State Officials Warn of Potential Unscrupulous Contractors in Wake of Delmont Tornado Disaster

@SoDakCampaigns

State Officials Warn of Potential Unscrupulous Contractors in Wake of Delmont Tornado Disaster

 

Marty JackleyPIERRE – Attorney General Marty Jackley and the South Dakota Department of Public Safety urge Delmont tornado victims to proceed with caution when moving into the recovery phase of this disaster. Residents will understandably be eager to have new construction or the necessary work done to their damaged property. However, state and local officials are urging consumers to take the necessary steps to evaluate a bidder before contracting for a job. Consumers who need repair work done quickly following a natural disaster are often targets of unscrupulous business practices.

 

“While the vast number of contractors follow legitimate business practices, there are a handful that will seek to take an unfair advantage of this tragic situation,” said Jackley. “Many victims are quite vulnerable in the recovery stage, and we encourage them to take time to evaluate and secure the right contractor to avoid becoming a victim of a scam.”

 

 

“In these types of disasters, those impacted residents are dealing with many issues and trying to cope with repairing their homes,” said Public Safety Secretary Trevor Jones. “We know these are momentous decisions. We urge them to take their time, do their research and hire a legitimate contractor.”

 

Here are a few suggestions when choosing professional contractors:

 

 

  • Take the time to evaluate the bidder before contracting the job.
  • Homeowners should look for a reliable contractor with a proven track record who readily offers credentials
  • Ask for reference Legitimate contractors should be more than willing to provide a list of satisfied customers to verify their work.
  • Ask for a written estimate and a written contract
  • Ask for sales tax license.
  • Keep a copy of the final, signed contract Read this contact carefully before signing. This contract will usually be binding once you have both agreed to it. The contract should state that any changes in the project should include a Change Order signed by both and put guarantees in writing. Any guarantees made by the contractor should be written into the contract.
  • Obtain a local building permit, if required.
  • Make final payments only after the work is complete Do not sign completion papers or make the final payment until the work is completed to your satisfaction.
  • Pay by check. Avoid on-the-spot cash payments. The safest route is to write a check to the contracting company.
  • Avoid door-to-door contracting offers. Many transient contractors will not be available if problems occur months after the work has been completed.

Tornado victims are also encouraged to shop around for materials that might be used during this time of recovery. South Dakota does not have price gouging statutes to protect consumers. Consumer will have to use their own due diligence to research and compare pricing of building products. If you have questions regarding price gouging or transient contractors contact the Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division at 1-800-300-1986 or at [email protected].

Referring Senate Bill 69 will kill expanded voting time for soldiers in 2016.

@SoDakCampaigns

Imagine if you were serving overseas in the United States Military, with your family stationed alongside with you. Or worse, you were by yourself serving in hostile territory. If you were serving your nation, you would think that the last thing that someone would do would be to make it harder for you to cast a ballot during your time away from home.

Especially if you knew that during one of the last elections, 40% of uncounted ballots were due to votes that were not received in time to be counted for the election.

In fact, you would think that if politicians should do anything, aside from removing you from conflict, they should make sure your vote counts when your life is on the line, or at the least, you’re serving in a foreign land.

In South Dakota, legislators did just that this year. But, it’s run into a snag.

Among many things, Senate Bill 69 which was passed by both houses of the legislature, and was signed by the Governor, moved the date for petitions to be circulated backwards by a month into December of 2015, and moving the petition deadline to the first Tuesday in March.  You might bemoan political campaigns starting a month earlier, but there’s a critically important reason to do so. Because there’s more time provided to facilitate the broad deadlines for military voting.

As I’d written back in January of this year:

This has been a move long in coming, given the tremendously tight deadlines largely driven by federal requirements of when to have ballots completed in time for military voting. According to the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) act, the MOVE Act requires States to send absentee ballots to UOCAVA voters at least 45 days before Federal elections.

So, those ballots have to be set in stone 45 days out under federal law.

Current law didn’t really allow for any significant time for challenges or fighting over ballot qualification. Those ballots were literally required to go to the printer within a couple of weeks of being filed. The proposed changes in law would give significantly more time to allow for challenges, but the cost is pushing the active campaign 2016 season back into 2015.

Read it here.

