Today's Mitchell paper promotes a crisis that they assume will happen if we don't pass more debt onto our children and grandchildren:
South Dakota will feel deeper financial pain than any other state if the sequestration happens as scheduled — or threatened — on Friday, according to a report.
A Pew Center study claims that South Dakota would suffer the largest share of loss of federal grants as a percentage of state revenue from the sequestration. The federal grants that would be cut by the sequester total more than 10 percent of South Dakota’s state revenue.
Sequestration is the term being used for $1.2 trillion in cuts to federal agencies over the next decade. They will start Friday unless Congress and President Obama can reach a compromise, or, as they did at the end of 2012, delay the decision.
Gov. Dennis Daugaard, who was in Washington, D.C., for the annual National Association of Governors conference this past weekend, called for caution in the 2013 legislative session because of the looming possible budget cuts.
Bob Mercer reports that the 2013 legislature is instead adding more spending to this year's budget:
The state House of Representatives debated tonight a variety of amendments to the current 2013 budget for state government that runs through June 30. There would be a net of about $24 million of more spending, including a net of about $4.5 million more from state general funds. About $21 million is for the state employees’ health insurance program, which is under-funded. What you see are the ordinary expenses of state govenrment but the amounts are different, Rep. Mark Mickelson, R-Sioux Falls said. There was a challenge that the bill contains one-time funding and non-ordinary expenses by Rep. Stace Nelson, R-Fulton. He charged that the bill, HB 1060, violates the state constitution provision regarding appropriations. House Speaker Brian Gosch, R-Rapid City, disagreed. He said he’s read it and doesn’t find anything that would require a separate bill and a two-thirds majority. House members voted 57-12 to approve the bill.
As stated earlier, HB1060 adds $5 million to the Governor's budget to fulfill promises he made to a French cheese maker. A few conservatives and even fewer Democrats were among the 12 House members that voted against the bill. This is how the Democrat's big and expanding government is used to funnel money into the pockets of Big Corporations, that are supposedly the GOP's exclusive special interest. At least that is what the Democrat leaders are telling their Kool Aid drinkers. While the media has their readers focused on a fabricated Democrat vs Republican feud, the ruling elite (who controls both parties) are using government to take money away from us (and also our children and grandchildren) and line their own pockets. And Mercer tells us where some of the taxpayer's money ends up:
Gov. Dennis Daugaard finished 2011 with a cash balance of $358,103.40 in his re-election account, after raising more than double in contributions than the $139,112.84 he reported that his campaign spent in 2011. He greatly improved on that total in 2012, ending last year with $1,046,584.84 cash on hand. From individuals he raised $791,831.19 in 2012 alone. At this point the Republican seems to have the 2014 election field to himself. No one else has filed a campaign finance report for the office of governor.
Again, those with money control the elections and thereby the government. And their South Dakota legislators must feel threatened enough by those who expose their big government voting record as they are passing more campaign finance laws to find the identity of those who would spend more than $100 to tell their fellow citizens how their legislators vote. Even those on welfare probably could find $101 to spend on postcards, yet too many South Dakota Democrats are on board with the Republican's agenda to allow the wealthy to excercise retribution on those who are too out spoken. But of course they first have to find out who they are. So much for the First Amendment.
Campaign finance laws are more about exposing the little guy than it is about the little guy finding out which money is controlling their elected officials. Anonymous speech is suppose to be protected. But that right is only for Pat Powers and his anonymous commentors who are protecting the Establishment, who pass out their marching orders at meetings such as the National Governors Association (as the Mitchell paper noted Daugaard's involvement). Check this out:
Setting goals, and designing visions and missions for groups of people is one of the favorite preoccupations of the New World Order philosophers and managers. In education, goal setting and visioning serve to CONSOLIDATE policies so the NWO/NCSS curriculum can be established in schools throughout the country. When you hear someone who uses the phrase, ‘We must. . .’ or variations of it such as, ‘We need to. . .’, ‘It is essential that we. . .’, etc, without adding, ‘if we wish to . . ,’ there is a pretty fair chance that person is trying to convince you to give up the idea of independent research and thinking so you will support whatever program or goals he or she might be promoting.
It is unfortunate that few of our congressmen, state, county, and city legislators have been alert enough to detect the behavior management and CONTROL that have been directed toward them. Many of them have been deceived, flattered, coerced, bribed or blackmailed into surrendering their legitimate authority to New World Order decision makers. This, too, was planned. In 1906, sociologist Lester Ward explained how NWO legislation could be achieved:
It must not be supposed that such legislation can be conducted to any considerable extent in the open sessions of legislative bodies. These will doubtless need to be maintained, and every new law should be finally adopted by a vote of such bodies, but more and more this will become a merely formal way of putting the final sanction of society on decisions that have been carefully worked out in what may be called the sociological laboratory.
Goals 2000 - Control is the Object
Most of the governors of the United States are members of the National Governors' Association. They have national meetings to CONSOLIDATE their policy decisions. In 1990, a policy was declared to promote the adoption of national educational goals. The Republican Bush Administration had endorsed the idea in 1989. Multinational corporations and the U. S. Chamber of Commerce supported it. Then, in 1994, Congress (Democrats and Republicans) passed and funded the Goals 2000: Educate America Act.
Originally, social studies was not included, but the NCSS saw to it that social studies was annexed to the national agenda. Its leaders appointed a task force to develop CONSOLIDATED curriculum standards. These were later adopted in most states as part of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act. Eight goals were chosen and publicized. The eight educational goals of Goals 2000 were not the important part of this operation. Any goals that sounded good, along with the money promised, could have enticed governors and state legislators to pass enabling legislation in their states. The real goals of Goals 2000 are to CONSOLIDATE leadership over all the states; CLAIM jurisdiction over curriculum to CONTROL what you and other students learn; and eventually to COMMERCIALIZE and CONTROL all educational resources through the use of charter schools and culture vouchers.
It is no surprise to find now that the eight publicized goals have not been reached—and will not be reached by the Year 2000. Does this mean that CONSOLIDATED goal-setting and visioning will be discontinued? On the contrary! To the goal-setters it means merely that the Goals 2000: Educate America should be renamed, America’s Education Goals, and should be extended beyond 2000 without a specific deadline. Even when failure is obvious and promises are not fulfilled, CONTROL, once gained, is never willingly relinquished by the NWO and United Nations regional government promoters.
Now we should better understand the true agenda behind Common Core Standards and Obama's NCLB waivers as they are the "renamed" Goals 2000. How many Republicans think the Educrats are exclusively a special interest of Democrats? Time for members of both parties to set down their Kool Aid and start thinking for themselves, instead of thinking the way they were taught to think by those who seek to control the world...and that includes you, your children, and your grandchildren.