Rounds Statement on Supreme Court Nominee

WASHINGTON—U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) today made the following statement on President Trump’s nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Replacing Justice Scalia, one of the Supreme Court’s strongest defenders of our Constitution, is no easy task,” said Rounds. “Justice Scalia set the gold standard for judges through his strict interpretation of the Constitution and deference to states’ rights. We believe Judge Gorsuch espouses the same approach as Justice Scalia and has a strong understanding of federalism upon which our country is built.

“The American people made their voices heard in the recent elections, and President Trump has made an excellent choice in nominating Judge Gorsuch. I look forward to getting to know him better in the coming weeks. Having previously been confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit unanimously – with not a single Republican or Democrat member of the Senate dissenting – we expect the Senate will continue its tradition of approving highly competent, qualified individuals to the Supreme Court in an up or down vote following a thorough vetting process.

Background:

• Judge Neil Gorsuch, 49, currently serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Colorado.
• He was nominated in 2006 by President George W. Bush and confirmed in the Senate by voice vote.
• Gorsuch received his undergraduate degree from Columbia University, his law degree from Harvard, and has a doctorate degree from Oxford University.
• He clerked for Supreme Court Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy.

###

Thune: President’s Supreme Court Nominee Is Exceptional Jurist

“Considering that Senate Democrats have repeatedly emphasized the need for nine justices, they should abandon their campaign to filibuster Judge Gorsuch and work with Senate Republicans to fill this vacancy.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) released the following statement on President Trump’s nomination of Neil Gorsuch to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia:

“President Trump has made an outstanding choice,” said Thune. “Neil Gorsuch is an exceptionally well-qualified, mainstream jurist, and I believe his long record of thoughtful jurisprudence will make him an asset to the court. I look forward to confirming Judge Gorsuch to serve on the Supreme Court. 

“Unfortunately, Senate Democrats decided to judge this nominee before they even knew who it was. Considering that Senate Democrats have repeatedly emphasized the need for nine justices, they should abandon their campaign to filibuster Judge Gorsuch and work with Senate Republicans to fill this vacancy.” 

###

From the Argus Leader, Rick Weiland apparently has little interest in defending or explaining the unconstitutional measure he thought was so important to South Dakotans to pass:

“Everybody’s expected to drop everything and travel to Pierre,” Weiland said. “I was booked. I couldn’t make it.”

The former Democratic U.S. Senate candidate said he’d been fighting for the measure from “the get-go” and shouldn’t be expected to make last-minute arrangements to accommodate the break-neck pace set by legislators in setting the committee schedule.

and..

Soli and other Democrats in the Statehouse have been stuck playing defense on the law that they’ve said they don’t support in its entirety.

When asked whether having one of the writers on the line to answer questions would’ve helped the process, Soli said, “I think that would have been wonderful.”

and..

“They apparently think it is so important that they are willing to take out full-page ads in the state’s largest newspaper, they’re willing to produce videos and post them on social media, they’re willing to raise money off of it for their next initiative and they’re willing to attack sitting members of the Legislature with innuendo and ad hominem attacks, none of which have shown to be true, yet it’s not important for them to show up and testify about anything,” said Senate Majority Leader Blake Curd, R-Sioux Falls.

Read it here.

So, Slick Rick Weiland doesn’t have the time to explain why they proposed the measure, and refused the help of the Legislative Research Council to make the ballot measure comply with the State Constitution.

However, I’m sure he had time to cash his check.  I’m sure he might have even made time for it.

KELO AM Radio hosted South Dakota Speaker of the House Mark Mickelson and Slick Rick Weiland, who the Republican Speaker called out for his group’s poorly written measure which was enjoined because Circuit Court Judge Mark Barnett found that it was unconstitutional, and would likely not survive a court challenge on that basis:

“You guys screwed up,” argued House Speaker Mark Mickleson in a debate Tuesday with Democratic Activist Rick Wieland over Initated Measure 22.

On KELO Radio’s It’s Your Business Show, Mickleson claimed the ethic overhaul package was poorly written, full of unintended consequences and needs to be replaced. Weiland countered that the courts have yet to rule on IM 22. and that the Republican controlled State Legislature is moving too fast.

and..

Mickleson took Weiland’s point personally.

“For me to take incoming from a guy like you who has been paid by Represent Us, to be their paid spokesman, I’m offended by it,” Represent Us is an out-of-state activist group pushing hard for IM 22 and against the effort to repeal and replace it.

Read it all here.

