The Senate will be appointing and convening a special committee meeting this next week to deal with the conduct of State Senator Julie Frye Mueller as it allegedly relates to her conduct during an interaction with an employee of the Legislative Research Council.
There’s a lot of speculation going on at the moment because Senators are taking this matter serious enough that there is an information lockdown like no one has ever seen with previous allegations or disciplinary matters. To their credit, they are taking this employee matter very seriously.
What do we know? We know they’re not talking about it. And that the allegations against Julie Frye Mueller are shocking enough to the Senators that they voted 27 – 6 to suspend her and convene a committee. That 6 includes Senator Frye Mueller herself, as well as her physical and ideological seatmate Tom Pischke.
Only 4 others in the Senate voted NOT to suspend the rules, not call the committee, and not suspend her immediately meaning that over 77% demanded that she needs to go NOW.
So where do we go from here?
I noted last night who we might see on the committee. But what are the options once they meet, and what is the likely outcome?
Next week will likely bring us snippets of the evidence against Senator Mueller, if not the entire thing. It’s an employment related action, so things are a bit more locked down to the public to protect the employee.
According to Senate Rules..
S8-1. Select Committee on Discipline and Expulsion. Any two Senators may by written motion first delivered to the president pro tempore move for the establishment of a Select Committee on Discipline and Expulsion to investigate the conduct of any other Senator. Upon being seconded, the motion is debatable, and passage of the motion requires a majority vote of the members-elect. The Select Committee on Discipline and Expulsion shall be composed of nine members of the Senate. The chair and vice chair of the select committee shall be chosen by the president pro tempore and may not both be members of the same political party. The other seven members of the select committee shall be chosen by the president pro tempore in consultation with the majority leader and the minority leader. The party makeup of the select committee shall be proportional to the party makeup of the Senate.
So, seven members. Republican Chair and Dem co-chair all chosen by the President Pro-Tempore. They will go through a hearing process, with Frye-Mueller likely represented by legal counsel, in a meeting structures like any other Senate Committee hearing. Let’s assume Senator Frye-Mueller did something stupid. (Because, let’s not kid ourselves. This is Julie Frye-Mueller.) She’s already claimed that she’s being persecuted for “advancing freedom,” and has a history of saying off-the-wall things.
If she’s found guilty of saying stupid things to a Senate Employee, what are the Senate’s options? Going back to Senate Rules:
S8-7. Select committee report. Any action to expel, censure, discipline, or exonerate a Senator shall be proposed in a select committee report of the Select Committee on Discipline and Expulsion. If the select committee report calls for expulsion, censure, or discipline, the report shall set forth the causes and grounds for which expulsion, censure, or discipline is being recommended by the Senate, and it shall state the particular form of action recommended to the Senate. If the select committee report calls for exoneration, the report shall set forth the reasons why exoneration is appropriate.
S8-8. Procedure in the Senate. Adoption of a select committee report for the expulsion of a Senator requires the favorable vote of a two-thirds majority of the elected members. Adoption of a select committee report for the censure or discipline of a Senator requires the favorable vote of a three-fifths majority of the elected members. Adoption of a select committee report for the exoneration of a Senator requires the favorable vote of a majority of the elected members.
Expel, censure, discipline or exonerate. If those are the options, what is the likely outcome for JFM?
Exoneration – Requires the favorable vote of a majority of the elected members.
Given the strength of the sentiment in the State Senate, unless there is video of her not doing what she’s being accused of, that’s not going to happen.
Discipline – Requires the vote of a three-fifths majority of the elected members.
Again, there are a lot of people who voted to move this forward based on what they’re not telling us behind the scenes. I’m kind of doubting they’ll go with this. And it requires the same number of people to vote to punish as….
Censure – Requires the vote of a three-fifths majority of the elected members.
Without knowing the substance of what the accusations are against Senator Frye-Mueller, but being given the impression that they’re bad, I think censure is a strong favorite. It’s more of a formal reprimand, and at least to the public is as strong as an admonishment as they can do, short of…
Expulsion – Requires the vote of a two-thirds majority of the elected members.
This might be a reach too far for all of the legislators who voted to move it forward, unless the conduct was particularly egregious. There are her allies who would likely argue that it would deny the will of the voters. But, the other side of the sword is that the voters didn’t send JFM to Pierre to be abusive to the legislature’s employees, even though she’s claiming the “advancing freedom” privilege. And that was a pretty strong vote to suspend her. Well within what they need to give her the boot.
