Salon Article: FEMA won’t give money to states who don’t accept ‘climate change’

@SoDakCampaigns

From Salon:

Rick Scott may have found a way of making climate denial state policy, but the Florida governor is going to have a hard time ignoring this. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) just updated its guidelines for state disaster preparedness plans, and under the new policy, plans will only be approved — and federal funds appropriated —  if they address the threats of climate change.

“The challenges posed by climate change, such as more intense storms, frequent heavy precipitation, heat waves, drought, extreme flooding, and higher sea levels, could significantly alter the types and magnitudes of hazards impacting states in the future,” the guidelines explain. They direct states to”assess vulnerability, identify a strategy to guide decisions and investments, and implement actions that will reduce risk, including impacts from a changing climate.”

Read it here.

I’m thinking the next Republican President is going to have a heck of a job cleaning out the US Government.

SDDP Files March Monthly FEC Report. 37% of SDDP receipts came straight from the DNC

@SoDakCampaigns

Well, the latest FEC Report is in from the Democrats. What’s new?

It looks like Zach Crago might have finally been weaned off of the payroll (At least the federal one), but the Democrats are still hugely dependent upon the national party to keep the doors open.

Democrat March20 FEC

Out of $19,240 in receipts, $7,026 came from the Democrat National Committee – 37%! That does not bode well for the SDDP, especially if they are suddenly cut off.

Stay tuned.

Lee Stranahan, and the manufactured attack narrative against Marty Jackley.

@SoDakCampaigns

stranahan_advI’m on Facebook recently, and I had the following sponsored ad pop up, promoting yet another ridiculous article by former sado/masochism pornography photographer Lee Stranahan, as he continues promoting a campaign against South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley.

This of course came on the heels of a press conference Stranahan held in Washington accusing Jackley of “criminal wrongdoing,” which was ignored with the exact same level of blasé by the Washington DC Area press that South Dakota Reporters previously have had for Stranahan’s silliness.

As you’ll notice in the ad on the left, it talks about how “Marty Jackley’s prosecutors” did this or that. But, that’s not exactly truthful.

In this case, they weren’t “Marty Jackley’s” prosecutors. In any way, shape, or form. They were State Attorneys, elected by the people of their county, and completely independent of the Attorney General.

But that’s pretty typical, and stands as one of the biggest problems with the “news stories” that Lee Stranahan has produced as he throws out stories accusing Jackley. They ignore glaring errors, and play up speculation of things that aren’t known at all.

It’s unclear why exactly Stranahan continues his pursuit, making outlandish accusations against South Dakota state & county prosecutors, and the Judiciary in what he characterizes as a scandal. After serving as a paid Annette Bosworth campaign consultant, and contributing to what most would consider a glorious mucking up of her criminal case, his antics caused at least one of her several attorneys to demand he cease association with Bosworth.

Yet, the silliness continued. And still does.

Stranahan’s storied past, including allegations of scams, cons, and other undesirable acts, don’t exactly paint him as a reliable source of news. Not only that, but as we saw with Bosworth, he has a tendency to harm those he claims to champion.  In fact, given that there have been a series of sponsored facebook ads, it leaves one with a sense of wondering who exactly is paying money to promote the messages?    And why?

Unfortunately, a lot of Stranahan’s antics do a grave disservice to a lot of things, including the truth.

First and foremost, many of these stories (and I use that term in a couple of definitions) are expressly and specifically directed at the Attorney General Marty Jackley. Despite the fact that Marty is peripheral, at best, to the matter that Stranahan goes on about, and didn’t prosecute the case.

What we do know conclusively is that Marty was one of the people stuck dealing with the aftermath.

As Attorney General, Marty Jackley is in charge of DCI, or the Division of Criminal Investigation. The Division of Criminal Investigation in South Dakota is often called in to provide specific expertise that many local law enforcement agencies aren’t able to supply themselves, and Special Agents conduct investigations on major felony cases, as they did in the case of the matter of the Mette investigation.

The investigation in the matter of the Mette family and the abuse of foster children at some point seems to have taken a sour turn, and while never indicated publicly, it seems that several things happened in the conduct of the investigation. Things that we can guess prosecutors thought could cost them the ability to pursue it.

The investigation involved issues of horrific child abuse, a type of case that is well noted among experts in law enforcement to be among the most difficult kinds of cases to work with.  As the FBI notes:

“Traditional law enforcement interviewing methods used in typical adult cases are counterproductive when it comes to child victims or witnesses to crimes,” said Stephanie Knapp, one of the Bureau’s four child forensic interviewers. “Sometimes you see unsuccessful outcomes in cases because of poor interview techniques. In many cases of child abuse, for example, where the victim is the only witness, the interview may be a critical element of the investigation.”

