South Dakota Ends Fiscal Year With Another Surplus

daugaardheader DaugaardSouth Dakota Ends Fiscal Year With Another Surplus

PIERRE, S.D. –  South Dakota state government closed the 2016 budget year on June 30 marking the fifth consecutive year with a surplus, Gov. Dennis Daugaard announced today. The state general fund budget for Fiscal Year 2016 ended with both lower expenditures and higher revenues than budgeted.

The majority of the surplus was a result of state agencies demonstrating fiscal restraint.  State agencies spent $10.4 million, or 0.74 percent, less than appropriated. Additionally, revenue for Fiscal Year 2016 exceeded estimates adopted by the Legislature last March by $3.6 million, or 0.24 percent. In total, the state’s budget for Fiscal Year 2016 ended with  a $14.1 million surplus.

“This marks the fifth year in a row that we have maintained structural balance in our budget. This was my number one priority when I took office,” Gov. Daugaard said. “Even with our revenue stream being soft the past few months, all areas of state government were able to spend fewer tax dollars than appropriated to contribute to the budget surplus. Finishing Fiscal Year 2016 in the black puts South Dakota’s budget in a positive position as we begin the 2017 fiscal year.” (Audio)

State agencies again remained within their appropriated budgets in FY2016. Collectively, the three branches of state government spent $10,427,398 less than appropriated. This reversion includes $2.4 million across all state government due to a decrease in the state paid health insurance rate; $2 million from the Board of Regents due to lower utility expenditures; $1.3 million from the Department of Human Services related to lower than anticipated operating expenditures and vacancies at the South Dakota Develomental Center; and $1 million from the Department of Social Services due to nominal variances in the utilization of services.

South Dakota’s sales and use tax receipts, the state’s largest revenue source, finished the fiscal year 0.71 percent below budgeted levels, but grew 2.91 percent compared to the prior year. Collections from the sales and use tax accounted for 58 percent of total general fund receipts in fiscal year 2016.

Sources of revenue with notable increases came from the bank franchise tax, severance taxes and insurance company tax, which grew 22.4 percent, 13.6 percent and 6 percent, respectively, over FY2015. Ongoing receipts to the general fund totaled $1,438,386,820 which grew 4.1 percent compared to the previous year. Total state general fund receipts were $1,496,940,642 for the recently ended fiscal year.

South Dakota state government ended FY2016 by transferring $14.1 million to the Budget Reserve Fund, as required by law. The state’s Budget Reserve Fund now has a $113,379,805  balance and the General Revenue Replacement Fund has a $44,000,048 balance.

The combination of those two funds, totaling $157,379,853, represents a combined reserve of 10.8 percent of total general fund spending for FY2016.

-30-

Congress Sends Thune’s Pro-Security Aviation Bill to the President’s Desk

thuneheadernew John_Thune,_official_portrait,_111th_Congress

Congress Sends Thune’s Pro-Security Aviation Bill to the President’s Desk

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chair of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, released the following statement on the Senate’s bipartisan passage of his FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 by a vote of 89-4.

The bill, which will provide important, time-sensitive safety and security improvements to the U.S. aviation system, awaits the president’s signature before the Federal Aviation Administration’s reauthorization deadline on Friday.

“Today, Congress passed the most significant airport security reform bill in a decade,” said Thune. “Reforms in our bill will help protect air travelers in South Dakota and around the country, and it will help ensure that attacks like those in Brussels and Istanbul do not happen in American airports. I’m proud of the Commerce Committee’s work in leading this effort, and I look forward to seeing the president sign this bill into law before the end of the week.”

To learn more about the bill and the committee’s work on this issue, please visit www.commerce.senate.gov/faa.

