From Farm to the Family Table
By Rep. Dusty Johnson

At the beginning of the pandemic, Congress passed the Families First Coronavirus Response Act – this bill authorized a critical pandemic program for American families – the Farmers to Families Food Box. Since March, more than 62 million families across the country have received food boxes.

Millions of Americans are still out of a job, and for some, these boxes are what’s keeping food on the table. As the lead Republican on the Agriculture Committee’s Nutrition and Oversight Subcommittee, it’s important I see where the rubber meets the road – that’s why I volunteered with Feeding South Dakota during their distribution of the boxes.

Feeding South Dakota is doing amazing work. They’ve successfully partnered with the Farmers to Families federal program and distributed 160,332 boxes of food to families across our state. When families drive up to the food bank to receive their boxes, they are greeted by a welcoming volunteer and given a produce and a dairy box. Milk, cheese, yogurt, apples, berries, onions, and carrots are just a few of the items the family will receive on any given distribution day.

It was amazing to see how many people are being helped, but even more so, I was impressed by the teamwork aspect of the program. The Farmers to Families Food Box is a solid example of good government. The federal government managed to develop a program in weeks, while working with private companies and local food banks to ensure the food gets from the farm to the family table. It’s not a perfect program, but it’s been largely successful – I credit the partnership with the private sector for that.

Not only does this program help families in need, it provides farmers facing lost demand with a place to sell their food. When things first shut down, some producers were forced to dump their milk, this program continues to help fill some of the void being felt throughout our agriculture communities.

The Farmers to Families food box program is largely serving families who have never needed assistance before. I was proud to see it work firsthand and serve alongside so many dedicated volunteers in my town of Mitchell. If you or a family member are in need of food during these hard times, please don’t hesitate and reach out to your local food bank today to see if they are a partner with the Farmers to Families Food Box.

Parents Agree: Let’s Get Our Kids Back to School
By Governor Kristi Noem 

Over the last few weeks, I had several opportunities to meet with parents across our beautiful state to discuss getting our kids back into school buildings this fall. My team and I met parents in Sioux Falls, Spearfish, and Huron. All but one parent agreed that we need to get our students back in the classroom.

The importance of in-classroom learning has been well-documented. Teachers and parents went above and beyond when our schools closed this past March, but their tremendous efforts could not overcome the inherent challenges of distance learning. Unfortunately, students only acquired about 70% of the learning gains in reading that they would have had they been in the classroom, and that number is only 50% for math. This cannot continue.

Learning in classrooms allows our students to retain more knowledge, continue to develop social skills, and, in some cases, improve their nutrition. As the CDC tells us, “Social interaction at school among children in grades PK-12 is particularly important for the development of language, communication, social, emotional, and interpersonal skills.” All of these areas are vital for our children, and keeping kids out of classrooms could have severe negative impacts on their long-term health.

Parents understand these challenges, and they also understand that children are less likely to contract or spread COVID-19. Data from other countries where schools have already reopened indicates that our kids are at low risk compared to adults, and a JAMA Pediatrics report tells us that “children are at far greater risk of critical illness from influenza than from COVID-19.” Given these promising facts, we can rest easy knowing that our kids are safely learning in the best environment possible.

Obviously, a school can’t operate without teachers and other staff. These hard-working individuals are unlikely to catch the virus from a student. However, if they have concerns, they can practice good hygiene and social distancing. They can also wear masks if they so choose. Some teachers are in the vulnerable population, and there may be opportunities for distance teaching to students who are distance learning.

Masks are a big part of the discussion on back-to-school. Most parents that we met with agreed that it is impractical for students to properly wear a mask for the entire school day. Kids will play with their mask, touch their face, or get them dirty, all of which can actually increase the spread of the virus. During a recent press conference, I gently teased a reporter that he’d touched his mask about a half-dozen times – and he was an adult! Certainly, our children are more prone to such behavior.

Other parents are making the decision that their kids will wear masks to school, and that choice is well within their purview to make. I’d encourage parents on both sides of this discussion to recognize that their peers may have reason to make a different choice, and that we shouldn’t shame those who choose differently. We don’t always know the reason behind the choices that someone else makes, so let’s be compassionate and understanding towards each other.