The bill was amended since I wrote that (it was originally back a week into February from the first Tuesday in March), but the same holds true – to meet federal guidelines on providing ballots to military voters as well as their overseas dependents, there simply needs to be more time.

Under Secretary of State Jason Gant, there were significant improvements to South Dakota’s system for military voters, as reflected in this article from Government Security News Magazine:

South Dakota Secretary of State Jason Gant has activated the new iOASIS system, a computerized absentee ballot system for members of the military. The iOASIS system will be available to military members serving overseas for the upcoming South Dakota elections in April 2014.

and…

The iOASIS system was developed and tested more than 1,000 times by the South Dakota National Guard as well as a number of overseas military bases. Intended as way to streamline absentee voting for military members serving overseas, it utilizes technology from the DoD such as the Common Access Card (CAC).

“iOASIS is based on a concept of simplicity,” said Gant. These voters will now be able to register to vote, request an absentee ballot, receive an absentee ballot and mark an absentee ballot in seconds. The ballot is then printed and returned for counting.

and..

Gant has presented the iOASIS system to the U.S. Congress as a potential solution for the American absentee-ballot system.

Read it all here.

Gant’s IOASIS system was revolutionary, and greatly alleviated the step of having to send ballots out through the mail, but because of law the ballots are still required to be sent back via mail:

Military voters will now be able to register to vote, request an absentee ballot, receive an absentee ballot and mark an absentee ballot in seconds. The ballot is then printed and returned for counting.

Read that here.

While the IOasis system arguably shaves off half of the up to 60 day timeframe, under current law if ballots are not provided until the minimum required 45 days before the election, that provides a window of roughly about two weeks, and after that, you’re at the mercy of your job, military mail and the US Postal Service.

The timeframe between ballots being provided for absentee use has continually run down to the wire because of petition certifications, challenges to petitions, as well as the amount of time to print ballots. In moving deadlines back by about a month, Senate Bill 69 would have relaxed the pressure, and provided more time for both challenges, as well as completing the ballots.

The referral of Senate Bill 69 which is currently underway by the State Democratic Party and it’s sycophants comes as a result of partisan, political objections over a measure that Democrats had attempted to amend several times during the process.

The biggest problem? In their rush to judgement and to put the measure to a political campaign where they can spin it – it hits the pause button on the reforms, and means that they won’t take place in 2016 as intended by the legislature.

Much of the hullabaloo over the bill came because it limited the ability of state Democrats to place candidates on the ballot who had no intention of running – what were termed ‘placeholder candidates’ which gave them further time to try to find someone better.

Twice; once in the Senate, and once in the House, they proposed failed amendments to allow ‘party bosses’ to fill empty slots that no one in their party had petitioned for, a move which for the most cynical illustrated their breakdown as an organization able to run candidates for office. Other objections have been raised with regard to standardizing petition signatory counts and deadlines between party organizations and candidates.

Currently, Democrats are out in South Dakota seeking signatures to refer Senate Bill 69 to a vote of the people. While they squawk about it allegedly “punishing independents” or “making it tougher for Democrats to put people on the ballot,” what they aren’t telling voters is that a referral of SB 69 will nullify the reforms passed by this years’ legislature to provide more time for military and many overseas voters to return a ballot to South Dakota in time for the election. What they aren’t telling you is that referring SB 69 will keep us stranded in a flawed system with near impossible deadlines to provide ballots to the military for yet another election.

What they aren’t telling you is that every signature they collect on the Senate Bill 69 referral petition is a signature against more time for military voters to cast a ballot.

And that’s a good reason by itself to just say no to the referral of SB 69.

Senators Introduce Port Transparency Bill in Wake of Prolonged West Coast Ports Strife

@SoDakCampaigns

Senators Introduce Port Transparency Bill in Wake of Prolonged West Coast Ports Strife

“This legislation adds needed sunshine to maritime shipping through our ports to help head off future economically destructive impediments to commerce.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.), along with Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) and Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) today introduced common-sense sunshine reforms as a part of S. 1298 to help with early identification of port disruptions caused by labor strife or other factors before they inflict serious damage on businesses and the broader U.S. economy.

