A year and a half ago now, I’d written about the Sioux Falls Mayoral contest, and noted a few things…

While this is a non-partisan municipal race, don’t kid yourself. It’s anything but non-partisan, and this has been exacerbated during Huether’s tenure. And the battle lines are often drawn this way with major blocs of voters falling along those lines.

On the Republican side of the coin, three major contenders stick out;

• Sioux Falls Entrepreneur Paul Ten Haken, Owner of Click Rain.
• Former Councilman Pat Costello, who currently serves as Commissioner of the Governor’s Office of Economic Development.
• Current Councilor Greg Jamison, who ran for the office in 2014 against Huether.

And on the Democratic Side, we have four people rising to the top of contention:

• Sioux Falls City Councilor Kenny Anderson, Jr.
• Sioux Falls Businessman and political consultant Steve Hildebrand.
• Sioux Falls City Councilor Michelle Erpenbach
• Former City Councilor and Huether right hand man Darrin Smith.

There are other names floating around out there, but none that seem to rise to the level of being taken seriously, or they actively disavow any interest in running, such as former legislator Christine Erickson who is in her first term of office.

Read that here. As time has passed, so has the electoral calculus. Since I first wrote about it, I believe Paul Ten Haken has taken himself out of consideration, due to his business responsibilities. Greg Jamison is newly elected as a state legislator, and may find extending his tenure there to be to his advantage. Pat Costello is back in Sioux Falls, himself with new and expanded business responsibilities.

On the Dem side, No one is really talking about Hildebrandt running anymore. Erpenbach’s name comes up on occasion for the office, but Kenny Anderson’s doesn’t. Nor does Darren Smith’s.

But what I do keep hearing – and did so again tonight – is that former Republican Legislator Christine Erickson who had said “no” before might be softening her no into a “maybe.”  And it might be a strong maybe at that.

Erickson had served in Pierre in the state legislature, and took a step back to be closer to home and family.  But her ability to get things done, her intelligence, as well as her charisma have kept her in the spotlight, and as a go to person for statewide officials who want to share the stage with her when they’re in Sioux Falls.

Even local media curmudgeons such as Stu Whitney have sang her praises as a public official who is going places:

“She’s a refreshing new voice, and she’s got moxie,” says fellow council member and former Sioux Falls mayoral candidate Greg Jamison. “Because of her experience in the legislature, she understands the technique of debate and communication. Some of us get involved in personal issues and egos, but she sees it as issue-based and doesn’t let that stuff get out of hand.”

and..

Erickson has made her presence felt with substance rather than bombast, standing firm on issues such as city pool rates and free summer bus rides for low-income kids. Much of her impact occurs behind the scenes and with measured dialogue rather than fire-and-brimstone exchanges.

“My style is not to be on the front page off the newspaper every day, but I’m always there to speak up when needed,” she says. “There are times when I get frustrated or angry, but I don’t think you gain a lot in the process when you’re disrespectful.”

Read it all here.

Erickson’s issue based approach on the council has been more aspirational and less confrontational than some of her colleagues. And she’s taken the lead on such issues as reworking laws and regulations to move Sioux Falls into the future with things the rest of the country enjoys such as Uber.

There’s still a lot of ground to cover between now between and the 2018 mayoral election, but Erickson might have a winning formula to bring together the disparate groups of the Sioux Falls electorate to build the winning coalition that escaped Greg Jamison and Kermit Staggers against Democrat Mike Huether.

At the very least, the rumored willingness to give the 2018 mayoral contest consideration has re-written the calculus of how the voting in the contest might go.

And if things progress beyond that? An official entrance into the race may very well give her a leap ahead of her peers.

Senate Sends Thune’s Bipartisan Legislation That Protects Consumer Reviews to President

“This legislation supports consumer rights and the integrity of critical feedback about products and services sold online.” 