Getting our kids back in the classroom may pose some challenges, but such challenges are an opportunity to adapt and improve the way we do things. Let’s embrace these challenges and do everything we can to ensure that kids across our state get back in the classroom so they can get the best education possible.

###

Statement on the Passing of Harold Thune

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) issued the following statement on the passing of his father, Harold Thune.

“My dad was the embodiment of the American Dream,” said Thune. “He was a small-town South Dakota kid who worked hard and valued God, family, and country. He lived a life of purpose that imparted a set of values on me and my siblings that I’ve always tried to embody and pass on to my kids and grandkids. And as a kid himself, he answered our nation’s call to defend freedom and help free the world from tyranny and oppression during World War II. He was my hero.

“One of the greatest treasures my dad gave me was the appreciation for being part of a team, no matter what station in life I’ve found myself – in sports, in politics, in governing, and, most importantly, in being part of a family. He’d always talk about making the pass, finding your teammate, making the team better. Whether we were on the basketball court, sitting around the kitchen table, or in the halls of Congress, his advice always made sense – now more than ever.

“This hurts, and I’m going to miss him, but I can’t help but smile knowing he’s been reunited with my mom, the love of his life. I’ll miss you, dad, but thank you for making me a better person, a better father, and a better citizen of this country you helped defend.”

Harold Thune, 100, was a World War II veteran, educator, and lifelong South Dakota resident. He was preceded in death by his beloved wife, Pat.

###

From Facebook, Senator Thune announced today that his father who has been such an influence in his life has passed away.

Please keep the Senator & his family in your prayers.

This reminds me of the woman who tried to pet a buffalo calf. Masked protestors in the middle of main street Sturgis during the rally? Good luck with that one.

Eventually, I’m going to fill the painted areas with political buttons, and cover them in epoxy (reproduction buttons, that is) but it looks pretty sharp at this point.

I hadn’t read this story until it was pointed out to me in postscript of my earlier post, which casts the Haugaard “discussion notes” document in a new light, and heightens the interest of some gossipy things I’ve been hearing.

As I’d noted in an earlier post, there was a teleconference among House members – both Republican and Democrat – facilitated by Legislative Research Council staff at Speaker Haugaard’s request (despite there not being any public notice I can find of the meeting). This was followed by the Haugaard handout.

Steve Haugaard House Handout by Pat Powers on Scribd

And yesterday, an article came out in the Rapid City Journal about proposed “listening sessions” that Speaker Haugaard is assembling:

With talks between Republicans and Democrats stalled in Congress, Haugaard gathered the signatures of 45 lawmakers calling for a special session. To reconvene, the Legislature either needs the support of two-thirds of both the House and Senate or to be called into session by the governor.

Haugaard said he had not yet heard back from Noem’s office on a special session, but said there is “increasing momentum for that, certainly among the House members.”

He is also assembling listening sessions to hear from the public on how the money might be put to best use. Haugaard pointed out that businesses and individuals may be struggling in the coming months from the economic impacts of the pandemic.

and…

“We still have plenty of time,” Noem’s spokeswoman Maggie Seidel said, claiming that the “vast majority” of lawmakers don’t want a special session.

Read that all here.

About these “listening sessions”…  there’s talk that they’ll be done under the umbrella of the legislature. Which could potentially mean that they’ll be arranged on the taxpayer’s dime.. as opposed to meetings that are held in communities during the legislative session (“cracker barrels,” which are sponsored locally, and aren’t taxpayer funded.)

While Haugaard notes 45 legislators who have supposedly signed on for a special session, that would leave 60 who haven’t. A far cry from the 2/3 of both the House and Senate that would have to agree to call everyone to Pierre.

These listening meetings seem to be an attempt at increasing justification for a special session to be pushed for. Because if they can’t convince legislators to call a special session now, they can hold meetings to push for it.

If you look at the document sent out, if it’s purely for discussion purposes, I can’t help but note some of the options that the Speaker is presenting in it:

Options:
1)Inventive solutions for all affected areas.
2)Modify / suspend burdensome rules or regulations.
3)Grants or loans.
4)Suspend some taxes.
5)Invite banks to forgive business loan interest with state match / grant / loans.
6)Liability protections.

