According to an e-mail sent out today:
Americans for Prosperity is leading the fight against Medicaid expansion in our state. Today, we announced a new TV ad that will run during the Republican presidential debate this Thursday evening.
The ad explains how budget shortfalls and potential tax hikes are likely if legislators allow this backdoor expansion of Obamacare.
Here’s the ad:
A SDWC correspondent recently got into an email chain discussion with Democrat US Senate Candidate Jay Williams, and was nice enough to send it on to me.
And it’s a good illustration of how he resides out in the Leftward wilderness of South Dakota Political views:
On Sunday, February 21, 2016, Jay Williams wrote:
Hi,
US Senators do not have a say in creating a State income tax. South Dakota has a real tax problem and it is not that we are over taxed. As I’m sure you know, the State Legislature just rejected the sales tax increase to fund the schools. Unless our state citizens are prepared to fund our State, we are going to continue down the path we are currently on which you note includes under funded schools and crumbling infrastructure. I favor any state taxes that will address these issues, including an income tax.
I believe we must change the prevailing attitude that all taxes are bad. We are the government and unless we are willing to fund it, the government cannot provide “we the people” with the services we need. Paying taxies may be difficult, but it is necessary and it is the right thing to do.
Thanks for your comment and inquiry.
Best wishes,
Jay Williams
“I favor any state taxes that will address these issues, including an income tax.” Well, at least he isn’t running from it.
But, it gets better.
On Sunday, February 21, 2016, Jay Williams wrote:
Hi Grant,
I really support both Hillary and Bernie. Either would be a great president, but if I were the one to choose, I would probably choose Hillary because she has such a wealth of foreign affairs experience, she is a woman, and I believe she will support most of the financial positions that Bernie champions. I will certainly be happy to support either one in the general election and I believe either will be able to beat any of the really bad Republican choices.
Jay
He likes Clinton because “she will support most of the financial positions that Bernie champions..”
So they’re both running on the “free stuff” platform?
Wait… I’m not done yet..
From: Jay Williams
Date: Monday, February 22, 2016Hi Grant,
I am a strong support of universal health care. With Obamacare, we finally have a national health care policy. Unfortunately, with the Republican controlled congress, it is impossible to do anything to make it better because they are only interested in repealing it. With a reasonable congress and a reasonable president, we could make Obamacare better. We can thank President Obama for at least providing our nation with a basis for national health care. Too bad the Republicans have no interest in working with the President to improve it.
As far as Hillary scandals, I believe any fair look at them reveals them as being fabricated by those who have hated her for years. Does anyone really think she had anything to do with the Benghazi deaths? I agree that she should have used her government email, but her haters are jumping on that like there was some wrong doing. Even after extensive investigations of those email messages, and lots of suggestions that there would be criminal charges, not one allegation has resulted in any kind of charge against her. I like Bernie and I would certainly support him for president, but the scandal charges are from the crazy right wing that hates her. She really deserves better.
Jay
And for the first time we’re hearing now that Jay Williams is not just all in for Obamacare, he wishes dems could “make it better,” if there just weren’t all those unreasonable Republicans in the way.
So to summarize, according to the book of Jay:
– State income tax – Yes
– President – HRC but Bernie would be ok
– Obamacare – Yes – and wants to expand
– HRC Scandals – its all a Right wing conspiracy… by the FBI and Obama’s State Department Inspector General investigating?
Amazing.
Most of the state’s attention has been directed at the goings on in the House over education funding… But what kind of reception does the bill face in the Senate?
In speaking with one Senator this morning, they weren’t entirely convinced that the tax plan has enough of a cushion to ensure passage, and a group of conservatives might find some momentum to offer an alternative plan without new taxes & block the plan as was attempted in the House.
Time to start counting heads. Things could be as contentious in the Senate as they were in the House.
From Public Radio, they say there’s a gunslinger who might not leave the OK Corral after all:
Some sources reported Schoenbeck planned to resign on Wednesday.
But in an e-mail this afternoon to SDPB News Schoenbeck says he is torn over the issue of resigning. He says he plans to talk with his family this weekend before making a final decision.
George Bailey, or should I say Lee Schoenbeck, the townspeople like you more than you think.
Thune Joins More Than 200 Members of Congress in Effort to Block Obama EPA’s Backdoor National Energy Tax
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) today joined 33 senators and 171 representatives in filing an amicus brief, or friend of the court brief, that urges the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to stop the Obama Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) power plant emissions rule, also known as the Clean Power Plan.
“South Dakotans applauded the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision to temporarily block President Obama’s backdoor national energy tax,” said Thune. “The EPA has overstepped its legal authority, and now it’s time for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to end the uncertainty and significant impact this rule would have on family budgets and our overall economy.”
