I had it confirmed today that as earlier noted as a possibility, current District 16 State Representative Jim Bolin is circulating petitions to run for the State Senate Seat in his district, potentially setting up a primary challenge to recently appointed State Senator Bill Shorma, who took office this past year after State Senator Dan Lederman resigned from the seat.
At the time the Governor made the appointment, outgoing Senator Lederman had recommended Bolin for the post, but he was passed over for Shorma. Bolin greeted the appointment with congratulations for Shorma, but did make a point of leaving the door open for a run:
Rep.Bolin (R-16)
I look forward to working with him on areas of mutual concern and interest. In 2015, the governor very legitimately gets to decide who will be the new state senator for District # 16. In 2016, the voters in District # 16 will very legitimately decide the same question.
A primary challenge would be Shorma’s first race against the campaign veteran Bolin. If you recall from back in may, I asked Shorma what he was going to do in preparation for the race:
Sen. Shorma (R-16)
While I do need to collect signatures, I will not be starting a campaign effort until after the 2016 legislative session. However, in preparation for my first session it is only 7 to 8 months away, I will visit with as many folks in the district as I can about their wishes, thoughts and interests. I will be reaching out to Small and Medium sized manufacturers and listen to their employee’s about their thoughts on issues that affect them and their families. I will be visiting with Agricultural producers to understand the challenges that they are facing or support that they may need.
With Bolin entering the contest, that may have Shorma re-calculating his strategy. Bolin, who has served in the legislature from 2009-2016, and currently serves as one of the House’s majority whips, is no slouch when it comes to the campaign trail. Bolin was first elected to the Canton city commission with almost 75 % of the vote and shortly thereafter became the mayor following a public vote to change the form of government in the city.
Following his time as mayor, Bolin was elected to the South Dakota House of Representatives. In the midst of this time, he has also worked in various volunteer grassroot campaign efforts for the GOP.
Depending on what happens, this could be one of the more hard fought primaries taking place this coming June.
Programming Note – Join Kristi Noem on Neil Cavuto tonight
Rep. Kristi Noem will be previewing President Obama’s final State of the Union address with Neil Cavuto on the Fox Business Network tonight at 8:30PM-ET/7:30PM-CT/6:30PM-MT.
AFP Reacts to Governor’s State of the State Address
“Medicaid Expansion Under Obamacare Too Risky To Be Lumped In With The Rest Of The State’s Priorities,” Says State Director Lee
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — Americans for Prosperity South Dakota reacted with disappointment to Governor Daugaard’s announcement of his plan to expand Medicaid in his 2016 State of the State address.
State Director Ben Lee released the following statement:
“While the state legislature absolutely should be working towards furthering policies that increase access and decrease the cost of healthcare, the Governor’s plan to include Obama’s Medicaid Expansion in the 2016 budget just isn’t what the doctor ordered. The risks of this plan are serious — and they deserve to have their own debate away from the fog of budgetary gimmicks. Only with two clean votes: one on Medicaid Expansion and one on the budget, can citizens be sure that their lawmakers are doing the right thing. Medicaid expansion is just too risky to be lumped in with funding for critical state priorities like schools and roads.”
“Expanding Medicaid under Obamacare would expand the national debt by $373 million a year while shackling the state to Obamacare’s terms funding and conditions. Even worse, should the federal government ever change its mind about the funding formula, the state could be put at risk of cuts to school and roads, tax increases or all three!”
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) today previewed President Obama’s final State of the Union address while citing many of the burdens placed on the American people by the Obama administration.
Remarks (as prepared for delivery):
“Mr. President, tonight President Obama will come to Congress to deliver his final State of the Union address.
“Which raises the question – what is the state of our union?
“And the truth is, while the strength and spirit of the American people remain a beacon of hope for our future, our country is facing a number of serious challenges:
“Global unrest has grown over the course of the president’s administration, most notably with the rise of ISIS, one of the most brutal terrorist groups in existence.
