From facebook, Attorney General Marty Jackley was hunting this weekend with a group including former Senate Assistant Majority Leader Dan Lederman:

I believe it was the occasion of Marty’s annual AG hunt, which raises funds for his various campaign/political expenses. (Which includes running for Governor in 2018.)

For those of you familiar with Senator Mike Rounds, during his time as Governor he had a strong commitment to the accelerated development of the ethanol industry in South Dakota.

So, why is Senator Rounds, along with Congressman Kevin Cramer (ND) and several other members of Congress from the Midwest, now calling for an end to the mandate in 2023?

There’s a good reason.  You can blame our friends in the federal government. Specifically, the EPA, which continues to cause chaos for South Dakota’s ag producers.

The Renewable Fuel Standard, or RFS, is an American federal program that requires transportation fuel sold in the United States to contain a minimum volume of renewable fuels. The RFS originated with the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and was expanded and extended by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) has established a vibrant and sustainable market for conventional ethanol, which has resulted in billions of dollars of operating income for the corn and ethanol markets in South and North Dakota since its inception.

After 2022, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is set to take full control of the RFS, which would be detrimental to South Dakota’s economy. In a recent congressional hearing [Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, “Oversight of the Renewable Fuel Standard,” 2/24/16], Senator Rounds asked an EPA administrator if corn ethanol would be part of the renewable volume obligations (RVOs) post-2022. The response from the EPA? There is not a specific standard for corn ethanol after 2022 and the future is unclear.

The bottom line is that the EPA’s only blending requirement is for levels of advanced biofuels (including cellulosic and sugarcane ethanol), and the agency has the authority to completely cut corn ethanol out of the mix. The EPA has always viewed conventional ethanol as a temporary filler until the program could shift to full reliance on advanced biofuels, as some greenhouse gas reports claim an increase or only a marginal decrease in emissions compared to gasoline.

Given the Obama Administration’s commitment to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, it is likely that the EPA could seize on these claims as justification to shift all of the biofuel requirements to advanced and cellulosic after 2022.

As Congressman Cramer stated in a recent opinion editorial, this ultimately means that “the EPA could force these more expensive biofuels onto consumers after 2022 through a program like California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard. California regularly has the nation’s highest gas prices, and a Boston Consulting Group study concluded compliance with the program could cost “between 33 cents per gallon and $1.06 per gallon by 2020.” Such high fuel costs will disproportionally impact lower-income Americans, who spend larger percentages of their income on energy.”

Members of Congress, such as Senator Rounds, are right to question the future of the RFS. Historically, the EPA has not been a friend to corn farmers and ethanol producers, and has already begun waiving down required blending volumes for conventional ethanol.

Trust me, it’s not to the benefit of South Dakota farmers to give the EPA full control over the program after 2022.

Looks like Marsy’s Law is hitting us twice in one week with postcards promoting their measure. See below for their latest.

(Guys, I know a local vendor who could be helping you. I’m just saying).

There’s another postcard out in the mail this week to help educate voters as to Slick Rick Weiland’s scheme to take taxpayer dollars away from schools, highways, law enforcement, etc, and turn them over to politicians for political campaigns.

I heard something interesting today.

The rumor on the street is that the Governor’s office is considering former house majority leader David Lust to assume the legislative vacancy caused by Representative Dan Dryden’s untimely passing.

Here’s where it becomes even more interesting.

What I’ve been told is that the former Representative is somewhat interested, but would be more interested if he could go back in at the top of the heap.

The word is that he is out contacting a few House members, and seeking support to run the house majority leader position. As you well know, with Brian Gosch’s term limit, and Steve Westra leaving, leadership is currently a great unknown in the house.

Rep. Qualm and Jean Hunhoff’s names come up in discussions over who may be running at this point for majority leader, but conventional wisdom would not indicate that either have any particular advantage.

Could Lust come in, and potentially ascend to the Republican throne after a gubernatorial appointment?

At the time of his previous departure, Lust was mired in a long running bout of Stace Nelson triggered misery, when the rogue legislator was accused of threatening a colleague, and in one memorable incident, was yelling at Lust across a committee room during a hearing, forcing the majority leader to deal with all the unpleasantry.

With Nelson likely to be the Senate’s problem this fall, Lust could return to a much more pleasant atmosphere. But he would have to get the leadership nod first.

And that’s not always so easy. Caucus elections can be a funny thing. Solid votes in your column sometimes evaporate when it’s time for people to make good on a commitment.

