Planes, Trains, and Automobiles
By Rep. Dusty Johnson
February 3, 2023

Transportation and infrastructure are used by everyone – people traveling to work or vacation, grains and parts transported by train, cargo by plane, or goods driven across the country by a semi-truck.

The COVID-19 pandemic aggravated delays and gaps in our supply chain system. Suddenly, Americans couldn’t get their goods in a timely manner. Christmas presents were delayed for weeks, Amazon packages weren’t delivered on time, store shelves were empty for more reasons than one.

When I came to Congress in 2019, the last thing I expected was a global pandemic. When these problems arose during and after the pandemic, I knew Congress should act. I partnered with Rep. John Garamendi to pass the Ocean Shipping Reform Act, addressing delays at ports across the country. We have seen progress from ocean carriers after passage of OSRA, but more kinks in the supply chain have been discovered.

The T&I Committee had our first hearing this week on the State of the Supply Chain. When seeing and hearing problems faced by our nation’s truck drivers – an 80,000-truck driver shortage, an aging truck driver population, and not enough parking spaces for each semitruck on the road – I introduced the SHIP IT Act with Rep. Jim Costa to address these concerns. The bill increases safety and shipping capacity for truckers; provides recruitment and retention incentives for drivers; and includes flexibility during times of emergencies or black swan events.

Maintaining our infrastructure is critical to keep our economy going and growing. This is my second term on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and I’m ready to keep improving our supply chain. I’m on the Subcommittees on Aviation; Highways and Transit; Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, which increases my ability to be a leader on supply chain issues for each of these modes of transport.

No one likes empty shelves, roads covered in potholes, or delayed packages, and out-of-date regulations aren’t keeping up with technology and innovation. The three subcommittees I am on will allow me to keep working on behalf of South Dakota to deliver results that keep our supply chains moving.

Johnson in Wednesday’s Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Hearing

 

###

Getting back to the quality of Julie Frye Mueller’s representation for a moment, this recent comment was interesting.

Frye-Mueller was suspended three days in 2023 and howled about not being able to provide representation for her district. Then took the next day off.

In 2022, she is said to have missed 5 days of session.

In 2021, she is said to have missed 6 days.

Exactly how is District 30 being shortchanged any more in 2023 with her being out of the Senate than they were in the prior two years when she skipped?  If anything, they’re a day ahead of the game (so far).

Carbon Capture pipelines are common carriers. Don’t apply different pipeline rules to ethanol, our most important state energy industry.
by Walt Wendland, CEO, Ringneck Energy

Recently, Representative Will Mortenson (R-Pierre) wrote an editorial outlining his thoughts regarding eminent domain and carbon pipelines. Rep. Mortenson believes the legislature should look at changing decades old policies to pick and choose which projects should have the right to use eminent domain, despite the harm such changes may bring to our state’s number one industry. While I appreciate the House Majority Leader’s self-professed warmth for ethanol, I find his premises don’t meet the facts and his conclusions to be missing some accurate considerations.

The proposed Carbon Capture pipelines are common carriers under the law. They are transportation entities which have contracted with others to transport goods for a fee. They conduct open seasons and maintain capacity for walk up shippers with goods to transport which meet the specifications of the pipeline. In all respects the proposed pipelines are organized and proposed like the many other pipelines which transport gas and oil for a fee. Why would we apply different rules to these pipelines which compete with them and support our most significant industry? We wouldn’t.

Rep. Mortenson professes to be for eminent domain for other uses but against the use of eminent domain for the carbon capture pipelines. South Dakota has had laws on the books for the use of eminent domain for more than 100 years. The laws are critical for the viability of such projects and for the fair treatment of landowners.  The SD House of Representatives wouldn’t function well if each member had a complete veto over legislation. Pipelines can’t be constructed in that situation either.

The ethanol industry is important to South Dakota and I’m glad to agree with him in that respect. More than one of every two rows of corn grown in this state is sold for use in renewable fuels. Corn prices and land prices have been built upon and depend upon this market.

Yet the ethanol industry is under tremendous pressure going forward. Fuel markets worldwide are demanding a less carbon intensive product. And renewable fuels produced elsewhere are seeking to meet that demand squarely. Carbon capture and sequestration represent the most economical way, by far to lower carbon scores and meet the developing demand. Without carbon capture and sequestration, our state’s renewable fuel industry is at a disadvantage and future opportunities at risk. One can’t be for ethanol and be against carbon capture at the same time. That is a position which doesn’t exist in the real world.

