Press Release: Rounds Questions EPA on Costly Carbon Emissions Proposal

@SoDakCampaigns

Rounds Questions EPA on Costly Carbon Emissions Proposal

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, today at a hearing questioned the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) plan to regulate carbon emissions. The proposal, expected to be finalized this summer, would impose costly new regulations on power plants, despite the Administration’s admission that it would do nothing to achieve its intended goal of reducing global warming.

Rounds pressed: “We have a limited number of electric generating resources in South Dakota.  Each facility is absolutely vital to meeting the energy needs of my state and our surrounding states.  In light of this, what, if any flexibility is built into your proposed rule for a state like South Dakota and what flexibility is there for facilities that are in the midst of a major upgrade – at your direction – and are now being told they need to do even more to meet these additional regulations you plan on implementing?”

Janet McCabe, Administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, failed to assure Rounds of the rule’s flexibility and was unable to answer when asked for the rule’s cost per American family.

A total of 31 states, including South Dakota, are on record opposing the Administration’s Clean Power Plan. South Dakota’s lone coal power plant, Big Stone, employs close to 100 people in Northeast South Dakota and is already under a $400 million project to comply with a different EPA regulation. Compliance is not yet complete, and this costly new rule could put the plant’s future in jeopardy, as Rounds noted in his questioning.

 ###

Thune Highlights Challenges of South Dakota Businesses and Ag Producers Due to West Coast Port Disruptions

@SoDakCampaigns

Thune Highlights Challenges of South Dakota Businesses and Ag Producers Due to West Coast Port Disruptions

“…it has a profound impact on the economy, not just on the West Coast but all across the country. Workers in South Dakota and other places are reliant upon…a reliable supply chain.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, today at a hearing before the Commerce Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety, and Security highlighted the frustrations and challenges South Dakota agriculture producers, businesses, and shippers are facing due to the self-imposed worker slowdowns at various West Coast ports. Thune highlighted two South Dakota stories and called for all sides to come together to find a resolution in the port dispute that has been going on for roughly nine months.


Video of Thune’s remarks and questions can be viewed here.

“We greatly appreciate Senator Thune highlighting these critical issues before the Commerce Committee,” said Jodie Anderson, Executive Director of the South Dakota Cattlemen’s Association. “The port strike limits the ability of ranchers throughout South Dakota to move fresh meat to Asian markets. This means lost revenue, unnecessary port charges, and severe consequences for our customer relationships. We thank Senator Thune for his call for greater urgency and intensity in ending these delays.”

Port inefficiencies impacting South Dakotans:

“I’ve talked with and Tyson’s [Fresh Meats] in my state in South Dakota and they have shared with me that we’ve got beef and pork sitting in freezers near the ports instead of heading to Asian markets, while we’ve got large container ships sitting off the coast waiting to export our nation’s premium products. That affects jobs. Tyson’s employs 41,000 people and the USDA estimates there a million jobs associated with agricultural exports in this country and so it has a profound impact on the economy, not just on the West Coast but all across the country. Workers in South Dakota and other places are reliant upon…a reliable supply chain.

“Outdoor Gear Inc., a family-owned business in South Dakota, they are a wholesaler, and it receives 95 percent of its inventory from West Coast ports and has been forced to miss deadlines, pay late-delivery penalties, and pass up important sales opportunities, including in December, which of course is the holiday peak season.”

Need for resolution:

“This is an issue that just really needs our focus. It’s a huge drain on the economy and I just urge all sides to come to a resolution in this dispute, and find a solution as soon as possible. We just can’t afford to drag this on and have our economy pay this kind of price. If we can get this behind us we can start focusing our energy and creativity on a lot of the other long-term infrastructure challenges that desperately need our attention as well.”

