Referring back to yesterday when my spies sent me over what is said to be Julie Frye-Mueller’s next attempt to shift blame from her harassment of a legislative employee and resulting censure, one item in the latest supposed plan to get revenge on all her colleagues for suspending lamented that Frye-Mueller was “unconstitutionally stripped of her rights, duties, and function of office, and subsequently intimidated, threatened with criminal prosecution, maligned by her fellow legislators…” yadda, yadda, yadda…  “and her constituents were left disenfranchised and unrepresented.”

Referring to the three days she was put in time-out while the Senate investigated the extent of her alleged harassment of a legislative employee, JFM claims that during this period her constituents were left disenfranchised and unrepresented?

Neverminding that Frye-Mueller skipped the Friday after she was suspended. And ignoring that 6 days she missed in 2021, and 5 days in 2022. Her people claim when she was forcibly suspended that THIS TIME her constituents were left disenfranchised and unrepresented!

But really, were they left disenfranchised because of her absence (in a string of them)? Or it the quality of what she is able to accomplish (or not accomplish) her problem? Because a glance of her legislative record this session does not paint a pretty picture as to how she’s doing for her voters.

Let’s look at the measures that the Legislative Research Council has her noted as prime sponsor for, along with where those measures are in the process…

Status	Bill	Title
Deferred to 41st Day	HB 1072	subject lithium to severance tax.
Deferred to 41st Day	SB 122	address the potential abuse of opiate and opioid drugs.
Deferred to 41st Day	SB 123	require certain reviews and updating of voter registration records and data sharing.
Deferred to 41st Day	SB 124	update maintenance and verification requirements for voter registration files.
Deferred to 41st Day	SB 125	prohibit the imposition of additional immunization requirements on children.
Deferred to 41st Day	SB 126	expand the availability of emergency services in state parks.
Deferred to 41st Day	SB 128	remove the option to register to vote by a signed statement.
Withdrawn at the Request of the Prime Sponsor	SJR 503	Proposing and submitting to the voters at the next general election an amendment to the Constitution of the State of South Dakota, limiting the amount of ad valorem tax on real property, and limiting the increase in the assessed value of real property.

With a third of the legislative session yet to go, every single one of Frye-Mueller’s bills have been killed, with the exception of the Joint Resolution she herself withdrew.

If her people try to turn in the weird “Victim Impact Statements” claiming they were somehow left “disenfranchised and unrepresented?” There’s a legislative record that would seem to disagree.

If they feel “disenfranchised and unrepresented,” it’s not necessarily the Senate’s fault. Taking a look at what she’s gotten done while she was there, the problem might just be Julie herself.

Hot off the press, it looks like Julie Frye-Mueller is going back at her fellow senators as she attempts to gin up to get people to file “Victim Impact Statements” and individualized affidavits in support of the prosecution of 27 of her fellow state Senators as claimed by this blank affidavit…  “unconstitutionally stripped of her rights, duties, and function of office, and subsequently intimidated, threatened with criminal prosecution, maligned by her fellow legislators, denied access to essential legislative resources and state email communications, deprived of her committee assignments, and her constituents were left disenfranchised and unrepresented.”

(No word about affidavits being filed for the day she just plain skipped session.)

I have to go back and look, but wasn’t the vote 33 – 1?   Where is the victim impact statement against Arch Beal, Red Dawn Foster, Brent Hoffman, Wiik, Wink?

The word I’m getting passed to me from my spies is that Senator Frye-Mueller supposedly wants this kept under wraps until Wednesday, as if it leaked early, it would ruin all of their plans.

So, this is just between us.. don’t go telling everyone that we have more stupidity coming from Julie Frye-Mueller in an attempt to shift blame for her actions.

In today’s article on how South Dakotans are racist, the Argus Leader has managed to find a way to make fishing about the white male patriarchy because many South Dakotans have traditionally not cared for carp.

It wasn’t a picture-perfect image of racial harmony, however; when white fishers discard a perfectly good fish like gar, David said that’s evidence some societal ley lines have yet to be crossed.

and..

This term, “rough fish,” is part of a racially biased vocabulary among the predominantly white fishing community, according to David, the fisheries expert who also runs Nicholls State University’s Gar Laboratory.

and..

