From the comment section – here’s how Senator Elect Ryan Maher is immediately affected by Initiated Measure 22:

Ryan Maher                  November 16, 2016 at 7:07 pm

Pat – here is my situation up here in little ole Isabel. I own an insurance agency that sells progressive insurance along with quite a few other companies as an indepent agent. I receive commissions every month from these companies which is over $100. I am at a loss right now with what to do with an entire agency. I also own a cafe I had a big event planned with Moreau Grand Electric they now had to cancel as the would be in violation of IM22. The local bank and health clinic both have Christmas parties scheduled, well they are going to have to cancel them. The list just continues.

Literally, this is just insane.

The problem with this law is that it assumes that our legislators are full-time. But they’re not. They’re part time legislators who have to have regular employment outside of the legislature. But IM22 makes no allowances for it.

This poorly written pile of garbage needs to be repealed immediately, and on an emergency basis.

If you’re resigning from a board, canceling a legislative event, or are otherwise negatively affected because of initiated measure 22 passing, drop me a note. I’d like to hear your story.

I’m happy to keep your name confidential in any story I write about it, if you prefer.

Funny coincidence about Initiated Measure 22 – there’s lots of other things happening that I’m hearing less than an hour from my previous post.  What am I hearing?

I’m hearing rumors of two new high profile resignations from a citizen board that just happened today because the people on the board also spend time in Pierre during session as lobbyists. Watch for those announcements, as well as more to come.

I’ve heard that invitations to events are not being taken. As a result of IM22, legislators are saying “no” when being invited to things as innocuous as the membership banquets held in Pierre, where legislators are invited to sit with and learn from organizations over a meal served en masse.

And similarly, organizations that have held events annually for years are canceling events left and right.

And as one attorney noted to me tonight, there are potential lawsuits “galore” being prepared across the state with regards to constitutional challenges to the measure.  Watch for multiple lawsuits, or one aggregated one to come against the poison pill ballot measure.

Legislators, courtesy of the newly passed Initiated Measure 22, you’re about to be hit with Section 31.

Section 31. That chapter 12-27 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:

For the purposes of this section, the term “gift” means any compensation, reward, employment, gift, honorarium, beverage, meal, food, or other thing of value made or given directly or indirectly to any person.

No lobbyist or employer of a lobbyist may make gifts to one person who is an elected state officer, legislative official or staff person, or executive department official or staff person aggregating more than one hundred dollars in a calendar year, nor may a lobbyist or employer of a lobbyist act as an agent or intermediary in the making of any such gift, or to arrange for the making of any such gift by any other person.

The value of gifts given to an immediate family member of any elected state officer, legislative official, or executive branch official shall be attributed to the officer or official for  the purpose of determining whether the limit has been exceeded, unless an independent business, family, or social relationship exists between the donor and the family member, subject to approval by the commission in a manner to be promulgated by rule by the commission  pursuant to  its rulemaking authority under section 40 of this Act.

No person may knowingly receive any gift which is made unlawful by this section. A violation of this section is a Class I misdemeanor.

That mess was just passed into law at the ballot box.  And it’s going to cause most legislators to automatically be in violation.

How? Let me provide an example or two.

A female legislator goes to HyVee. She shops sensibly, and purchases a number of items which are part of the HyVee Discount program, gets her .35 cents a gallon off of gas.  This happens a few times monthly, so when she gasses up her suburban, she ends up saving a couple of hundred dollars a year.   Her husband works for Avera Hospital as a program director, and makes a good salary, but they’re not wealthy.  Their son is in football, and they’re quite pleased that he is good enough that he earned a scholarship to attend college, which will help with his ability to attend school.

In what way did legislator X violate the law?  Let me count the ways.

Legislator X saved more than $100 in the HyVee Gas Program. HyVee has a lobbyist that they send to Pierre. 

Per the new law – “gift” means any compensation, reward, employment, gift, honorarium, beverage, meal, food, or other thing of value made or given directly or indirectly to any person.  No lobbyist or employer of a lobbyist may make gifts to one person who is an elected state officer, legislative official or staff person, or executive department official or staff person aggregating more than one hundred dollars in a calendar year.

Because the legislator earned more than $100 in incentives from HyVee, and they have a lobbyists, she’s committed a class one misdemeanor.

Her husband works for Avera Hospital as a program director, and makes a good salary.

Per the new law, “gift” means any compensation, reward, employment…”  and “The value of gifts given to an immediate family member of any elected state officer, legislative official, or executive branch official shall be attributed to the officer or official for the purpose of determining whether the limit has been exceeded…”

Because Avera has a lobbyist, and they pay Legislator X’s husband to work there, and they pay him more than $100, she may be guilty of another class one misdemeanor.

Their son earned a scholarship to attend college.

And here we go again.

Per the new law, “gift” means any compensation, reward, employment…”  and “The value of gifts given to an immediate family member of any elected state officer, legislative official, or executive branch official shall be attributed to the officer or official for the purpose of determining whether the limit has been exceeded…”

Because Legislator X is a legislator, the act of a son earning a scholarship, combined with the fact Universities have their own lobbyists, here’s another class one misdemeanor that has occurred.  

The scary thing is that this law touches nearly any and all legislators in these kinds of ways. And not just legislators. The law applies to elected state officers, legislative official or staff persons, or executive department official or staff persons.

If I’m a car washer in the State of SD Motor pool at SDSU, guess what? That’s an executive department staff person.

This bill was so poorly drafted, it goes beyond reasonable restrictions into making it nigh-impossible for anyone to serve in these offices who aren’t personally wealthy cave dwellers, and represents a constitutional crisis for legislators and elected officials unless and until this mess is fixed.