Sincerely,

Walt Wendland, CEO
Ringneck Energy

If you recall yesterday’s legislative session when Julie Frye-Mueller skipped session, denying her district representation at both a hearing on one of her bills, and the entire day on the Senate Floor…

…then I’m not sure you can make this press release up, which actually ignores the fact she was absent from session yesterday and instead of “representing her constituents” issued a press release complaining about her suspension preventing her “ability to fulfill her duties of office”

PRESS RELEASE – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SENATOR FRYE-MUELLER ISSUES STATEMENT ON REINSTATEMENT

Rapid City, SD (Feb.3, 2023) – The South Dakota Senate has reinstated Senator Julie Frye-Mueller, with a public censure and restricting her interactions with the Legislative Research Council. Senator Julie Frye-Mueller has issued another statement:

Press Statement: Senator Frye-Mueller made the decision to withdraw her federal lawsuit, as initially filed. She was given extremely short notice “suspending” the Senator from her elected office based upon unsubstantiated hearsay.

The Senator’s counsel is reviewing both the unauthorized actions of the Senate as a body, and Senate President Pro Tempore, Lee Schoenbeck, individually, in interfering with the Senator’s ability to fulfill her duties of office. She was stripped of her committee assignments; her Senate email account was closed to thwart communicate on with her constituents; she was barred from introducing or guiding legislation in the face of fast-approaching legislative deadlines; and was prohibited from casting any votes on behalf of District 30.

The Senator adamantly denies accusations which were deliberately undisclosed until just prior to a very public hearing on the matter, as they were simultaneously presented to the press. The Senate’s “reinstatement” of Senator Frye-Mueller’s elected office has proven a hasty but nominal announcement to save face, given the absence of any authority to “suspend” the Senator’s office. As of the date of this release, the Senator has not been restored to her committee assignments (which committees have simultaneously been stacked with questionable legislation) and has been given an undefined restriction on her use of essential legislative staff and resources, effectively hamstringing her ability to steer legislation on behalf of District 30.

Senator Frye-Mueller greatly appreciates the outpouring of support and is determined to continue serving the constituents of District 30 and the State of South Dakota.

If JFM actually wants to serve the constituents of District 30, then she might want to start with showing up for work.

The Associated Press has a new article out today looking at the claims of the parties involved in the Julie Frye-Mueller employee harassment scandal, as well as JFM’s paranoia about a deceased Schoenbeck family cat:

Frye-Mueller disputed that account in testimony to a Senate committee investigating the complaint. She said it was the staffer who brought up breastfeeding. Frye-Mueller said she asked the aide whether she wanted advice she had received as a young mother, and when the aide said yes, she said, “Have your husband help.”

And..

During her Senate testimony, Frye-Mueller even pointed to a Facebook post from the Republican Senate Pro Tempore Lee Schoenbeck about the death of a family cat. She alleged it was somehow proof of a conspiracy that he was employing a “dead cat strategy” of drawing attention to something shocking to distract media attention from another story.

Read the entire article here.

Another good reason to choose a dog over a cat. Because even the hard-right knows to just let sleeping dogs lie.

Where is Senator Julie Frye Mueller in this photo of the Senate Floor today? Answer: she’s not, and was marked ABSENT from the legislature. 

If you recall, Senator Mueller is recently off of her suspension from the South Dakota State Senate where during her suspension, she had a lot to say about what happens when a legislator is absent from that body:

“I am thankful to rightfully return to the South Dakota Senate to represent the citizens of District 30.  The action of this body in suspending the Rules of the Senate to immediately suspend a member WITHOUT DUE PROCESS on an accusation alone without evidence is simply unjust.  The consequence of these actions were to silence the voices of over 25,000 people.

Read her words here.

Yet now that her suspension has been lifted, where is Julie? After complaining that her suspension would silence the voices of 25,000, Sen. Frye-Mueller skipped the legislative session today, and was absent for all proceedings on the Senate floor.

Senator Julie Frye Mueller decided to skip session, silencing the voices of 25,000 people in District 30, and leaving them unrepresented?

Someone should investigate that.

*UPDATE*

Hearing that Frye-Mueller also had a bill up in committee that she skipped as well. She really decided that she didn’t want to do her job today.

