From Politics 1:

On the same Lisa Boothe podcast, Pres Trump said if he doesn’t run in 2024, those he specifically named as “very good” GOP candidates were Ron DeSantis, Kristi Noem, Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

— Politics1.com (@Politics1com) March 22, 2021

Libertarians held their convention this weekend, and at least according to the video, it appears that Greg Baldwin is the new Libertarian Party Chair.

Of course, if you watch the video, I’m guessing they won’t be doing a lot of recruiting in Native American communities, after Baldwin’s comment at the podium about running late, referring to it as “Indian Time.”

Racially charged commentary aside, it looks like Libertarian leadership for the next election is as follows:

Chair – Greg Baldwin
VC – Collin Duprel
Treasurer – Daryl Root
Sec – Ashley Strand

The Communications Director is Devin Saxon, who lost for PUC last year after doing nothing. (Which might be why I had to skim their video to pull this list together.)

Because most communications directors would have fired a press release out to the state’s media after the election.

Governor Noem to Hold Media Availability on Fairness in Women’s Sports

PIERRE, S.D. – Governor Kristi Noem will hold a media availability on Monday, March 22, 2021, at 10:30 am CT in the Hegg/Lloyd Room of the Hilton Garden Inn in Sioux Falls to announce a new initiative to defend fairness in women’s sports.

The announcement will include participation from 4-time LPGA Player of the Year Nancy Lopez, former NFL football player Jack Brewer, and other athletes.

WHAT: Governor Noem to Hold Media Availability

WHEN: Monday, March 22, 2021, 10:30 am CT

LIVESTREAM: SD.net / Facebook.com/govnoem

Governor Noem Returns HB 1217 to Legislature, Suggests Style and Form Changes

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Noem returned HB 1217 to the South Dakota Legislature with Style and Form suggestions.  Specifically, the Governor suggests four Style and Form changes to address the potential unintended consequences of HB 1217 as originally enrolled.

Governor Noem’s Full Letter:

Dear Legislators,

I respectfully return to you House Bill 1217 with the following recommendations as to STYLE and FORM.

I believe that boys should play boys’ sports, and girls should play girls’ sports.  As the legislative findings in the original version of the bill set out, “[w]ith respect to biological sex, one is either male or female[,]” and “[p]hysiological differences between males and females include ‘those most important for success in sport: categorically different strength, speed, and endurance.’”

That is why House Bill 1217 properly provides that females should have opportunities to play youth sports on teams comprised of females and against teams of females. Unfortunately, as I have studied this legislation and conferred with legal experts over the past several days, I have become concerned that this bill’s vague and overly broad language could have significant unintended consequences.

For example, Section 2 of House Bill 1217 requires a student athlete to verify, each year, that the student “is not taking and has not taken, during the preceding twelve months, any performance enhancing drugs, including anabolic steroids.”

Presumably, this requirement was included to address a student taking these drugs as a part of a gender transition, but House Bill 1217 is not limited in this way. Rather, if a male student athlete failed to make the football team, and later learned that another student on the team was taking steroids without disclosing it, the student who didn’t make the team would be entitled to sue both the school and the steroid-using student for damages.

In addition, Section 2 creates an unworkable administrative burden on schools, who under its terms must collect verification forms from every student athlete, every year, as to age, biological sex, and use of performance-enhancing drugs; and furthermore must monitor these disclosures throughout the year so that if “reasonable cause” is found of a false or misleading form, the school can take action to avoid civil liability.

I am also concerned that the approach House Bill 1217 takes is unrealistic in the context of collegiate athletics. In South Dakota, we are proud of our universities’ athletic programs, and in particular the great strides we have taken to gain national exposure and increase opportunities for our next generation over the past two decades.

South Dakota has shown that our student athletes can compete with anyone in the country, but competing on the national stage means compliance with the national governing bodies that oversee collegiate athletics. While I certainly do not always agree with the actions these sanctioning bodies take, I understand that collegiate athletics requires such a system – a fifty-state patchwork is not workable.

To achieve the legislative intent of protecting girls’ sports, while simultaneously avoiding potential unintended consequences, I recommend the following Style and Form changes to the Enrolled version of House Bill 1217:

1. Revise Section 1 to read:

13-67-1 Athletic teams and sports-–Designation by sex–Participation.

Any athletic team or sport that is sponsored or sanctioned by an accredited elementary or secondary school public school, a school district, or an association meeting the requirements of § 13-36-4, or an institution of higher education under the control of the Board of Regents or the South Dakota Board of Technical Education must be expressly designated as being:

(1) A male team or sport;

(2) A female team or sport; or

(3) A coeducational team or sport.