In the amicus brief, which can be found here, the members write:
The Final Rule goes well beyond the clear statutory directive by, among other things, requiring States to submit, for approval, state or regional energy plans to meet EPA’s predetermined CO2 mandates for their electricity sector. In reality, if Congress desired to give EPA sweeping authority to transform the nation’s electricity sector, Congress would have provided for that unprecedented power in detailed legislation. Indeed, when an agency seeks to make “decisions of vast ‘economic and political significance’” under a “long-extant statute,” it must point to a “clear” statement from Congress. Util. Air Regulatory Grp. v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427, 2444 (2014) (quoting FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120, 160, 120 S. Ct. 1291, 1315 (2000)). EPA can point to no statement of congressional authorization for the Final Rule’s central features, precisely because there is none.
Nor has Congress authorized EPA to make the policy choices that are reflected in the Final Rule—a rule that imposes enormous costs on States and the public without achieving meaningful climate benefits. Because of the Final Rule, States will face unprecedented new regulatory burdens, electricity ratepayers will be subject to billions of dollars in compliance costs, and American workers and their families will experience the hardship of job losses due to power plant shutdowns, higher electricity prices, and overall diminishment of the nation’s global economic competitiveness. Choices of this nature are inherently Congressional decisions. See W. Minn. Mun. Power Agency v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 806 F.3d 588, 593 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (“Agencies are empowered to make policy only insofar as Congress expressly or impliedly delegates that power.”) (citing Util. Air Regulatory Grp., 134 S. Ct. at 2445 (2014)). Congress has not authorized EPA to make the central policy choices in the Final Rule and, in many respects, has affirmatively rejected those policies, as it certainly did with respect to cap-and-trade programs for CO2 emissions from power plants.
Accordingly, the Final Rule that has been properly stayed by the Supreme Court should now be vacated by this Court.
Twenty-seven states have challenged the final Clean Power Plan in court, which was recently stayed by the U.S. Supreme Court on February 9.
###
Rounds Statement on Administration Plans to Close GTMO
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today issued the following statement on the Obama administration’s plan to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, commonly known as GTMO. Earlier today, the Pentagon submitted to Congress a plan to close GTMO despite President Obama signing into law last year legislation specifically prohibiting its closure. The plan would cost more than $400 million and relocate nearly 60 detainees to one of 13 locations in the United States.
“Transferring detainees to the United States is a direct violation of laws the president himself has signed,” said Rounds. “Law enforcement officials across the nation have spoken against bringing them into their communities. Additionally, detainees may receive legal protections under the Constitution if they are housed in the U.S. I will continue working with my colleagues to prevent the closure of GTMO, just as we have done in previous legislation, which President Obama signed into law.”
In March 2015, Rounds visited Guantanamo Bay Naval Base with U.S. Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.). There are around 90 inmates housed at Guantanamo Bay, which has been open since 2002.
###
Thune: President Should Abandon Plan to Close Guantanamo Bay
“Once again, the president is attempting to move forward without regard for the will of the American people, and he is putting our communities and neighborhoods at risk by doing so.”
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) issued the following statement after President Obama announced a plan to close Guantanamo Bay and transfer terrorists to the United States. Under current law, it is illegal to transfer foreign terrorists at Guantanamo to the United States.
“Once again, the president is attempting to move forward without regard for the will of the American people, and he is putting our communities and neighborhoods at risk by doing so. Congress has already rejected bringing these foreign terrorists to American soil in bipartisan legislation, which President Obama signed into law. The president should redirect his focus from an old campaign promise to the larger national security issues facing our nation.
All I can offer is “Say it ain’t so, Lee“
We have a new advertiser, Neal Tapio, who is joining us for a while.
Neal is a successful entrepreneur, a long time conservative Republican, and self described “Tea-Party believing, Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin listening, Donald Trump loving potential candidate for office” who is looking to change the conversation for South Dakota conservatives, and re-focusing what’s important for members of the Republican party in South Dakota.
His website will be linked soon, but until then, we can all be intrigued by what he’s going to bring forth.
Welcome Neal!
Anyone swayed by Caitlyn/Bruce Jenner’s plea for a veto of HB 1008 as noted in the Argus this AM?
The measure, sponsored by Rep. Fred Deutsch, R-Florence, would bar transgender students from using public school bathrooms, locker rooms and shower rooms of the gender with which they identify. Those who don’t want to use bathrooms of their biological sex could request that the schools provide “reasonable accommodations.”
I’m not thinking reality TV stars getting involved helps their case. Unless someone promises to launch the Kardashians into orbit, never to return to the planet…