They could vote to expel her, but I think it’s going to have to be bad – really bad – for them to do so.
So what say you? Exonerate, Discipline, Censure or Expulsion?
Let us know what you think is going to happen, and why.
Not sure but it is another great distraction so that the legislature does not have to deal with real immediate and long chronic issues facing South Dakotans.
Never let a good opportunity go to waste.
Expulsion would be great for my own amusement. Is there a rule on electing a new senator? Is there a way to bar her from running again?
Depending upon the alleged act and how egregious it was, the minimum would be Censure. However, we should pray for Explusion though! (That is probably not going to happen.) JFM has been a hollow shell of a Senator anyway, bringing nonsense and conspiracy laden bills while doing nothing to support District 30. If you look at her associates, you will understand why she is what she is – they all feed off each other’s insanity. Those who voted for her should finally come to their senses while being ashamed and appalled by her continued actions and bottom line lunacy. This is a sad day for the SD Legislature and the people of SD.
This is a sad day because liberal ideology has infiltrated the SD GOP and state govt. So now members of our Freedom Caucus, who fight for our constitutional rights, must now watch their backs knowing that they could be next on the list. The people who voted for this are Noems lapdogs and will do anything she commands.
This is so hyperbolic. Give me a break.
Members of the South Dakota Freedom Caucus don’t even vote for republicans. Total RINOs https://dakotawarcollege.com/group-of-radical-rinos-abandon-party-and-line-up-against-gop-candidate-in-d35/
No kidding. GOP Traitors Tina & Tony.
I am a REPUBLICAN. I would not vote any republican who does NOT think like me. I am a ANTI-FEDERALiST, hard core state rights, I vote against all Federal Monies, Grants, Loans, etc. That weeds out 75% of Repubicans
LOL, this guy.
You are correct because our republicans are rhinos. The Freedom Caucus operates under the Constitution not Samford.
mind if i take notes? there’s a novel of great mystery and intrigue begging to be written here.
I bet its Ravnsborg in the library with the candlestick.
If the people in my district voted me onto the Legislature, knowing that I am every bit a “Anti-Federalist” supporter of the ideals of Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and George Mason, which places me at odds with many “establishment” type legislators, of who are pro-federalism, supporters of the status quo, let alone pro-federal oversight of our our states, counties, the peoples right to be free, I would challenge ALL Legislators who disagree with me to suspend me, to place me on a so called trial in a public hearing, thus daring them to remove me from the legislature. This would set me up in the future to sue every one of them after the session is over, for defamation of character, abuse of power, let alone the constitutional protected right to free speech, let alone the ability to speak on grievances, disputes, and controversies. I would use it as a weapon to call out the Establishment, let alone hold them accountable in the future. After the legislative session, Ms. Frye would be free to sue each member of the legislator, whereas they give up their immunity outside the forum, furthermore, she could also sue the L.R.C staffer on grounds he or she defamed her character. If I was Ms. Frye, I would challenge such abuse of power, let them remove her, then this would set up legal challenges later on…after the session is expired.
In all fairness, not knowing any of the facts, I would, at this time, have to vote to exonerate. Anyone else that reads this blog would have to do the same, if no facts are available, and there are none at present. To vote without facts is purely arrogance, and ignorance.
The issue of “discipline” or “Censure” really leaves one wondering, as there is little difference in definition according to Webster.
Just my thoughts in attempting to be educationally fair on a question that is not based on any presentable facts, just opinion.
Fool…you believe they care about facts
Pat didn’t ask what should happen. If you read the last sentence in the post, the one that immediately followed his closing question, it’s clear he was asking what people guess will happen. You’ve only answered a question he didn’t ask.
Well it’s clear it’s a sham
They will expell her and put Tim Goodwin in there
nothing about this is “clear.” the full analysis given here is much appreciated.
Expulsion. Based on what I’ve read, she was treating staff like dirt. Make an example out of her. No one should treat anyone like dirt and get away with it.
“based on what I’ve read”
What have you read? What do you know? Best I can tell, there’s really nothing out there to read. Will anyone tell us?!!!
So you will be asking for schoenbecks expulsion next after how he treats and talks about people?
My point exactly, as I first responded above – I WOULD challenge them to remove me from the legislature, then come back thereafter after the session is expires, and sue every MEMBER and L.R.C Staffer in a legal setting for defamation, and challenge them on “Hear-Say Evidence” let alone the first amendment. I would use my power as a FREE American to sue every member of the Legislature, of whom in private gives up their immunity, this brings into the public court, the statements, issues, and defamation issues against those legislators who cast insults and words at others. IN that regard, it would best show the people the true character of several members of the legislature itself. Let alone their lack of morals, values, respect for each other.