This last week then House Bill 1111 was argued in front of the House of Representatives to raise campaign finance limits, State Representative Jon Hansen argued against the measure claiming that it would throw open the doors for “corporate interests.”

Hansen worried that “big corporate interests” would be among the only beneficiaries of the increase and would turn legislative attention away from constituents.

“If we’re honest, I guarantee you that most of your ordinary, everyday constituents don’t even have $1,000,” Hansen said. “But you know who does? Corporate interests.”

Read that here.

As I noted from a quick look at the highest funded campaign in the last election cycle, that statement sounded like a lot of buffalo chips.

The hands down champion in legislative fundraising this last election was State Representative Tony Venhuizen.  As a former Regent, son-in-law to former Governor Daugaard, Long-time campaign worker, Tony arguably has among the best fundraising success of all other people in the South Dakota Legislature, raising an absolutely staggering $126,301 in funds for his State Legislative campaign effort. How much of that came from corporate dollars?

$1450. Approximately 1.1%. Try not to gasp and be shocked over that corporate donation of $50. 

Read that here.

After that article yesterday, Student Regent Brock Brown reached out, and noted that he had previously done full research on the amount of money that corporations donate to legislative candidates.  And the resuts of his study mirrored what I’ve been saying:  Corporations don’t donate to candidates in any significant amount.

My SDSU capstone project was on legislative candidate’s ability to fundraise. Based on my data, in the 2018 pre-general report 2.2% of funds donated to all legislative candidates were classified from entities.

$40,920.34 Entities
$1,852,268.72 Total Donations (incl. goods) https://t.co/TCC1IvnV0V

— Brock Brown (@BBrownInBtown) February 3, 2023

Across all legislative campaigns, 2.2% of the amount donated to legislative candidates come from corporations. 2.2%? So much for “corporate interests.”

Unfortunately, Hansen’s argument was a strawman argument for the purpose of hoodwinking his colleagues and playing for the cameras.

But what else is new?

Agriculture is the bedrock of South Dakota. The ag industry is tough, and it’s often thankless, but it truly is how we feed the world. As a lifelong farmer and rancher myself, I take great pride in my rural upbringing. Not a day goes by where I don’t appreciate the life lessons I learned from my parents on our farm. At our house it was always go, go, go. We were constantly making things better, faster, and more efficient. That’s the exact attitude of so many of our farmers and ranchers across South Dakota. I still can’t believe I’m lucky enough to go to work every day to serve them.

I’ve made my living from farming and ranching, worked on ag policy in the state legislature, and helped write and pass farm bills and risk management programs. I sat on the State Committee of the USDA Farm Service Agency, which oversees all federal farm programs in the state and worked on food policy for over 20 Years.

As Governor, it’s not only my job to work to help our largest industry thrive, it’s also important that I recognize and fight national security threats we face right here at home that affect our land.

Today, agriculture is a $32 million industry, and it’s responsible for 1 in 5 jobs in the state. When agriculture thrives, the entire state thrives. That’s why it is critical that we continue to protect our ag industry for the next generation.

This legislative session, I’m working with legislators on two initiatives to accomplish just that. I announced a bill earlier this month focused on preserving agriculture in South Dakota. It protects operations from frivolous claims that can delay development and increase costs for producers. This legislation will ensure the continued growth and success of the state’s agriculture industry.

We also have a duty to protect South Dakota ag land from national security threats. Possibly the greatest external threat facing our nation today is the Chinese Communist Party. Unfortunately, foreign countries now hold approximately 40 million acres of ag land in the United States – and that number will only increase as evil governments like China step up their game. This hasn’t been much of a problem in South Dakota. At least, not yet. But we must face the fact that our state is a target.

Earlier this week, Steve Yates, Chair of the China Policy Initiative at the America First Policy Institute, came to Pierre to emphasize the need for this legislation. Yates spoke with South Dakota legislators about the important example that our bill is setting for other states across the nation. If we fail here, it will have a negative effect on the whole country.

South Dakota is now the only home of the B-21 Bomber. This next generation military asset will be housed at Ellsworth Air Force Base. That’s huge for both our state’s economy and our national security, but it also means that hostile countries like China are going to do whatever they can to get intelligence on that bomber. Just last year we saw a Chinese entity purchase land near an Air Force Base in North Dakota. Though they claimed it was for corn processing, there is not enough corn nearby to justify the facility. So, it appears to be more nefarious.

