A host of Alcohol bills dropping today in Pierre
l3wis Some have to do with taxation and some with awareness.
Bills:Â 328Z0758 Alcohol Tax 25 Cents
670Z0767 – Alcohol Taxation Revenue Neutral
Reports about alcohol:Â BillBriefAlcoholTax
State Legislature
Legislators are elected to represent us, not their own self interests
Commenter Pete Weisel says it best;
So the Argus should apologize for pointing out that elected representatives are NOT voting based on the electorates needs but their own?
In South Dakota, we have always let legislators who are attorneys vote on legislation to make changes in criminal and civil law. We let farmers vote on agricultural issues. We let teachers vote on issues of education and teacher salaries.
So why has the Argus Leader’s Editorial Board chosen to attack the credibility of Rep. Arch Beal, R-Dist. 12, and Sen. Jack Kolbeck, R-Dist. 13, just because they work for a beer distributor? They have the right and responsibility to consider all proposed legislation, including bills that would impact the beer industry.
People who are elected to serve in Pierre do so at the pleasure of their constituents, not at the whim of the Argus Leader Editorial Board.
The editorial board owes these gentlemen an apology for an unwarranted attack.
Dean has a special interest in this topic as he is the Chamber of Commerce which receives funds from the distributors.
You Dean, are the problem with this country sir.
Pierre’s House of Lords Chief Knothead, Mark Mickelson
By now, you have probably heard of Mark’s brilliant idea to either get rid of constitutional amendments through the initiative process, or to give the House of Lords (State Legislature) veto power over citizen’s initiatives on constitutional amendments. Here are some thoughts on it, from Drinking Liberally;
In South Dakota: Last week while researching G. Mark Mickelson, the current Republican Speaker of the South Dakota House of Representatives, I discovered Mr. Mickelson’s interview with Rapid City Journal reporter Seth Tupper in which Mr. Mickelson expresses his impatience with democracy and disdain for those who disagree with him. He was especially disdainful toward those of us who are not “lawyers”.
Now, ignoring our proud 120-year history as the first state in the Country to adopt the initiative and referendum process and allow ordinary citizens to participate directly in the legislative process, Mr. Mickelson has launched a two-prong attack on South Dakota’s Initiative and Referendum process. First, he has led a drive to raise the threshold for initiated Amendments to our Constitution and to restrict the funding of Initiative and Referendum efforts. Cynically, he is using the very Initiative process he wants to undermine to propose these changes. Second, and perhaps more ominously, just this week he filed two bills that would further eliminate or restrict our tradition of Direct Democracy. One, HJR 1007, would eliminate the initiative process for constitutional amendments. Another, HJR 1008, would, in effect, give the Legislature a veto on any Constitutional Amendment which the voters of South Dakota may enact.
Mark seems to have an autocratic bent. He certainly reflects the current Republican leaderships intolerance with those whose views on policy differ from their own. Heaven forbid, if once in awhile, the people successfully enact their own ideas of good government and circumvent the cozy, smoke-filled rooms in Pierre where the current leadership cuts deals with their donors.
Here are some thoughts from Dakotafreepress;
This Republican Legislature is out to kill voter initiatives. Voters, you should initiate some conversations with your legislators this weekend (the calendar says they are home Friday through Monday). Rep. Mickelson doesn’t have a crackerbarrel until February 10, but there are crackerbarrels this weekend in Aberdeen, Brandon, Rapid City, Vermillion, Watertown, and Webster where you could catch your local Republicans (because Democrats don’t do mean, elitist things like these proposed amendments) and tell them to stop calling you stupid and to leave your right to vote and amend your (your!) constitution alone.
What I don’t understand is why is Mark so bitter towards the citizens (voters)Â of South Dakota? Like the governor he thinks we are too dumb to pass these initiatives and amendments on our own.
But really? How has this hurt Mark in any way? His party has controlled Pierre for over 40 years, him and his family have been elected to serve in many positions. His wife, with the help of many prominent donors was able to win (buy) the SF school board seat. Mark has done very well in his business and politically. So Mark, what are you so pissed off about? The voters of this state have been very kind to you and your family over the years, and this is the way you treat us? It’s despicable. If you are mad at Noem and Jackboots for pushing you out of the governor’s race, take it up with them. It seems Mark wants all the power in this state not only to be in one party but one institution, Pierre’s House of Lords. Paul Getty was asked by his assistant once how much money would make him happy, and Getty said, “All of it.” It seems having ALL of the power in our state would make Mark happy . . . maybe.
Legislative Update from Advocates
Advocates, Good news from Senate floor today.
SB56 The Senate Appropriations committee listened to our request last week to adjust the income eligibility limits for the tax refund program for the elderly and people with disabilities. Sen. Wik brought an amendment from that committee’s discussion to the Senate floor today, and it passed unanimously. You can thank all Senators (except the two absent ones, Cammack and Partridge) for their support of SB56 and its helpful amendment. And I thank all of you who made contacts to the committee on this. It paid off. Now we hope the House agrees.
• Report. These 3 bills passed committee today and now head to Senate floor soon, so contact any or all Senators on these:
1. Sorry to say, SJR1 proposes a 55% vote to pass amendments to the state constitution.
Voters would have to approve that change, but this is an attempt to reduce our citizen rights to initiatives. Ask Senators to vote NO.
2. SB77 asks for mid-year reports for ballot committees, so we can see where their money is coming from sooner and don’t have to wait til after the election to find out. This one is helpful. Support.
3. SB79 lets Independents sign candidate petitions. That’s a step forward for participation in democracy. (Maybe someday they’ll even get to vote in primaries.). Support.
• New for Senate State Affairs committeeÂ
You can comment on any of the above 3 bills they voted on today. (like thanking them for support for 77 and 79). Now these bills are headed there on Wed. (1/24) at 10AM,(9 Mt time). Â Senate State Affairs has these senators:
Bolin,  Curd,  Ewing,  Heinert,  Langer, Maher,  Netherton,  Novstrup,  Sutton.
SB2Â is helpful for the housing opportunity fund
HB1006 is the one that needs its Section 2 taken out, according to Dakota Rural Action. Its problem is that it could possibly shorten the time for initiatives rather than lengthening it.
Is District 10 Senator Jenna (Haggar) Netherton living in SD?
Since Jenna got married there has been much speculation if she still lives in SD anymore. Curiously her husband’s last job was listed in Wichita, KS that he left in December of 2016. Rumor around the capital is that she has been living with her husband in Texas. This of course would disqualify her to be a State Senator in South Dakota. Also interesting is that her address listed on her legislative page is a PO Box. I know that Jenna is pretty petite, but it would be pretty hard to live in a PO Box. So is claiming South Dakota residency while living in Texas? Many are wondering. Will leadership in Pierre have her give proof of residency?
The irony is that I haven’t seen Jenna for well over a year. Not that we run in the same circles, but I used to run into Jenna in Downtown Sioux Falls at least a couple times a month.
Like her father who is supposed to be banned for lobbying for a year in Pierre yet was there lobbying, it seems Jenna may have no disregard for the rules.