###

Thune Leads Senate REBOOT Members in Introducing Legislation to Improve Meaningful Use Program

thuneheadernew John_Thune,_official_portrait,_111th_Congress

Thune Leads Senate REBOOT Members in Introducing Legislation to Improve Meaningful Use Program

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Pat Roberts (R-Kans.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), and Bill Cassidy (R-La.) today introduced the Electronic Health Record (EHR) Regulatory Relief Act (S. 3173), legislation that would provide regulatory flexibility and hardship relief to providers and hospitals operating under the meaningful use program.

“Health information technology, especially the advancements in electronic health records, is an integral part of the future of America’s health care delivery system,” said Thune. “Our bill ensures that unnecessary regulatory burdens do not continue to negatively affect providers’ ability to leverage technology to improve patient care. I’m thankful for the administration’s willingness to provide constructive feedback and engage with Senate REBOOT members on this important piece of legislation.”

“This legislation will help ease the burden of the meaningful use program for doctors and hospitals who have told me they want to spend more time caring for patients instead of trying to comply with government regulations,” said Senate health committee Chairman Lamar Alexander. “Specifically, it will give hospitals the same flexibility that Congress passed for doctors with overwhelming bipartisan support last April, and it will give doctors and hospitals the certainty of law that the 90-day reporting window for meaningful use proposed by CMS earlier this month is here to stay. I look forward to Senate passage of this legislation as we continue to work to pull the electronic medical records system out of the ditch, transforming it into something that doctors and hospitals look forward to rather than dread.”

“As doctors and hospitals continue the transition to effectively using Electronic Health Records, it is important that regulations do not get in the way of patient care,” said Enzi. “This legislation would ensure that health care providers can use electronic medical records as a patient care tool and continue to incentivize adoption of new technologies. The future of health information technology is bright, but we cannot let the weight of unworkable regulations burden that progress.”

“Leveraging health information technology holds the promise of improving patient care and better utilizing taxpayer funds,” said Roberts. However, the prescriptive nature of the meaningful use program has made it nearly unworkable for our doctors and hospitals. I am proud we have found some reasonable ways to provide much needed regulatory relief to the program and allow our health care professionals to spend more timing focusing on what they do best – caring for patients.”

“One-size-fits-all regulation is jeopardizing the full potential for electronic health records to improve care for North Carolinians,” said Burr. “I’m pleased to be working with my colleagues to advance common-sense policy that will provide flexibility and better support North Carolina’s hospitals and doctors in what’s most important—providing quality care to North Carolinians.”

“As a doctor, I know firsthand how bureaucratic hurdles can interfere with patient care,” said Cassidy. “This legislation will reduce those regulatory burdens on providers, allowing them to better serve patients.”

The senators’ legislation would shorten the reporting period for eligible physicians and hospitals from 365 days to 90 days, relax the all-or-nothing nature of the current program requirements, and extend the ability for eligible providers and hospitals to apply for a hardship exception from the meaningful use requirements.

In April, the senators wrote to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Acting Administrator Andy Slavitt to request input on a draft bill, and with the feedback they received, developed the version that was introduced today.

Click here for a summary document and here for legislative text.

Thune, Alexander, Enzi, Roberts, and Burr are original members of the Senate’s health IT working group, Re-examining the Strategies Needed to Successfully Adopt Health IT (REBOOT). In 2013, the senators released a white paper in which they outlined their concerns with current federal health IT policy, including increased health care costs, lack of momentum toward interoperability, potential waste and abuse, patient privacy, and long-term sustainability.

The white paper was part of a broader effort to solicit feedback from the administration and foster an ongoing conversation on improving the health IT program with the stakeholder community, including health care providers, technology vendors, and others.