“On President Obama’s watch, we have experienced the worst economic recovery since the Eisenhower administration, with stagnant wages and millions dropping out of the labor force as the lasting trademark of the Obama economy.
“And American families are seeing their dreams for the future erode, as they struggle under ever-increasing government burdens and a lack of economic opportunity.
“Any serious discussion of the state of our union needs to address these challenges and offer solutions.
“And that is the kind of speech I wish we were going to hear tonight.
“But unfortunately, all indicators suggest that’s not the kind of speech the president plans to give.
“Instead, the president apparently intends to take a victory lap – despite the fact that the American people clearly don’t think there’s much to celebrate.
“A recent New York Times/CBS News poll found that 68 percent of the American people think our country is on the wrong track, and most Americans believe the next generation will be worse off, not better off.
“In a preview of the president’s speech, the White House notes, and I quote, ‘we have made extraordinary progress on the path to a stronger country and a brighter future.’
“But that’s not how the American people are feeling.
“And it doesn’t reflect the reality of the president’s administration.
“The president plans to talk about his supposed economic successes tonight.
“But while our economy has recovered to a certain extent since the recession, it has never fully rebounded.
“Wage growth continues to lag.
“December marked the 77th straight month in which year-over-year hourly wage growth was at or below 2.5 percent.
“Underemployment also continues to be a problem, with millions of Americans continuing to work part-time jobs because they can’t find full-time work.
“Almost five years after the recession ended, the percentage of Americans working full time has still not returned to pre-recession levels.
“While the most commonly mentioned unemployment rate is 5.0 percent, the U-6 unemployment rate, which measures the number of both unemployed workers and underemployed workers, is 9.9 percent.
“Of the unemployed, those who have been unemployed for 27 weeks or more — or those considered long-term unemployed — make up 26 percent.
“And labor force participation remains near record lows.
“In short, stagnation has become the new normal for the economy under the Obama administration, and economic opportunities for American families have been few and far between.
“And in addition to the lack of economic opportunity, families have had to shoulder new burdens thanks to the Obama administration.
“Chief among those burdens, of course, is Obamacare, the president’s disastrous health care law, which has failed to reduce the cost of health care, ripped away millions of Americans’ preferred health care plans, forced families onto insurance plans they don’t want and can’t afford, reduced patients’ access to doctors and hospitals, increased taxes, and wasted billions of taxpayer dollars.
“Then there are the burdensome regulations the Obama administration has imposed, which have made it more challenging for businesses large and small to grow and create jobs.
“The Obama Environmental Protection Agency in particular has done more than its fair share to make things difficult for Americans.
“During the course of the Obama administration, this agency has implemented one damaging rule after another, from a massive national backdoor energy tax that would hurt poor and working families the most, to a new rule that would subject ponds and puddles in Americans’ backyards to a complex array of expensive and burdensome regulatory requirements.
“Again and again, I’ve heard from South Dakota farm and ranch families, homeowners, and small businesses about the difficulties they’re facing thanks to the Obama EPA’s massive new regulations.
“Mr. President, if the president’s record on the economy and middle-class opportunity is bad, his record on foreign policy is even worse.
“A White House preview of the State of the Union touts the president’s work to, and I quote, ‘redefine American leadership for the 21st century.’
“During the president’s last year in office, the White House says, and I quote, ‘we can show the world what is possible when America truly leads.’
“Republicans couldn’t agree more that America should truly lead – the problem is that the president’s first seven years in office have generally been distinguished by a lack of leadership.
“Back in June, former President – and fellow Democrat – Jimmy Carter described President Obama’s successes on the world stage as ‘minimal.’
“‘On the world stage, just to be objective about it as I can,’ Carter said, ‘I can’t think of many nations in the world where we have a better relationship now than we did when he took over.’
“Neither can I, Mr. President.
“The White House claims the president has ended two wars, yet neglects to mention that since the U.S. withdrew from Iraq, large sections of the country have descended into chaos thanks to ISIS.
