Thune: Don’t Jeopardize South Dakota Tourism Industry by Halting Important Work Visas

@SoDakCampaigns

Thune: Don’t Jeopardize South Dakota Tourism Industry by Halting Important Work Visas

-Letter demands DHS, DOL reach an immediate agreement on H-2B Visa Program-

 

WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) today sent a letter to U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary (DHS) Jeh Johnson and U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Secretary Thomas Perez calling on the agencies to reach an immediate agreement on issuing important seasonal employment work visas (H-2B) critical to the South Dakota tourism and construction industries. The loss of these employees would have a significant impact on South Dakota’s economy. Last week, DOL began halting all H-2B labor visas after a federal judge ruled the agency was stepping outside its statutory authority.

 

“Bureaucratic red tape at the Departments of Labor and Homeland Security is jeopardizing South Dakota’s tourism and construction industries,” said Thune. “I’ve heard from several businesses across the state concerned that this standstill in H-2B visas could threaten their ability to fill important seasonal positions ahead of the upcoming tourist season. These agencies have the ability to fix this visa issue before it becomes a problem for industries across the nation, and the time to act is now. I’ll continue to stay in close contact with the DOL and DHS and remain committed to working with South Dakota businesses to get this problem resolved.”

 

The text of Thune’s letter is below:

__

 

March 9, 2015

 

The Honorable Thomas Perez

Secretary of Labor

Office of the Secretary

U.S. Department of Labor

200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room S-2018

Washington, DC 20210

 

The Honorable Jeh Johnson

Secretary of Homeland Security

Office of the Secretary

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Washington, DC 20528

 

Secretaries Perez and Johnson:

 

It has come to my attention that the Department of Labor (DOL) has ceased processing H-2B visa requests following an injunction by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.  South Dakota relies heavily on H-2B visa holders serving as seasonal employees supporting the tourist industry throughout South Dakota, including the Black Hills.  Without the ability to hire such seasonal workers for the upcoming tourist season, many local businesses will be severely impacted, and some may be unable to operate.  H-2B visas are also essential to the construction industry in South Dakota, which contributes significantly to my state’s economy. 

 

It is my understanding that this issue can be resolved if the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issues delegation authority for H-2B visas to DOL or if DHS and DOL issue joint H-2B visa regulations together.  I would encourage you to pursue one of these solutions as soon as possible so that employers can prepare for the upcoming tourist season.

 

I would appreciate a response once you have determined the best solution for resolving this issue.

 

Sincerely,

 

###

 

Rounds Condemns ATF Framework Limiting Sporting Ammo

@SoDakCampaigns

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) today joined 52 colleagues in expressing concern for a new proposal that would severely limit access to rifle ammunition primarily used for sporting purposes. This class of ammunition is protected from prohibition under a 1986 Law Enforcement Officer Protection Act exemption. The framework, proposed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), would set arbitrary guidelines for determining whether certain ammunition meets the 1986 law’s “sporting purposes” exemption. As a result, access to rifle ammunition long considered to be primarily used for activities such as target shooting and hunting could be limited.

 

In a letter to ATF Director Todd Jones, the senators assert that the new framework defies the intent of Congress when it passed the 1986 law. They also question ATF’s authority to establish such a framework and express concern for its impact on Second Amendment rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

 

“Second Amendment rights require not only access to firearms but to bullets,” the senators write. “If law-abiding gun owners cannot obtain rifle ammunition, or face substantial difficulty in finding ammunition available and at reasonable prices because government entities are banning such ammunition, then the Second Amendment is at risk.”

 

Text of the letter is below.

 

 

March 9, 2015

 

The Honorable B. Todd Jones

Director

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

99 New York Avenue, N.E.

Washington, DC  20226

 

Dear Director Jones:

 

We take issue with the “ATF Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C),” to which ATF sought comment on February 13, 2015.

 

Congress in 1986 passed the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (LEOPA).  It did so to protect law enforcement officers from a particular category of bullets – those that could be fired from handguns and pierce police officers’ body armor.  Because rifle ammunition could also pass through police body armor, and some rifle ammunition could be fired from handguns, LEOPA protected common rifle ammunition by exempting from its scope projectiles “which the Attorney General finds [are] primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.”

 

The “Framework” does not follow LEOPA.  Without any support, it purports to create an “objective” test never before applied for delineating which projectiles are “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.”  ATF will exempt a “.22 caliber projectile … if the projectile weighs 40 grains or less AND is loaded into a rimfire cartridge,” and will exempt other forms of ammunition if they are “loaded into a cartridge for which the only handgun that is readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade is a single shot handgun.”  But even if a particular projectile satisfies these novel tests, ATF proposes to “retain[] the discretion to deny any application for a ‘sporting purposes’ exemption if substantial evidence exists that the ammunition is not primarily intended for such purposes.”