At a hearing before the Commerce Committee earlier this year, Thune highlighted the challenges South Dakota businesses and agriculture producers have faced in light of the recent nine month labor dispute at 29 West Coast container ports. Some estimates say that these disputes cost the economy up to $2.5 billion per day and the resulting strife was widely cited as a contributing cause to the anemic 0.2 percent annual growth rate of the U.S. economy in the first quarter of 2015.

“Every day, South Dakota businesses and Ag producers depend on the efficient operation of U.S. ports,” said Thune. “The recent labor dispute at West Coast ports underscored how a lack of data and transparency to quantify on-going problems at our ports can affect businesses from coast to coast. At present, statistics for air cargo and even forms of ground transportation are more developed and accessible than those for maritime transport. This legislation adds needed sunshine to maritime shipping through our ports to help head off future economically destructive impediments to commerce.”

“A labor dispute at one of our ports can cause significant damage to U.S. employers and to our economy – the recent nine-month dispute at the West Coast ports made it difficult for auto manufacturers and suppliers in Tennessee to keep production lines running,” said Alexander. “This bill will help shine a light on what’s happening at our nation’s ports before a labor dispute erupts and threatens our economy.”

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation over half of all containerized imports enter the U.S. through West Coast ports. The Department has separately stated that a “lack of complete data on U.S. international freight continues to hamper research and analysis of trends in international freight movement and its impact on transportation activity within the United States.” While the Maritime Administration (MARAD) does produce its annual Statistical Snapshot of 20 water-freight-related statistics on freight volume and port of entry, MARAD has reported that the lack of a national standard for performance measures and “the lack of a reporting process have stymied its attempts to measure the efficiency of major U.S. ports.”
S. 1298 creates a new level of transparency and accountability for ports, many of which are government owned, by requiring:

· The director of the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) to establish a port performance statistics program and report annually to Congress on the performance and capacity of the Nation’s key ports.

· U.S. port authorities that are subject to federal regulation or that receive federal assistance to report annually to BTS.

· The Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with the Secretaries of Labor and Commerce, to report to Congress on a port’s performance before and after the expiration of maritime labor agreements to help indicate whether labor discussions have impacted operations, the estimated economic impact of such disputes and roughly how long it will take for shipments to return to normal.

Click here for a copy of S. 1298 as introduced today by Sens. Thune, Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), and Cory Gardner (R-Colo.).

The Senate Commerce Committee has broad jurisdiction over the U.S. Department of Transportation and our nation’s transportation system, as well as the U.S. Department of Commerce.

###

Noem Votes to Send EPA, Army Corps Back to the Drawing Board on WOTUS

@SoDakCampaigns

Noem Votes to Send EPA, Army Corps Back to the Drawing Board on WOTUS

kristi noem headshot May 21 2014Washington, D.C. – Representative Kristi Noem today helped the U.S. House of Representatives pass the bipartisan H.R. 1732, the Regulatory Integrity Protection Act of 2015, which would send the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers back to the drawing board on a proposed “waters of the United States” rule. The proposal of concern would expand the federal government’s control over small and seasonal bodies of water throughout South Dakota.

“It’s time that the EPA and Army Corps ditch this intrusive and unnecessary regulation,” said Rep. Noem. “The proposed rule, which could become one of the largest land grabs in U.S. history, was built on incomplete scientific data and a flawed economic analysis. The federal government ought to go back to the drawing board. After all, the potential federal takeover of many prairie potholes, ditches and streams isn’t an option.”

Throughout the last Congress, Rep. Noem helped lead the U.S. House of Representatives in passing bipartisan legislation to prohibit the EPA and the Army Corps from developing, finalizing, adopting, implementing, applying, administering or enforcing the proposed rule to or any similar rule that would expand the agencies’ jurisdiction over these waters. She also called on the EPA to define regulated navigable waters on a map after an alarming graphic was released that has raised questions about how extensive the EPA’s regulatory authority could become. Read more and view the graphic here.

In May 2014, Rep. Noem joined 231 Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle on a letter urging the EPA and the Secretary of the Army to withdraw the proposed rule. She also questioned the USDA Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment at an Agriculture Committee hearing in June 2014. Here, the Congresswoman raised concerns about the lack of clarity the interpretive rule would provide to producers and questioned why the administration is pursuing the rule when so many are opposed to it (watch the exchange here).