“The president’s failure to enforce his red line in Syria when President Bashar al Assad used chemical weapons on his own people and the president’s lack of a strategy to defeat ISIS have contributed to a massive refugee crisis with no easy solution.
“Meanwhile, Assad remains in power and ISIS continues to thrive.
“With the terrorist attacks in Paris in November, ISIS officially expanded its theater of operations beyond the Middle East.
“And as we witnessed in the case of the San Bernardino shooting, as long as ISIS continues to exist, its demented ideology will inspire disturbed individuals to commit acts of terror.
“The United States is in desperate need of a comprehensive strategy to confront the threat posed by ISIS, yet the president has so far made no move to develop one.
“On another foreign policy front, the president has repeatedly touted his nuclear deal with Iran as one of the major foreign policy achievements of his presidency, yet the agreement he signed actually improves Iran’s long-term prospects for developing a bomb.
“And in a clear violation of UN restrictions, Iran recently tested a ballistic missile, demonstrating once again that it has in no way curbed its aggressive behavior.
“Elsewhere, Russian aggression has increased on the president’s watch, and North Korea recently conducted yet another nuclear test.
“Mr. President, the Obama administration has left the American people with a host of problems at home and abroad.
“But once again, it sounds like President Obama’s State of the Union address will fail to offer any substantive solutions.
“More than that, it sounds as if the president will largely ignore the problems.
“And that’s unfortunate.
“The president is missing an opportunity to offer substantive solutions before turning the problems of his administration over to his successors.
“Mr. President, I don’t want to give credence to those Obama administration accusations that Republicans are all ‘doom and gloom.’
“As I said above, I believe that the strength and spirit of the American people mean that the future in America is always bright.
“But realizing that future requires understanding and developing solutions to the problems facing our nation, and that’s something the president is unwilling to do.
“Mr. President, Republicans have worked hard over the past year to make our economy stronger, our government more efficient and accountable, and our nation and our world safer and more secure.
“But there’s a lot more work to be done.
“And we need a partner in the White House who’s willing to meet us halfway.
“We hope the president will use this last year of his presidency to work with us as we seek to address the challenges facing the American people.”
Attorney General Jackley Joins Challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s Contraceptive Mandate
PIERRE, S.D. – Attorney General Marty Jackley announces that South Dakota has joined 20 other State Attorneys General in an amicus or “friend of the court” brief, challenging the Affordable Care Act’s “contraceptive mandate”. The States ask the United States Supreme Court to consider an exemption from the contraceptive mandate for religious nonprofits organizations. The amicus brief argues the contraception mandate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) as applied to nonprofit religious employers.
“The federal government has gone too far with the passage and implementation of mandated healthcare that fails to protect the most basic and important sincerely held religious beliefs. The federal government should and must respect sincerely held religious beliefs,” said Jackley.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) adopted a regulatory accommodation that some nonprofit religious employers find objectionable under their religious beliefs. Challenging the authority of HHS to promulgate this rule, the brief argues it makes little sense to exclude religious nonprofits from this contraceptive mandate in light of the exemptions for most churches, small employers and employers with grandfathered plans. There is no cost to the State of South Dakota for its participation in this multi-state litigation.
With the session at our door, now might be a good time to unveil the results of our unscientific polling on the question of a sales tax increase:
(Are you trying to give us a hint?)
By a majority over all other choices combined, you said “No, no, and NO!” to any increase in the sales tax in one of the largest responses to a SDWC poll ever.
19% said increase in the sales tax of education was ok. A little over 16% said that they would increase the sales tax for both counties and education. But 52 1/2% put their foot down and said “don’t you dare!”
In light of that sentiment, how do we think this legislative session going to go?
Attorney General Jackley to Address U.S. Chamber
as National Attorney General President
PIERRE, S.D – South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley as President of the National Association of Attorneys General will deliver the Wednesday morning keynote address to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for Legal Reform at their annual meeting on January 13, 2016 in Florida.