###

Thune, Cardin Introduce Bill to Improve and Modernize S Corporations

thuneheadernew John_Thune,_official_portrait,_111th_CongressThune, Cardin Introduce Bill to Improve and Modernize S Corporations

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.), members of the tax-writing Senate Finance Committee, today introduced the S Corporation Modernization Act of 2016 (S. 3181), legislation that would make several pro-growth reforms to help S corporations operate more easily, which would improve their ability to raise capital. S corporations were created in 1958, must be domestically owned, and are limited to 100 shareholders. This type of business has grown in popularity, particularly among small businesses, because of its simplicity and flexibility. S corporations are the most common form of business structure in America, with more than 4 million in existence today. Despite their popularity, relatively few reforms have been made to S corporations since their creation, which is why the Thune-Cardin bill would help modernize this part of the tax code.

“Family owned small businesses are the backbone of the U.S. economy and can be located in every corner of the country,” said Thune. “Small towns and rural communities are oftentimes the ideal location for these small- and medium-sized businesses, which is why making these common-sense reforms to S corporations is so important to South Dakota. There’s broad bipartisan agreement that our tax code is wildly outdated, and making these kinds of incremental changes is an important step in the right direction.”

“S corporation businesses are critical to the well-being of the Maryland economy and account for more than half of our state’s private-sector workforce,” said Cardin. “Unfortunately, our federal tax code has not kept up with the increasingly important role that these types of companies play,” said Cardin.  “The S Corporation Modernization Act contains much-needed changes to the tax treatment of S corporations, allowing them to better attract capital, create jobs, and make charitable investments in their communities.”

This is the first time since 2009 that the S Corporation Modernization Act, of which Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) is also a cosponsor, has been introduced in the Senate. U.S. Reps. Dave Reichert (R-Wash) and Ron Kind (D-Wis.) have introduced companion legislation in the House of Representatives.

Highlights of the S Corporation Modernization Act

Expansion of Qualifying Beneficiaries of an Electing Small Business Trust

o   This provision allows a non-resident alien to be a qualified beneficiary of an Electing Small Business Trust (ESBT), which is a certain type of trust allowed to own shares in an S corporation. Currently, only U.S. citizens or U.S. residents can own S corporation shares. This provision does not change the direct ownership requirement, but it allows a non-resident alien to get the benefits of S corporation ownership by being a beneficiary of the ESBT, while ensuring that any applicable taxes are collected by the ESBT.

  • Modifications to Passive Income Rules

o   The tax code includes an additional tax on S corporations that have previously converted from C corporations if more than 25 percent of the S corporation’s income is passive in nature (such as rents, royalties, and interest). The provision implements a 2001 recommendation by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) that this threshold be increased to 60 percent and that the rules be altered so than an S corporation paying this tax does not lose its S corporation status.

  • S Corporation IRA Shareholders

o   This provision permits any S corporation bank to have IRA shareholders. Current law limits IRA ownership of S corporation banks to only those S corporation banks with stock held by an IRA as of October 22, 2004. As under current law, the IRA would be required to pay Unrelated Business Income Tax on its share of S corporation income. A significant percentage of banks are currently organized as S corporations.

  • Charitable Contributions for Electing Small Business Trusts

o   ESBTs are allowed to own S corporation stock, but are not allowed a charitable deduction for certain donations to charitable organizations. Individual S corporation owners are allowed the charitable deduction. This provision would allow ESBTs to claim the deduction.

  • Basis Parity for S Corporation Assets

o   This provision would provide a basis adjustment for S corporation assets, but do so in a way that would not require tracking the basis of individual assets, which would be complex and time consuming. Instead, upon the death of a shareholder, the S corporation would get a 15-year amortization deduction attributable to the percentage of S corporation assets owned by the deceased owner.

###

And the MAC v PC battle continues.

So, I keep struggling with the possibility of switching, as I’m not happy with my PC continuing to lock up. Is it a power issue? Is it heat? Who knows. I’m simply tiring of dealing with it.  And to add insult to injury, my Real Estate office PC – which is quite important to me to have running – happened to take the opportunity to absolutely die in the middle of a Win10 update.

As in died so badly that I need to take a day and re-install everything from scratch.

So, one PC down hard. One ailing enough to require attention. Something has got to change. The question is… to what?