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, applauded the Senate’s unanimous passage of bipartisan, bicameral legislation that will outlaw the use of “gag clauses” in non-negotiable form contracts. Some businesses have attracted national scrutiny for using gag clauses to punish or silence honest criticism of products and services. Thune was the lead sponsor of the Senate version of the bill, and the final version now heads to the president for his signature.

“By ending gag clauses, this legislation supports consumer rights and the integrity of critical feedback about products and services sold online,” said Thune. “I appreciate the bipartisan efforts of my Senate and House colleagues to get this legislation over the finish line.”

The Commerce Committee held a hearing on gag clauses on November 4, 2015, featuring testimony from Ms. Jen Palmer, a plaintiff in Palmer v. KlearGear, where a company demanded the removal of a negative online review or payment of $3,500 in fines because the online merchant’s terms of service included a non-disparagement clause. When the review was not taken down, the company reported the unpaid $3,500 to a credit reporting agency as an outstanding debt, which negatively impacted the Palmers’ credit.

Thune and U.S. Sens. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) and Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) introduced S. 2044, the Consumer Review Freedom Act, in September 2015, and the Senate passed the measure unanimously last year. The Senate today approved the companion House version, H.R. 5111, introduced by U.S. Reps. Lance Leonard (R-N.J.) and Joseph Kennedy III (D-Mass.) earlier this year. 

###

I’m an outlaw. He’s an outlaw. She’s an outlaw. They’re all outlaws. We’re all outlaws. You might be an outlaw too, according to IM22.

A friend on the opposite side of the aisle dropped me a note today. One that has serious repercussions for not just bloggers, but for anyone who uses Social Media in South Dakota. Because the poorly written Initiated Measure 22 might have just made all of us who engage in Social Media into a pack of outlaws.

The culprit? Section 11 of the act:

Section 11. That chapter 12-27 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:

Any expenditure made by any person, group of persons, political committee, or other entity in cooperation, consultation, or concert, with, or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate, the candidate’s authorized political committees, or the candidate’s committee’s agents, is considered to be a contribution to the candidate.

For the purposes of this section, candidate solicitation or direction of funds for or to a person, group of persons, political committee or other entity constitutes cooperation sufficient to render any subsequent expenditure by the person, group of persons, political committee, or other entity in support of that candidate or in opposition to that candidate’s opponent to be considered a contribution to the candidate.

The financing of the dissemination, distribution, or republication, in whole or in part, of any broadcast or any written, graphic, or other form of campaign materials prepared by a candidate, the candidate’s authorized committee, or an agent of either of the foregoing is considered a contribution for the purposes of contribution limitations and reporting responsibilities of the person group of persons, political committee or other entity making the expenditure. The candidate who prepared the campaign material does not receive or accept an in-kind contribution, and is not required to report an expenditure, unless the dissemination, distribution, or republication of campaign materials was done in concert or cooperation with or at the request or suggestion of the candidate. However, the following uses of campaign materials do not constitute a contribution to the candidate who originally prepared the materials:

(1) The campaign material is disseminated, distributed, or republished by the candidate or the candidate’s authorized committee who prepared that material;

(2) The campaign material is incorporated into a communication that advocates the defeat of the candidate or party that prepared the material; or

(3) The campaign material is disseminated, distributed, or republished in a news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate.

Read that here.

As bad as other portions of this measure are, this section is very notable in it’s definition, and it’s poorly worded language for being particularly offensive. Why? Because it represents an attempt to censor and control what people write about candidates:

The financing of the dissemination, distribution, or republication, in whole or in part, of any broadcast or any written, graphic, or other form of campaign materials prepared by a candidate, the candidate’s authorized committee, or an agent of either of the foregoing is considered a contribution for the purposes of contribution limitations and reporting responsibilities of the person group of persons, political committee or other entity making the expenditure.

Read it again.  The financing of the dissemination, distribution, or republication in whole or in part, of any broadcast or any written, graphic, or other form of campaign materials prepared by a candidate, the candidate’s authorized committee ot an agent of either of the foregoing is considered a contribution….