Will we see David Lust get the nod for Dan Dryden’s seat? Easily, he’s the best candidate the GOP could have in an unusual situation such as the Dryden vacancy, he has strong name identification in the district, and he could hit the campaign trail running.

It all depends on whether it ends up being worth his time or not.

Stolen from facebook, Senator Thune became a grandparent yesterday. Congratulations to the entire family.

Marsy’s Law Launches First TV Ad in South Dakota

“One Day” Asks Voters for Yes on S

(Pierre, SD)—Today Marsy’s Law for South Dakota launched a new television ad that will run statewide starting today and will run in rotation with additional Marsy’s Law ads to be announced in the near future. The ad, called “One Day,” is a significant ad buy which asks voters to support Amendment S, also known as Marsy’s Law for South Dakota. 

Amendment S would provide South Dakota crime victims with the equal constitutional rights that are already afforded to the accused and convicted.

View ad here: https://youtu.be/0e0yMTH5Lks

“South Dakota has some of the weakest laws in the nation for crime victims and we are one of the last remaining states that has not yet passed constitutional rights for crime victims,” said Jason Glodt, State Director for Marsy’s Law and former Assistant Attorney General. “All crime victims deserve the right to be notified about hearings in the judicial process and to be present and heard at those hearings. Victims also deserve a constitutional right to be notified when offenders are released from bail or prison.”

Recent polling shows strong support for Amendment S by voters in South Dakota. The poll, conducted in July, showed voters approved expanding rights for crime victims by an overwhelming 74%-18% margin. The poll also shows that when voters are given more information about the amendment, support climbs to 84%-12%.

Marsy’s Law for South Dakota is a Crime Victims’ Bill of Rights that is named after Marsalee “Marsy” Ann Nicholas. Marsy was a beautiful, vibrant college student who was stalked and killed by her ex-boyfriend in 1983. Only a week after Marsy was murdered, her mother Marcella and her brother Nick walked into a grocery store after visiting her daughter’s grave and were confronted by the accused murderer. They had no idea that he had been released on bail.
For more information, visit www.equalrightsfordouthdakota.com

###

Noem Opens Up About Her Time In Agriculture

“The work ethic is something I’m very proud of.”

Today is American Business Women’s Day, when we commemorate and recognize the contributions of women business leaders, small business owners, and working women across America. Rep. Kristi Noem spoke about her experiences as a woman in business, managing her family’s farm and ranch operation. 

“One of the reasons I grew up to be a strong woman was because my dad never doubted that I could do anything the boys could do,” says Noem. After losing her father in a farming accident, she left college and returned home to take on new responsibilities. Watch her talk about how that experience made her the person she is today.

Senator Mike Rounds Announces Opposition to Amendment V 

Pierre, SD – September 22, 2016 – U.S. Senator Mike Rounds opposes Constitutional Amendment V as an out-of-state effort to hide information from South Dakota’s voters.

“South Dakota’s Constitution gives voters the right to know a candidate’s party on the ballot.  Amendment V would strip voters of that right and instead allow candidates to hide information from voters.  Voters deserve more,” said Senator Rounds. 

Amendment V alters South Dakota’s constitution by merging the Democratic and Republican primaries into one primary and cuts off direct general election ballot access for Independent candidates.  This is similar to the system in place in California.  Amendment V also hides candidate party labels on the general election and primary election ballots.

“South Dakotans deserve to know that Amendment V is using 76% out-of-state money to put California’s merged primary system into our Constitution.  South Dakota works.  We should be proud of our state.  We shouldn’t be looking to California for ideas on how our state should be run,” Rounds added. 

The South Dakota Farm Bureau and the South Dakota Association of Cooperatives also officially opposed the measure. 

“South Dakotans across the state are starting to see Amendment V for what it is: an out-of-state effort to hide the ball from voters.  We are very thankful to have Senator Rounds join the fight to preserve South Dakota’s way of doing things.” said Will Mortenson, Chairman of South Dakotans Against Amendment V.

The Chairman of the pro-Amendment V ballot committee is a Democratic party boss and former statewide partisan candidate.  South Dakotans Against Amendment V is an ad hoc effort consisting of agriculture groups, college students, Democrats, Independents, and Republicans.

South Dakotans should vote NO on Amendment V in November.  Voters can visitwww.VoteNoOnV.com to find more information.

##