My current configuration is (roughly)  as follows…

CPU: AMD FX-8350
MOBO: Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3
RAM: 16gb DDR3 Ram
Video: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
PS: Corsair HX650  (circa 2012)
Plus, 2 optical drives, about 5 Hard Drives, and a SATA add in card.
And for monitors, a 28 inch Samsung 4k UE590 and a 27 inch Samsung SynchMaster T27B350

It could be I’m asking too much of that 4 year old 650 Watt power supply, but regardless, it leaves me facing the question of whether to put $500 – 1000 into a PC that I’ll have to build for an i7 CPU, or do I drop $1800 into a MAC (including Apple care). I do have my eye on a refurbished MAC with the following specs..

Refurbished 27-inch iMac 3.2GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5 with Retina 5K display (Originally released October 2015)
27-inch (diagonal) Retina 5K display with IPS technology; 5120‑by‑2880 resolution
8GB memory
1TB hard drive
AMD Radeon R9 M380
Built-in FaceTime HD camera
(and I think I can hook my 4k monitor into the MAC for use as a second monitor)

As a PC guy, I’ve always looked at MACs as underpowered, but there’s something to be said for just working.  If I go PC, I’ll probably start largely from scratch, with the exception of the video card and some useful parts. If I go MAC, it’s a whole other story.

I had my finger on the “buy” button today for the MAC, but…. jeez. That price….. And those specs.   That’s what I was running 4 years ago!

But, those machines are pretty dominant in the graphic art industries.

FCC making another run at taking over how the Internet runs.

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the Internet waters, the regulatory sharks are back to try to expand their power base.

If you recall last year, there was action from Senator Thune and broadband providers to stop the FCC from expanding their regulatory authority over broadband access. 

The case was recently heard in court…

The broadband industry has lost its lawsuit attempting to overturn the Federal Communications Commission’s net neutrality rules and the related reclassification of Internet service providers as common carriers.

Read that here

.. And unfortunately, the bureaucrats were able to expand their power base.

What many people don’t realize is that while that case was winding its way through the halls of justice, The FCC opened up another front in the battle, as they pursue taking over the Internet.

From back in April…

The Federal Communications Commission today proposed new price regulations for so-called “business data services,” potentially bringing Comcast and other cable companies under a type of regulatory regime that already applied to phone companies such as AT&T and Verizon.

The price rules won’t extend to home Internet or the typical broadband service that companies buy to get their employees online. Instead, this form of data connectivity—also called “special access”—is sometimes thought of as the Internet equivalent of a barrel of oil.

And…

“[T]he FCC’s proposal to impose rate caps and other regulatory mandates extends beyond the incumbent telco providers to new entrants in that marketplace, such as Comcast and other cable companies that are investing billions of dollars of capital and bringing real competition and innovation to the sector,” Comcast Senior Executive VP David Cohen wrote. “In this upside-down new regime, a competitive cable provider that currently holds a 10 percent share in a market would be treated the same as a dominant incumbent provider serving 90 percent of that market.”

Read that here.

Basically, the FCC wants to set prices on wholesale data between providers which will stymie growth and drive up costs for consumers, because they will set the pricing for “barrels of data,” for lack of a better term.

The problem with much of this, is that it has been private business that has driven the growth and expansion of the Internet. While it originated as a data communication system commissioned by the US government in the 60s, it’s commercialization is what has turned it into the Internet that we know today.

In the 20 years since 1995, the Internet’s use has grown 100-times. Yet, we are now being told by government that they need to step in, take over, and run things.

Somehow, that provides little comfort.

Constitution Party makes it official on candidates, announces D23 Candidate

Now, if they can only sue successfully to put them on the ballot. The South Dakota Constitution party announced late yesterday who their choices are for Senate and that mysterious D23 House Seat:

Kurt Evans won the CP’s nomination for the US Senate at the Constitution Party of South Dakota’s state convention that was held on Saturday, July 9th in Sioux Falls.  We are happy to have Kurt back in our party after a long hiatus.

and.