Thune, Heitkamp Introduce Legislation to Preserve Rural Access to Therapy Services

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) recently introduced the Rural Hospital Regulatory Relief Act of 2017 (S. 243), legislation that would permanently prohibit the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) from enforcing direct supervision policy for certain outpatient therapeutic services, a harmful regulation that would jeopardize access to therapy services, particularly in rural areas where there are fewer practicing physicians. U.S. Reps. Lynn Jenkins (R-Kan.) and Dave Loebsack (D-Iowa) recently introduced companion legislation in the House of Representatives.

“CMS’ flawed direct supervision rule is a perfect example of a Washington-based, one-size-fits-all policy that might look good on paper, but does not deliver its desired result,” said Thune. “In this case, like many others, it is rural America that is overlooked. If CMS had its way and this policy was fully implemented, outpatient therapy services in rural South Dakota could be put at risk. It is the wrong approach that could ultimately end up hurting, not helping seniors.”

“Delivering the dependable, accessible health care services rural families need is critical to maintaining strong, thriving communities – but too often, a one-size-fits-all regulations can hinder that access,” said Heitkamp. “By removing barriers that could hurt rural seniors’ abilities to obtain reliable, therapeutic care, we can prioritize the quality services rural towns need to strengthen the health of our statewide community. I’ll keep fighting for smart, commonsense fixes like this bipartisan bill so the nation’s health and regulatory systems fully support the vitality and growth of our rural communities.”

CMS’ policy would require practicing physicians to directly supervise other certified medical professionals who deliver outpatient therapy services. Without direct supervision, this type of service could not be administered. Thune and Heitkamp believe there is a more efficient and cost-effective approach, which would allow other certified medical professionals, like general practitioners, to provide outpatient therapy services with a more indirect role from a physician.   

In response to concerns raised by hospitals and lawmakers, including Thune and Heitkamp, CMS delayed enforcement of its direct supervision policy through 2013 for Critical Access Hospitals and small rural hospitals. Congress suspended enforcement of the regulation from 2014-2016.

###

From my mailbox:

Dear Republican Leaders,

Out-of-state money is paying tens of thousands of dollars to attack our legislators with newspaper and social media ads, robo calls and paid protestors. They continue to mislead the public by being dishonest about the facts.

We created this video, which exposes the truth about IM22 and its supporters:

Please share it and spread the word.

Legislators will vote in the coming week to repeal IM 22 and replace it with something that does not violate our state’s constitution. They’re hearing a great deal from IM 22 supporters, and it’d be great if they could hear from you and your friends. Please call your legislators and let them know that you support their desire to repeal IM 22 and replace it with something that works for South Dakota. 

It would be great if you would consider writing letters to the editor in your local paper to help people in your area understand the truth about IM 22. 

For fun, Senator Stalzer created this image to highlight the groups in town this week for session. These are the groups represent.us calls “corrupt lobbyists”.

Please share this message with your County Committee Members, friends, and family. 

Thanks!

Ryan Budmayr
Executive Director
South Dakota Republican Party

2018 South Dakota Congressional Candidate Dusty Johnson got off to a very strong start in his first quarter of fundraising for the campaign. Especially considering his efforts only started a week before Thanksgiving, two years prior to the 2018 General Election.

Just under $105k raised. $1600 spent, and having over $103,000 cash on hand is a pretty good way to kick of his campaign, and shows the steep uphill battle that any potential challengers would face.

Dusty Johnson 2016 4q FEC by Pat Powers on Scribd

And yes, before you point it out in the comment section, I did send Dusty a check. As should you.

While the lying liars of Represent.us are trying to portray events such as the REALTOR/Home Builder Chili Oyster feed as a champagne reception…

The South Dakota Republican Party came out with a video of their own, hitting back at their false claims.

Tomorrow, the Senate is scheduled to decide if it’s going to side with the Massachusetts dark money group that spent millions to push an unconstitutional measure over on South Dakotans to fund the political campaigns of liberal democrats, or if they’re going to side with their friends and neighbors who come to Pierre, and make sure that State Government does no harm as part of the legislative process.

From the Rapid City Journal, it appears that the defendant in the EB-5 case is going to change his plea. 

So much for the need for a special prosecutor.

Our Nation’s system of national elections (A.K.A. The Electoral College) was put into place by our forefathers to guarantee that state’s are the one casting ballots for presidents, versus them being elected by popular vote, as a way to balance out the interests of large states versus small states.

Obviously, South Dakota’s vote would be rendered meaningless and swamped out by larger states such as California, or Texas, or New York. Granted, our weight in the electoral college is minimal compared to theirs, but it’s better than being out-voted by several million votes.  In other words, it’s incontrovertible and undisputed that it’s a good thing for our state. So, who would disagree with it in our sparsely populated state?

Democrats, of course.

Without exception, every single vote against supporting the electoral college – every vote against making sure South Dakota matters in the vote for President – came from Democrats.

Just something to keep in mind.