Are the dozen or two people constantly outside the Brookings County Courthouse all waiting for court dates on Monday? No. They’re part of the roving bands of nomads wandering the streets who have started playing the handheld “Augmented Reality” game Pokemon Go.

The game was released in the past couple of weeks, and it has hit the United States like nothing you’ve ever seen, with an estimated 9.55 million daily users of the game, who span all age groups. Admittedly, I’m a bit addicted to the telephone app, and went walking with my wife and children this morning – I had the dog, while the kids played on my wife’s phone, and my own.

The game has already found it’s way into the political lexicon, with the presidential contenders each trying to “out clever” each other by using Pokemon Go references in jabs against their opponent:

Having my children grow up with the cartoon, I can see why it’s become so popular – a bit of nostalgia for millenials, combined with a old-fashioned scavenger hunt. It’s like geo-caching with a smartphone assist.  And for school-age kids, what parent is going to complain about their kids wanting to get out from behind the computer or iPad, and go for mile-long hikes?  The opposite, actually, as parents such as myself do what they can to facilitate it.

And it’s not just the young. As noted above, I was downtown in the area bounded by the City Library, the County Courthouse, the Brookings arts Building, and the Children’s Museum. It forms the City’s “Pokemon epicenter” with no fewer than 4 poke-stops, and a poke-gym all in the immediate vicinity. My wife and I came across a couple who had to be in their 70’s walking around with their smartphones out, as well as a man in his late 50’s – early 60’s with his phone mounted on his bicycle handle, to allow him easy access to seek out and catch the electronic prey.

It’s pretty harmless fun, unless people are stupid about it by not paying attention where they’re going. Or as the security staff of a local organization noted to me tonight – he’s had to reset the alarm system for the building he’s responsible for, because people climb fences to try to hunt for pokemon. And they’re doing it here just like they do everywhere else.

We’ll see how long the country’s obsession with catching pokemon lasts. It may just be Summer love, or it could hang around a while. As long as people get the hint to watch where they’re going, and keep it to public areas, the pursuit of walking around in search of treasure (via virtual reality) sounds like a fairly harmless pursuit, where the unintended consequences may involve exercise and (at least some) social interaction.

Oh, darn, huh?

Let Me Know What You Think
By Sen. John Thune 

Each week the Senate is in session, I travel back and forth from my home in Sioux Falls to Washington, D.C., for hearings, votes, and other meetings. While I love representing South Dakotans in Washington, it’s no secret that I’m happiest when I’m home in South Dakota, hearing directly from you. So, as I head back to spend several weeks traveling the state and connecting with you, I wanted to share some of the big things we’ve accomplished in the Senate over the last 18 months and look forward to hearing what you think. 

Our top priority has been to focus on policies that boost America’s economic security and strengthen our national security. We passed the first significant education reform bill since 2002, the first major trade promotion authority bill since 2002, the first significant reforms to Social Security since 1983, and the first major environmental law reauthorization since the 1990s. We worked hard to pass legislation that prevents states from imposing unworkable mandates on the food supply and protected the homeland by passing the National Defense Authorization Act, key cybersecurity reforms, and sanctions against the North Korean regime.

I knew serving as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee would give South Dakota’s interests the national attention they deserve, and the results speak for themselves.

Congress passed and the president signed my bipartisan bill that makes landmark reforms to the Surface Transportation Board, the federal agency that oversees our nation’s rail system. These reforms will make the agency more accountable to the people who depend on rail transportation, like our agriculture producers. The president also signed the first multi-year highway bill since 2005 – the longest since 1998. And all Americans will benefit from the aviation security reforms I authored as well as the consumer protection provisions included in the bipartisan aviation bill that I helped get to the president’s desk. All of that is good news for states like South Dakota where a safe, reliable, and effective transportation system is critical.

While a lot was accomplished, there’s a lot more we tried to do. Unfortunately, Senate Democrats and President Obama have made it difficult to approve must-pass bills like the Department of Defense appropriations bill, which would fund our troops, and the Military Construction/Veterans Affairs appropriations bill, which would fund key infrastructure programs and support our veterans. Despite bipartisan attempts to reach an agreement, Democrats opposed a $1.1 billion funding bill that would have helped tackle the nationwide Zika threat. I’m most disappointed, though, that amid all of the threats we face from terrorist groups like ISIS, President Obama has yet to lay out a concrete and comprehensive plan to defeat the group and its radical ideology. These are important issues, and they deserve to rise above politics.

If our paths cross this summer, please stop and say hello. I can’t do my job without knowing what’s important to you, and your feedback on what I’m working on in the Senate is invaluable. If we don’t catch up in person, you can always call my office, write me a letter, or send me an email. Either way, I look forward to hearing from you this summer.   