###

While Wismer gave South Dakota Democrats $4600, the SDDP kicked a check for $23,000 to Kansas Democratic Party

@SoDakCampaigns

Now this was a curious thing I noted on the South Dakota Democrat Party’s Year End Report. While Susan Wismer gave South Dakota Democrats $4600, the South Dakota Democratic Party was shipping money out of state to the tune of $23,000 to Kansas Democratic Party

donations_from_dems

As Indicated in the year end report filed with the Secretary of State’s office for the period during the last 2 weeks of the election through the end of the year, State Democrats received donations from various people, including $4600 from the Wismer for Governor campaign. (I’m assuming it was for printing, since that’s how Wismer coded it in her campaign finance report, as opposed to a contribution to the party, as the party had coded it)

But during the same period Susan and others were paying in as they raced to the finish line, the State Democratic Party cut a check – and not just a small one – to the Kansas Democratic Party, totaling $23,000 .At the same time they made various token donations of $1838 to Denny Pierson, and $500 to their Secretary of State Candidate.

kansas_dems

So, why were South Dakota Democrats sending $23,000 to another state at a time when their candidates were probably looking in couch cushions for money?  I’m sure Denny Pierson, or Angelia Schultz could have found a way to use $23,000, not to mention Susan Wismer, or the dozens of Democrats running legislative races.

Now, to be fair, South Dakota Democrats weren’t the only ones who kicked a check down to the land of Dorothy & Toto. The Louisiana Democratic Party joined South Dakota’s donation with even more:

kansas_dems

So, what were the sources of the funds the SDDP sent off to another state? That’s a good question. Standing out in the year end report was a big check from United Auto Workers at the same time for 20k….

uaw

But the remaining $3000 is a bit more mysterious. No money from the Democrat Governor’s Association or other national level entity. Just the 20k check from the union. But, I’m sure the source is in there somewhere.

So, we have the who and most of the what at this point…. just leaving the why.

Why did South Dakota Democrats send off $23,000 to another state?

It likely was a way for an organization(s) friendly to Democrats to get around more restrictive campaign finance laws in other states by routing federal funds through a state political party with lax campaign finance laws. They in turn send it to another state political party in a state with stronger laws that wouldn’t normally allow them to take such a large donation directly from that type of organization.

Cool, huh?  Those are the odd loopholes in campaign finance that are often exploited to get money to a campaign effort that groups are otherwise topped out on donating to.

But of course, I’m sure Democratic candidates didn’t need the $23,000 their state party sent off to another state. I’m sure they got plenty of assistance from the State Democratic Party to run the kind of campaigns they could be proud of, despite losing 4 more legislative seats, and giving Republicans total control over all the statewide elective offices.

What do you think?

Thune, Wyden Reintroduce Bill to Permanently Block Taxes on Internet Access

@SoDakCampaigns

Thune, Wyden Reintroduce Bill to Permanently Block Taxes on Internet Access

John_Thune,_official_portrait,_111th_CongressWASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee and member of the tax-writing Senate Finance Committee, and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, today reintroduced the bipartisan Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act, the House companion to which passed the U.S. House of Representatives by voice vote last Congress.

“For successful 21st century innovators and entrepreneurs, the Internet is their lifeblood,” said Thune. “We should be celebrating their success, not taxing the tools they use to achieve it. Our bill, which would permanently ban Internet taxation, would encourage more American innovators and entrepreneurs to use broadband to develop the next big thing, while keeping the Internet open and accessible to consumers across the country. Senator Wyden and I look forward to working with Leader McConnell to bring this bill to the Senate floor.”

“I co-wrote the Internet Tax Freedom Act to protect the openness and viability of the Internet as a platform for commerce, speech, and the exchange of ideas,” said Wyden. “Without ITFA, access to information would no longer be tax-free. Access to online communication would no longer be tax-free. Access to the global marketplace so crucial to America’s economic future would no longer be tax-free. The cost to consumers could easily be hundreds of dollars a year per household. Now is the time to make this law permanent.”

The original ITFA, which Wyden co-authored in 1998, put in place a moratorium preventing state and local jurisdictions from imposing new taxes on the Internet and multiple and discriminatory taxes on e-commerce. While Congress has reauthorized the law five times since its enactment, the Thune-Wyden bill would make the moratorium permanent.

Thune and Wyden’s Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act is also supported by 39 other senators: Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), John Boozman (R-Ark.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Christopher Coons (D-Del.), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), Dan Coats (R-Ind.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Dean Heller (R-Nev.), Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), and David Vitter (R-La.).