“The National Association of Attorneys General understands that businesses are critical components to building healthy economies and strong communities. This is an excellent opportunity to address workforce development, consumer protection, data privacy and our Presidential Initiative, ‘To Serve and Protect with 21st Century Policing’. I also intend to discuss the significance of South Dakota’s balanced budget without a state income tax,” said Jackley.
This annual meeting includes general counsel and directors of governmental affairs from U.S. Chamber members and businesses throughout the United States.
Unless the world moves to total anarchy, there will always be a government upon which the people depend. And day-in-and-day-out, there will be bureaucrats who make that government run. They labor in bland offices, they are the subject of jokes and called dumb and lazy (e.g. the title of this post), they seldom get a thank you from those they serve and do so at wages less than they could get in the private sector, especially those who rise up in the ranks, never to move on to greener pastures because they are called to serve the public.
Paul Kinsman was a bureaucrat for almost 30 years and he didn’t need anyone to lead him to think. He thought, did and served.
When I was in Pierre, I don’t remember his title nor his official duties. You always found him at his desk in the Bureau of Administration. If you needed advice, Paul was always generous with his time and expertise. But, if you needed something that was going to cost money, Paul’s first inclination was it was a “want” and he treated every dollar of taxpayer money as if it was his own last dollar. But, if you came to him with a real problem or opportunity, he could figure out how to solve it and then he would make sure you had the resources to do so.
In the late ‘80’s, state government was getting new desktops, beginning to use email, getting wired, replacing secretarial pools with technology. It was a time when it looked like technology increased inefficiency, not decreased it. Somebody needed to understand the “big picture” lest money was wasted. Paul was that guy making him the “oil” for the bureaucratic machine that is state government. He messed up and things screeched to a halt. He did good and things moved forward at lower cost.
If I were to detail one simple solution, you’d all say “duh” but back then it was innovative. Our Division budget was getting killed with travel back and forth while separation was also killing our ability to get things done at the office. I had an idea my boss wasn’t buying (rightly so it turned out) so I was sent to Paul for a reason I didn’t understand at the time. After I detailed the issues, he authorized giving our Division a laptop (which was a luxury needing the signature of his boss and his boss’s boss). That first laptop was “free” in that it didn’t come out of my budget but was loaned from the BofA. Shortly thereafter, the value of laptops was clear and I was re-configuring my budget for more laptops.
The point is Paul knew travel was slowing the comprehensive move to reliance on technology. He knew laptops were a necessity and not a luxury but he needed a “test case” to prove his theory to his superiors and figured our division staff of people in our 20’s would embrace laptop use. To this day, I credit Paul Kinsman as the person most responsible for the State of South Dakota being known as a national leader in adopting technology to increase efficiency and reducing costs.
This all said, I would be remiss if I reduced Paul to just a public servant. Paul was at his core a personally kind human being. When his friend Labor Secretary Peter deHueck was diagnosed with terminal cancer, I’m sure Paul was suffering and in need of consolation but he was the one giving everyone else consolation. When the plane crashed in Iowa and everything seemed turned upside down, Paul stayed right side up. Too often kindness is seen as weakness. Paul Kinsman showed it is actually strength. Somehow, I’m pretty sure him watching Peter fade from life prepared him for his own journey to Eternity.
As a former colleague, I’m not sure I really expressed my appreciation for all his help beyond a short “thanks.” I’m not sure I ever really expressed my affection or gratitude for his kindness, especially when I lost people most dear to me in the plane crash (as did Paul). As a “bureaucrat” who served our state with integrity, a selfless spirit, and competence, I know I never thanked him. It is a shame I am doing so upon hearing of his death. But, as much as Paul deserved to hear gratitude for what he did and who he was, he knew he was doing good work and making a difference in the lives of the people of South Dakota and I suspect that was enough for him.