We cannot allow this kind of situation to happen in South Dakota. I’m working with legislators to block nations that hate us from purchasing ag land. This bill creates a Committee on Foreign Investment in the United State – South Dakota. We’ll rely on national and state security experts and legal counsel to review any purchases, leases, and transfers of South Dakota ag land. If purchases are made by a foreign person, company, or entity, they will recommend whether the purchase should be approved. And if that purchase comes from a nation that hates America, I will not allow it to go forward.

This week, we saw a Chinese spy balloon hovering over Montana. This goes to show that it is more important now than ever for states to step up and defend our people form the threat posed by the Chinese Communist party. This is exactly why we need to pass these bills. We cannot allow Chinese interests to purchase any South Dakota ag land, much less land near any military base or critical infrastructure.

I am committed to keeping South Dakota secure, and that includes protecting our farmers and ranchers from hostile foreign intervention.

###

Weekly Column: The Table Is Set
by Casey Crabtree

MADISON–The Legislature had its only five-day week of the session in Week 4, and we were hard at work. This week was also the bill filing deadline for all members and committees. Now, the table is set for the session and we know the proposals before us for the year. In total, there are 221 Senate proposals and 259 House proposals, including eight measures where I am the prime sponsor.

I was honored to join Gov. Kristi Noem on Wednesday for her first bill signing ceremony of 2023. Several leaders gathered to witness the historic signing of SB 41, my housing bill to help fund infrastructure for new housing. This one-time funding proposal, first approved in 2022, will have a long-term positive impact for South Dakota communities and families. Thank you to Rep. Roger Chase (R-District 22) and all of the stakeholders that helped move this bill forward.

I continue to work with House Republican leadership and the Appropriation Committee to include a tuition freeze for our public universities and technical colleges in the upcoming state budget. Keeping higher education affordable is one of the best ways South Dakota can keep our young adults here and help them enter the workforce with a manageable amount of student debt. Controlling the costs of higher education also helps increase the pipeline of an educated and skilled workforce needed to keep our strong economy going.

Progress was made in both the House and Senate on the Stronger and Safer for 2024 legislative package to strengthen South Dakota’s election laws. Bills to ban ranked-choice voting, improve approved candidate transparency and reporting, secure ballot tabulation machines, reduce the time frame of runoff elections, improve the primary recount process, and allow for the Legislature to intervene in election-law related litigation all made their way through committees favorably. More proposals are still on the table and will see floor action soon.

Finally, we welcomed more visitors to the Capitol in Week 4 including members of the National Guard, the Towns and Township Association, Lions Clubs from around the state, the Land Title Association, Realtors, and student leaders from our state universities. If you live in District 8 and are planning a trip to the Capitol, please let me know so that we can say hello.

Thank you for the opportunity to serve the communities I love as your State Senator. I’ll continue to keep you updated on the important matters as the Legislature works hard for the people of South Dakota.

###

The Legislative Research Council has released the redacted transcript of the Hearing with their employee in executive session, after redacting the appropriate sections.

And much like the statement which started the scandal involving Senator Julie Frye Mueller, if you believe the employee as many do, it is a story of a legislator who acted inappropriately:

EMPLOYEE: Mr. Chair. In this job, we deal with high tension situations, and people, legislators, staff, we say things, I think we all know that, but, ummm, this conversation went as far as to say that my son would die, my child, that something physically might happen to him based on my parenting decisions. It talked about one of my body parts and sexual acts I would do with my husband, and I don’t believe that’s — I don’t think that’s — that’s not falling into the category of maybe getting a little heated if your bill didn’t go — your hearing didn’t go the right way. That’s beyond what should be happening in this building. I truly believe that crossed a very clear boundary.

SENATOR BOLIN: Thank you, Mr. Chair. At any time during any of these – during the one incident and others, did you ever indicate to the Senator, can you please stop talking about this?

EMPLOYEE: Mr. Chair. Quite frankly, I don’t feel like I can say that I am — that — I don’t feel like I have the ability to say that because of my role as a staffer and that you all have that relationship of being my — I view you all as my bosses, and I don’t believe that if I were to upset you in that way, that you may decide not to work with me or something to that effect. So no, I did not.

Read the entire statement here.

LRC transcript by Pat Powers on Scribd