What about the SD House race

The South Dakota House race between Larry Diedrich and Stephanie Herseth has been over shadowed by the Senate race. Today’s poll shows Diedrich closing the gap and within striking distance. If Daschle would not have won by just a very few votes n 1978, he made not have had the 26 years in DC. This House race is very important.

During the Mitchell gun show, a person pointed out a House bill Herseth refused to support. It was H.R. 4571. Here is some insight:

House Republican with jurisdiction over a suite of environmental issues says yesterday's House passage of a bill designed to stem "frivolous" lawsuits will help slow environmental litigation by activist groups.

The House, along essentially party lines, passed the "Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act" yesterday. The legislation would create mandatory penalties on attorneys who file suits dismissed as without merit, removing federal judges' existing discretion to apply such sanctions.

House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo's (R-Calif.) office released a statement praising the bill, claiming environmental litigation has depleted U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service critical habitat funds, slowed forest thinning needed to prevent fires, and hindered energy production.

"Frivolous lawsuits filed under the guise of environmentalism actually hurt the environment and hinder economic growth at the same time," Pombo said in a prepared statement.

Environmental groups have countered that the legislation makes it more difficult to uphold anti-pollution and other environmental laws.

The bill, H.R. 4571, also requires suspension of attorneys from practicing in a federal district court for one year if they have brought three or more cases deemed frivolous in that court, among other provisions.

The bill passed 229-174, with 16 Democrats supporting the bill and three Republicans opposing it.

Herseth was not among the 16 Democrats supporting the bill. Remember, I just covered a lawsuit made by one of Tony Dean’s environmental comrades:

The National Wildlife Federation has filed a federal lawsuit alleging that duck, pheasant and other ground-nesting bird populations are being harmed by mismanagement of a government program that pays farmers to set aside croplands. The lawsuit challenges a decision by the Farm Service Agency, a division of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, that allows haying and grazing on millions of acres of land enrolled in the federal Conservation Reserve Program during times when birds are likely to be nesting or rearing broods in the inland West and Great Plains.

I posted the above coverage on ranchers.net. Here is a response:

Haying is not permitted until after July 15 each year, long after the annual nesting(hatching) is completed. In our area, F & W has taken a more proactive approach to grazing their owned land, admittedly because of the "grass mat" situation. The last time I tried to re-enroll some CRP acres, rejected because not enough tall grasses were planted. How else does Nat'l Wildlife Fed think the grasses get tall? (Use promotes continual growth). But don't tell them something they should already know. After all, it is a "control" issue, not a conservation issue.

I have learned that cutting the prairie is actually healthy, otherwise things become "matted" and not good as beneficial to wildlife. One rancher said that he likes to cut a third every year, thus leaving two thirds for habitat and hunting. It makes sense to me.

Stephanie Herseth is no friend to South Dakota farmers, ranchers, and property owners. She instead is partial to environmentalists and trial lawyers.