Lora Hubbel was elected as the new State Chairman of the Constitution Party of South Dakota!  We also elected Joel Bergan as the new State Vice-Chairman.  Lori Stacey will serve as State Party Treasurer and Secretary.
 
Wayne Schmidt of Mobridge was nominated for the State House, District 23.  Wayne has run for this legislative seat in the past and we wish him well on his new campaign.

Read it all here.

Obviously, it’s summer, and there’s not a lot going on. Because they’re all going to get their silly butts kicked.  But, it’s something political to write about!

Thune, Rounds and Noem appearing together at Dakotafest

From the Mitchell Republic, it looks like our entire Washington Delegation will be appearing together in Mitchell for the annual Dakotafest:

South Dakota’s full congressional delegation has committed to attending Dakotafest.

On Monday afternoon, Samantha Castro, marketing manager for IDEAg Group, the organization responsible for Dakotafest, received confirmation that Sen. John Thune, Sen. Mike Rounds and Rep. Kristi Noem will participate in a panel at the farm show.

The congressional panel will take place at 10:30 a.m. Aug. 17, the second day of Dakotafest, scheduled for Aug. 16-18 at Schlaffman Farm on the southeast edge of Mitchell.

 

Read about it here.

Rounds Introduces Bill to Ease Regulatory Burden on Local Banks & Credit Unions

This is an important action by South Dakota’s Junior Senator, Mike Rounds:

Rounds Logo 2016 MikeRounds official SenateRounds Introduces Bill to Ease Regulatory Burden on Local Banks & Credit Unions

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, today introduced the Taking Account of Institutions with Low Operation Risk (TAILOR) Act, a bill to require federal regulatory agencies to take risk profiles and business models of institutions into account when crafting regulations.

“Since the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010, smaller financial institutions in particular have been negatively impacted by burdensome, unnecessary regulations because of disproportionate compliance costs,” said Rounds. “These disproportionate costs and regulatory hurdles have hurt consumers the most. The TAILOR Act would ease the regulatory burden on smaller financial institutions so they can focus their resources on taking care of their customers, rather than spending time and money on regulatory compliance. This will allow them to better meet the needs of families and local businesses, which will in turn lead to a stronger economy and healthier communities across the state.”

“South Dakota is home to some of the smallest and the largest banks in the world, with wide variations in their business models,” said Curt Everson, President of the South Dakota Bankers Association. “Bankers from those institutions agree that today’s one-size-fits-all regulatory scheme doesn’t make sense. We applaud Senator Rounds for introducing the TAILOR Act to start the conversation about matching bank regulation to risk.”

The TAILOR Act would require regulatory agencies, such as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to take into consideration the risk profile and business models of individual financial institutions and tailor those regulations accordingly. Additionally, the bill requires the regulatory agencies to provide an annual report to Congress outlining the steps they have taken to tailor their regulations.

The TAILOR Act also requires regulators to conduct a review of all the regulations issued by the agencies since the 2010 passage of the Dodd-Frank Act. If the review finds that the regulations issued since 2010 do not conform to the TAILOR Act, the agency would be required to revise the regulations.

###

This is pretty important news for our state lending institutions, which have seen themselves under increasing attack from the Democrats who have not only been extremely hostile towards the banking and finance industries, but have adopted a “one size fits all” solution in law and regulation, whether it’s J. P. Morgan Chase, or Bankstar out of Elkton, South Dakota.

It’s even more important in terms of the vocal commitment of Democrats to fight any regulatory relief for community lenders. Take a look at what their draft platform for the Democrat Party states with regards to how they want to paint banks with a one-size fits all brush:

from the draft platform section entitled “The Fight for Economic Fairness and Against Inequality.”

