Governor Noem supporting Campus Free Speech Bill

WNAX is reporting this morning that Governor Kristi Noem is noting that she’s supportive of the free speech portion of House Bill 1087.

The Governor cites that intellectual diversity portion of the measure doesn’t cause her concern, and that it “is something we should strive for on our campuses across the state of South Dakota.”

It does sound as if she wants to leave the civics part in her K-12 package, but it’s a sign of Governor Noem’s strong support for free speech on our college campuses.

Read/Listen to the entire story here at WNAX.

17 Replies to “Governor Noem supporting Campus Free Speech Bill”

  1. a friend of education

    Agree. Support free speech on every college campus. Free speech = constitutionally required; moreover, an intellectually diverse environment helps college students develop critical thinking skills.

    Reply
  2. enquirer

    legislatures, and any rulemaking person or group, have to be careful not to make rules that are hard or impossible to enforce. not only is the endeavor itself a waste of time, such rules undermine the group’s overall ability to wield power over the course of time. the regents and school leaders themselves know this because THEY are who would have to enforce this. it would be better for the regents and presidents to acknowledge that institutional suppression of conservative speech at many public universities around the country is a real and provable thing, and for them to come up with a pragmatic approach to prevent such political suppression in the way they can make it workable. but if they won’t admit it’s a thing they need to address, that is a problem. the bill itself seemed too broad and overreaching from what I’ve read – trying to correct a basket of problems.

    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      Very good points but until and unless they find a means to actually enforce it (which they are not now), then I don’t think we can call this legislation a waste of time. It’s needed and it’s needed yesterday. And of course, it needs to be enforced and those not need to be held accountable (especially in SD when it’s the libs acting like their way or the highway and getting away with it within our higher ed arena) when it becomes ‘a thing’.

      Reply
  3. Anon

    Glad to see her come out in support of this, considering she endorsed it during the primary last legislative session. So far, there has been a little too much continuation of the status quo from Noem, like giving the same line as Daugaard on the sales tax reduction. Getting this bill done would be a positive step in a different direction and proof she’s willing to take on the entrenched bureaucracy at the Board of Regents.

    Reply
    1. Tara Volesky

      Troy Jones
      February 10, 2019 at 8:13 am
      Two other things,

      1). just because someone says it will fix the problem doesn’t mean it will. Liberals say stuff like “this is good for the poor” when the reality is it is good for the politicians. This bill is exactly the same thing.

      2). The only difference between a communist and a fascist is who they shoot in the middle of the night. If you care about liberty, real free speech and a constitutional freedom, it (communist vs. fascist) is a distinction without a difference.

      In fairness, I retract that I have definitive grasp of what is the motives of the sponsors. I really have no idea if the sponsors have bad intent, have poor judgment, or of weak intellectual capacity, but I have no doubt this bill will have negative long-term consequences on both liberty, will not enhance the quality or diversity of speech, and will deteriorate the quality of our institutions of higher education.

      I expect real leaders to deal with the problem in a meaningful way and this exactly the opposite. I have been hammering on this trend for decades and was encouraged when the issue was raised last year. From that discussion, I was expecting the discussion would continue to lead to real solutions. And, that is why I want this bill to die. It will give the illusion of doing something positive. The problem is endemic and deep. Easy solutions like this never do anything but give false security it has been solved. The worst of all scenarios.
      I am quite impressed with Mr. Jones critical thinking skills. I read all of his comments from a previous post and why not just deal with the problem through communication rather than legislation. Let’s be good examples to the students. Let the students draw up the policy. I think they might surprise you.
      Reply ↓

      Reply
  4. Tara Volesky

    Troy Jones
    February 10, 2019 at 8:13 am
    Two other things,

    1). just because someone says it will fix the problem doesn’t mean it will. Liberals say stuff like “this is good for the poor” when the reality is it is good for the politicians. This bill is exactly the same thing.

    2). The only difference between a communist and a fascist is who they shoot in the middle of the night. If you care about liberty, real free speech and a constitutional freedom, it (communist vs. fascist) is a distinction without a difference.

    In fairness, I retract that I have definitive grasp of what is the motives of the sponsors. I really have no idea if the sponsors have bad intent, have poor judgment, or of weak intellectual capacity, but I have no doubt this bill will have negative long-term consequences on both liberty, will not enhance the quality or diversity of speech, and will deteriorate the quality of our institutions of higher education.

    I expect real leaders to deal with the problem in a meaningful way and this exactly the opposite. I have been hammering on this trend for decades and was encouraged when the issue was raised last year. From that discussion, I was expecting the discussion would continue to lead to real solutions. And, that is why I want this bill to die. It will give the illusion of doing something positive. The problem is endemic and deep. Easy solutions like this never do anything but give false security it has been solved. The worst of all scenarios.
    I am quite impressed with Mr. Jones critical thinking skills. I read all of his comments from a previous post and why not just deal with the problem through communication rather than legislation. Let’s be good examples to the students. Let the students draw up the policy. I think they might surprise you.
    Reply ↓

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.