If you recall a few days ago, I reported that State Representative Rhonda Milstead had introduced a resolution to block the executive branch from lobbying…
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION, Urging the executive branch to refrain from seeking or promoting specific legislative outcomes.
And..
WHEREAS, it is a direct conflict of interest for the executive branch to introduce legislation that, once enacted, is subject to the executive branch’s independent exercise of enforcement authority;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the House of Representatives of the Ninety-Seventh Legislature of the State of South Dakota, the Senate concurring therein, that the executive branch is urged to serve as a transparent resource in the provision of accurate and objective information to the Legislature, but to refrain from utilizing public resources, directly or indirectly, to introduce legislation or lobby members of the Legislature, in an attempt to seek, or promote, a specific legislative outcome.
Read that here.
But come to find out from a correspondent, this isn’t the only legislative push from the State House to block suggestions from the executive branch on legislation to fix problems and challenges they‘ve come across in the preceding months.
In addition to the resolution, there have been three bills filed along the same lines:
- HB 1260 seeks to eliminate the executive or judicial branches from introducing legislation, except having a committee introduce it. (Sponsored by Representatives Randolph (prime) and Milstead)
- HB 1290 prohibits state officials and employees from lobbying. (Sponsored by Representatives Milstead (prime), Aylward, Beal, Cwach, Greenfield (Lana), Gross, Haugaard, Howard, Jensen (Phil), May, Mills, Mulally, Overweg, Pischke, Randolph, Weis, and Wiese and Senators Frye-Mueller, Maher, and Symens)
- HB 1251 is a placeholder bill regarding lobbying for hoghousing. (Sponsored by Representative Haugaard)
These bills certainly appear to be a power grab by the legislative branch, because why else would they be trying to ban proposals from the Governor, department head of an executive agency, a constitutional officer or board, or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (as Randolph & Milstead attempt to do in HB 1260.)?
If Secretary of State Barnett finds a deficiency or loophole in our election process, they don’t wanna hear it. If as State Auditor, Rich Sattgast wants to improve a process for paying the state’s bills, or expand open government for the documents he holds, they’re telling him to talk to the hand. Or if the Chief Justice wants to fix a problem in the guardianship law they passed a session or two ago, he would have to jump through new legislative bureaucratic hoops just to get a fair hearing.
Or not get a fair hearing, as they did to the Governor last week.
HB1290 might be even worse, in that some legislators simply want to turn a deaf ear to any concerns that the people who would have to carry out the changes in legislation on a day to day basis can quickly identify at the time of introduction of bills, whether the bright ideas coming out of session could add time and/or expense, all the way to measures being violative of the United States Constitution.
Then we have HB1251, Steve Haugaard’s open-ended vehicle to introduce whatever changes he wants to make to the process of lobbying the Legislature in South Dakota. I’ll defer to Yvonne Taylor’s judgment on whether giving Steve the authority to write that measure on lobbyists would be a good idea.
Fortunately, I suspect all of these measures will go down in flames at some point, whether cooler heads prevail in the House itself, or in the State Senate.
But it’s a good indication of what some members of the House of Representatives are looking for in the years to come for the State Legislature.
More power for a part-time Legislature at the expense of the people who keep the trains running on time each and every day.