Over the last couple months, I’ve checked out groceries at stores in communities across South Dakota. One out of every four or five customers had to put something back because of how much it cost. They were shocked at how much their grocery bill has gone up. And it isn’t getting better. South Dakotans need relief – and we can give it to them by eliminating the sales tax on groceries.

Prices are rising far too rapidly on everyday food items like milk, ground beef, eggs, and other groceries. Eggs alone have increased to over 140% of what they were in January 2021. Even with South Dakota having the best personal income growth, family budgets are not keeping up.

When you elected me to serve a second term as Governor, you tasked me with continuing to fulfill the duty of proposing a budget for our state. I recently announced my budget for the next year, and South Dakota has $310 million in permanent revenue growth because of our strong economy.

This means we can afford to eliminate the sales tax on groceries. It is a $102 million tax cut for the people of South Dakota – meaning we still have $208 million in permanent new revenue even after we deliver this tax cut to the people. The people of South Dakota overwhelmingly want this tax cut, and they know we can afford it.

Gas prices continue to increase because of President Biden’s energy policies. New regulations and taxes, a lack of utilization of American energy sources, and a dwindling reserve indicate this trend will continue.

Every South Dakotan is paying more for food, gas, and to heat and cool their homes – including those who can afford it least, like senior citizens, working parents, and single moms. Their family finances are struggling under the strain.

Remember – our revenues are strong because we have grown our economy. It is the strongest in the nation. People have moved their families, their jobs, and their businesses to South Dakota. Our new housing developments are here to stay. New industries are thriving. The jobs of the future are right here in South Dakota.  We have the fastest growing incomes in America – and we can grow incomes even more by letting people keep more of their own hard-earned money in their pockets.

This growth is sustainable. And there won’t be a better opportunity in the future. My team and I are fully confident that this is the right tax cut at the right time. I look forward to working with the legislature to get it done.

###

 

(In light of the recent push by the Convention of States to attack Republican legislators and continue to push for passage of a resolution in the legislature for an Article V. convention, I found this guest article interesting enough to share with you for your consideration. -pp)

 

Bluffing Their Way to an Art. V Convention
Part 1: Validation Schemes
By Judi Caler. 

Sound the alarm!! We are closer than ever before in our nation’s history to Congress’s calling a  convention under Article V of the US Constitution, where we would likely lose our Constitution. And it’s because of yet another deception from the con-con lobby.

Article V says that “The Congress…on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States [now 34], shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments [to the US Constitution]…”

There have been approximately 450 applications passed by 49 State Legislatures since 1788, the year our Constitution was ratified. So, whether or not a constitutional convention has been triggered depends upon the criteria Congress uses to determine which of the 450 applications are valid. Only then can Congress count the States that submitted those applications to find out whether or not the 34-state threshold was reached.

On July 19, 2022, US Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-TX), introduced H.Con.Res.101 and  H.R.8419. The former is a purported “call” for a convention.[1] And the latter directs the Archivist of the United States to “authenticate, count, and publish” all non-rescinded applications and notify Congress of its duty to call a convention, if those applications were passed by at least 34 State Legislatures.

Of the 450 applications passed since 1788, about 230 have since been rescinded[2]—leaving about 220 non-rescinded applications from 39 States. So, if H.R.8419 becomes law, Congress will all but guarantee that the first constitutional convention since 1787 will be triggered—simply by establishing “all non-rescinded applications” as the only criterion by which Congress would authenticate applications!

 

H.R.8419—A Validation Scheme Too Big to Fail

Although counting states from the set of “non-rescinded applications” seems reasonable on its surface, it’s a trick. Every application passed since the 18th century that states hadn’t bothered to rescind would be considered valid under H.R.8419 (or an updated 2023 bill #). And almost 80% percent of those “valid” applications were passed before the 21^st Century.

Rep. Arrington would combine all relatively recent applications with applications passed by at least 24 State Legislatures asking Congress to call a convention to propose amendments on obsolete topics, including directly electing US Senators (resolved by the 17^th Amendment ratified in 1913); averting the Civil War (ended in 1865); prohibiting polygamy (now outlawed in all 50 states), repealing prohibition (resolved by the 21^st Amendment ratified in 1933), prohibiting slavery (resolved by the 13^th Amendment ratified in 1865), averting the Nullification Crisis of 1832–33, and adding a Bill of Rights to our Constitution (ratified in 1791).