 “We will also vigorously implement, enforce, and build on the landmark Dodd-Frank financial reform law, and we will stop dead in its tracks every Republican effort to weaken it. We will continue to protect consumers and defend the CFPB from Republican attacks. Our goal must be to create a financial system and an economy that works for all Americans, not just a handful of billionaires. We support a financial transactions tax on Wall Street to curb excessive speculation and high-frequency trading, which has threatened financial markets. We acknowledge that there is room within our party for a diversity of views on a broader financial transactions tax.”

“Democrats will not hesitate to use and expand existing authorities as well as empower regulators to downsize or break apart financial institutions when necessary to protect the public and safeguard financial stability, including new authorities to go after risky shadow-banking activities. Banks should not be able to gamble with taxpayers’ deposits or pose an undue risk to Main Street. Democrats support a variety of ways to stop this from happening, including an updated and modernized version of Glass-Steagall and breaking up too-big-to-fail financial institutions that pose a systemic risk to the stability of our economy.”

Read that here.

If that doesn’t scare the pants off of the business community it should, because it’s going to only serve to limit the availability of credit and choke off lending services in your hometown under ever more burdensome regulations.

That is, unless you want to combine it with more government:

The effort is led by consumer advocates, financial reform groups, postal labor unions and some leading liberals, such as Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). They say that offering services such as paycheck cashing, bill payment and free ATMs would provide cash-strapped consumers with an affordable alternative to payday, auto-title and other short-term loans that have been criticized for high fees.

and…

“We can have our Postal Service provide modest banking to low-income people where they can cash their checks and they can do banking,” Sanders said. “I think it will help the post office and it will help millions of low-income people.”

The Postal Service’s inspector general’s office agrees. It estimates that expanding financial services beyond the current limited offerings, which include money orders and international funds transfers, could pump $8.9 billion a year into the financially struggling agency.

“The Postal Service has a public mission to serve citizens and support the growth of commerce,” the inspector general’s office said in a report last spring that presented five potential approaches for expanded banking services. “And while it is required to cover its costs, profit is not its key motive.”

Read it here.

At the same time Democrats in Washington are intent on killing private industry with one-size-fits-all regulation, they’re also trying to replace private industry with yet an expanded government agency. Again. And it has got to stop.

Senator Rounds’ legislation is a common sense step to base regulation on those being regulated, as opposed to a top-down, one-size fits all government solution, which Democrats seem intent to wield as a mace to smash all that stand in their way.

Either Democrats care about what main street needs, or they don’t. It’s as simple as that. And services to main street are best provided by those living there. And Rounds’ TAILOR act is a step in the right direction to meet those needs.

Constitution Party: Kurt Evans running for Senate, Mystery candidate for D23 House?

An observant reader pointed out a couple of things with regards to the Constitution party’s unnamed candidates over the noon hour. And I have to admit, you had me on these, because even I couldn’t guess they would have gone this route.

First up, as confessed by himself, Kurt Evans admitted that he’s changing parties again From Indy, to libertarian, to democrat…. and now to Constitution Party, where’s he’s going to run, and presumably drop out for US Senate at a later date:

KurtEvans

Read that here.

If you recall, Evans has been active in social media using anti-Catholic rhetoric on occasion, and has faced questions over accusations of stalking a woman on the SDSU Campus, as well as other controversies. He was widely viewed as a spoiler candidate in John Thune’s race against Tim Johnson for the US Senate in 2002, and has announced for US Senate on more than one occasion since, and dropping out about as often.

As for the legislative candidate running on the Constitutional ticket…. while Lora Hubble was the immediate suspect.. apparently, that’s not correct, according to outgoing Constitution Party Chair Lori Stacey (of the robot bees):

d23

So, Kurt Evans for US Senate, someone for D23 according to robot bee lady, and Lora hubbel is the new Constitution Party Chair. Good luck with that.

And that’s all the news about the Constitution party that’s fit to print.