 

ATF would determine what amounts to “substantial evidence” and whether the “ammunition is not primarily intended for [sporting] purposes.”  The statute was not enacted to give authority to ATF to do either.  In 1986, the sponsors of the legislation were emphatic in stating that ammunition commonly used in rifles for target practice or hunting was not of the type of ammunition that the bill would ban.  ATF seems to have decided to ban ammunition types that the law did not ban, then developed from whole cloth an “objective” test to supposedly provide it with the ability to ban the ammunition types it already had selected for prohibition.

 

Earlier, ATF recognized the proper scope of LEOPA.  ATF has always granted an exemption to the M855 5.56 x 45mm cartridge from the LEOPA ban because it recognized that this ammunition fell squarely within the “sporting purposes” test.  It did so because factually, as well as legally under the legislative language, such cartridges were and are widely used by millions of law-abiding gun owners for “sporting purposes.” These cartridges are prevalent for one of the most commonly possessed rifles, the AR-15.  Congress did not, and did not intend to, ban this form of ammunition.

 

ATF’s proposed restriction of the M855 cartridge is particularly serious in light of efforts to ban other forms of ammunition.  The standards in the “Framework” would make use of ammunition containing materials other than lead more difficult.  At the same time, various efforts to ban lead ammunition are proceeding apace.  Second Amendment rights require not only access to firearms but to bullets.  If law-abiding gun owners cannot obtain rifle ammunition, or face substantial difficulty in finding ammunition available and at reasonable prices because government entities are banning such ammunition, then the Second Amendment is at risk.  An outright ban is an even more serious threat to the Second Amendment than the threat to the First Amendment’s protection of free press created by a tax imposed only on voluminous purchases of paper and ink.  See Minneapolis Star Tribune Co. v. Commissioner, 460 U.S. 575 (1983). 

 

It is not clear where ATF believes it has obtained the authority to issue general standards interpreting the meaning of “sporting purposes” under LEOPA as opposed to exempting or not exempting particular cartridges.  Nevertheless, no federal statute, including LEOPA, interferes with the ability of law-abiding citizens to obtain ammunition commonly used for such legitimate purposes as target shooting, hunting, and shooting competitions.  Nor could any such statute do so consistent with the Second Amendment.  The “Framework” should not be adopted, and ATF should not propose in the future to ban any widely used form of ammunition used by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.

 

Sincerely,

###

Pot advocates planning on two ballot measures to make access to drugs easier.

@SoDakCampaigns

According to the Argus Leader this morning, pot advocates are planning 2 measures for the 2016 ballot. One, for ‘medical marijuana.’  The other? To reduce the penalty for when they’re caught with ‘medical marijuana,’ a.k.a., decriminalization. 

 Organizations have submitted two proposals to the Legislative Research Council that could potentially wind up on the 2016 presidential election ballot. 
One would establish protections for medical marijuana. The other would ease some of the punishments for recreational users. 
 “Decriminalization would ease that burden for the legal system to prosecute real problems, like methamphetamine and rape,” said Ryan Gaddy, administrator for South Dakotans Against Prohibition. “Non-violent offenders aren’t hurting anybody.”

Read it all here.

So, “Decriminalization would ease that burden for the legal system to prosecute real problems, like methamphetamine and rape?”

But as a gateway drug, isn’t pot use the constant when they arrest users/dealers of meth? 

And it seems that there are plenty of real problems just with pot itself. Just ask the uptstanding Sioux Falls citizen-pot users involved in this case going to jail for a couple of years.

I suspect South Dakotans will once again reject these measures, despite it being trendy among liberals.

US Senator John Thune’s Weekly Column: Black Hills Future Uncertain Due to Long-Eared Bat

@SoDakCampaigns

Black Hills Future Uncertain Due to Long-Eared Bat
By Senator John Thune

John_Thune,_official_portrait,_111th_CongressHundreds of different wildlife species call the Black Hills National Forest home. Bison, deer, elk, coyotes, and antelope are all part of the vast array of wildlife that make the Black Hills a unique place to visit. Among the lesser-known wildlife species that call the Black Hills their home is the northern long-eared bat.

Unfortunately, northern long-eared bats are dying at alarming rates in parts of the country. Researchers have determined that the leading cause of death among northern long-eared bats is a disease in certain areas of the country known as white-nose syndrome. While this disease has been found in 22 states across the country, it has not been detected in South Dakota.

In 2011, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) reached a secret sue-and-settle agreement with two radical environmental groups resulting in endangered species listing determinations for more than 250 species across the United States, including the northern long-eared bat. Despite the lack of evidence suggesting white nose syndrome exists in our state, if the FWS chooses to list the northern long-eared bat under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) it would likely institute a number of restrictive measures in the Black Hills to “preserve” the long-eared bats’ habitat, including severely limiting active forest management.