So, if Dakotawarcollege.com disseminates a campaign brochure. Or a press release. Or a YouTube based commercial that comes from a campaign, that could possibly be considered a campaign contribution under IM22.

Now, saying that, there is a carveout.

However, the following uses of campaign materials do not constitute a contribution to the candidate who originally prepared the materials:

(3) The campaign material is disseminated, distributed, or republished in a news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate.

Herein lies the problem that adherents of social media face.  The carveout allowing it only applies if it’s in “a news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication.”

So, where exactly do political blogs fall under this? And more importantly to users of social media – how is Facebook exempted? Or Twitter?

Initiated Measure 22 ignores the existence of any kind of modern social media, choosing to focus solely on traditional Mainstream Media. If I had a newspaper, I’m ok. However, if I’m solely internet based… not so much.  Or maybe not at all.

Exceptions for traditional media…but not new media . And according to IM22, dissemination of information in whole or part is considered a contribution, with only the exceptions outlined in 11(3).

You might not care that I might not be able to publish a press release from Kristi Noem or Marty Jackley for Governor.  But what about your own ability to share political news with your friends on facebook or twitter. Because there’s no carve out for that, either.

These are the uncertainties and questions we have to thank Don Frankenfeld and Rick Weiland for. Complete and utter violations of the rights of the press, and our right to free speech. They might not fit neatly into the little box their out of state allied drew up. But they exist. And shame on them for replacing those freedoms with Government oversight.

Uncertainty is a scary thing. These are the same uncertainties we need our legislators to resolve immediately.

Gov. Daugaard Orders State Capitol Flags At Half-Staff For Former State Sen. Jacob Krull

PIERRE, S.D. – Former state legislator Jacob J. “Jake” Krull of Watertown passed away on Friday, Nov. 25, 2016.

Krull, 77, represented the Codington County area in the state Senate for five terms from 1973 to 1982. He served as minority leader during his last two terms.

Gov. Dennis Daugaard has ordered flags to fly half-staff at the State Capitol on Wednesday, Nov. 30, the day of Krull’s funeral.

-30-

This year has been tough on my SDSU home game football attendance. Every weekend they were playing this fall ether coincided with me working on a project, or my wife having to go to Vermillion for one of her doctoral classes.

But then a curious thing happened. SDSU not only made the playoffs, but got a first-round bye, and it was confirmed this weekend that they would be playing Villanova. Almost immediately after that was confirmed, my phone was buzzing with texts from my dad that he would like to attend that game.

It’s not that this game is particularly special to me over any other game I missed this year – I kind of wanted to see the State-U game, but like I said, my wife was in class, so I was out of luck. But, this playoff game holds a bit of meaning to my dad, as it may represent his last opportunity to see his alma mater.  You see, way back in the 1950’s he was a graduate of the Pennsylvania-based Catholic University.

In the intervening years he moved around a bit with the FBI, eventually landing in South Dakota. Which is about as far away from Pennsylvania as you get.

And now about 60 years after he graduated, he hasn’t been in a position to attend of their games for decades. 80 years old, and mostly homebound due to health after bypass surgery and a subsequent light stroke a while back, he’s not likely to travel anymore in his remaining years. Certainly, not for a football game in Pennsylvania.

However, sometimes opportunities arise. Even for one of South Dakota’s few Villanova graduates.

So, on Saturday, a 50’s era Villanova graduate is going to be sitting with me, an 80’s era SDSU grad, one of his five children who graduated from SDSU.  (My wife will be there too, and I might claim her if she doesn’t wear her USD colors.) The weather forecast says mid-30’s for Saturday, so we’ll be bundled up.

And we’re going to be rooting against each other as we watch the game unfold in what might be a final chance to see “his team” live on the field.