After earlier pressure from Noem and others, the U.S. Department of Agriculture did withdraw the “waters of the U.S.” interpretive rule, a portion of the controversial expansion. But action must still be taken by the EPA and Army Corps to fully eliminate the proposed rule.

###

Jackley details all of what’s under review by the AG for ballot measures

@SoDakCampaigns

I received a note from Marty Jackley this afternoon noting the status of what has been submitted for proposed ballot measures for 2016. In case you’re interested – here’s what Marty noted:

As of today, the Attorney General is currently preparing Attorney General explanations for the following four initiated measures and one initiated constitutional amendment (identified by the titles presented by the sponsors which is subject to change), which will be the subject of petition signature gathering in order to be placed on the 2016 general election ballot.

  • 1. An Act to provide for a limit on finance charges on payday, car title, and installment loans and to provide a penalty therefor.
  • 2. An Act to ban the transfer of alcoholic beverages with more than one percent alcohol content in South Dakota.
  • 3. An Act to ban the transfer of tobacco or tobacco paraphernalia in South Dakota.
  • 4. An Act to provide for the regulation, access and compassionate use of cannabis in South Dakota.
  • 5. An Amendment to the South Dakota Constitution relating to initiatives and referendum.

The Attorney General’s title and explanation for each of these proposals will be filed with the Secretary of State within the next few weeks, along with the final version of each proposed measure.

In addition, based on information from the Secretary of State’s website (under “upcoming elections” link), there are three potential referred measures that may appear on the 2016 ballot if sufficient signatures are obtained, as well as one Legislature-proposed constitutional amendment that will appear. Attorney General explanations for these will be prepared by May 2016. They may include:

  • 1. Referral of SB 69 (revise provisions regarding elections and election petitions)
  • 2. Referral of SB 177 (youth minimum wage)
  • 3. Referral of SB 1179 (revise definition of veteran)
  • 4. HJR 1003 (constitutional amendment regarding the authority of the S.D. Board of Regents)

The thing that strikes me if all of these appear on the ballot? Especially when they hit the legal substance bans, followed by the pot legalization, people are going to start ticking off the “no” box as they have a tendency to do when the ballot measures start multiplying.

Rounds Urges Senate Democrats to End Filibuster of TPA

@SoDakCampaigns

Rounds Urges Senate Democrats to End Filibuster of TPA

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) today voted in favor of allowing debate on Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) legislation on the floor of the Senate.  TPA would strengthen the hand of the U.S. when entering into trade negotiations with foreign nations. Despite widespread bipartisan support for TPA, the vote failed 52-45. Every president since FDR has been granted TPA through 2007.

“I’m disappointed that Senate Democrats are putting politics before policy and blocking debate on TPA legislation,” said Rounds. “TPA promotes job growth here at home by allowing us to negotiate stronger, more enforceable international trade agreements that benefit our producers. As we negotiate trade deals in the Pacific region and other parts of the world, TPA will make certain that we have a strong voice in the global marketplace. In South Dakota, trade supports more than 124,000 jobs and results in billions of dollars of exports. I encourage Senate Democrats to work with us to pass TPA so we can open new markets for farmers, ranchers and business owners whose livelihoods depend on free and fair trade.”

Renewing bipartisan trade promotion authority would empower our negotiators to come up with the best trade agreements possible, making certain that American priorities always come first. America hasn’t signed any new trade deals in the past five years. Meanwhile, an estimated 400 trade agreements have been implemented around the world. In the past 40 years, only one trade agreement has passed without TPA.

###

Thune Leads Bipartisan Letter Calling on FCC to Modernize Support for Rural Broadband Services

@SoDakCampaigns

Thune Leads Bipartisan Letter Calling on FCC to Modernize Support for Rural Broadband Services

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, and fellow committee member U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) today released a letter signed by 61 senators to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler calling for a modernization of rules intended to ensure that Americans in rural areas have access to affordable broadband services. Under current rules, Universal Service Fund (USF) support for broadband in rural areas is dependent on the outdated requirement that customers also sign up for traditional landline phone service. When rural customers “cut the cord” of traditional phone service in favor of wireless or Internet-based phone services, rural communities served by smaller telecommunication providers lose access to USF support for broadband deployment even if the customer continues to pay for broadband Internet service. The outdated rules create a needless link between customers signing up for services they may not want or need and broadband deployment.