According to a 2021 research paper from the American Fisheries Society, which David contributed to, European and white males have historically dominated the fisheries science in the U.S. Early fishery organizations, including the aforementioned society, laid the foundations of the nation’s management systems for freshwater fish, David said. However, since their contemporary leadership entirely or nearly-entirely comprised of white men, they followed a distinctly Euro-centric view.

Read the story on how most fisherman are racists here.

Nothing to do with the fact that many carp are bottom feeders, and people don’t care for the taste.

Darned white male patriarchy. Now they’re ruining fishing too.

Or maybe people just fish what they like to fish, and the Argus is calling it a white-male bias because their stylebook tells them that’s what they have to say. 

I had promised to post the vote on Senate Bill 40 this last week, and then I flew to the east coast for a visit to my daughter,  so I wanted to get back to the topic.

As of this writing, SB 40 will go to the House State Affairs committee in the coming days.  It may be a while, as the House is supposedly going to take a look at reworking it to make it more palatable, as it was a close vote in the Senate. Stay tuned for more on this.

 

POLL: South Dakotans Support Grocery Tax Cut

PIERRE, SOUTH DAKOTA – Today, Governor Kristi Noem released polling data indicating that South Dakotans strongly prefer the elimination of the grocery sales tax to other potential tax cut options.

A memo summarizing the poll results is attached. The poll was conducted by Front Porch Strategies on behalf of South Dakota Strong Leadership PAC.

Front Porch Strategies released a memo on the results, which is attached. Key results include:

• 75% of South Dakotans support eliminating the sales tax on groceries, with 50% being very supportive.
• 93% of South Dakotans have been significantly impacted by rising inflation.
• 95% of South Dakotans say their grocery bill is more expensive than it was in 2020, with 82% saying their grocery bill has increased by over $50.
• When informed of the pros and cons of different tax cut proposals, 58% prefer eliminating the grocery tax, 29% prefer reducing property taxes, and 3% prefer reducing the overall sales tax rate.

South Dakotans across the political spectrum and from every walk of life overwhelmingly support eliminating the sales tax on groceries, including:

• 75% of Republicans;
• 76% of Democrats;
• More than 70% of every income breakdown;
• More than 70% of both genders; and,
• More than 70% of every age bracket.

Kristi Noem Grocery Tax Polling Memo by Pat Powers on Scribd

Former Argus Leader reporter, Joe Sneve, now of The Dakota Scout, is in a Twitter debate with Argus Leader education reporter Morgan Matzen over the language he used in a story about State Representative Fred Deutsch.

It’s an exchange which seems to give some insight into the work conditions that former Argus Reporters Sneve and Jon Ellis from the Dakota Scout worked under and the corporate demand for woke-speak from corporate parent Gannet:

I don’t need a whole thread to respond to this. I’ll sum it up in one tweet: Activist journalism is not what we do at @TheDakotaScout https://t.co/TtHPAogobD

— Joe Sneve (@DakotaScoutJoe) February 17, 2023

The Trans Journalists Association style guide actually says to avoid “biological female” for example because it’s inaccurate and offensive. When necessary, you can refer to someone’s sex assigned at birth, but think seriously about whether a story requires this information.

— Morgan Matzen (@bymorganmatzen) February 17, 2023

If you’re reading this thread and have any questions, please consult the @TransJA handbook. https://t.co/8P6QrSUG6o

— Morgan Matzen (@bymorganmatzen) February 17, 2023

What do you think? Is Sneve in the wrong for not following the “trans-journalism style book?”

Or is he correct to reject the demands from his former co-worker Matzen, commanding him to get in the woke-lane, grab a pronoun list, and go along with the crowd when it comes to his writing?

Attorney General Jackley Announces Lawsuit on Biden Administration WOTUS Rule

PIERRE, S.D. – South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley says South Dakota has joined 23 other states in filing a lawsuit against the Biden Administration’s “Waters of the United States” rules.

“This is a federal government attempt to exceed its authority granted by Congress as provided in the Clean Water Act,” said Attorney General Jackley. “This rule will drastically impact how South Dakota manages its waterways.”