His last Villanova game? Maybe. Maybe not.  But we’ll enjoy ourselves as if it is. Until the next time.

From KELOLAND comes a story from democrat lefty former US Senator James Abourezk about how he was friends with evil, murdering communist dictator Fidel Castro who died this past week:

Former South Dakota U.S Senator Jim Abourezk thinks back to the year 1975 when he met Cuba’s Fidel Castro. 

And…

The two formed a close bond through a six hour conversation focused on normalizing relations between Cuba and the US. 

And..

His recent death has prompted a variety of mixed emotions around the world. For some, joy, yet for Abourezk, sorrow. 

“I feel very sad because I considered Fidel a friend of mine,” Abourezk said. 

And..

While he admits he doesn’t agree with every decision Castro made, Abourezk says he’ll continue to honor his legacy.

Read it all here.

He’ll continue to honor his legacy? Which parts? The forced labor camps? Or Castro’s firing squads?  Abourezk wanting to honor his legacy comes off as a sick joke. 

A love of evil, murdering communist dictators must have been infectious around the Abourezk office, because if you recall, one of his staffers and her husband treasonously spied for Castro, and were caught, tried, and convicted in recent years:

The Washington Post reports Saturday morning that Walter Myers and Gwendolyn Steingraber Myers pleaded guilty in federal court Friday “that they spied for Cuba over the past three decades, receiving coded instructions over a shortwave radio and passing along information to intelligence operatives in ‘dead drops’ and ‘hand to hand’ passes.” (See the full story by reporter Del Quinten Weber at www.washingtonpost.com.) Myers, age 72, gets life in prison, his wife, age 71, six to seven-plus years. The story says they agreed to become spies for Cuba while living in South Dakota.

According to a long piece reported by Toby Harnden and published earlier this fall by Washingtonian magazine, the couple met in Washington, D.C., while she worked on the staff of then-U.S. Sen. Jim Abourezk, a Democrat from South Dakota. 

And…

Harnden wrote that she was working on Abourezk’s staff in Washington, D.C., within two years, the marriage dissolved. While there, she met Myers. The couple in turn met their initial Cuban contact at a gathering at the home of Wendy Greider, who was Abourezk’s staff member for foreign affairs.

And…

Myers took his first trip to Cuba in January 1979, staying about two weeks. A Cuban operative later traveled to Pierre and secured their agreement to spy for Cuba when they returned to Washington, according to Harnden’s story.

Read it all here.

Somehow, reading Abourezk’s statements this weekend, none of it comes as a shock.

Heaping praise on a man who is responsible for killing between 10,000 to 100,000 people is a pretty shameful thing to do. And it’s compounded by the fact that this association helped lure a member of Abourezk’s staff and her husband to betray their country. 

Abourezk wants to turn a blind eye and honor the legacy of a very bad man who killed tens of thousands of his people – including several Americans along the way? 

Let history judge them both. I doubt it will do so kindly.

(BTW, I learned that Myers, the husband of the Abourezk staffer is currently incarcerated at the federal ADX Florence supermax facility in Colorado. And deservedly so.)

Apparently, Obamacare’s death panels have been forestalled. So, the South Dakotans out there who would like to clear up the excess elderly and infirm in the state are planning to bring a ballot measure in 2018 to legalize physician assisted suicide in South Dakota.

According to the Secretary of State’s office, a legalized suicide act submitted by Angela Albonico of Spearfish has gone through LRC comments, and is currently awaiting review by the Attorney General prior to being submitted to the Secretary of State for petition circulation:

LRCComments_DeathWithDignityAct by Pat Powers on Scribd

What do you think? Are we ready to fight it out on the ballot to kill legalized suicide in South Dakota?

