Thune, Colleagues Introduce Legislation to Expand Interstate Firearm Sales

“Lawful South Dakota gun owners, including members of our armed forces, should have unimpeded access to exercise their lawful right to keep and bear arms.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) recently joined his colleagues in introducing the Firearms Interstate Commerce Reform Act (FICRA), legislation that would address burdensome federal regulations on the sale or delivery of firearms between different states.

“Enabling licensed firearm dealers to sell across state lines strengthens law-abiding gun owners’ Second Amendment rights and helps promote a marketplace on which many livelihoods depend,” said Thune. “Lawful South Dakota gun owners, including members of our armed forces, should have unimpeded access to exercise their lawful right to keep and bear arms.”

The legislation was led by U.S. Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) and, in addition to Thune, was cosponsored by Sens. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Ted Budd (R-N.C.), Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-La.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kan.), Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and Tim Scott (R-S.C.).

Thune has led several efforts to protect the freedoms of law-abiding gun owners and prevent the federal government from infringing on those rights. Last year, Thune introduced the Merchant Category Code Neutrality Act, legislation that would block the Internal Revenue Service from conducting taxpayer audits that unfairly target lawful firearm sales. Thune also introduced the Allowing for Recreational Resources for Outdoor Wellness Act to prevent the Biden administration from blocking funding for elementary and secondary schools’ hunting and archery programs.

###

Johnson Votes for Election Integrity

Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) voted to secure the integrity of American elections by passing the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act to prevent noncitizens from voting in federal elections. The SAVE Act would require proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote.

“Voting is a sacred honor reserved for American citizens,” said Johnson. “Millions of illegal immigrants have crossed our border since Joe Biden took office—if they cast votes, our election system would be severely compromised. We must protect this right and protect election security. Allowing noncitizens to vote threatens both of those objectives.”

More than 45 million noncitizens reside in the United States, and nearly ten million illegal immigrants have crossed our borders since January 2021. Many states are committed to providing driver’s licenses to these individuals.

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act will:

• Require an individual to provide proof of citizenship in person when registering to vote in federal elections.
• Require states to remove non-citizens from existing voter rolls by providing access to existing federal databases.
• Adds penalties for federal, state, and local officials who knowingly register non-citizens to vote in federal elections.

###

Who’s the Real Republican? Casey Murschel Claps Back at Jon Hansen’s Gatekeeping

Supporting Freedom Amendment G is True GOP – SDSU Poll Shows 77% of Voters, Including 66% of Republicans, Say No to Forcing Rape Victims to Give Birth, Which is Current Law in SD

Sioux Falls, SD…Former Republican State Representative and chair of the newly formed Republicans for Freedom Amendment G, Casey Murschel, today released the following statement in reply to Representative Jon Hansen who charged in a statement emailed to South Dakota media yesterday that Murschel “might be registered ‘Republican’” but is “as much of a far left liberal as it gets.”

Statement by Casey Murschel:

“Right to Life official and State Legislator Jon Hansen says he represents all Republicans when he says South Dakota’s total abortion ban must stand and charges that I am not a real Republican.

Who put Jon Hansen in charge of deciding who is Republican enough? I don’t recall the voter registration form asking if Jon Hansen gave me permission to register as a Republican. I am not claiming to speak for all Republicans. Our intention as Republicans for Freedom Amendment G is to show how Freedom Amendment G is consistent with Republican support for smaller government and individual liberty. We reject the current ban and the extremist view that women who have been raped should be required by law to give birth. That is not the view of most real Republicans.

I and my group, Republicans for Freedom Amendment G, intend to prove that the numerous surveys showing large majorities of Republicans nationwide and here in South Dakota are against requiring a woman who has been raped to give birth, and are in favor of a more moderate Restore Roe approach, are accurate and reflect the real Republicanism in which I and they believe. We shall see, in the campaign on Freedom Amendment G, and in the election returns this November, which of us better understands and represents what South Dakota Republicans, and particularly Republican women, really want.”

SDSU December 2023 Poll on Abortion

Vote Yes on Referred Law 21: Protect the Landowner Bill of Rights

(Pierre, SD) The Landowner Bill of Rights is pro-landowner, pro-agriculture, and pro-business. The Landowner Bill of Rights provides significant benefits for landowners, including property tax relief, indemnification, and annual compensation. The South Dakota Ag Alliance is encouraging South Dakotans to vote Yes to uphold this pro-landowner and pro-agriculture, pro-business legislation that also holds pipelines accountable.

“Supporting Referred Law 21 will ensure landowners receive the rights and protections they deserve,” said Jason Glodt, founding member of the SD Ag Alliance. “Referred Law 21 is not just about pipelines, it’s about securing the future of South Dakota agriculture and ensuring new market opportunities that will benefit all South Dakotans.”