In fact, we hit the 2/3-state threshold for Congress’s calling a convention per H.R.8419 in…(drumroll)… 1907, and we’ve NEVER dropped below the threshold in the 115 years since! The number of states with non-rescinded applications gradually grew from 34 states in 1908 to 48 & 49 States during the 3 decades between 1970 and 2000; and stands at 39 states today due to rescissions. That’s more than enough States to trigger a convention. (See graph).

Raise your hand if you think the Framers envisioned giving the states centuries in which to reach the 34-state threshold—so that by the time Congress called a convention, the American People would no longer remember or care about the issues that triggered the call!

 

Common Sense Validations

There are common sense ways for Congress to validate applications that would yield markedly different results than H.R.8419. In addition to considering all rescinded applications invalid, Congress could add the following criteria:

Validation by Obsolescence. Common sense dictates that if the purpose for calling the convention has been resolved (i.e. the Civil War, etc.), the applications should automatically expire.

Validation by Age. If a crisis could be remedied by altering or overhauling our founding document, then 34 States should be able to pass applications within, say, a five-year timeframe.[3] Consider that 46 States enacted COVID-19 legislation within just 10 months in 2020; and all 50 States did so within the 2021 calendar year.[4]

Validation by Type (limited or unlimited). Yale law professor Charles L. Black Jr. (1915–2001) was one of the leading constitutional law scholars of the twentieth century. Black considered all applications asking Congress to call a convention limited by subject, null & void—and that would include most of the applications passed by State Legislatures in the last 45 years. Other scholars agree[5]:

“I believe that, in Article V, the words ‘a Convention for proposing Amendments’ mean ‘a convention for proposing such amendments as that convention decides to propose…’[thus] a State application for a convention limited to one or more proposals or subjects is not an application for the ‘Convention’ denoted by the words in Article V…

“…[I]f thirty-four States may put Congress under a certain obligation by, and only by, requesting X, and thirty-four States request Y instead, then no congressional obligation arises6.  —Charles L. Black, “Amending the Constitution: A Letter to a Congressman”

Depending upon which criteria Congress chooses, there are currently valid applications submitted to Congress from NO states, 39 states, or somewhere in between! Change the criteria, and you’ll change the result.

 

The Convention Deception 

Mark Meckler, President of “Convention of States (COS),” and the other special-interest lobbyists have been falsely assuring legislators for nearly a decade, that a “runaway convention” is next to impossible. That’s because, they say, only when Congress receives 34 identical or similar applications on the same subject or subjects can Congress call a convention; and, they say, that convention would be limited to the subject of the 34 applications.

But the proponents’ own Article V experts contradict their lobbyists! Attorney and Article V scholar John Cogswell, who admittedly bends over backwards to ensure Congress’s calling a convention, made the following points in a 2018 report to the American Constitution Foundation (ACF)7:

“Congress has a duty to call a convention for proposing amendments without any limitations on the agenda of the convention…” p. 2

“There is no such thing as a ‘limited’ constitutional convention because a convention by definition and practice is a free agency and may propose whatever it likes…” p. 18

“…a convention for amendments could easily amend the Constitution in its entirety and replace it with some other document…” p. 27

“…it is unanimously understood by all scholars that the rules of the convention are to be decided by the convention.”  p. 28.

Proponents bury the “too-big-to-fail” validation scheme in one bland adjective—“non-rescinded”—in §106c(b) under §1(a) of H.R.8419 and in §1(a)(2)(A) of H.Con.Res.101. But the accompanying press release, including legislative summaries and comments by Rep. Arrington, pretend to promote a “Fiscal Responsibility Amendment” and “Article V Accountability.”

 

H.R.8419 & H.Con.Res.101 are in-your-face evidence that proponents are attempting to manipulate the 34-state count to trick Congress into calling a convention which is inherently illimitable. This is not surprising, coming from the same folks that misled State Legislatures into passing applications for a “limited” convention.

Coming soon: Part 2

Judi Caler is a citizen activist working to defend our Constitution from those who would risk it at an Article V constitutional convention. She serves as Article V Issues Director for Eagle Forum of California.

—–

[1] But since applications from 34 States need to be authenticated before Congress calls a convention, H.Con.Res.101 appears to defy the Constitution.

[2] Compiled from applications posted on the unofficial Article V Library website, corrected for Illinois’ 2022 rescission.

[3] Only 10 States passed applications in the past 5 legislative years (2018–2022).