###

Helping South Dakota Families Access Capital
By Senator Mike Rounds

When the recession hit in 2008, it was initiated by the collapse of the housing market.  Ironically, many argue the housing collapse was, at least in part, caused by the federal government pushing financial institutions to lend money to those who couldn’t afford it. The stagnant economy that followed and the resulting loss of wealth and capital led to sharp cutbacks in consumer spending. In places like South Dakota, consumer spending drives our economy – and we definitely felt the recession. The loss of consumer spending, coupled with the lack of business investment, led to massive job losses. Americans felt the pressure of the most dramatic employment contraction since the Great Depression. However, like most actions with the federal government, they acted too late and over-corrected. 

Since the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010, financial institutions in America have been overly burdened and consumers have paid the price. Dodd-Frank was 2,300 pages of burdensome regulations that created multiple layers of untouchable, unaccountable bureaucracies. It passed with only three Republican votes between both the U.S. House and Senate. It was the worst example of partisan “reform” since Obamacare. 

As a member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, one of my top priorities has been to provide regulatory relief to financial institutions so that South Dakota families can have better access to loans and capital – capital that is used to buy a home, start a business, purchase a car and invest in the future of our state.

One flaw in our banking rules today is that, too often, the administration takes a “one-size-fits-all” approach to regulating. In South Dakota, we are home to both large and small financial institutions that serve a host of purposes for our state. All agree that when it comes to banking regulation, one size does not always fit all. This type of approach is particularly harmful to our smaller financial institutions which are so vital to our communities.

I recently introduced legislation that would require federal regulatory agencies to take risk profiles and business models of institutions into account when crafting regulations. The Taking Account of Institutions with Low Operation Risk (TAILOR) Act would allow smaller financial institutions to 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 our state.                       

The TAILOR Act also requires regulators to conduct a review of all the regulations issued by the relevant agencies since the 2010 passage of the Dodd-Frank Act. Approximately 500 new final rules have been issued since Dodd-Frank was enacted, many of which have placed undue burdens on our banks and our economy. 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. 

I also recently introduced legislation that would exempt community banks and credit unions from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s revised Regulation C final rule, which amends the 1975 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA). The intent of HMDA is to determine whether certain financial institutions are properly serving the communities in which they are located. However, the revised rule is harmful to our smaller banks and credit unions. It would require them to collect nearly 50 unique data points on loan applications and share that information with the federal government – with a huge cost to comply.

Too often today, financial institutions are forced to divert their resources from providing loans and services within their communities in order to comply with onerous regulations. The TAILOR Act and Home Mortgage Disclosure Adjustment Act would alleviate compliance hurdles facing many of our community banks and credit unions today. Rather, these bills would allow our financial industry to do what they do best — serve their customers and strengthen our communities. Sound regulation is necessary for a strong economy, but Dodd-Frank goes too far. 

###

Classified: Careless
By Rep. Kristi Noem

Some degree of confidential communications has existed in America since George Washington’s time as general in the Revolutionary War. But as the global landscape became increasingly complex and the stakes of a single information leak rose, the system used to protect that information evolved from a gentlemen’s agreement to a formal national security classification system.

The modern version we operate under today dates back to World War II when – at the urging of Albert Einstein and other scientists – it became necessary to ensure information related to the atomic bomb remained secure. Just as during World War II, what earns a classification today must remain undisclosed for the continued safety and security of the United States. No exceptions can be made.

In January 2009, just days before assuming the role of Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton set up an unauthorized email server in an unsecured location over which both personal and official emails would be transmitted. Few in the general public knew of the set up before a House investigation into the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, uncovered it in 2015.

In the months since, we have learned that tens of thousands of State Department emails were sent through that server, including more than 100 that contained classified information at the time they were sent. Eight of those email chains included Top Secret information, which under federal rules means the information would cause “exceptionally grave damage to the national security.”

Despite the sensitivity of the information, the email server was left physically and virtually unprotected. Getting a Gmail account would have been more secure, according to FBI Director James Comey.

The consequences are real. Comey explained hostile actors may have gained access to the information. In fact, the FBI was able to confirm hostile actors did gain access to the private email accounts of individuals Clinton was in regular contact with.

Despite all this, no indictment of Clinton or her staff was made, a decision the FBI says was because Clinton didn’t mean to put our national security at risk with the careless behavior. Regardless of intentions, carelessly mishandling classified information breaks the public’s trust and jeopardizes our national security and the safety of our troops and diplomats abroad.

With so many serious questions remaining, I am actively fighting to keep America’s classified information – and in turn, the American people – secure.

Following the Democratic National Convention at the end of this month, Clinton is expected to begin receiving classified intelligence briefings. Without the public’s overt permission in November, this level of access should not be given to someone who has historically acted carelessly with our national security.