Paul Kinsman, you are the epitome of a public servant and give bureaucrats a good name. We were blessed by your service. Thank you.
Paul Kinsman, Bureaucrat. Rest In Peace.
Incline, O Lord, Your ear to my prayer, in which I humbly beseech Your mercy, that You would place the soul of Your servant, Paul Kinsman, which You have allowed to depart from this world, into the region of peace and light; and unite in the fellowship of Your Saints. Through Christ our Lord,
I was chatting with a politico this morning who was remarking on the dismal voter registration numbers for Democrats, when he pointed out that right now, Republicans in South Dakota outnumber Democrats by around 70k votes. And he used Stephanie Herseth as a benchmark of how Democrat fortunes in the state have risen and fallen.
If you look at 2004, when Herseth won over Larry Diedrich in the fall, the DEM/GOP gap was around 47,000 fewer Democrats than Republicans. In 2010, when Congresswoman Noem won, the gap was actually narrower….
Republican
Democrat
GOP v. DEM
IND, Etc.
Total
2004
238,530
191,523
-47,007
72,158
502,261
* Herseth Won
2010
237,809
194,204
-43,605
85,932
519,361
* Noem Defeated Herseth
1/5/2016
237,636
167,272
-70,364
108,766
513,674
* Present Day
Difference between 2004 & Today
-894
-24,251
-23,357
36,608
11,413
The 2010 race was a hard fought contest, which flies in the face of thinking it’s based on just a simple numeric supremacy. Incumbency can play a significant factor, as I think we’d all agree. But you have to give the “strength in numbers” theory as affecting the race some credence as well.
Looking at Congresswoman Kristi Noem’s dominance between 2010 and now…
2010
Candidate
Vote %
Votes
Noem>Opponent
Republican
Kristi Noem
48%
153703
-7114
Democratic
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
46%
146589
2012
Candidate
Vote %
Votes
Republican
Kristi Noem
57%
207640
-53851
Democratic
Matt Varilek
43%
153789
2014
Candidate
Vote %
Votes
Republican
Kristi Noem
67%
183834
-91349
Democratic
Corinna Robinson
34%
92485
The numbers that Congresswoman Kristi Noem continues to post in her election margins continues to be more and more impressive. As the GOP registration numbers have accelerated past those of Democrats, look at Noem’s margin of victory.
In fact, if you overlay the raw numbers, her margins of victory are climbing even faster than that of GOP registration:
Republican
Democrat
GOP v DEM
Noem>Opponent
10/18/2010
237,809
194,204
-43,605
-7,114
11/5/2012
243,113
189,493
-53,620
-53,851
11/3/2014
240,545
176,169
-64,376
-91,349
1/5/2016
237,636
167,272
-70,364
We shall see….
In 2010, when facing an incumbent, she managed a 7114 vote margin when we had a 43,605 advantage. In 2012, her margin and the party registration advantage was almost identical. In 2014, not only did she beat the party registration advantage, she left it in the dirt with numbers that were fully 141% of that party registration advantage.
I think we’d all agree there’s factor of incumbency to take into account, which explains why Noem’s advantage over Herseth’s in the face of stronger GOP numbers was what it was. But ever since, Noem has taken full advantage of that widening voter registration, and added to it with ever widening electoral performance.
What does this mean for Paula Hawks in the 2016 race for South Dakota’s Congressional seat? Nothing but bad, bad news.
Democrat numbers dwindling ever further, and Congresswoman Noem’s ever increasing electoral dominance represents an effective combination that we can say with confidence means that Hawks stands no chance to win, place, or show.
The only question is how big the margin of victory is going to be. Will Noem be able to win by a 90,000 vote margin again? Or will Hawks keep her at a 50,000 vote margin?
Programming Note – Join Kristi Noem on Neil Cavuto tonight
AFP Reacts to Governor’s State of the State Address
Thune: Obama Victory Lap Flies in the Face of Reality
Attorney General Jackley Joins Challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s Contraceptive Mandate
