Sibby Online

Pat Powers pulls a SDBWM and deletes web content

The Mitchell Daily Republic reports on Pat Powers' dumping of his web site content:

He pulled all his writing and the comments off the site when he handed it over to the other writers.

He could of stopped blogging and left the content. The South Dakota Blog Watch Man also deleted his content before leaving the blogosphere. So what is Powers ashamed of?

And the report also includes this denial:

Although there are rumors, including some on the blog he founded, Powers said he isn’t in line for a job with any newly elected Republicans.

“Dennis Daugaard didn’t call,” he said. “Kristi (Noem) didn’t call.”

What about Jason Gant or some other Republican? Will Pat Power have to eat those words?

He also said this:

Although his politics are conservative, he feels all sides were given a chance to comment on his posts.

Powers is not a limted government conservative as he is a part of the Big Government SDGOP establishment. And he has not only refused to allow me to expose his lies, I have heard complaints from others that Pat has shut them out too.

It will be interesting to see if Powers will have to eat more of his words if he does get a position in the SDGOP establishment's club of cronies.

Daugaard begins building his Big Government bureaucracy, Dusty Johnson to be the Chief

While Bob Mercer wonders if Dennis Daugaard will be the "Mr. Fix It" regarding the state budget, Daugaard announces his plans to build another expensive layer of government bureaucracy:

Rather than route most decisions through a chief of staff as Gov. Mike Rounds has done the past eight years, Gov.-elect Dennis Daugaard said he will have six people in his senior management team.

And Dusty Johnson was picked to head the team. The report also provided this important piece of information:

Daugaard was in San Diego and Colorado Springs for the past week attending training and orientation meetings held by the Republican Governors Association and the National Governors Association.

On November 1, Bob Mercer did a column on cronyism that included this:

One of the simmering controversies among members of the Legislature are taxpayerfunded trips for legislators to meetings of the American Legislative Exchange Council, a pro-business national organization that is largely funded by corporations.

Private sponsorships in large amounts also help underwrite national meetings of the National Governors Association, the Council of State Governments and the National Conference of State Legislatures that are attended by South Dakota officials and legislators.

Senator Mike Vehle has used taxpayer's money to attend Council of State Governments conferences. His campaign ads bragged about his role as "Co-Chair of Council of State Governments Midwest Economic Development Committee". In May 2009 I did a post that included Daugaard's Chief of Staff joining forces with Vehle to grow Davison County's government bureaucracy:

There’s always room for improvement, Davison County Commission Chairman Jerry Fischer said Tuesday, but things are running well in Davison County and no major changes are required.

That was the gist of Fischer’s response to recommendations made by the local planning group Focus 2020, which was represented at Tuesday’s commission meeting in the courthouse by state Sen. Mike Vehle and Public Utilities Commissioner Dusty Johnson. The two men, both Mitchell residents, are cochairmen of Focus 2020’s Government Structures Subcommittee. The subcommittee issued draft recommendations recently for the county that included hiring a "county mayor" to represent the county as a whole and holding evening instead of daytime meetings. Tuesday, Johnson and Vehle delivered presentations summarizing the recommendations.

The two Republicans are also pushing for Mitchell to add a city manager. I suspect these kinds of big government ideas come out of the National Governors Association and Council of State Governemnts.

The South Dakota GOP is being lead by big government advocates who get their marching orders from the National Governors Association and the Council for State Governments. Research shows their policy agenda to be in lockstep with Obama's far-left secular socialist agenda. While the GOP told South Dakota voters that Obama's stimulus was wrong headed, South Dakota's governemnt, lead by the GOP, was gladly spending it and hoping for more. 

It is sad to watch conservaitve Republicans being mislead by charismatic faux conservatives. The biggest lesson I learned during the District 20 Senate campaign was how little the GOP voters follow the policy positions of those they support. And for those who find out, they even go out of the way to hide the voting records that are an embarrassment to the principles of the party.

It was also disappointing to watch my conservative political allies idolize Dusty Johnson as he supported the far-left Mike Vehle and distanced himself from the real conservative in the race. For Dusty, power is more important than principles. And I congratulate him as he has gotten his wish. He is now the second most powerful man in South Dakota.