Active forest management is critical to combating the spread of pine beetles, preventing forest fires, and cultivating a healthy forest in the Black Hills. Maintaining forest health isn’t just for the purpose of preserving the beauty and majesty of this treasured area of our state, but also represents an important sector of our state’s business interests. The FWS’s proposed forest management restrictions would significantly curtail the timber industry in the Black Hills at a cost of more than 1,500 jobs and $119 million in lost revenue to local economies. Additionally, widespread forest fires or pine beetle advances could jeopardize the state’s second largest industry, tourism; and ironically destroy the habitat of the species it is trying to protect under the listing.

After working closely with the Black Hills communities and timber industry, I introduced a bill on March 4 to prevent the FWS from listing the northern long-eared bat under the ESA. Since learning of the potential listing late last year, I have been actively engaging with the FWS and stakeholders to prevent these unintended consequences from impacting the Black Hills, including sending two separate letters calling on the FWS to stand down on its listing of the long-eared bat and resulting misguided forest management policies.

Limiting forest management practices due to listing the long-eared bat as endangered is unnecessary, reckless, and irresponsible. Rather than limiting active forest management in the Black Hills, the FWS should be focusing its efforts on eradicating white-nose syndrome. Over the past 10 years, no wildlife species has been listed by the FWS naming disease as a primary cause, which makes listing the long-eared bat even more questionable. I will continue working with my colleagues in the Senate to stop the FWS’s ESA listing, and advocate for common-sense policies that protect the forest and the animals that call it home.

###

US Senator Mike Rounds’ Weekly Column: Stopping Iran’s Nuclear Threat

@SoDakCampaigns

Stopping Iran’s Nuclear Threat
By Senator Mike Rounds
March 6, 2014

MikeRounds official SenateI recently had the opportunity to attend Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to a Joint Meeting of Congress. His speech to us focused on the important bond between the U.S. and Israel, as well as our shared goal of preventing Iran from ever obtaining nuclear weapons. I was pleased to hear the Prime Minister’s thoughts, especially as the Administration negotiates with Iran to eliminate their nuclear program.

Iran is a dangerous nation that threatens the security of the entire world.  This terrorist regime supports Bashar Al-Assad in Syria, the Houthi militia in Yemen, Hezbollah and Hamas – all of which have targeted or killed Americans. The country’s radical and hostile agenda, including plans to destroy Israel, must be opposed.

The administration’s deadline for laying out a framework of the agreement is the end of March. Prime Minister Netanyahu expressed his serious reservations about the administration’s approach to these negotiations. I hope the President will carefully consider the Prime Minister’s concerns. I believe the government of Iran is an enemy that cannot be trusted.

Previous nuclear talks with Iran have been unproductive, and the Administration has been unable to secure a long-term deal that would force Iran to suspend its nuclear enrichment program.

I am a cosponsor of the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act, which would reimpose economic sanctions on Iran if an agreement is not reached. Imposing sanctions on Iran will demonstrate our resolve and encourage Iran to end their nuclear program. Iran’s weak economy would suffer immensely under more sanctions. The Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act also requires that any agreement reached with Iran would be subject to Congressional approval.

If we allow Iran to maintain a nuclear program capable of creating nuclear weapons, other countries in the Middle East will certainly pursue nuclear weapon programs, ultimately creating a nuclear arms race in the most volatile region in the world.

I am pleased Prime Minister Netanyahu addressed the Joint Meeting of Congress on this important issue. The United States has no greater ally in the Middle East than Israel.

Israel has remained a steadfast ally, working with us to prevent the spread of violent extremism and the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region, especially in Iran. Our relationship with them transcends both time and political theater, and it is imperative we continue to work together to defeat our enemies who would destroy us. A nuclear Iran threatens the entire world. This cannot be tolerated.

Congresswoman Kristi Noem’s Weekly Column: Cherishing Freedom and Offering Hope

@SoDakCampaigns

Cherishing Freedom and Offering Hope
By Rep. Kristi Noem
March 6, 2015

kristi noem headshot May 21 2014“America and Israel, we share a common destiny, the destiny of promised lands that cherish freedom and offer hope” – a resonant statement from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he spoke to a joint meeting of Congress on March 3 about the consequences for his country – and ours – if a bad nuclear deal with Iran is finalized.  As I watched him speak from the House floor, I couldn’t help but think this was a speech the American people needed to hear – a speech we deserved to hear.

Nuclear talks with Iran have been ongoing for much of President Obama’s tenure.  They’ve been extended twice and under the current timeline, negotiators must agree on an outline of an accord by late-March with a detailed agreement due by the end of June.  Today, there are deep-seated and bipartisan concerns about the deal our administration is making with Iran.  Most notably, that it could fundamentally fail to stop Iran’s nuclear program.