And..

Although they follow time-tested protocols, interviewers acknowledge that working with children is an art as well as a science, requiring experience and intuition. “You have to understand and follow the protocols,” Blackwell said, “but it’s also essential that you connect with the kids so that they trust you.”

Read that here.

Investigators and child advocates came into the case, and after a short time were accused of possibly coaching the children on what to say. Into this scenario came DCI investigator Mark Black, who claimed to both interview the children involved, as well as to investigate accusations of witness tampering. And the ambiguity coming out of what happened here seems to be the focus of much of the rhetoric that Stranahan is trying to twist and gin up in his mindless pursuit of Jackley, because much of “what happened” is not public.

Why? Because it involves underage crime victims. It involves personnel matters. And in either case, there’s not much that’s ever going to come to light.

But once in a while you get a hint dropped along the way like a breadcrumb. As noted by the Argus Leader in 2014 with regards to the 2012 case:

Jackley said he had asked North Dakota investigators to look into Black’s behavior in late February, but that the agent’s questionable behavior extended beyond the high-profile case of former advocate Shirley Schwab and former prosecutor Brandon Taliaferro.

By February, Black was accused of domestic abuse by his ex-wife, who took out a temporary protection order against him early this year. The order was not made permanent, but a hearing outlining accusations from Black’s ex-wife was held March 13. The temporary order was extended for 10 days and dismissed March 24.

By then, Black had been terminated.

“I think it’s fair to say that (the witness tampering investigation) was a factor,” Jackley said Friday. “If you were to ask about the protection order issues, I would say that was a factor, too. It was the totality of the circumstances.”

Read it all here.

In addition to what happened with Mark Black, Michael Moore the Beadle County state’s attorney prosecuting the matter had brought witness tampering charges against others involved in the case, which were later dismissed for lack of evidence.

We have an investigator accused of questionable behavior, partially in connection with the case. We have others whose conduct in the matter which had been brought into question. And on top of it all, the crime involves children who may or may not have been willing to take the stand, as well as possibly being the only witnesses in the case.

That seems to leave prosecutors in the unenviable position of trying to figure out what’s left to build a criminal case from to accomplish the ultimate goal – to put a bad, bad person in jail for as long as they could.

Richard Mette, the perpetrator in the sexual abuse case ended up getting a plea agreement of 15 years in prison, which might seem light to some. But in an investigation that apparently was experiencing evidentiary problems as this one did, sometimes a prosecutor – in this case, Michael Moore – is forced to move forward and procure the best deal they could. And we ended up with the 15-year plea agreement.

What really happened to cause problems with the case is arguably something we’ll never know. But as noted, what we do know is that – far from the wild accusations that Lee Stranahan makes of ridiculous grand conspiracies of abuse of power and corruption – the State’s attorney put the bad guy in jail, as best he could with what he had to work with. And, as the person responsible for DCI, Jackley was left to clean up an ugly mess contributed to by one if it’s agents, which was cited by the AG as part of the reason for the agents termination.

Lacking conclusive proof as to exactly what happened, anything else is just what those with overly fertile imaginations want to plant as their narrative, with sponsored facebook links and all.

It’s especially telling that in all of the weaving of this fairy tale by Lee Stranahan, all along the path, Stranahan’s smearing and false narrative of Marty Jackley doing bad things is constantly tied back to his prosecution of Annette Bosworth for fraudulently attesting to witnessing petition signatures.

It was in the beginning. And it continues to be to this day.

We can only hope that when the Bosworth trial happens in May that the silliness, and the sponsored facebook ads, finally go away.

As Lee Stranahan should.

Thune and Nelson Introduce Bipartisan Freight Rail Reform Bill

@SoDakCampaigns

Thune and Nelson Introduce Bipartisan Freight Rail Reform Bill
-Legislation scheduled for Commerce Committee mark-up next week-

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) and U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who respectively serve as the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, today introduced S. 808, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) Reauthorization Act of 2015.

The STB is the federal regulatory body responsible for economic oversight of the nation’s freight rail system. Run by a three-member, bipartisan board, the agency has regulatory jurisdiction over railroad rate reasonableness, mergers, line acquisitions, new rail-line construction, line abandonment, and other rail issues. The STB was created by Congress in 1996 as the successor to the Interstate Commerce Commission. Since that time, the STB has not been reauthorized or substantively reformed.