Shortly after Comey’s announcement, I joined Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul and others in supporting the TRUST Act, which would revoke Clinton’s security clearance as well as the security clearances of her colleagues at the State Department who were also careless in their handling of classified information. Additionally, the legislation would express Congress’s desire to keep classified information out of Clinton’s hands until she earns the legal right to such access.

I have also reached out directly to Comey with questions about the process he used to make a recommendation against indictment as well as the precedent this decision will set. It is imperative we have clarity and accountability on this.

I firmly believe there is a great responsibility that comes with access to classified information. Only those who will treat it with the extreme care it merits should have access. No one should get an exception to that rule.

###

Another AAA and Budget Surplus
A column by Gov. Dennis Daugaard:

Throughout my time serving as governor, good stewardship of taxpayer dollars has been my goal. Two pieces of recent news can encourage South Dakotans that their state government is handling their money responsibly.

On July 11, Moody’s announced that it was giving South Dakota a AAA public issuer rating. In their announcement, Moody’s attributed the rating to South Dakota’s “high levels of reserves, low fixed costs, stable revenues and an economy that has historically been more stable than the rest of the nation.” The rating is South Dakota’s third AAA rating. Fitch awarded their highest rating to South Dakota last month, following Standard & Poors’ similar ranking of our state last year.

The good news from Moody’s was followed by the announcement of South Dakota’s fifth consecutive budget surplus. We closed the books on our budget year that ended June 30, 2016, and announced a $14.1 million surplus which will be transferred to our budget reserve fund.

Attaining a surplus this year certainly wasn’t inevitable. Just a few months ago revenue was trending below projections adopted in March. With the slowing of the agriculture sector, the state’s revenues were weaker in April and May. April revenue was lower than was received in April of 2015.  May 2016 was better than May 2015, but still weaker than projected. Fortunately, June’s revenue came in higher than projected, leaving the state with $3.6 million more revenue than projected for the full fiscal year.

In large part our surplus is result of the fiscal restraint demonstrated by state agencies. Every agency reverted funds this year. Instead of spending every dollar appropriated to them, state agencies left nearly $10.5 million unspent, which also contributed to our surplus.

When I took office in 2011, balancing the budget was my number one priority. It’s not a flashy endeavor. Nor is it an easy task. I would not choose to relive the 2011 session when we had to make cuts, and saying no to funding requests isn’t pleasant. Still, managing the budget is among the most important tasks of any elected official.

As Calvin Coolidge once said, “There is no dignity quite so impressive, and no one independence quite so important, as living within your means.” Judging by Coolidge’s actions as president, I’d say he meant this applies to government as well as individuals. South Dakotans do their best to live within their means, and their government should do likewise.

In a time when many other states are adopting rosy projections and employing budget gimmicks to justify overspending, South Dakota is acting responsibly. We don’t spend money we don’t have, we keep our budget structurally balanced and we seize opportunities to spend in the short-term where it can lead to savings. These practices reflect the responsible values of South Dakota citizens.

-30-

Greetings from the dark side, as I’ve been suffering under the steep learning curve of going from PC to MAC, and reorienting myself to finding where in the heck my files are.  Moving 100 gb of photos and several years of political print work is also proving to be quite entertaining.

Although, while I was working on that, I drafted my son into scanning 500 or so photographic sides from the 1960’s, which was a project that had been long lingering around my desk that I wanted done badly while some of the subjects were still on this earth.

My Aunt Addie, who is 83 but looks 65 (I kid you not – must be the farm living.) was tremendously excited to see the photos of her kids from 50 years ago, as well as pictures of my mom, as well as their Mother and stepfather who have departed from this mortal plane in recent years.

There were lots of pictures of my parents strolling through the 1964 Worlds Fair in Queens, NY, such as the picture to the left of my mom in front of the Lowenbrau Gardens at the fair, and many many others that I’m sure my dad forced people to sit through a couple of times at get togethers when people would watch slideshows (pre-power point).

But, I digress.. This is a post about politics, not misty-eyed memories of a time long past..  Getting back to the Republican platform, here’s what Sioux Falls Republican Michael Wyland had to say about the 2016 GOP platform in his analysis of what Republicans are preparing to send forth as their message for governance:

Three themes permeate the draft. First, the platform frequently contrasts its policy positions with those of the Obama administration. If it happened since 2008 and the federal government did it, it was probably dangerous and harmful, according to the platform. Second, the platform consistently refers to the individual and the traditional as the fundamental basis of the nation, with relatively few references to interest groups (exceptions include veterans, Native Americans, and people with disabilities). In its references to family, the platform explicitly advocates for marriage to be defined as between one man and one woman. It also extols the benefits of children living in a home with both a mother and a father. Third, the draft platform reaffirms the GOP’s decades-long assertion that government power is best exercised sparingly and at the state and local level. There are frequent references to federal regulatory overreach in several areas of domestic policy, with the need to limit or end federal intervention.

