlined in this agreement, Iran will be empowered to increase funding for terrorist organizations.
According to President Obama, under this agreement, all UN arms embargo provisions against Iran will be lifted permanently in five years, including the export of nuclear-and-missile-related goods as well as a ban against Iran participating in ballistic missile development in eight years. This will occur after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) verifies Iran’s nuclear compliance with the agreement.
A robust inspection regime requires an anytime, anywhere policy. This deal falls short of that requirement. Instead, if the IAEA requests access to an undeclared location under the JCPOA agreement, Iran can delay access to the facility for two weeks or longer with the outlined multi-step process for undeclared locations. This timeframe may provide ample opportunity to conceal covert activity.
Under the preamble of the JCPOA agreement, the United States and other countries in the agreement recognize and legitimize Iran’s right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. This is extremely concerning given their untrustworthy track record and history of covert nuclear activity.
The JCPOA allows Iran to research and develop more advanced centrifuges, as well as retain the possession of all nuclear-related equipment. In short, the JCPOA may simply delay the inevitable: it places Iran as a threshold nuclear state.
###
Transportation Reforms Strengthen, Provide Certainty to
Farmers, Ranchers, and Businesses
By Senator John Thune
With all the Senate has accomplished this year, it is hard to believe that we are just six months into the Republican majority. The Senate has passed nearly 50 bipartisan bills since January, and we are on pace to pass many more. We have made bipartisanship a cornerstone of the GOP-led Senate because when the two parties work together, the American people win.
With a new majority, came a fresh set of leaders at the numerous Senate committees, which is where the important groundwork is laid before legislation comes to the Senate floor. For years, this process was ignored under Democrat leadership, and the legislative process suffered because of it. Thankfully, that has changed, and our committees are once again hard at work.
I was among the new set of committee leaders that took over earlier this year, and am humbled that my colleagues selected me to lead the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, which has broad jurisdiction over significant issues that are important to South Dakota, including telecommunications, aviation, rail, highway safety, and interstate commerce. The committee has already passed a number of improvements this year.
South Dakota businesses and agriculture producers faced numerous challenges last year during the nine-month labor dispute at 29 West Coast container ports. During this prolonged slowdown, many businesses and agriculture producers faced inventory challenges during the holiday season because shipments on the West Coast were severely backed-up.
Some estimates say that these disputes cost the economy up to $2.5 billion per day, and the resulting strife was widely cited as a contributing cause to the anemic 0.2 percent annual growth rate of the U.S. economy in the first quarter of 2015.
To help prevent a reoccurrence, I led a group of senators in introducing a set of common-sense sunshine reforms that would help with early identification of port labor disruptions before they inflict damage on the economy. These reforms would also require yearly port metrics reporting, which would create a new level of transparency and accountability for U.S. ports and give businesses and agriculture producers across the country greater certainty. Last month, my bill cleared the Commerce Committee, and I am hopeful that the full Senate will consider this legislation soon.
Freight rail is another issue that is critically important to South Dakota businesses and agriculture producers because of our dependence on transporting commodities and products across the country and around the globe. Because of the serious rail backlogs that occurred at the end of 2013 and into early 2015, I introduced legislation last Congress, and again this year, to provide common-sense reforms to the Surface Transportation Board to address the added costs and uncertainty that many South Dakota agriculture producers and businesses encountered when they were unable to get reliable rail transportation they depend on.
I have worked with numerous South Dakota groups for years on this bill, which has strong bipartisan support and the endorsement of organizations like the American Farm Bureau Federation, the South Dakota Grain & Feed Association, the National Rural Electric Cooperatives, and the South Dakota Farmers Union. This bill passed the Senate unanimously late last month and is awaiting consideration in the House.
Once these reforms are in place, South Dakota farmers, ranchers, and businesses will be in a stronger position to ensure that they get a fair deal on critical shipments, coming or going.
###
We Must Act Decisively to Defeat ISIL
By Senator Mike Rounds
July 10, 2015
Protecting our nation through a strong defense is a fundamental role of the federal government. We have the greatest military in the world, and it’s an honor to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee to give them the support they need to continue to protect our nation. The House and Senate recently passed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, which supports our troops and provides them with the tools necessary to successfully complete their missions. Yet, while Congress has done its part, I am concerned about the administration’s strategy to combat and defeat ISIL in the Middle East and the threat ISIL poses to the U.S.
ISIL emerged two years ago out of the Al Qaeda terrorist organization. Since its formation, it has made alarming advances in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East and Africa as other violent terrorist groups pledge loyalty to ISIL. This group is the most dangerous, extremist Islamic terrorist group history has ever seen and now poses a direct threat to the United States. ISIL is a jihadist organization following an extreme interpretation of Islam which conducts unspeakable acts of violence against Muslims and non-Muslims, to include women and children. The United Nations holds ISIL responsible for human rights abuses and war crimes, and they have also been accused of ethnic cleansing on a “historic scale.” Their ultimate goal is to unite the entire Arab world under a violent extremist Islamist caliphate, and they are the first terrorist organization to hold large swaths of land from which they can obtain financial and other resources as well as organize and train their fighters. They have destabilized the entire Middle East and pose a threat to the United States and other nations outside the region partly because of the many individuals from the U.S. and Europe who have joined ISIL’s ranks and can one day return home to commit terrorist acts.
Many experts view ISIL, in conjunction with other expanding threats, as posing the most complex and uncertain international environment for the U.S. since the end of World War II. They pose a direct threat to our nation and American interests all over the world. ISIL must be defeated – and can be – but the administration’s halfhearted strategy to defeat them is failing to produce results, even emboldening them.
I recently had the opportunity to question Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey about the administration’s lack of a strategy to defeat ISIL during a Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing. During that hearing, Sec. Carter acknowledged that the Pentagon’s effort to defeat ISIL has been severely slowed due to a lack of Syrian and Iraqi recruits to undergo U.S. training and eventually join the fight. Shockingly, so far we’ve only trained 60 Syrians to fight ISIL instead of the thousands the administration promised. I believe the reason we are having trouble finding recruits is because potential fighters lack confidence in our commitment to support them over the long term and fear what will happen to them and their families if we abandon them. Unfortunately, President Obama’s strategy, with its multiple constraints on what our troops in Iraq can do, does little to convey such a commitment. In particular, the administration refuses to provide Iraqi security forces with U.S. advisors who would serve with them on the front lines and forward air controllers to direct airstrikes to help them. Providing this kind of support would reassure Iraqis of our commitment and help provide backbone to forces who, with our help, have the potential for success.
Just as General Petraeus rallied the Sunni tribes in 2006 and 2007, we must do so again in order to stop the Sunnis from joining ISIL. The Sunnis feel as if they are second class citizens in Iraq due to Shiite control of the country, and their way of fighting against this control is to join ISIL. By working with the Sunni tribes and their elders, we can begin to recruit fighters in our cause as well as reduce the number of fighters providing support to ISIL. We must also work to create greater ethnic and religious tolerance in Iraq among the Kurds, Shia and Sunnis.
No one wants to see American boots on the ground in the Middle East, but this administration’s failing ISIL strategy threatens the region, country and the entire world. We must change our current course and act quickly and decisively to defeat ISIL. Failing to do so would be a profound failure to keep Americans safe.
###