“While the STB has been working diligently to ensure the major rail service issues experienced last year by shippers and businesses in South Dakota and other states across the U.S. don’t happen again, last year’s crisis highlighted some of the inefficiencies that currently exist at the agency,” said Thune. “Oversight efforts have identified causes of wasteful and unnecessary delays in adjudicating cases that harm rail shippers, freight operators, and ultimately consumers who pay higher costs. These reforms will help make the STB a more efficient, effective, and accountable agency for the benefit of shippers and railroads alike.”

Thune and Nelson’s bill would allow board members to work together in a more streamlined approach. Their bill would expand the STB board membership from three to five members, and allow for board members to discuss pending matters without issuing a public meeting notice, but with later public disclosure. The bill would also allow the board to initiate some investigations, not just respond to complaints, and would require the STB to establish a database of complaints and prepare quarterly reports on them.

Thune and Nelson’s bill would also change the case review process by requiring the board to establish timelines for stand-alone rate cases and a report on rate case methodology. The bill would codify an arbitration process for certain rate disputes and carrier complaints.

The STB reform bill expands on the work Thune has done over the past year and a half to prevent the rail service challenges experienced in the Upper Midwest in 2013 and 2014 from happening in the future. Thune has worked with the STB, as well as senior leadership of Canadian Pacific Railway and BNSF Railroad, to address service issues that South Dakota shippers have raised.

Thune serves on both the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee which has jurisdiction over our nation’s freight and passenger railroads, as well as the Senate Agriculture Committee. In addition, Thune previously served as State Railroad Director under former Governor George S. Mickelson from 1991-1993. For a complete outline of Thune’s work to reduce the rail service backlog, visit his website.

###

The EPA doesn’t just want to regulate your ditch water. They’re coming for your T-Bones and Pork Shoulders as well.

@SoDakCampaigns

snppIf you’re a reader of more than a few months, you might remember I’m an aficionado of backyard grilling.  Pictured at the left is my Brinkman Smoke ‘N Pit Professional, a.k.a., the SNPP as it’s known in the grilling community. It was my first father’s day present, and has been used regularly ever since.

With the offset box, it’s great for smoking meat, but I tend to use it more for grilling, preferring my electric smoker simply for convenience, because if you’re smoking a pork shoulder all day in a charcoal/wood grill, you just have to fuss with it too much.

Regardless, I repaint, refurbish and do regular maintenance on my grill, because you can’t get them with as heavy gauge of steel as this anymore unless you have someone make you one out of a tank. I’m probably due to have some welding work done on the legs, with the only problem being how tremendously heavy it is to move – definitely a 2 man job.

Ok, admittedly, I’m going on a bit. As you can see, I’m like a number of average Joe’s in the nation who actively enjoy their grilling, and it’s a center of many family meals when weather allows.  So, it’s tremendously disconcerting to see that the Environmental Protection Agency is overstepping the bounds of common sense, once again, as they begin initial steps to start pursuing “pollution” from backyard barbecues:

The Environmental Protection Agency has its eyes on pollution from backyard barbecues.

The agency announced that it is funding a University of California project to limit emissions resulting in grease drippings with a special tray to catch them and a “catalytic” filtration system.

The $15,000 project has the “potential for global application,” said the school.

and…

The school is proposing two fixes to reduce emissions from barbecues. First, they want to cut back on grease flare-ups. The idea: “A slotted and corrugated tray is inserted immediately prior to meat flipping, and removed immediately after. This short contact time prevents the tray from over-heating and volatilizing the collected grease. This collected grease will then drip off into a collection tray and can be used at the pit master’s discretion.”

But, total capture isn’t “practical,” so a filter and fan are proposed for installation. “The secondary air filtration system is composed of a single pipe duct system which contains a specialized metal filter, a metal fan blade, a drive shaft, and an accompanying power system with either a motorized or manual method. This system can be powered by either an exterior electric motor with a chain-driven drive shaft, directly spinning the fan blade, or a hand-powered crank,” said the project write-up.

Read it all here.

Our representatives in Washington are already having to fight the EPA to keep them from regulating water in rural ditches as being a navigable body of water.   Now we have to also ask them to keep the EPA away from our lawn mowers and backyard grills?

This type of bureaucratic overreach is why average everyday citizens of the United States are rejecting the policies of Democrats, and soft-headed liberals in general. They aren’t happy unless they’re meddling in people’s everyday lives.

