State Legislature

The normal dilly-dally by the state legislature

This is why I don’t blog as much about the state legislature, it’s like a freaking broken record. They do this every year. (notice the cartoon is from 2009)Waste enormous amounts of time on guns and abortion without really addressing the budget;

The South Dakota Legislature’s budget-writing committee has delayed a decision on how much revenue to expect for the rest of the current year and the budget year that begins July 1.
The Joint Appropriations Committee had planned to make a formal decision Monday. But House Appropriations Chairman Fred Romkema of Spearfish says the decision is delayed until at least Tuesday because the Legislature has not settled the fate of some other bills that could affect revenue collections.
The committee later this week will put the finishing touches on the spending plan so the Legislature can pass the budget by Friday, the end of the main run of this year’s legislative session.
Gov. Dennis Daugaard has proposed a $4.1 billion state budget, with $1.3 billion to come from state tax funds.

Oh, but they had time to thumb their noses at voters with this proposal;

A comprehensive South Dakota economic development fund proposed by state legislators would be paid for with contractors excise tax collections and money from unclaimed property.
Republican Sen. Corey Brown, of Gettysburg, outlined the Building South Dakota Fund to the House State Affairs Committee on Monday. The panel voted unanimously to move the bill to the House floor.
The measure was introduced at a bipartisan news conference last week. It would focus on providing tax breaks for large projects that the state otherwise might not attract. It also would provide money for training workers and helping communities build the infrastructure needed to encourage development.
Republicans and Democrats have worked for the past two months to find a compromise plan.
The bill received supportive testimony from nearly two dozen people.

At least it is not coming out of the general fund, and supported by contractors, BUT voters clearly told them last November, NO HANDOUTS TO LARGE CORPORATIONS, and what do they do? Well at least job training is included, but I have a feeling that will be trickle down. You know, if the state was attracting businesses that paid living wages, I would be all for these incentives.

My ‘Opinion’ on the School Sentinels Bill

Trust me, there are many compelling arguments as to why the Sentinel Bill is legislative stupidity on many levels;

A proposal to let schools arm volunteer “sentinels” for defense passed the South Dakota Senate Wednesday and could be headed to Gov. Dennis Daugaard’s desk.

The school sentinels bill gives every school district the option to arm teachers, staff or community volunteers, but doesn’t require any district to bring guns into schools.

Allowing guns in schools to make them safer is similar to storing gasoline next to your backyard firepit to make it safer.

But I’m sure my commenters will have plenty to say about whether it makes schools safer or not. My biggest problem with the passage of this bill is how our state continually comes across as backwoods hillbillies because of our state legislators. Even if this bill passes, there won’t be a single school board in this state that will approve having armed sentinels in their schools. So why even move ahead with this? You don’t heal a black eye by punching it again and you don’t make schools safer from gun violence by allowing more guns in schools.

Guns & Abortion. Both legal in the United States. Why does SD want to limit one and not the other?

Tiffany Campbell sent me her opposition testimony to HB 1237 (AUDIO LINK. HB 1237 testimony starts at 24.56, and opposition testimony starts at 1:20:41);

Testimony in Opposition to HB 1237 • Tiffany Campbell • Advocacy Director

ACLU of SD believes – and works hard to ensure – that every woman has medically accurate, unbiased information so she is able to make the best choices for her and her circumstances, without undue pressure. This bill isn’t about letting a woman consider her decision, it’s about coercing her and shaming her for a decision she’s already made.

Forcing a woman who needs an abortion to delay her procedure for non-medical reasons is callous, cruel, and dangerous. Medical experts, including the World Health Organization, recommend that states consider eliminating waiting periods that are not medically required and work to expand services so that all women may access prompt abortion care.

South Dakota already has one of the most extreme laws of its kind on the books and this bill just makes it worse. There is no medical reason to make a woman wait 72 hours before her abortion, and there’s certainly no reason to make her wait even longer if her abortion happens to be scheduled after a weekend or a holiday.

Many things can happen in pregnancy. No woman wants to hear that carrying her pregnancy to term will seriously threaten her health or endanger her life. No woman wants to hear that the baby she’s been looking forward to holding will likely not survive the pregnancy. No woman plans to have an abortion for any reason.

I am one of those women.  In 2006 I was a married mother of two wanting to add to my family.  I was thrilled to learn I was expecting identical twin boys, but the excitement didn’t last long. I was told they might be suffering from Twin to Twin Transfusion Syndrome, a very deadly disease that left untreated has a morality rate of 100%. We were immediately sent to one of the top fetal care centers in the country. We were told that one of our boys was extremely sick and wouldn’t make it much longer.  Our five doctors told us the only way to save the healthier twin was to selectively terminate the sicker twin.  We had the procedure less than 12 hours later.   Five months later I gave birth to a healthy baby boy, and today my beautiful son, Brady, turns 6-years-old.

TTTS can progress incredibly fast.  My friend Becky Matthews’s twins also suffered from TTTS.  Becky and her husband were told of their treatment options and decided to think it over and scheduled a doctor appointment in Minneapolis for the following week.  They never made that appointment. Her girls died in utero just days after being diagnosed.

These are just two examples of what can go wrong in a pregnancy.   The definition of a medical emergency as set forth in SD Codified Law 34-23A-1 (5), only applies for abortion to save a woman’s life or if a major bodily function would be irreversibly impaired. My life was not in danger, therefore the lifesaving procedure I chose wouldn’t be covered under SD law and I might have lost both babies. In difficult situations, medical decisions should be made by a woman, her family, and her doctor, not politicians. I urge you vote no on HB 1237 and preserve the right for a woman to make her own medical decisions without government intrusion.

Thank you and I will stand by for questions.

You may know Tiffany from this TV commercial;

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-jFedfN760[/youtube]