Shopping Small Can Have a Big Impact
By Sen. John Thune

Nearly everyone in America is familiar with Black Friday. It’s the unofficial start to the holiday shopping season, and with it often comes an early morning, long lines, and, depending on what you’re looking for, some pretty good deals. Black Friday is nearly synonymous with the big-box retailers that are able to stock their shelves and warehouses and offer the large and well-publicized deals we’re used to seeing on commercials between our favorite TV shows. Not only are shoppers happy with Black Friday deals, but the sales are a boon to the economy, and they help sustain a seasonal workforce who depends on the paycheck.  

While Black Friday has cemented its place in American shopping history, it’s the Saturday after Thanksgiving that’s quickly gaining its own notoriety. “Small Business Saturday,” as it’s become known, is a nationwide movement that encourages shoppers who brave the long and sometimes fiercely competitive lines on Black Friday to add Main Street’s small businesses to their holiday shopping routine as well. 

You don’t have to look far in South Dakota to find a small business since there are more than 80,000 of them across the state. You likely know someone who works at a small business, or perhaps you work at one yourself. Small businesses represent 96 percent of all businesses in South Dakota, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration, and they employ nearly 60 percent of our workforce. It would be an understatement to say small businesses are the backbone of South Dakota’s economy.   

South Dakota is full of success stories, and if you’ve ever visited downtown Sioux Falls, I’m sure you’re familiar with one: Chef Chris Hanmer’s CH Patisserie. Chris, who is one of America’s top pastry chefs, opened his shop in 2013, and it’s quickly grown into a must-stop location in Sioux Falls. I’d challenge you to eat only one of his famous macarons – one is never enough. Chris and other small business owners like him not only have successful brick and mortar stores, but they’re also using the power of the Internet to connect with shoppers in other parts of the state and country and grow their business along the way.  

Small Business Saturday is a great opportunity to get out and support the local small businesses that are often the first ones to give back and support the communities in which they serve. For many entrepreneurs, to build a successful small business is to build a part of their community. We should celebrate their contributions on this Small Business Saturday and continue to support them every month of the year.

###

Getting our Country Back on Track
By Senator Mike Rounds

As we look forward to the start of a new year, Congress and the new president will have a number of agenda items to start working on to get our country back on track. Along with executive overreach and regulatory reform, finding a solution to our nation’s fiscal crisis is one of the more important issues to address. With our debt spiraling out of control at more than $19 trillion, it’s clear that federal spending at current levels is unsustainable. According to a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), in ten years, 99 percent of all revenue will go toward mandatory payments and interest on our debt. We need to begin managing our entire budget before it is too late.

The long-term driver of our debt and deficit remains the rapid growth of mandatory payments. These include Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Already, spending on these mandatory payments, as well as interest on our debt, account for nearly three-quarters of all federal spending. Since the passage of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, Congress has not exercised oversight over mandatory programs. There is no specific committee with oversight over the efficiency of these necessary expenditures. Instead, Congress has focused on defense and non-defense discretionary spending. This makes up only about 28 percent our entire budget today. I believe now we have the opportunity to change this outdated, failing budget process.

Compare our lack of management of Social Security to South Dakota’s retirement system, in which both chambers of the legislature and the South Dakota Retirement System Board of Trustees actively manage one of the best retirement systems in the nation, every single year. Proactive management of all mandatory programs would be easier if they were voted on as part of the budget process every single year. Better management of these programs does not necessarily mean cutting them. It means making them as efficient as possible.

When our Founders wrote the Constitution, they explicitly gave Congress the task of setting spending and tax policies for our country. James Madison called this power of the purse “the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people.”

Currently, I am working with a number of other senators to find ways to revive the budget process here in Congress, so we can address our budget crisis once and for all. What we have been working on would open up the entire budget to congressional management, including mandatory payments. Our plan would also require the federal budget to be approved and signed into law. Additionally, there would be consequences for Congress should we fail to pass a budget in a timely manner.

As we move forward into a new year, I will continue to encourage my colleagues to work with us to make these important changes to the budget process in Washington. The fiscal crisis isn’t coming ten years from now. The crisis is here, and we need to face it head on.

###