The Senate Commerce Committee has jurisdiction over the FCC and related telecommunication laws. The full letter is available here and the text appears below:

Dear Chairman Wheeler:

On May 6, 2014, 44 Senators signed a bipartisan letter calling on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to move forward on tailored modifications to modernize the federal Universal Service Fund (USF) as it supports the delivery of communications services to consumers in high-cost portions of the United States served by small, rural rate-of-return-regulated local exchange carriers.  While we commend the FCC for its continuing efforts to implement a Connect America Fund for consumers in areas served by larger carriers, we are troubled that the FCC has yet to take meaningful steps to address one of the most problematic aspects of the existing USF rules in areas served by smaller carriers. 

As you know, Americans are increasingly “cutting the cord” and dropping their traditional landline voice “plain old telephone service” (POTS) in favor of wireless or voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service.  Many of these consumers, however, still desire fixed broadband services that offer robust speeds – in fact, fixed broadband services are necessary for consumers to make effective use of VoIP service. 

Unfortunately, the FCC’s USF rules have not kept pace with changing technology and shifting consumer preference.  Instead, out-of-date rules tie high-cost USF cost recovery for small rural carriers to a consumer’s actual purchase of voice service, even if the consumer no longer wants that service and only wants broadband service.  The POTS requirement prevents rural consumers from making choices that are available to their urban counterparts.  Ironically, these outdated rules may hurt lower-income rural consumers the most, possibly putting the price of broadband out of reach unless those consumers make the additional expenditures to buy POTS as well.  

A year after the previous letter, the time has come to take common-sense steps to update the rules.  While long-term options to modify USF support can and should be explored, as you’ve committed to doing via the Connect America Fund Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the FCC must not leave consumers in the lurch given the substantial time needed to develop, evaluate, and implement such options.  No new models or sweeping changes are needed to adopt and implement a targeted update to fix the issue highlighted in this and last year’s letters – instead a simple plan that isolates and solves this specific issue is all that is needed right now.  In addition, we continue to support measures that ensure USF distributions are invested prudently and reasonably, which helps provide the credibility necessary for the FCC to fulfill its statutory mandate. 

Small rural carriers have worked hard to provide innovative services to some of the most difficult-to-serve parts of our country.  However, without the update to the USF support rules described in this letter and in the letter last year, many rural consumers will continue to be denied a choice among these innovative services.  As the FCC continues to modernize USF to support broadband deployment, we must ensure rural consumers are not left behind by antiquated rules that inhibit investment, adoption, and consumer choice.  We therefore renew our call for the FCC to expeditiously make careful, targeted updates to the existing USF mechanisms to provide sufficient and predictable support so that consumers in areas served by smaller rural carriers can make the choice to obtain robust broadband services at affordable rates without being compelled to purchase other services.

Thank you for your consideration.  We look forward to continuing to work with you to update USF to ensure rural consumers receive reasonably comparable voice and broadband communications services of their choosing at reasonably comparable rates.  

The sixty-one U.S. Senators who signed the letter are:

  1. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
  2. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
  3. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
  4. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
  5. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
  6. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
  7. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.)
  8. Joe Manchin III (W-Va.)
  9. Deb Fisher (R-Neb.)
  10. Michael F. Bennet (D-Colo.)
  11. Jerry Moran (R-Kans.)
  12. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.)
  13. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
  14. Al Franken (D-Minn.)
  15. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.)
  16. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
  17. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.)
  18. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
  19. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
  20. Angus S. King, Jr. (I-Maine)
  21. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
  22. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.)
  23. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
  24. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.)
  25. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
  26. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.)
  27. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
  28. Kirsten E. Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
  29. Pat Roberts (R-Kans.)
  30. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
  31. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
  32. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
  33. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
  34. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
  35. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
  36. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.)
  37. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
  38. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.)
  39. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
  40. Dan Coats (R-Ind.)
  41. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
  42. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
  43. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.)
  44. James E. Risch (R-Idaho)
  45. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah)
  46. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
  47. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
  48. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
  49. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
  50. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
  51. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.)
  52. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
  53. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.)
  54. David Vitter (R-La.)
  55. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)
  56. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
  57. John Cornyn (R-Tex.)
  58. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
  59. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
  60. Dean Heller (R-Nev.)
  61. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)