If those are the options, what exactly on that list from 2-6 can be accomplished without a special session.. especially if they want to do it under the current budget year?

What’s driving the push by the Speaker for a special session? Here’s where we get into a little speculation and a little rumor.

The first is that now-speaker and State Rep. Haugaard is out of a speaker job after this year, and his name is being bandied about as being one of those in competition to run for House Majority Leader, a position which is vacant with Lee Qualm’s departure from the House.

Leading a push for a special session would give him a heightened platform before the caucus meetings where they’d elect those positions, coming about the time of the Governor’s budget address.

Let’s also not forget there’s also been a bit of conflict in the past between Haugaard and Governor Noem:

Tomorrow the legislative executive board will decide who should pay for Speaker Haugaard’s legal bills. The taxpayers or Haugaard?

— Governor Kristi Noem (@govkristinoem) March 29, 2019

(I do believe he wrote the check, BTW)

So, there’s a been some history of disagreement between the big office on the second floor, and the eastern end of the third floor, and there’s talk that this might be an attempt by the speaker to heighten his profile a state level.  I’ve even heard some go as far as to say the Speaker may covet Governor Noem’s office… but in light of Kristi’s popularity among Republican faithful, I can’t take any such rumors seriously.

The Executive Board is scheduled to meet on August 31st, but no agenda has been posted yet.  When they get around to it, I’ll be curious to see if discussion on these listening meetings is on the agenda, and the action they end up taking on them.

I might also mention that people will be starting to vote in mid-September.

Will there be a push for a Special Session to be conducted while the election is underway? Or will the Exec Board decide to stay the course, save the money they’d spend on a special session, and figure it out in January?

From Facebook:

Sioux Falls Argus Leader reporter Joe Sneve announced today via Facebook that he “formally accepted a job offer today as the Argus Leader’s primary South Dakota politics reporter.”

Congratulations to Joe, I’m sure he’ll write things we agree with, and things that we don’t.

My only question is.. does that mean after a few years of doing the job, he’ll announce he’s moving to Minnesota, like the last 3 Argus political reporters?  (It just seems there’s a trend.)

This story caught my eye this noon hour, from the City of Vermillion:

Approval of 1st Reading of Emergency Ordinance 1419

Additionally, at the August 11, 2020 special meeting, to help promote the community culture of face covering/face mask wearing inside of buildings open to the public, the Council approved the first reading of Emergency Ordinance 1419 to Require Signage at the Entrance to Buildings Open to the Public Stating That Face Coverings are Expected to Help Slow the Spread of COVID-19 (coronavirus). If adopted at the second reading on Monday, August 17, 2020, Emergency Ordinance 1419 would require all buildings open to the public to put up a sign at their entrance, no smaller than 8.5 x 11 that states, “Masks Expected.”

Read this here.

I can understand a city limiting numbers of people in a restaurant, based on public health authority, or similar action which is clearly within their licensing purview. But this ordinance just seems a bit chilling. Because they are making a blanket demand that all buildings post their sign. “Emergency Ordinance 1419 would require all buildings open to the public to put up a sign at their entrance, no smaller than 8.5 x 11 that states, “Masks Expected.” 

They literally will be voting on an ordinance to mandate speech.  So, law offices, accountants, etc., – all private buildings open to the public – would be required by ordinance to post a sign at their entrance based on the city council’s mandate?  Sorry, but I don’t think they can do that.

The US Supreme Court calls that compelled speech. And they’ve ruled on compelled speech, and they’ve said “no.”  There’s a great article about it at the First Amendment encyclopedia:

The compelled speech doctrine sets out the principle that the government cannot force an individual or group to support certain expression. Thus, the First Amendment not only limits the government from punishing a person for his speech, it also prevents the government from punishing a person for refusing to articulate, advocate, or adhere to the government’s approved messages.

and..

More recently, in Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (2006), Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. reiterated the essence of the compelled speech principle: “Some of this Court’s leading First Amendment precedents have established the principle that freedom of speech prohibits the government from telling people what they must say.”

Read that here.

If they want to demand that these signs be posted at city owned buildings, so be it. They can do whatever they want on buildings under their own control.

But demanding that private businesses post a sign of their choosing?  Business owners should tell those overzealous city councilors to take a long walk off of a short pier.