###

Delegation Urges VA Secretary to Withdraw Plans to Close Hot Springs VA from Obama Admin. Budget Proposal

@SoDakCampaigns

Delegation Urges VA Secretary to Withdraw Plans to Close
Hot Springs VA from Obama Admin. Budget Proposal

WASHINGTON—U.S. Sens. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) and John Thune (R-S.D.) and Rep. Kristi Noem (R-S.D.) today urged Department of Veterans Administration (VA) Secretary Robert McDonald to withdraw all plans to reconfigure the Black Hills Health Care System (BHHCS) from the Obama Administration’s budget proposal. Last week, the administration’s budget request proposed measures to close Hot Springs VA facilities, despite previous assurances that the VA would not act without finishing a fair and thorough Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

The delegation writes: “…the VA’s FY 2016 Congressional Budget Submission targeting the Hot Springs VA Medical Center is a direct reversal of the VA’s repeated assurances that it would not proceed with a predetermined outcome.  The request also serves to deepen the distrust of impacted veterans who well remember the VA’s budget request to vacate the campus without conducting an EIS.  We request that the VA expressly remove all Enhanced Use Lease provisions pertaining to the Hot Springs VA from its FY 2016 budget request and judiciously proceed with the EIS.”

Full text of the letter can be found below:

February 10, 2015

The Honorable Robert McDonald
Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Department of Veterans Affairs
810 Vermont Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20420

Dear Secretary McDonald:

We are writing to express our concern regarding the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) budget submission for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016.

As you know, we continue to have concerns about the impact the VA’s proposal to reconfigure the Black Hills Health Care System (BHHCS).  For over four years, the South Dakota delegation has been closely engaged with the VA and veteran stakeholders on this issue.  Throughout this time, the VA has assured us that any final decision would not be made until it completed an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in full accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act.

However, the inclusion of 14 separate line items in the VA’s FY 2016 Congressional Budget Submission targeting the Hot Springs VA Medical Center is a direct reversal of the VA’s repeated assurances that it would not proceed with a predetermined outcome.  The request also serves to deepen the distrust of impacted veterans who well remember the VA’s budget request to vacate the campus without conducting an EIS.  We request that the VA expressly remove all Enhanced Use Lease provisions pertaining to the Hot Springs VA from its FY 2016 budget request and judiciously proceed with the EIS.

Moreover, given the persistent discrepancies with the data used to formulate the VA’s proposed reconfiguration of the BHHCS, as well as current concerns with management decisions, we again request the VA make every effort to return the Hot Springs VA to its former level of operations and staff before conducting a five-year review to gather reliable data.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.  We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

###

10 Years a Blogger Journalist. THANK YOU for the wild ride.

@SoDakCampaigns

I have to laugh, I missed my own birthday. Or anniversary.  On February 5th, 2005, South Dakota War College was hatched waaaay back when on the free blogging platform “Blogger,” which is now owned by Google. 

It’s almost scary to read now, but this was my inaugural post.

I had someone tell me the other day that they were traveling to listen to “X” teach a class on campaign techniques and strategy. Admittedly, it was really arrogant of me to say so, but my response to them was “You’ve got to be sh*tting me. They ran a terrible campaign, and spent money like an idiot. They were lucky their opponent rolled over and died. What are they going to teach – ‘how to spend money like a drunken sailor?’”

In saying that, I was probably just verbalizing a frustration. There are tons of good Republican candidates out there, but many of them lack someone to show them the way. Hopefully, this weblog can serve as a reference for campaign “newbies” and those with some experience to use as something to get them pointed in the right direction.

Who the hell am I? I’ve been involved with Republican political campaigns since 1988. (I don’t know if I should wear this as a badge of honor, or hide my head in shame for having this affliction.) I’ve worked for the Republican party for a couple elections in Pierre, and one in Rapid City.

I’ve worked for candidates, I’ve worked with candidates, and I’ve done a bunch of other stuff in between. I’ve dived in with both feet, walked away for a few years as a sanity check, and came back. I ran for office myself, and got my stupid ass deservedly kicked for violating every rule I’ve set down to candidates, and it ended making me better for the loss.

In effect, it made me take stock and say “I will not run and do a crappy job again.” It forced me to understand that it takes certain “things” to run a campaign, and to recognize those things.

Circumstance has made me into an unofficial mentor. Why unofficial? One of the people whom I consider a mentor, Geraldine “Gypsy” Hines, the principal of Good Government Consultants in Sioux Falls once noted to me that a lot of people don’t want to pay for political consulting in SD. I tried it to make money off of it once, and while I had a few people who were willing to pay for consulting, I realized that most candidates at this level lack the resources to do so.