I believe the administration vastly underestimates Iran and their intentions.  They assume that the Iranian regime will respond to diplomacy, but that assumption was and is wrong.  As the Prime Minister asserted in his speech: if Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, they ought to act like a normal country.

Iran has sent satellites into space, conducted numerous missile tests, and diversified their nuclear program, moving forward on the construction of a heavy water reactor and installing a new generation of faster centrifuges.  This could enable the country to very quickly produce bomb-grade materials in the near future.

Without question, the threats posed by Iran are immediate.  We cannot miscalculate their seriousness.

During his speech, Prime Minister Netanyahu admitted that Israel may not get the agreement it wants in these talks, but Israel needs an agreement that it could live with – literally.  I believe America needs an agreement that would allow Israel to survive too.

The national security interests of Israel do not stop at Israel’s border, as those who seek to destroy Israel wish the same fate upon America.  Israel shares our common values of liberty and democracy.  They remain a key partner as we’ve worked to defeat the terrorism of ISIL, Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and affiliate groups.  We have collaborated on improving stability in the region, behavioral screening techniques for airport security, and counterterrorism efforts that bring security benefits to both countries.  For these and many other reasons, Israel is our strongest ally in a region that greatly impacts American national security.  Their survival is critical.

Time and again, President Obama and his administration has reiterated that no deal with Iran is better than a bad deal, but Prime Minister Netanyahu pushed back in his address, saying:  “This is a bad deal.  It is a very bad deal…. We are being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That is just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal.”  I agree completely and would urge the President to negotiate a better deal – a deal that would prevent a nuclear-armed Iran and the consequences it would have on America and our allies.

We live in a dangerous world, but Israel lives in a dangerous neighborhood. America cannot turn our back on our ally in times of peace – and certainly, not in times of heightened threats.

The Prime Minister closed his remarks with this: “Moses led our people from slavery to the gates of the Promised Land.  And before the people of Israel entered the land of Israel, Moses gave us a message that has steeled our resolve for thousands of years. I leave you with his message today.  ‘Be strong and resolute, neither fear nor dread them.’   My friends, may Israel and America always stand together, strong and resolute.  May we neither fear nor dread the challenges ahead. May we face the future with confidence, strength and hope.”

###

Governor Dennis Daugaard’s Weekly Column: Preserving A Way Of Life Through Ag Development

@SoDakCampaigns

Preserving A Way Of Life Through Ag Development
A column by Gov. Dennis Daugaard:

DaugaardIn South Dakota, agriculture is more than just a sector of our economy. It’s a way of life. Whether it’s a small family farm, a sizeable cattle ranch or a dairy operation, all forms of agricultural businesses are important to that way of life.

In 2013, the South Dakota Department of Agriculture (SDDA) began offering counties a service called the County Site Analysis Program. This service helps counties use data to identify sites suitable for agriculture-related development, and to avoid sites which are not suitable.

Ag investments are vital, especially in rural South Dakota, but development must be done responsibly. Because not every new project is a good fit in every location, the program helps county commissioners and landowners determine where projects best fit.

Through the County Site Analysis Program, SDDA looks at local zoning ordinances, locations of roads, utilities and other infrastructure, as well as other local permitting requirements. This information is used to rate property locations on their suitability for things such as manufacturing, commodity processing or livestock-related enterprises.

This program respects local control, because local officials must initiate the process by a formal resolution, requesting SDDA assistance. County commissions, planning and zoning boards, and landowners can use the produced data to make well-informed decisions. Local leaders use the data in their comprehensive planning efforts; landowners have concrete information outlining options for their land; and agribusinesses learn where their investments will be welcomed.

Even though the County Site Analysis Program is fairly new, a majority of counties have already expressed interest in participating. Since the program’s launch, 49 counties have requested a site analysis, and SDDA has completed analyses in 15 counties.

In addition to this program, local governments may soon have another way to pave the road for economic development. There’s a proposal in the Legislature right now that would revise state law on conditional use permits. Conditional use permits are local zoning exceptions which allow property to be used for specific purposes. Cemeteries, churches, golf courses, gravel pits and livestock barns are some examples of projects that might require this kind of permit.

Under current state law, local governments must have a two-thirds majority to approve conditional use permits. House Bill 1201 would allow local governments to change that requirement to a majority vote, if they so choose. Like the County Site Analysis Program, this proposal respects local control. It does not mandate that local governments change the current supermajority requirement. It gives the option. This bill could make it easier to start an agribusiness in South Dakota within our counties and municipalities who invite those opportunities.

Agriculture’s preeminence in our state economy is not something that is inevitable. Local leaders understand this and they know they must be intentional about allowing for opportunities. The County Site Analysis Program and House Bill 1201 seek to broaden those opportunities.

By furthering ag development in our state, we’ll not only be maintaining our number one industry, but we’ll be preserving a way of life.

-30-