I have nothing to go on but the person’s own account. However, if this is true, it’s shocking to say the least.  h/t to Steve Sibson of Sibby Online for pointing this out.

This originated as a WOW moment in response to the Nesiba arrest for unwanted sexual contact, and the silence by the SDDP over it. It was posted at Cory Heidelberger’s blog, by Katrina Wilke, who was involved in the Bernie Sanders campaign out of Rapid City earlier this year.

Apparently Wilke is laying all of her cards out there, and is going public accusing South Dakota Democratic leaders of unwanted advances and sexual assault over the past couple of years.

And it’s not pretty.

Katrina Wilke                                                  2016-11-15 at 14:40

A friend sent me this article today and after reading it I felt like throwing up. There is a fine line between responding too quickly, before all the facts are in, and responding too slowly, making it appear like I don’t care. I don’t want to have a knee jerk reaction, but I need to address this.

and…

I have been a victim of unwanted advances and sexual assault from Democratic leaders over the past couple of years. Yet I said nothing because I didn’t want to give the Republicans ammunition against us. What if I had said something? Could I have helped change the culture? I am in tears, not for myself, but for the women I could have protected. If I had said something and been more vocal about unwanted advances, maybe something would have changed.

That’s why I am saying something now. Men, you can NOT treat women like this. You are not allowed to grab my butt without permission, you cannot let your hands linger on my lower back for too long, and you cannot objectify me and tell me how pretty I am and stare at me with that lustful look on your face. I will not tolerate this anymore. I cannot allow the young women growing up now to be treated like you treated me.

Read that here.

This is especially troubling coming at a time when Senator Elect Reynold Nesiba has been accused of unwanted sexual contact, with him writing it off with claiming the woman “was playing hard to get.”

Not to mention the fact it has all taken place under SDDP Chair Ann Tornburg’s watch.

After my post, the Argus Leader came out with a story of their own on former PUC Chairman and Daugaard Chief of Staff Dusty Johnson’s plan to run for the congressional seat that Kristi Noem is going to be leaving in her own bid for Governor:

With Noem set to step down following her two-year term, the race has begun for someone else to fill the House seat.

“I’m certainly planning to run,” Johnson, 40, told Argus Leader Media Wednesday. “And the reality is that people have been asking me how they can contribute and to be able to accept those contributions I need to file the paperwork.”

The former chief of staff to Gov. Dennis Daugaard said he doesn’t plan to launch his campaign right away, but wanted to be straightforward about his intentions.

Read it here.

And if you are interested in donating to the campaign, I believe you can do so here.

Attorney General Jackley Coordinating Efforts to Implement Marsy’s Law

PIERRE, S.D. – South Dakota voters have passed Marsy’s Law, Constitutional Amendment S, supporting victims’ rights. The Amendment received 60 percent of the vote.

“South Dakota voters have emphasized the importance and priority of helping victims.  I am working to help our counties and to make sure victims are receiving the information that they need,” said Jackley. “I have authorized 100,000 victim notification cards from our consumer fund settlements, and I am working to expand our state’s victim notification program to incorporate our new law from funding sources other than victim use fees or counties. Counties are already working on very tight budgets and putting the entire cost of program implementation on local government would not be in our best  interest.”

With the passage of the law, constitutional requirements must be met including victim notification cards distributed to victims via law enforcement. The Marsy’s Card outlines all the victims’ rights and the process to invoke them.

Marsy’s Law expanded the definition of a victim and will require more access to the newly implemented Statewide Automated Notification System (SAVIN). SAVIN System, which was rolled out in August 2016, is a free, automated service that provides crime victims with vital information and notification 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.  Victims can access the SAVIN website at https://savin.sd.gov/portal/ or contact the call center at 1-844-299-4608.

See the link below for  a copy of  the Marsy’s Card, which includes a full list  of victims’ rights.

http://atg.sd.gov/docs/MarsysLawCard11.15.2016.pdf

-30-

This AM, if you notice in the feeds at the right of the page under our sponsors, there was a filing with the FEC for Friends of Dusty Johnson.

I spoke with Dusty on the campaign this morning when this popped up on my website feed, and he offered the following statement.

“It’s an important time for our country, and I want to make a difference.  I think I’d be an effective voice for South Dakota and I’m planning to run for Congress. 

The election is a long way away, of course.  We are months away from parades and commercials and postcards and debates . . . thank goodness.  I’m not launching a campaign today, but I do want to be honest with people.  I’m not good at dropping political hints or being coy, so I will come right out and say it:  Our seat in Congress is important, and I’m interested in serving.“

All I have to say is “Go Dusty!”

Paige Wilbur Bock Appointed by Attorney General Jackley to Board of Pardons and Paroles

PIERRE, S.D – Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today the appointment of Paige Wilbur Bock of Sioux Falls, SD to the Board of Pardons and Paroles. Bock will fill the vacancy left by Greg Erlandson.

“Paige has demonstrated a strong desire and commitment to public service and public safety. Her strong business and legal background will serve her and our state well in the difficult and important decisions of the board,” said Jackley.

“We want to extend our appreciation to Greg Erlandson for his dedicated service on the Board of Pardons and Paroles. He has been a strong leader in protecting our communities and strengthening rehabilitation efforts for nonviolent offenders,” added Jackley.

Bock is the Contract Administrator at Zuercher in Sioux Falls, SD. She also worked as an Assistant Attorney General from 2008-2014.

The Board of Pardons and Paroles is a nine member appointed board charged with the authority to make decisions of parole, the revocation of parole, and parole policy and procedures. Three of the board members are appointed by the Governor of South Dakota, three are appointed by the Attorney General, and the remaining three are appointed by the South Dakota Supreme Court.

This appointment is subject to final confirmation by the South Dakota Senate.

-30-