It’s interesting and pathetic that so many “Anonymous” people have arrived at judgements based on NO EVIDENCE having been presented. I’ve been called up for jury duty and I sure hope I’m not seated on a panel of folks like you.
Yes, everyone’s entitled to their own opinions and are expressing them here, but there is one very interesting that may come up.
In municipal and county cases regarding personnel issues, those are held in ‘closed session’ and the public is not privy to what transpired.
So in this ‘she said/she said’ scenario, will the ‘victim’ come forth and testify in public? If not, exoneration is the only option. If she does, then judgements can be legally made.
In the meantime, Senator Crabtree and Senator Schoenbeck’s actions (suspension) is depriving District 30 constituents of our say in the senate and that is egregious!
Having read, in this website and periodicals, of Senator Schoenbeck’s intense dislike of Senator Frye-Mueller, I don’t doubt there will be a “loaded panel” in HIS favor.
The fact that Dist 30 citizens, that elected JFM, don’t realize that they are not represented in Pierre even if she is there or not.
She passes no bills, doesn’t work for the entire betterment of SD, spreads phobias, encourages biases, and is completely ineffective.
District 30 you have not had representation since you elected JFM.
I am no fan of JFM, but I will withhold comments until the facts come out. If her actions were egregious enough to warrant a 2/3rds vote for expulsion, so be it. If the facts do not support it , she should be exonerated.
There is a lesser option. If 60% (21-23) vote against her, she should not be exonerated. They can and should discipline her.
There’s a hole in the system. The senate is 35 takes 24 votes to expel her. Takes 21 to discipline or censure her. She needs 18 to exonerate. That leaves a hole. If 18, 19, or 20 vote against her she isn’t exonerated, but also not censured, disciplined or expelled. Limbo.
I guess the establishment never learned anything with the Russian Collusion and January 6th fiascos in DC. Let the “Witch Hunt” begin.
How about we actually hear the facts before we pre-judge anything?
Not the way it works these days. It is called the tyranny of the majority. Somehow the rights of the minority always seem to disappear.
I agree. Nno one is saying what was actually said. A threat is one thing. A heated disagreement with words is amorher. This seems to be a rush job and no thought given to innocent until proven guilty. I would guess heated arguments between individuals occur often in state politics. It seems this reeks of politics and wiill set a dangerous precedent.
http://dakotawarcollege.com/senate-appoints-select-committee-on-discipline-and-expulsion/
Vaccines and breastfeeding. And JFM may have lied to the caucus about it.
Yes, it wasn’t too many years ago that two women Senators and a male were is a disagreement, I believe in the Capitol. Another man had to restrain the guy from hitting one of the women. The case was basically hidden and nothing was done about his actions. Yes, there was video proof as well as many witnesses to that case. Buried and supposedly forgotten!
The case you’re referring to was the Johnson Disanto incident in the House chambers. Very appropriate example that the current Senators who voted to preempt the rules should have remembered. Including, Now Senator Dave Johnson, who was the victim then of being prejudged by House members before the facts came out. The case was not “buried and forgotten”. Three days after the torch and pitch fork crew publicly tried to burn Johnson at the stake, the video was released that exonerated him and they dissolved the committee.
My point exactly, as I first responded above – I WOULD challenge them to remove me from the legislature, then come back thereafter after the session is expires, and sue every MEMBER and L.R.C Staffer in a legal setting for defamation, and challenge them on “Hear-Say Evidence” let alone the first amendment. I would use my power as a FREE American to sue every member of the Legislature, of whom in private gives up their immunity, this brings into the public court, the statements, issues, and defamation issues against those legislators who cast insults and words at others. IN that regard, it would best show the people the true character of several members of the legislature itself. Let alone their lack of morals, values, respect for each other.
this is why we can’t have nice things.
LOL, this “tough” guy.
He is a RINO along with close to half of the senate. Voters have been asleep and have allowed the left of center to take over the Party. An uninformed electorate is a threat to liberty. This apparent farce is just the tip of the iceberg called the tyranny of the majority.
I don’t much like predictions, so my analysis reflects the odds.
Odds are, slightly, that the SD Deep State just gave a nice big hug to a tar baby with this one.
Yikes.