House Bill 1073 smoke-out effort coming this afternoon. SDSU Collegian speaks out against Student Senate resolution against bill

Pat Powers

I’ve been told that an effort will be coming today to smoke-out House Bill 1073 – the Campus Free Speech bill – from it’s premature demise in House Judiciary Committee.

The measure to ensure that free speech is recognized and enforced on our college campuses comes as a result of incidents across the country where speakers have been shouted down, as well as in South Dakota, where a controversial movie was canceled at USD. In fact, USD was recognized for their policies violative of free speech by The Foundation for Individual Right in Education.

Among those supporting the measure are Attorney General Marty Jackley, Congresswoman Kristi Noem, the State GOP, Americans for Prosperity, the South Dakota College Republicans and others. But despite that, the measure was killed on a 9-3 vote after testimony from parties including the SDSU Student Senate.

However, after the vote was taken, we’re finding out that maybe the student senate’s opposition wasn’t exactly on the up and up, as noted by several student senate members, and the SDSU Collegian:

The sponsors of the resolution wanted to pass it quickly to have a chance to lobby against HB1073 at the South Dakota House Judiciary Committee on Friday. But the resolution was added to the agenda at the beginning of the meeting — before most senators could be educated and form an opinion to debate it properly.

What’s worse is in the meeting agenda sent with “The Rabbit Report” Monday morning, the resolution wasn’t included, so students were unaware and didn’t have a chance to voice their opinions to their senator.

While there were good intentions with this resolution, the presentation was poorly executed and hurt SA’s senator-student transparency. This resolution is too important to slide onto the agenda last minute.

And..

If SA isn’t being transparent with its student body, or its own body, and actively seeking to represent the students to the best of their ability, then it becomes an issue of integrity.

Read that here.

If the testimony offered by some of the opponents was questionable, the measure deserves the opportunity to be discussed and debated by the full chamber.

When originally discussed in committee, there was actually testimony that the bill should not be passed because it would make it harder to stop speakers who might offend some people.  But isn’t that what free speech is about? That you might have to hear some ideas that contradict your own?

Given the restrictions on our own University campuses, it’s a bill whose time has come.

36 thoughts on “House Bill 1073 smoke-out effort coming this afternoon. SDSU Collegian speaks out against Student Senate resolution against bill”

  2. SDSU is being controlled by a politically correct cult and our tax dollars are funding it all. Legislators need to address this immediately

  3. Start looking at the faculty who were behind this fake resolution at SDSU and you’ll learn a lot. Not a pretty picture. All very unprofessional. Keep your kids away from this place

  4. How hard the PC patrol is fighting free speech is deeply concerning. They want zero conservative voices on campus and they’ve achieved that

  5. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, I got to hear a bunch of speakers all over the political dial as and undergraduate and employee at three colleges in Ohio, then as a grad student at Boise State. No safe places to be found. And it was good for everyone. I’d hate to be in school today. Would have to lay low and keep your mouth shut to survive.

  6. What Cliff said.

    The universities will never fix this. Liberals on campus want an echo chamber. The legislature has to fix it.

    1. Quite blaming USD. I want to know who the person or group was that stopped the showing of the Honor Diaries. Mr. Clark, since you are carrying this bill, I would surely hope you have the background and facts behind this controversial issue.

  7. We don’t say this enough, but thank you to these brave legislators for standing up to the leftwing attack machine and fighting for speech rights and some degree of political balance on campus.

  9. I am quite disappointed that Rep. Clark will not answer my questions. It’s campaign season and this bill means nothing. We already have free speech. Did the Muslim student association help stop the Honor Diaries viewing? If you read this article, the coordinators of the Women’s Gender Program were 100% behind showing the documentary. Who stopped it Rep Clark? And where did you get that bill? https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2015/04/honor-diaries-who-is-afraid-human-rights/

  10. Quite blaming USD. It has great professors. I want to know who the person or group was that stopped the showing of the Honor Diaries. Mr. Clark, since you are carrying this bill, I would surely hope you have the background and facts behind this controversial issue.

  11. Is Tara insane? Does she not support free speech?

    Anyway, pass this bill and promote free speech! Good work in Pierre

    2. Yeah she’s insane. She says the showing of Honor Diaries was stopped at USD but posts a link to an article which says it wasn’t. According to the article, the film was shown.

      I am more concerned that the taxpayers are subsidizing a department of women’s and gender studies.

      I remember when Janklow shut down an early childhood ed program because all it did was prepare graduates for jobs that paid minimum wage.
      How much money can you make wearing a vagina costume?