There are at least a couple of libertarian areas in the platform where factions of both Republicans and Democrats might find common ground. A call for the end to crony capitalism is one such area, though examples of the practice each party cites would likely be very different. Another area is a nod to Ron and Rand Paul supporters, who have long advocated that Congress increase oversight of the Federal Reserve and “audit the Fed.”

Unlike the Democratic platform, the GOP draft makes explicit reference to charity and philanthropy. Intriguingly, it uses its section on “Fundamental Tax Principles” to do so, addressing an issue familiar to NPQ readers: whether charitable donations should remain tax-exempt.

Read it all here.

 

 

Paula Hawks can take heart that her campaign isn’t nearly as bad as Jay Williams’ is. But, her “burn rate” has her spending it nearly as fast as it’s coming in.

Paula Hawks 2016 2 Q FEC

In order to compare apples to apples, I combined the pre-primary and the 2q report, which has Hawks running about a third (117k) to what Noem was able to raise ($310k), and spending 81K to Noem’s $215k.

That places Hawk’s burn rate at about the same as Noem’s for the quarter for money that’s come in.

But, while Hawks was messing around last spring through December, much like the fable about the grasshopper and the ant, Kristi was preparing for the race. This is why when Democrats are mewling that there’s no reason for a Democrat to campaign until election year, they need to be ignored.

As candidates move into the summer and the fall, and burn rates will greatly increase in the contest, Noem has about 1.7 Million in the bank, while Hawks only has 152K.

You might think, “that’s not bad.”  But you’d be mistaken. Think of it this way –  a statewide mailing runs about $75k, with postage. I’m not thinking that 150K is going to carry her very far.

If you’re a Game of Thrones fan, the talk last year about Hawks needing to get engaged in the race is akin to Eddard Stark warning everyone “Winter is coming.”

Unfortunately for Paula Hawks, Winter is about here.

I’m waiting for the full FEC Report, but initial reports of Senator Thune’s cash on hand indicate he’s done quite well for the quarter:

Sen. John Thune’s re-election campaign will report that the senator has nearly $12.5 million in cash on hand in his second quarter filing with the Federal Election Commission.

Thune raised $818,384.88 in the second quarter, leaving him with almost $12.5 million as he heads into a match for a third term. It’s an uptick of what he raised in the first quarter, $588,360.

Read that here.

Defeat 22 Coalition Announces Growing List of Coalition Members
Initial members include leading charitable, business, and policy organizations

Sioux Falls, S.D. – Defeat22, the coalition urging voters to reject Initiated Measure 22 on the November ballot, today announced the initial list of coalition partners. The coalition opposes Measure 22 because it will force taxpayers to fund political campaigns via a “public funding” law.

Initial Coalition Members – Defeat22:

• SD Farm Bureau
• SD Retailers Association
• SD Chamber of Commerce
• SD Cooperatives
• Western Dakota Families
• Family Heritage Alliance Action
• Concerned Women for America of South Dakota
• Americans for Prosperity – South Dakota

“We are proud to have so many great South Dakota organizations standing with the Defeat 22 coalition to educate voters about this outrageous proposal,” explained Larry Rhoden, former South Dakota state legislator and spokesman for the Defeat 22 coalition. “Our coalition represents many different perspectives within our state, all of which agree that tax dollars should never pay for politicians and their political campaigns. We welcome other organizations in the state to stand with us and help educate voters about what is at stake. Right or left, up or down state, all South Dakotans should agree that no taxpayers should be paying for attack ads and robocalls.”

Last week the coalition announced a new radio ad, mailer, and grassroots door knocking effort. The coalition plans to continue heavy grassroots advocacy and paid media over the next four months.

Defeat 22 is a coalition opposing Measure 22, which would create taxpayer-funded campaigns and force South Dakotans to be added to a government database. The coalition includes non-profits, concerned citizens, and lawmakers. For more information, visit Defeat22.com.

###

Looks like Democrat US Senate Jay Williams is raising good money for a legislative campaign. Too bad, it’s a state legislative one, because this is some of the worst fundraising for a US Senate campaign we’ve seen since… well, ever.

Jay Williams 2016 Q2 FEC Report by Pat Powers on Scribd

Coming off of the Democrat State Convention, you would have thought he should have had a nice bump, raising money from his “people;” the true believers of the State Democrat Party. Instead, it’s as if the heaviest hitters the Democrat party had to offer looked at Jay… looked at their checkbooks…. and decided to give the minimum amount they had to with out looking cheap. And there are far more people on the Democrat’s fundraising rolls who simply did not give at all.

Clearly, Democrats are saving their money for a different candidate, or to place elsewhere, such as State Legislative races. Because they aren’t opening their hearts and wallets for this candidate.

(* Williams raised $19,623 as reported in the pre-primary report, which could be added to this total. Which is still less than Thune earned in Interest)