“I can relate to the opponent’s concerns, but Referred Law 21 doesn’t do what they say it will do,” added Rob Skjonsberg, also a founding member of the SD Ag Alliance.  “Referred Law 21 will not stop Carbon pipelines from being built so we need the Landowner Bill of Rights to hold pipelines accountable and ensure that landowners and communities receive the advantages and protections they need.”

With corn prices at $3.44 in South Dakota, farmers are facing financial challenges and losing money this year. We need to find new markets and add more value to our commodities to secure the future of South Dakota.  The Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) market represents a significant opportunity to lower the carbon footprint and add more value to the corn farmers produce, however, our farmers will not be able to benefit from SAF if the pipeline is not built. Every farmer in South Dakota will be impacted, and we cannot miss this one shot to take advantage of new market opportunities.

Voting Yes on Referred Law 21 means supporting landowner rights, protecting agriculture, holding pipelines accountable, and opening doors to new markets for the benefit of all South Dakotans.

Landowner Bill of Rights

1. Compensation for Landowners: Requires carbon capture pipelines to pay landowners reoccurring annual payments of .50 cents per linear of pipeline through their property.
2. Compensation for Counties: Allows counties to collect an additional .50 cents per linear foot of pipeline that runs through their county for property tax relief.
3. Indemnity for Landowners: Requires pipeline companies to indemnify landowners for liability.
4. Minimum Burial Depth: Requires pipeline to be buried at least 4 ft deep, exceeding federal regulations of 3 ft.
5. Disclosure of Dispersion Models: Requires carbon pipeline companies to make dispersion modeling public.
6. Lifetime Drain Tile Repairs: Requires pipeline companies to repair any damage to drain tile
7. Impact Mitigation: Requires pipeline companies to file an impact mitigation plan.
8. Leak Liability: Makes carbon pipeline companies liable to the landowner for any damage caused by leaks.
9. Land Surveyors Must be from SD: Requires land surveyors be South Dakota residents.
10. Bans Perpetual Easements: Limits easements to a maximum of 99 years.
11. Information Disclosure: Requires carbon pipeline companies to report linear footage of pipes in counties and disclose if they claim a tax credit.

###

Reports are coming in this afternoon that the referral of Senate Bill 201, the Landowner Bill of Rights, had sufficient petitions signatures to send it to a vote this fall.

Of course, this comes well over a week after the deadline, and when the bill was supposed to go into effect.  What are we going to be voting on? According to the SD Ag Alliance, the “Landowner Bill of Rights” includes the following protections and compensation for landowners and counties:

• Compensation for Landowners: Requires carbon capture pipelines to pay landowners $500 to access their land for surveying (HB 1185) and at least .50 cents per linear foot of pipeline through their property in the form of property tax relief (SB 201)

• Compensation for Counties: Allows counties to collect $1.00 per linear foot of pipeline that runs through their county. At least 50% of the surcharge must be used for property tax relief for landowners on the route. The remaining revenue can be spent by counties at their discretion. (SB 201)

• Indemnity for Landowners: Requires pipeline companies to indemnify landowners for liability. (SB 201)

• Minimum Burial Depth: Requires pipeline to be buried at least 4 ft deep, exceeding federal regulations of 3 ft (SB 201)

• Disclosure of Dispersion Models: Requires carbon pipeline companies to make dispersion modeling public. (SB 201)

• Lifetime Drain Tile Repairs: Requires pipeline companies to repair any damage to drain tile (SB 201)

• Impact Mitigation: Requires pipeline companies to file an impact mitigation plan. (SB 201)

• Leak Liability: Makes carbon pipeline companies liable to the landowner for any damage caused by leaks. (SB 201)

• Land Surveyors Must be from SD: Requires land surveyors be South Dakota residents. (SB 201)

(As cribbed from DRG News.)

So, no payments for landowners, no property tax relief, no lifetime drain tile repairs, no liability, etc.

The system that legislators attempted to improve will remain as it has.

At least until a vote in the fall.

Final Ballot Statement Released for Potential Referral of Proposed Pipeline Bill

PIERRE, S.D. – The final ballot statement for the potential referral of Senate Bill 201 has been released by the South Dakota Attorney General’s Office.  It was filed with Secretary of State’s Office on Monday, July 8.

Attorney General Marty Jackley takes no position on any such proposal for purposes of the explanation. He has provided a fair and neutral explanation to help assist the voters as required by South Dakota law.

Senate Bill 201, which was passed by this year’s Legislature and signed by the Governor, would provide new statutory requirements for regulating linear transmission facilities, and to allow counties to impose a surcharge on certain pipeline companies. A group has circulated petitions to put the issue on this November’s general election ballot. The Secretary of State’s Office is determining if the petitions have enough valid signatures to qualify for the general election ballot.

The final ballot explanation can be found here.