[4] Select Year (2020 or 2021); and Status: “Enacted” within the COVID-19 Database.

[5] For example, convention proponents John Cogswell and Michael Stokes Paulsen. See Cogswell’s 2018 ACF Report.

6  Yale Law Journal, 199 1972–1973

7 ACF’s goal is to facilitate a “general” convention, where no amendment is declared off-limits in advance by language in the applications. In 2018, John Cogswell conducted a study for ACF and found valid applications from 36 States.

Texas real estate agent Dan Kreamer is back at it.

After running a facebook page to run a primary against Congressman Dusty Johnson in 2022, This goofball has now changed the name of his facebook group, and apparently plans to continue his efforts through 2024.

\

How did that go for them with Taffy “14%” Howard? Not so good.

It’s going to be a long election.

From the Argus Leader and other sources the next hearing in the matter of the accusations against former State Senate candidate Joel Koskan have been moved to March 12:

Koskan was originally scheduled to be arraigned Monday morning, but his court date was moved to 9:30 a.m. March 13, 2023.

and..

While a proposed plea agreement was filed in court in November following the allegations, signatures on the paperwork were dated in September before Koskan was formally charged with child abuse.

In the plea agreement, all prison time would be suspended for Koskan if he agreed to plea guilty. Felony child abuse typically comes with a 10-year prison sentence.

Read the entire story here.

I think we’re also still waiting to see where things end up with the rape charges filed against House candidate Bud May.

 

Thune, Wicker Call Out U.S. Commerce Department IG for Neglecting Mandated Broadband Oversight Duties
“Contrary to the requirements of the law, you have failed to fulfill your duties required by Congress.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.), ranking member of the Subcommittee on Communications, Media, and Broadband, and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), ranking member of the Senate Commerce Committee, today sent a letter calling out U.S. Department of Commerce Inspector General (IG) Peggy Gustafson for failing to fulfill mandated congressional oversight of previously authorized broadband funding. As a result of IG Gustafson’s dereliction of duty, taxpayer dollars intended for broadband services are subject to waste, fraud, and abuse.

“Contrary to the requirements of the law, you have failed to fulfill your duties required by Congress,” the senators wrote. “This is deeply concerning for two reasons: [First,] [the National Telecommunications and Information Administration] has a long and well-documented history of misusing federal dollars when attempting to expand broadband access; and [second] your office has had a significant and ongoing problematic history. Further, Congress has recently heard testimony of funds being used to overbuild existing broadband networks which makes it even more alarming your office would disregard its oversight responsibilities.”

Earlier this week, Thune launched a nationwide broadband oversight effort that will review numerous broadband programs spanning several federal agencies. The primary goal of Thune’s effort is to hold these agencies accountable and ensure that previously authorized broadband funding is being used in the most efficient way possible to protect taxpayer dollars. Thune recently sent a letter to a diverse group of stakeholders, including broadband associations, public interest groups, and free market think tanks to seek their input on the current broadband regulatory structure.

Full letter below:

The Honorable Peggy E. Gustafson
Inspector General
U.S. Department of Commerce
1401 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20230

Dear Inspector General Gustafson:

As you know, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), housed under the Department of Commerce, is a major driver in fulfilling the Department’s mission to provide reliable broadband services to all Americans.

One of the numerous programs aimed at closing the digital divide is NTIA’s Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program (TBCP).  Established under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L.116-260), the TBCP has received nearly $3 billion in funding to support broadband deployment, telehealth, distance learning, broadband affordability, and digital inclusion in Tribal areas. NTIA awarded its first grant under the program on November 16, 2021, and to date, the agency has provided roughly $1.5 billion to over 100 projects.

To ensure taxpayer dollars are used in the most efficient manner possible, Congress required the Commerce Department’s Inspector General (IG) to review TBCP grants awarded by NTIA and make recommendations to address any waste, fraud or abuse with respect to these grants. Specifically, the IG is required to provide its recommendations and report no later than six months after the first TBCP grant was awarded and every six months thereafter. Thus, based on the timing of TBCP grants awarded by NTIA, the first IG report was due on May 16, 2022, and a second report was due on November 16, 2022.

Contrary to the requirements of the law, you have failed to fulfill your duties required by Congress. This is deeply concerning for two reasons: 1) NTIA has a long and well-documented history of misusing federal dollars when attempting to expand broadband access; and 2) your office has had a significant and ongoing problematic history. Further, Congress has recently heard testimony of funds being used to overbuild existing broadband networks which makes it even more alarming your office would disregard its oversight responsibilities.