A team or sport designated as being female is available only to participants who are female, based on their biological sex, as reflected on the birth certificate or affidavit provided upon initial enrollment in accordance with  verified in accordance with § 13-27-3.1 13-67-2.

2. Strike Section 2;
3. Revise former Section 3 to read:

13-67-2 3 Complaint—Investigation—Adverse Action.

A governmental entity, licensing or accrediting organization, or athletic association or organization may not entertain a complaint, open an investigation, or take any adverse action against an accredited elementary or secondary school, or a school district, or an association meeting the requirements of § 13-36-4 or an institution of higher education,or against any person employed by, or a governing board member of, such an elementary or secondary school, or school district, or institution, or an association meeting the requirements of § 13-36-4, for maintaining athletic teams or sports in accordance with § 13-67-1.

4. Strike Section 4.

The proposed revisions limit House Bill 1217 to elementary and secondary school athletics, which are primarily conducted among South Dakota schools and at the high school level are governed by the South Dakota High School Activities Association, a creature of South Dakota law.  The proposed revisions will also remedy the vague language regarding civil liability and the use of performance-enhancing drugs.

Overall, these style and form clarifications protect women sports while also showing empathy for youths struggling with what they understand to be their gender identity. But showing empathy does not mean a biologically-female-at birth woman should face an unbalanced playing field that effectively undermines the advances made by women and for women since the implementation of Title IX in 1972. The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment allows for the law to treat women and men differently, and in this instance that equal protection afforded women absolutely should apply on our state’s elementary and high school playing fields.

I support this legislation and hope that House Bill 1217, with the changes I am proposing, becomes law. I respectfully request that you concur with my recommendations as to STYLE and FORM.

Respectfully submitted,

Governor Kristi Noem

###

Thune Secures Several Key Agriculture Subcommittee Assignments

“With the next farm bill right around the corner, I am ready to get to work.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), a longtime member of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, was recently chosen to serve on several key agriculture subcommittees: the Subcommittee on Commodities, Risk Management; the Subcommittee on Conservation, Climate, Forestry, and Natural Resources; and the Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, Poultry, Local Food Systems, and Food Safety and Security.

“As long as I’ve served in Congress, I’ve fought for South Dakota’s hardworking farmers and ranchers,” said Thune. “With these key subcommittee assignments, I can continue building off the work I’ve done in previous farm bills to ensure farmers and ranchers have a strong safety net through programs like the Agriculture Risk Coverage Program and the Livestock Indemnity Program as they continue to feed the world.  I’ll also keep working to improve conservation programs like the Conservation Reserve Program, among many other important provisions. With the next farm bill right around the corner, I am ready to get to work.”

###

ATTORNEY GENERAL RELEASES EXPLANATION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTH DAKOTA CONSTITUTION PROVIDING FOR A TOP-TWO PRIMARY ELECTION

PIERRE, S.D. — South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg has released the following Attorney General’s ballot explanation for the November 2022 general election.

(a.k.a., another dumb amendment that was already rejected at the ballot box – editor PP)

The amendment is entitled An Amendment to the South Dakota Constitution Establishing Top-Two Primary Elections.

-30-

3.19.2021 AG Statement. Initiated Const. Amend. Top Two Primary Elections by Pat Powers on Scribd

One Family Farm Lost to the Death Tax is One Too Many

By Sen. John Thune

Last week I introduced a bill to permanently repeal the death tax. I’ve been pushing to repeal the death tax for a long time, because I’ve seen the consequences the tax can have for family farms and ranches and for family businesses. I’m proud that we protected a lot of family farms and businesses three years ago with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by doubling the death tax exemption, but the death tax is still a big problem.

First, the change we made to the death tax in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act isn’t permanent – the increased exemption level expires at the end of 2025. Second, Democrats – always eager to seize any possible revenue source – have proposed not merely returning the exemption to its previous level, but reducing it even further. That would be a big problem for a lot of family farms and businesses.

Every American, of course, has an obligation to pay what he or she owes in taxes, but there should be a limit to how many times the government can tax you. Death should not be a taxable event. The money you leave at your death has already been taxed by the government at least once, which makes the death tax double taxation.