And now they’re moving to install filters and fans in backyard barbecues?  God help us all.

Noem Introduces Legislation Offering More Flexibility for Local School Meal Programs

@SoDakCampaigns

Noem Introduces Legislation Offering More Flexibility for Local School Meal Programs

kristi noem headshot May 21 2014WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. Kristi Noem today introduced legislation that aims to reduce federal mandates on school meal standards, including the more stringent whole grain requirements that went into effect in July 2014 and the Target 2 sodium requirements set to be implemented in the coming years.

“As a parent, I want nothing more than for my kids to grow up happy and healthy,” said Rep. Noem.  “Unfortunately, current school meal requirements push all kids – and all schools – into a one-size-fits-all model.  The declining number of kids in the school lunch program shows that it’s not working.  Our kids deserve better.  They deserve a school meal program that is rooted in science-based nutrition plans – a program that includes food that they’re actually going to eat.  My bill gives schools the flexibility to accomplish that.”

Rep. Noem introduced her initial Reducing Federal Mandates on School Lunch Act in December 2013.  The latest version of the bill includes new provisions to address concerns with the Target 2 sodium levels and whole grain requirements.

“Everyone in this debate shares a common goal.  We want our kids to be served healthy and nutritious foods through the school lunch program,” said Neil Putnam, a member of the Mitchell School Board and the Western Region Director for the National School Board Association.  “The  issue comes when federal mandates sometimes divert scarce financial resources from a school’s instructional program.  I am grateful to Rep. Noem for introducing legislation that maintains the goal of healthy meals, but does it in a way that gives school districts, like Mitchell, the flexibility and affordability to make decisions on the local level that are best for our students’ overall success.”

The Reducing Federal Mandates on School Lunch Act, which has been endorsed by the National School Board Association and the School Superintendents Association, would:

  • Allow schools to maintain the previous whole grain requirements.  Without this change, 100 percent of the grains that schools would be required to serve students would be whole-grain rich, pushing items like tortillas and pasta largely off the menu.  Rep. Noem’s bill would restore the requirement back to 50 percent, meaning at least half of the grains served would be required to be whole-grain rich.
  • Maintain Target 1 sodium requirements.  Absent a change, schools would have a difficult time serving healthy foods that include milk, cheese, meat and other foods with naturally occurring sodium.
  • Give administrators flexibility on some of the rules that have increased costs for school districts, including the school breakfast program, a la carte options, and school lunch price increases.
  • Make the USDA’s easing of the meat and grain requirements permanent through law, rather than regulations.  This would give certainty to schools that they’ll be allowed more flexibility in serving meats and grains while still staying within calorie maximums.

###

Thune to FCC: Can’t Apply Old Rules of Telecom to New World of Internet

@SoDakCampaigns

Thune to FCC: Can’t Apply Old Rules of Telecom to New World of Internet

“… the Internet is not the telephone network, and you cannot apply the old rules of telecom to the new world of the Internet. Three weeks ago, three regulators turned their backs on that consensus, and I believe the Internet and its users will ultimately suffer for it.”

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 entitled, “Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission” questioned the five members of the FCC about its controversial Open Internet Order.

Video of the questions for the commissioners is here and remarks as prepared for delivery are below.

“Welcome to today’s oversight hearing on the Federal Communications Commission. Every day, every single American relies on some part of our nation’s vast communications system – the Internet, the telephone, television, GPS, or the radio. An efficient, effective communications system is the bedrock of our nation’s economy and it is the tie that binds together our 21st century society.

“The FCC sits right in the middle of America’s digital world. And this is even more true following the FCC’s recent decision to turn our nation’s broadband Internet infrastructure into a public utility. As is apparent from that action last month, the FCC is also a potentially threatening and unpredictable agency as it struggles to operate under legal authority designed nearly 100 years ago and not seriously updated in decades.

“To be clear, today’s hearing is not a response to the Title II order, but clearly no discussion about the FCC can ignore one of the most significant and most controversial decisions in the agency’s history. My views on this subject are well known. I believe there should be clear rules for the digital road with clear authority for the FCC to enforce them. I have put forward a draft bill with my House colleagues to begin the legislative discussion about how best to put such rules into statute. Like most first drafts, our draft bill is not perfect. I invite members of this committee and stakeholders from across the political spectrum to offer us ideas on how we can improve it, so that the final draft can win bipartisan support and provide everyone in the Internet world with the certainty that they need.