July 10 2024 Attorney Generals Statement Referral of SB 201 by Pat Powers on Scribd

State law requires the Attorney General draft a title and explanation for each initiated measure, initiated constitutional amendment, constitutional amendment proposed by the Legislature, or referred measure that may appear on an election ballot. The Attorney General’s explanation is meant to be an “objective, clear, and simple summary” intended to “educate the voters of the purpose and effect of the proposed” measure, as well as identify the “legal consequences” of each measure.

For more information regarding ballot measures, please visit the Secretary of State’s website.

-30-

From facebook, the campaign has kicked off against Initiated Measure 28, with State Representative Taylor Rehfeldt taking part:

Johnson Bill Reforms Indian Health Service

Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) reintroduced the Restoring Accountability in the Indian Health Service Act of 2024 to improve quality and delivery of patient care.

Due to a lack of oversight, financial integrity, staffing needs, and employee shortcomings at the Indian Health Service (IHS), tribal patients have been receiving substandard care for far too long.

“Tribal communities deserve access to efficient, safe, and high-quality care through the IHS,” said Johnson. “This bill would bring necessary changes to improve the quality of service and care for tribal members.

Background:

The Restoring Accountability in the Indian Health Service Act of 2024 seeks to improve the delivery of care for Native Americans relying on IHS by promoting the recruitment and retention of staff, best practices on information-sharing, cultural awareness, and accountability. Specifically, the bill:

• Incentivizes recruitment and retention of staff by establishing a competitive pay system and expanding eligibility for IHS loan repayment program.
• Strengthens information-sharing practices between IHS and state medical boards on provider professional conduct violations.
• Establishes a tribal consultation policy with IHS.
• Directs IHS to establish standards for timeliness of care.
• Protects whistleblowers from retaliation.
• Promotes fiscal accountability and requires reports on spending at all levels of IHS.
• Requires HHS Inspector General to report on patient harm/deaths and deferrals/denials of care in Service units.

U.S. Senators John Barrasso (R-W.Y.) and John Thune (R-S.D.) are leading similar legislation in the Senate.

A full text of the legislation can be found here.

###

Now that I’m done traveling for a few weeks, I can get to a few things that I’ve been planning to touch on. First and foremost are the June FEC Reports from the two main political parties in the state. And they tell different tales.

First up is the June FEC report from the SDGOP:

June 2024 Sdgop Fec by Pat Powers on Scribd

The SDGOP has a couple of donations in to the federal account, from Katie Washnok for $1041.02 and Toby Doeden for $5000; I’m guessing for SDGOP convention sponsorships. Otherwise, there’s a significant void of donations going into the federal account. $6789.55 in direct funds including those two, and another $10,162.00 from what I’m guessing is the state account.  They spent $8057.23 during this period, which I’m guessing means bills have not come in from convention, or they rolled through the state account, leaving the SDGOP $39,473.88 to move into the fall.

Now, South Dakota Democrats:

June 2024 Sddp Fec by Pat Powers on Scribd

Democrats appear to be rolling some federal campaign donations through the account this month for people who have maxed out otherwise, including $10,000 from George Soros. The big total is $719,297.80 in total donations, with $707,041.89 back out the door. But, they got to grab a little bit of that cash on the way by for the privilege of parking it in their account. (Before you get your shorts in a twist, GOP does that too).

The total left over is $65,182.08 to put towards candidates and party building.

The big take away? Look at the number of pages in those reports. 12 versus 196.  And that mainly comes from the number of people donating.

Dems are boasting around 100 or so donations that came out of South Dakota. Maybe not all large amounts, but there are enough of them who are engaged, involved and donating. And the inter-party chaos that the GOP is suffering from right now is hardening the hearts and closing the wallets of people who want to fund party efforts.

Might not be a big deal on one report, but the cumulative effect is going to come back and bite someone in the tail eventually.

Stay tuned.

The Argus Leader apparently does NOT like losing their taxpayer funded welfare, and has brought a lawsuit to try to claw back legal notice publication for the City of Sioux Falls, which they lost to competitor The Dakota Scout several weeks back:

On June 5, the City Council approved the Dakota Scout, a publication with a weekly printed newspaper founded by two former Argus Leader reporters and in operation since August 2022, to serve as the official newspaper of Sioux Falls for the purpose of publishing legal notices starting July 1. The council had two newspapers to choose from, with several councilors citing that cost savings and local ownership played a part in their decision to vote in favor of the Dakota Scout’s plan, though circulation and overall reach in the community is larger for the Argus Leader.

and..

According to the Secretary of State’s website, the Dakota Scout filed its newspaper ownership and circulation statements June 26, meaning the earliest the weekly could obtain legal newspaper status is 2025.

Therefore, the Argus Leader argues the Dakota Scout does not qualify to publish the city’s legal notices at this time.

Read it all here.

Get your popcorn out.

Frankly, the legislature should require all official newspapers to be physically published in South Dakota to be honored with that status. But, we’ll see how this goes.