And really, the people who can’t afford it need it the most. So, the people I end up helping are typically the young, first time candidate whose never done this sort of thing before, but they’re jumping in with both feet. I’ve got a soft spot for these guys (and gals), because that was me once.

So, I’ve kind of ended up as that politically active guy who people get pointed to by acquaintances who say “Call this guy, he can help you with…..”

Ugh. My first blogpost was rough. I was much freer with “sentence enhancers,” which changed about 6-8 months into it when I started hearing that the Governor, John Thune, and many others whom I respect were reading. Just a little sense of self-consciousness, and getting to know my audience helped.

At times, my love affair with blogging has waxed and waned. It has shut doors in my face, and opened them.   I’ve thought about quitting a couple of times, and after a job required 18-month hiatus where I handed it off to others, I couldn’t wait to jump back in, and I did so with a vengeance.

I’ve made many, many friends, and maybe a couple of enemies with really think skin.  But I’m still here, and I’m not going anywhere.

In retrospect, I’m surprised that I did think about walking away, as there have been times I’ve fought for it, and fought hard.

When Noel Hamiel’s awful blog control act was introduced, while others spent time behind their desks, I was out in Pierre testifying against it, as well as pointing out to groups with lobbyists how it would affect them. And when someone wanted to drag me into court on a fishing expedition, Joel Arends successfully argued that I, as a blogger, have a journalistic privilege, making me a journalist, and not just a guy with a computer on his desk.

As the use of social media has risen I’ve managed to go from being treated as a freak of nature who people avoided, to someone that people are as used to being accustomed as a part of the political process.

And honestly, I couldn’t have done it without you; the readers. You are the ones who have made it happen, and I can’t thank you enough. It’s been a rollercoaster for the last ten years. And I’m here in line to give you ten more.

THANK YOU!

Does Kathy Tyler have imaginary tea parties with President Obama as well?

@SoDakCampaigns

From Kathy Tyler’s Facebook:

Untitled-4

“No matter how one feels about the topic, we, as legislators, should not be interfering with decisions made by other, non-legislative entities.”

Um…. What’s this “we as legislators” stuff? The last time I checked, Kathy Tyler is not a legislator, and the fact she was beaten in the November election should have been a big hint to her that she wasn’t going to be a legislator any more.

What else does she do when playing make believe, besides pretending she’s a legislator? Is she having imaginary tea parties with President Obama?

You know, once you get past a certain age, if you’re still playing make believe, people kind of look at you funny.

Following Pressure from Delegation, FEMA Releases Timeline for Updated Sioux Falls Flood Map

@SoDakCampaigns

Following Pressure from Delegation, FEMA Releases Timeline for Updated Sioux Falls Flood Map

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Following pressure on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) from the delegation at a January 27, 2015, meeting, U.S. Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) and Rep. Kristi Noem (R-S.D.) received a timeline for the release of the updated Sioux Falls flood map. According to the February 5, 2015, letter, FEMA will provide a draft of the updated flood map along the Big Sioux River and Skunk Creek by June of 2015. The letter also outlined FEMA’s plans to issue a letter of final determination in the spring of 2016. Once the flood maps are finalized, most impacted homeowners who wish to cancel their flood insurance will likely be eligible for a refund of their annual flood insurance premium.

“The draft flood map due in June of 2015 should provide more certainty for commercial developers in Sioux Falls,” said the delegation. “For too long, developers have been sidelined due to the financial hardships associated with building in the flood plain; however, the draft maps should provide guidance for what the new flood plain will look like and allow construction to get underway. We will continue to urge FEMA to approve a new flood map as quickly as possible, which will ease the financial burden on homeowners in the expanded floodplain.”

Following Hurricane Katrina in 2005, FEMA began issuing new 100-year flood maps, which resulted in nearly 1,600 additional Sioux Falls homeowners and businesses being required to purchase costly federal flood insurance. In 2008, the city and the Army Corps of Engineers worked out an agreement to expedite construction of upgraded levees to decrease the size of the flood plain by allowing the city to fund the outstanding federal cost of the project, with the potential to be later reimbursed by the Corps. This agreement led to a less costly and timelier completion of the levees, and the city has since been reimbursed by the Corps for the federal share of the project.