“The FCC’s recent action accomplished the exact opposite. Rather than exercising regulatory humility, the three majority commissioners chose to take the most radical, polarizing, and partisan path possible. Instead of working with me and my colleagues in the House and Senate on a bipartisan basis, to find a consensus, the three of you chose an option that I believe will only increase political, regulatory, and legal uncertainty, which will ultimately hurt average Internet users. Simply put, your actions jeopardize the open Internet that we are all seeking to protect.

“The tech and telecom industries agree on few regulatory matters, but there was one idea that unified them for nearly two decades – the Internet is not the telephone network, and you cannot apply the old rules of telecom to the new world of the Internet. Three weeks ago, three regulators turned their backs on that consensus, and I believe the Internet and its users will ultimately suffer for it.

“The debate over the open Internet illustrates the importance of the FCC, which makes it all the more amazing that Congress has not reauthorized the FCC since then-Representative Markey’s bill was passed a quarter century ago. Indeed, the FCC is the oldest expired authorization within this committee’s expansive jurisdiction – a situation that I intend to rectify this Congress.

“Today’s hearing marks the beginning of the Commerce Committee’s efforts to write and pass legislation to reauthorize the FCC. I know that contentious matters like Title II divide the membership of this committee, but FCC reauthorization is an area where I believe Republicans and Democrats can and should work together. Wanting the FCC to be an effective, efficient, and accountable regulator shouldn’t be a partisan goal. I know members on both sides of the aisle have common-sense ideas to make the agency more responsive to the needs of consumers, Congress, and regulated companies alike, and I look forward to hearing their suggestions and views. And I look forward to hearing the commissioners’ thoughts today about ways Congress can help their agency improve.

“Writing a new FCC reauthorization bill should not be a one-off effort. It is my hope that the committee will get back to regularly authorizing the commission as part of its normal course of business. In order to do that effectively, the committee must be diligent in its oversight. As such, the commission should expect to come before this committee again.

“How the commission works is just as important as what the commission does. In addition to discussing important communications policy matters, I hope members will use today’s hearing to explore the Commission’s operations, processes, and budget. For example, the FCC has requested $530 million dollars for Fiscal Year 2016. This funding level would be the highest in the Commission’s history. That alone raises eyebrows, particularly when American households continue to do more with less in this stagnant economy, but the FCC also wants to fund this increase in part by raiding the Universal Service Fund.

“Paying for record high budgets by siphoning money from USF is a dangerous precedent. While members of this committee may have varying views on the USF’s efficiency, scope, and growth, one thing I think we can all agree on is that its limited funds should not be used as a reserve fund to pay for the FCC’s core statutory functions.  That’s what the Commission’s regulatory fees are for.  USF funds should pay for USF services, and I don’t believe the FCC should jeopardize the stability and integrity of the Universal Service Fund in order to paper over its record high budget request.

“Given the significant interest in hearing from the commission today, I do not expect this hearing will be a short one. In order to more quickly get to members’ questions, I have asked that all the witnesses limit their oral statements to three minutes apiece. Their longer written statements will be submitted for the record.

“I look forward to hearing from our witnesses in what I hope will be a productive afternoon.”

###

Rumor Confirmed: Weiland forming liberal attack group with Johnson staffer. What would Harry Reid say? (Updated)

@SoDakCampaigns

I’m hearing reliable rumors out of Sioux Falls this afternoon that the Democrat’s loss leader, 3-time candidate Rick Weiland, is supposedly teaming up with former Tim Johnson Chief of Staff Drey Samuelson to form a new liberal attack dog group.

Word is that Weiland is pushing the story this afternoon with reporters about his new liberal group.

I suspect he’s forming this group in an attempt to remain nominally relevant. The outlook on it is somewhat doubtful, given his complete implosion at the end of his ill-fated US Senate campaign where he went on the attack against the DSCC.

No word on what Democratic US Senate Leader Harry Reid thinks about this latest Weiland effort.  Although, I suspect it would go along these lines:

“Desperation is an ugly thing, and it’s sad to see Rick Weiland ending his ill-advised campaign and brief political career by attacking fellow Democrats,” said Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Reid.

Read it here.

Update – Yep. Scooped them again.

After I pointed out that Weiland was shopping the story, a rushed press release was dropped about his takeitback.org website. And once you look past his barfy platitudes, it looks like he’s setting up an organization to channel money to candidates through:

take_it_please

So, just like when he was campaigning, he’s once again demanding that people send him money to ‘take it back’ from special interest groups….

Just like the one he’s forming.