The states’ lawsuit is filed against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The states contend that the rule, signed by President Biden on his first day in office in 2021, would redefine “navigable waters” to include ponds, certain streams, ditches, and other bodies of water that would be placed under the Clean Water Act as defined by the EPA and the Corps of Engineers.

“As it states in the lawsuit, this rule would require farmers, developers and other property owners to get permission from the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers to use these water ways in most ways,” said Attorney General Jackley. “That places an undue burden on South Dakotans who would face federal government punishment for even the slightest misuse.”

Other states involved in the lawsuit are Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

“We appreciate the involvement of other states on this issue, and we hope for a positive consideration from the courts,” said Attorney General Jackley.

-30-

Governor Noem Appoints James White to Game, Fish & Parks Commission 

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem announced that she will appoint James (Jim) White to serve on the South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks (GFP) Commission.

“I love South Dakota’s outdoors. We need to preserve our natural treasures for our kids and grandkids while responsibly sharing them with those who come to visit us,” said Governor Kristi Noem. “Jim recognizes this important responsibility and will pursue his role on the GFP Commission accordingly. I look forward to working with him.”

White resides in Huron, South Dakota. He previously served as a member of the South Dakota House of Representatives from 2011-2012 and South Dakota Senate from 2013-2020, including as Assistant Majority Leader from 2015-2016.

In 2004, White retired from his role as a district president of Wells Fargo Bank in Aberdeen. White received a teaching degree from the University of North Dakota at Ellendale and later worked as a teacher.

“I was raised outdoors and have been hunting, fishing, camping, and enjoying our state parks my whole life,” said Jim White. “I was fortunate to raise my children and grandchildren the same way and I want to ensure future generations can enjoy our outdoor resources here in South Dakota.  I am extremely excited for the opportunity to serve on the GFP Commission.”

Information on the GFP Commission can be found here. A photograph of White can be found here.

###

Gov. Noem and Colleagues Release Joint Statement on Foreign Objects

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem and 16 of her fellow Republican governors released a joint statement on the multiple foreign objects that have violated American airspace over the last few weeks. You can read the statement here.

 “The violation of American airspace by multiple foreign objects is unprecedented and threatens our national sovereignty along with the security of our states,” wrote Governor Noemand her colleagues. “As Governors, we have sworn an oath to defend against ‘all enemies, foreign and domestic.’ Yet, President Biden has chosen not to fully communicate with the public about this critical issue impacting public safety.”

When the federal government refuses to step up, it’s up to the states to take action. Governor Noem is working with legislators this session on bills that will keep South Dakota secure.

“Too much time has passed, and too little information is known,” continued Governor Noem and the other governors. “President Biden owes the American people answers.”

Governor Noem was joined by the following Republican governors in issuing the statement: Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds, Arkansas Governor Sarah Sanders, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, Georgia Governor Brian Kemp, Idaho Governor Brad Little, Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb, Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves, Missouri Governor Mike Parson, Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt, South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee, Texas Governor Greg Abbott, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin, and Wyoming Governor mark Gordon.

###

A bill was in front of legislators today to help school boards protect kids from their fellow students that might do them harm, but one Senator was definitely out to lunch and out of his mind this morning.

Senate Bill 168 was up in Senate Education this morning to allow school boards to deal with the sticky issue of what to do with students who are sex offenders:

A board of a school district may adopt a policy that requires a student who is registered as a sex offender, pursuant to § 22-24B-2, to receive instruction through remote or distance learning or an alternative educational program.

Read that here.

Apparently, there is a case that a School District is dealing with, and this measure was brought to create permissive language to give the school district options to meet their obligations under FAPE to make it clear they will allow an student who is a sex offender to be served and educated remotely.  Away from classmates, away from potential victims.

Good solution, right? Apparently there are those who disagree.

It was about then my phone started blowing up, as State Senator Tom Pischke, the same person who was the lone voice protecting Senator Julie Frye Mueller’s right to harass an employee about breastfeeding was a hard NO vote on kicking sex offenders out of the classroom.

I haven’t had a chance to listen for myself, but I’m told that in his dissent of protecting kids from rapists in their midst, apparently he was muttering something about the “rights” of the sex offender.

Fighting schools on protecting their students from sex offenders… Hm..

Is that what passes as statesmanship in the Senate nowadays?