People who support the death tax tend to talk as if the death tax only affects the fabulously wealthy, which isn’t the case. Small and medium-sized businesses, family farms, and ranches spend a lot of time and money on estate planning to avoid being hit by this tax.  Farmers and ranchers in my state know that without careful – and costly – planning, the federal government can come around after their death demanding a staggering 40 percent of their taxable estate, and their children won’t have the money to pay without risking the farm or ranch.

Why? Well, farming and ranching is often a cash-poor business. A farmer might technically be worth several million dollars, but the vast majority of that is land and farming equipment, and only a small fraction of it is money in the bank. The Farm Bureau reports that over the past 10 years the value of farmland has increased by nearly 50 percent. It’s completely possible that a farmer’s land might have substantially increased in value over the past decade while his income has barely increased at all. In fact, it’s perfectly possible that in a bad year, a farmer with several million dollars’ worth of land might barely break even income-wise.

So what happens when a farmer dies? Well, the federal government will claim up to 40 percent of his taxable estate. But his liquid assets – in other words, the cash he has available – will likely not come close to covering the tax bill from the federal government. And so the only thing left for his children to do will be to start selling off farm equipment and land. In some cases they will be able to keep the farm – just a smaller version of it. In others, they may have to sell off the family farm entirely.

On top of all this, the death tax is an inefficient tax that raises a very small amount of revenue – while placing a very large burden on farmers and ranchers and small businessmen and women.

Repealing the death tax is an idea that has won bipartisan support in the past – including support from more than one sitting Democrat senator. I hope it will win bipartisan support in this Congress as well, and I will continue to fight to ensure that no family farm or business has to worry about this punishing tax.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: One family farm or business lost to the death tax is one too many.

###

Rounds, Smith Lead Bipartisan Push to Repeal Outdated, Discriminatory Laws Against Native Americans

 WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) and Tina Smith (D-Minn.), both members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, have reintroduced the Repealing Existing Substandard Provisions Encouraging Conciliation with Tribes (RESPECT) Act.

The RESPECT Act would repeal a number of outdated federal laws that are discriminatory against Native Americans. Examples include laws that allow for the forced removal of Native American children from their homes to be sent to boarding schools and laws subjecting Native Americans to forced labor.

“Throughout history, Native Americans have been subjected to federal laws that are offensive, immoral and outright racist,” said Rounds. “In many cases, these laws are more than a century old and do nothing but continue the stigma of subjugation and paternalism from that time period. Clearly, there is no place in our legal code for such laws. The idea that these laws were ever considered is disturbing, but the fact that these laws remain on our books – is at best – an oversight. While we cannot rewrite the past, we can help write a better future for generations to come. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to pass the RESPECT Act this session of Congress.”

“This is about justice for Native communities in Minnesota and across the country,” said Smith. “The fact that these racist, shameful laws still exist is yet another sign of the federal government’s failure to live up to its treaty and trust obligations. There is much more work we need to do to reckon with our country’s history of disparaging, disrespecting, and erasing Indigenous communities, and this bill is one of many steps we must take. I will continue to lift up the voices of Minnesota’s Ojibwe and Dakota nations, its urban Indigenous population, and all the sovereign Tribal Nations across the country as Congress works to right these past wrongs and strengthen the government-to-government relationship going forward.”

Joining Rounds and Smith in reintroducing this bill are cosponsors: James Lankford (R-Okla.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.).

The RESPECT Act is supported by the Great Plains Tribal Chairmen’s Association (GPTCA) and the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI).

“We thank Senator Rounds and his co-sponsors for their leadership in bringing forward the RESPECT Act to eliminate the outdated, substandard, and anti-Indian measures from the era of Indian wars and cultural oppression,” said Harold Frazier, Chairman of the GPTCA and Chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. “Please move this bill forward to enactment.”

“The RESPECT Act is common sense legislation that is long overdue,” said Oglala Sioux Tribe President Kevin Killer. “Wopila to Senator Rounds for his leadership in reintroducing this legislation that seeks to bring reconciliation, understanding, and healing to Native communities nationwide. These revisions are much needed and appreciated.”

Rounds first introduced the RESPECT Act during the 114th Congress, where it passed out of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. During the 115^th and 116^th Congresses, the legislation passed the Senate unanimously but failed to receive a vote in the House.

###

After flirting with running for US Senate a few days ago, it looks like Lora Hubbel is back announcing on the KOTA Territory News page that she’s running for Governor:

Yeah, whatever, captain crazy. 

I would encourage you to find out more about her platform at LoraHubbel.org.  I hear part of what she claims is that she’ll never let you down.  At least, that’s what her website says.