Now that the levees along the Big Sioux River and Skunk Creek have been upgraded and certified by the Corps, it is up to FEMA to issue a new flood map reflecting the new, smaller flood plain in Sioux Falls. Once a new flood map is finalized, many local residents and businesses will no longer be required to purchase federal flood insurance policies and others will have less expensive premiums due to the reduced risk of flooding. Without an updated flood plain map, economic development and construction along the Big Sioux River and Skunk Creek are significantly limited while developers wait for updated maps.

On September 11, 2014, Thune and Noem sent a letter to FEMA Director Craig Fugate calling on the agency to develop a new flood map for Sioux Falls as soon as possible. The January 27, 2015, meeting continued the delegation’s work to push for a timely update to the flood map along Skunk Creek and the Big Sioux River.

###

Release: Rounds Joins Bipartisan Call on EPA to Provide Certainty to Biodiesel Workers

@SoDakCampaigns

Rounds Joins Bipartisan Call on EPA to Provide Certainty to Biodiesel Workers
Lacking Federal Direction, 80 Percent of U.S. Biodiesel Producers Scaled Back Production in 2014

MikeRounds official SenateWASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) today joined a bipartisan group of 32 Senators in pressing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to live up to its legal obligation to provide certainty to the biodiesel industry and the thousands of workers it employs by setting long-delayed production standards.

Expressing concern with recent layoffs and plant closures in the biodiesel industry, the Senators underscored the need for the EPA to provide certainty for biodiesel workers by setting production levels under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) for 2014, and to move ahead on these levels for 2015 and 2016.

“EPA’s recent actions have neither reflected industry capacity nor biodiesel’s separate treatment under the RFS,” the Senators wrote. “The recent delay has only compounded the effects from the November 2013 RFS proposed rule which did not adequately reflect biodiesel production levels. These actions continue to create tremendous uncertainty and hardship for the U.S. biodiesel industry and its thousands of employees. Plants have reduced production and some have been forced to shut down, resulting in layoffs and lost economic productivity. We urge you to get biodiesel back on schedule under the statutorily prescribed Renewable Volume Obligations (RVO) process and quickly issue volumes for 2014 at the actual 2014 production numbers. We also hope you move forward on the 2015 and 2016 biodiesel volumes in a timely manner, ensuring that these delays do not become the norm for the industry.”

Last year, nearly 80 percent of U.S. biodiesel producers scaled back production and almost 6 in 10 idled production altogether. Additionally, two-thirds of producers said they have already reduced or anticipate reducing their workforce as a result of the downturn. The Senators emphasized the need for the agency to respond with new production levels immediately and to make production level decisions in a timely manner going forward.

Full text of the letter is attached.

###

Senate Biodiesel RFS Letter 2-9-15

US Senator Mike Rounds’ new routine profiled in Real Clear Politics

@SoDakCampaigns

Real Clear politics has a profile on US Senator Mike Rounds, and how some of the lessons he learned while being Governor were helpful to his new position, and how he needs to reach back to when he was State Senate Majority Leader for others:

..Democrats wasted little time employing the same tactics they denounced Republicans for when they were in the majority. When the chamber moved from Keystone into funding for the Department of Homeland Security last week, Democrats filibustered the GOP leadership, voting three times in three days against debating a bill that would fund DHS while derailing Obama’s executive action delaying deportations for millions of undocumented immigrants.

MikeRounds official SenateRounds’ experience with those two bills informed his observation that things often move either too quickly or too slowly in the Senate. The Keystone debate was positive because there was a free flow of ideas, but there wasn’t always time to look into amendments carefully before voting on them, Rounds said. With DHS funding, Rounds said Republicans want to bring the bill up for debate, even if they don’t necessarily agree with the House provision to reverse Obama’s immigration order, but Democrats are blocking anything from moving forward.

“It’s a matter of getting to that point where each of the two parties has a certain position of strength,” Rounds said, but at this point in the process, neither side trusts the other to compromise.

Though he served as governor for two terms, Rounds isn’t new to legislating. Before his gubernatorial run, he spent a decade in the South Dakota State Senate, including six years as majority leader. Rounds said the process so far in Washington is very similar to what he experienced legislating at the state level.

“I think he really knows the drill better than most who come here who haven’t had that dual background,” said Sen. John Hoeven, the former governor of North Dakota. “As a governor you can really set your agenda much more, whereas it’s much harder to do that in the Congress or in the Senate. But I think in Mike’s case he really comes well prepared because he’s had experience doing both.”

Read it here.