Please provide a specific timeline by Friday, December 16, 2022, as to when Congress will receive your recommendations as mandated by Congress. We urge you to carry out the duties Congress has entrusted to your office.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

Sincerely,

###

This just rolled through my facebook feed. Welcome to the new reality where pop up clinics appear at local bars and lounges so people can get their medical marijuana cards:

From sdsos.gov, the masthead for the South Dakota Secretary of State’s website is now updated, and showing signs that a new Secretary of State is in office:

What other changes will we see? I did catch in one of her speeches that Secretary Johnson mentioned we should have greater campaign finance disclosure to allow donors to be searchable on the SDSOS website. Which I found extremely interesting, as the capability was there at one point, only to be removed.

The ability to search donors across the entire system was put in place after Secretary of State Jason Gant took office back in 2011, in the form of the “C.A.S.H.” system as implemented by the office at the time:

For open government and those who research donations, it was revolutionary and an absolute boon. The problem? Legislators hated it. They really hated it.

In the start, legislators were required to go into the system and key their donations in, or upload a spreadsheet. This represented a big change to the procedure under Chris Nelson as Secretary of State where they just sent in a paper form.   Change is hard, especially for those in the legislature who lean away from the younger portion of the age scale.  There was resistance in going fully electronic from some. Another part was that was for the system to automatically account and to trigger reporting when you hit the $100 threshold for reporting. So it required all small donor amounts to be put in the system, and that also brought pushback from those who didn’t like the smaller donors being entered.  And, there was a person or two who didn’t care for the disclosure that the system brought, because the system also provided the same transparency to Political Action Committees.  If you were juggling things across several PACS, it made it pretty easy to ferret that out, and there were those who didn’t like that.

After some time battling complaints of those who held the purse strings, there were changes made.  Paper forms could be submitted if so desired, and they would be entered into the C.A.S.H. system, keypunched by SOS employees. But the handwriting was on the wall with enough elected officials disliking aspects of the new system.

When Secretary of State Shantel Krebs took office, the entire system was shelved, and a system put in place that at the time had worse lookup capability than what was available under SOS Nelson, and would pull up the once again paper forms that legislators would mail and fax in. Since it’s earliest form, the system has been slightly improved and refined in the eight years it has been in operation, but at it’s heart, it is largely a simple lookup tool for paper forms.

A decade later, we’re now back full circle. With landmines that I suspect are still there, but still a call for voters wanting to have the ability to know more about our elections.

If Secretary of State Monae Johnson wants to improve the system as she has mentioned with greater disclosure, there are a few hurdles she has to cross, mainly in how she would get the information in, and who would do the input? And how to make it user friendly.

But, increasing transparency and open government is always a good thing.

Gov. Noem Calls for Immediate Review of State Investments

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem called for an immediate review of all investments under the control of the South Dakota Investment Council in order to determine if taxpayer dollars are being invested in companies that pose a threat to our national security, like those in Communist China. She challenged the Investment Council to complete the review in 7 days.

“South Dakotans deserve to know if their taxpayer dollars are being invested to benefit the Chinese Communist Party,” said Governor Kristi Noem. “The Investment Council has ensured that South Dakota has the best-funded pension in the country. But it is not possible to make good deals with bad people. If this review shows that such investment is taking place, then the Investment Council should propose alternative investment options.”

Last week, Governor Noem signed an Executive Order banning TikTok for South Dakota state government.

This week, Governor Noem wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “Many American intelligence officials believe that the Chinese Communist Party poses the greatest threat to the U.S., and most American people agree. If [President] Biden won’t take this threat seriously, then Congress and state governments must fill the gap.”

###

Had someone send this over to me last night.

Apparently in late October while the rest of us were working on the election, former 2014 US Senate Republican Primary Candidate and State Senator (2017-2019) Stace Nelson was on facebook announcing some life changes:

Thune: Biden Administration’s Radical ESG Policies Have Real-World Impacts

“Between higher energy prices and higher food prices, the kind of financial hardship Americans have been experiencing during our current inflation crisis could become a fixture for the long term.”

Click here or on the picture above to watch the video.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) today expressed his concerns regarding President Biden’s far-reaching environmental, social, and governance (ESG) agenda. Thune noted that the administration has failed to examine the impact ESG policies will have on the price of food and energy, and he warns that these overreaching regulations could result in serious consequences for essential industries within our economy.