 

###

Thune Optimistic on Trade Promotion Authority Bill Despite Setback

@SoDakCampaigns

Thune Optimistic on Trade Promotion Authority Bill Despite Setback

“Unfortunately, Senate Democrats have chosen to block their own president’s agenda, uniting against one of his top policy priorities …”

John_Thune,_official_portrait,_111th_CongressWASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) issued the following statement after Senate Democrats obstructed consideration of H.R. 1314, the TPA legislation:

“The sooner Congress renews the bipartisan trade promotion authority legislation, the sooner South Dakota consumers, workers, and job creators can experience the benefits of a healthier economy. Unfortunately, Senate Democrats have chosen to block their own president’s agenda, uniting against one of his top policy priorities while, so far, President Obama has failed to adequately make his case among his own party. This is a setback, but I am hopeful that the Senate can find a path forward to pass this legislation, which is essential to securing free and fair trade agreements and providing access to new markets for American farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers.”

###

Rounds Introduces Legislation to Streamline Tricare for Service Members and Military Retirees

@SoDakCampaigns

Rounds Introduces Legislation to Streamline Tricare
for Service Members and Military Retirees

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Armed Services and Veterans’ Affairs Committees, today introduced legislation to streamline the process for service members and military retirees enrolled in Tricare health plans when they move from one Tricare region to another. The current system for transferring Tricare beneficiaries is often ineffective, resulting in unnecessary delays.

“For our service members and military retirees, who have given so much while serving our country, making simple changes to streamline transfer of their health care is the least we can do,” said Rounds. “Often times, jobs within the military require our service members to move to different parts of the nation. Relocating – which includes saying goodbye to coworkers, packing one’s belongings and adapting to a new job – can be daunting enough for service members and military families. They shouldn’t have to worry about their access to health care benefits on top of everything else. My legislation seeks to simplify the transfer process and give our military families the health care certainty they deserve.”

Rounds’ legislation makes changes to the Tricare program within the Department of Defense so beneficiaries can seamlessly access health care in each region through:

  • Enacting automatic electronic transfer of enrollment information; and
  • Facilitating beneficiaries’ ability to obtain a new primary care provider within 10 days of moving to a new region.

###

A few more details on the upcoming ballot measure to limit legislative ability to change referred measures. Plus, how the AG reviews measures.

@SoDakCampaigns

I had further conversation yesterday with Doug Kronaizl regarding his proposed measure to “enable voters to responsibly refer any laws passed by the legislature and limit legislative overreach…”, and he was kind enough to provide a few more details while the Attorney General reviews the language that was originally submitted for review:

The idea stems from some of the activity during the past legislative session regarding the process. I’m of the same opinion as Governor Janklow in that we are fortunate to be able to have such in-depth, statewide discussions on specific issues important to the voters and thus I felt compelled to maintain its accessibility and work towards its viability. The broadening aspect isn’t actually intended for the initiative process (I understand how the wording might imply that) nor is it an effort to lower signature counts or anything like that. Instead, it’s partly an effort to rid the referral process of loopholes, by which the Legislature can enact un-referable laws.

Doug also tells me that his effort is currently a solo effort, noting “No organizations are backing/funding the measure, although I am open to support from any like-minded individuals across the state. It’s all very grassroots – just an interested South Dakotan at work.”

When will we see the measure? Well, it could be a little while, as the AG is working on it along with several other proposals.

I spoke with Attorney General Jackley yesterday, who was kind enough to provide a bit more detail on what the AG review actually entails.  No, it’s not just in a pile on his desk, tucked inbetween Annette Bosworth and Clayton Walker.

There’s a very deliberative process which I think I’d find fascinating to listen to the give and take on. Marty tells me:

The process we undertake has been developed by previous Attorneys General, we form a committee made up of 3 to 5 attorneys with specialty in the area of law; the committee prepares recommendations to me for the language along with any legal issues; I then review it and meet with the committee for questions, changes, or additional research; then I make the final decision on the language for the public’s consideration.

Given that he’s dealing with goofy proposals this year such as outlawing Tobacco & Alcohol, I’m sure there’s a whole body of law that must be reviewed and discussed.

But, that’s what I know.  Stay tuned to SDWC for more on ballot measures as they arise!