  12. Fancher, did you read the article? I guess you aren’t into facts, just propaganda. Once again, Mr. Clark will not respond.

  14. Just got blocked from anti-women’s Muslim rights group, the Pussy Hatters. And this group claims to be for free speech and non-partisianship. WOW! I guess they want their party to become extinct. Samantha Spawn shared a link.
    1 hr
    South Dakota deserves better than divisive rhetoric aimed at pitting neighbors against each other and fostering a culture of fear.

    This Trumpian sycophant is power-hungry with no leadership skills, claims to seek an end to the war on terror, yet presents no viable solutions for peace, and is essentially using his tax-funded position as a state senator to drive home campaign talking points. Unacceptable, unethical, and UNAMERICAN.

    Are you an ‘enemy of the state?’
    South Dakota state senator pushes resolution calling anyone who doesn’t support it an ‘enemy of the state’ and an ‘apologist’ for radical Islam.
    KOTATV.COM
    Like
    Like
    Love
    Haha
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    Comment
    Share
    10Dick Leir and 9 others
    Comments
    Kathie Allstot
    Kathie Allstot Simple question-where was this guy born and raised? Just curious.
    Manage
    Like · Reply · 22m
    Tara Batcheller Volesky
    Tara Batcheller Volesky Watertown.
    Manage
    Unable to post comment.
    Tara Batcheller Volesky
    Tara Batcheller Volesky watertown.
    Manage
    Unable to post comment.
    Tara Batcheller Volesky

    Write a comment…

  16. As an alumni of the School of Mines here in Rapid City, it isn’t just at SDSU. As a matter of fact,while circulating a ballot measure last year on my old alma mater’s campus, the security there confronted me and threated to call the Police to arrest me for not obtaining permission from them first. Needless to say – I wasn’t pleased and still am not. Ridiculous that they had the gall a few days later to call me for a donation to the foundation for the school – after threatening to arrest me.

    But bottom line, they can either pass this legislation or us political activists can do a repeat of: Tinker v. Des Moines and see how it shakes out in federal court.

  18. The Board of Regents needs to be sued in court the next time somebody’s First Amendment rights are infringed.

    We don’t need a new Law, we need to enforce the ones we already have.

  19. To Tara Volesky & Anon:

    Stay tuned – and if you wanted to chip in on some bail money this coming summer, it would be appreciated.

  20. Wow, if a GOP super majority in the House can’t pass a bill protecting free speech what good are they?

  21. Here’s a list of the legislators who killed this bill:

    Barthel, Diedrich, Lust, Reed, Rozum, Turbiville, Wismer, Johns, Stevens

  22. Put together a fund or a petition drive to put on the ballot. I’ll contribute. USD has had issues for years and the money I was going to give will be better used for free speech. Blame the gov for the board of regents.

    1. Put together a legal fund to take it to court the next time something happens.
      Enacting a new Law isn’t actually necessary. We already have the First Amendment. It just needs teeth.

      1. That’s right, we already have the law. The problem is, it has not been enforced. How hard is that?

      2. Administration is the problem. Not the law. These regulated speech zones that are regulated buy leftist academics to their narrow interpretation of their ideology is the issue. Time for the adults to remind academia of the 1st Amendment.

  23. The failure of the smoke-out is a great example of how bad the situation is in Pierre. When conservatives get more involved in the Republican primaries and support true conservatives rather than waiting until the general election and rubber stamping whomever has an R after his/her name, we might see some change. There is a super-majority of Republicans in the House, but only about 15 of the representatives are actually conservative.

    1. Define conservative. Because my guess is, you are referring to the ones who bring more bills than anyone else, preach small government and local control, but want more committees and more oversight on things in which they are ignorant.

  24. In related news:

    Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville has agreed to pay $10,000 to settle a First Amendment lawsuit filed by the school’s College Republicans chapter.
    https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10477

    “According to NBC affiliate KSDK, the university will pay $10,000 for attorney fees and has already eliminated its speech zone after the College Republicans, with help from the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), challenged the constitutionality of the school’s free speech policy in October.”

    They keep losing and they keep doubling down…

    1. Cool. So what you’re saying is that the First Amendment already has this issue covered and we don’t need extraneous laws like HB 1037. Good to know.

      1. As long as you enjoy spending taxpayer dollars to settle lawsuits that should be unnecessary, I suppose.

        Better to start holding the Board of Regents and Faculty administrators accountable, IMHO.

Comments are closed.