UPDATE: In today's Mitchell Daily Republic, Dusty Johnson is quoted;"It's not about being famous for me. It's about making South Dakota better." The political philosophy of the 2010 candidates for District 20 State Senate was clear. I adhere to the SDGOP platform, while Senator Vehle adheres to the secular socialist agenda that Barack Obama is pushing. So is Johnson saying the GOP platform is not in the best interest of South Dakota? He made it very clear to me on more than one occasion, he cares far more about GOP power than he does conservative principles of limited government and individual liberty. Perhaps the real agenda of the SDGOP is secular socialism, and they believe that is how we make South Dakota better. It would be nice to get this stuff out in the open so people would know, but that is not how the SDGOP works. They stay behind close doors and then deny conclusions people like me come to when we analyze their actions. It is sad that they even go behind close doors to discuss the South Dakota state budget. It is even more sad as they have expanded the control they have on the State.

Deficit-reduction commission, an escape hatch for big spenders

Thomas Sowell:

Another deficit-reduction commission has now made its recommendations. My own recommendation for dealing with deficits would include stopping the appointment of deficit-reduction commissions.

It is not the amount of money that these commissions cost that is the issue. It is the escape hatch that they provide for big-spending politicians.

Do you go ahead and spend the rent money and the food money – and then ask somebody else to tell you how to escape the consequences?

If President Obama or the Congress were serious about keeping the deficit down, they could have had this commission's recommendations before they spent hundreds of billions of dollars, handing out goodies hither and yon to their pet constituencies.

I don't know why people agree to serve on these bipartisan commissions, which save the political hides of the big spenders after they have run up huge deficits. Back in the 1950s, there was a saying: "If you didn't invite me to the take-off, don't invite me to the crash landing."

Deficit commissions make it politically possible to spend money first and get somebody else to recommend raising taxes later. They are a virtual guarantee of never-ending increases in both spending and taxes.

Why provide political cover? Leave the big spenders out there naked in front of the voters! Either the elected officials will change their ways, or the voters can change the officials they elect.

There is no special information or wisdom available to unelected deficit commissions that is not available to elected officials. Nor are they more far-seeing than politicians.

Treating the once universally respected dollar like the peso of a banana republic

Pat Buchanan:

If it is the first responsibility of the Federal Reserve to protect the dollars that Americans earn and save, is it not dereliction of duty for the Fed to pursue a policy to bleed value from those dollars? For that is what Chairman Ben Bernanke is up to with his QE2, or "quantitative easing."

Translation: The Fed is committed to buy $600 billion in bonds from banks and pay for them by printing money that will then be deposited in those banks. The more dollars that flood into the economy, the less every one of them is worth.

Bernanke is not just risking inflation. He is inducing inflation.

He is reducing the value of the dollar to make U.S. exports more competitive and imports more expensive, so that we will consume fewer imports. He is trying to eliminate the U.S. trade deficit by treating the once universally respected dollar like the peso of a banana republic.

Sarah Palin has nailed cold what Bernanke is about:

"We shouldn't be playing around with inflation. It's not for nothing Reagan called it 'as violent as a mugger, as frightening as an armed robber and as deadly as a hit man.'

Who is the tea-party candidate to step up and run for the chairmanship of the RNC?

Judson Phillips:

Ego and incompetence is a dangerous combination.

No, I'm not talking about Obama. I'm talking about Michael Steele.

Michael Steele, on Friday, claimed credit for the Republican wins last Tuesday. All I can say is I am grateful I was not drinking my coffee at the time I read that or I might be buying a new laptop.

Tuesday was historic, and there is no other word to describe it. It could have been much better. The Republican gains in the House could have been considerably larger. The Republicans could have gained control of the Senate. Instead, the party of socialism held on to the Senate.

What was the socialists' secret weapon that helped them avoid total defeat?

Michael Steele.

Steele thinks he is responsible for this amazing election result. Politics has been transformed in the last two years. Was it Michael Steele or was it the tea-party movement? How many Michael Steele rallies have there been over the last two years? How many Michael Steele candidates have been announced for office? How many Michael Steele conventions were there in the past year? How many Michael Steele websites are there? How many Michael Steele PACs are there?

As chairman of the RNC, Steele spent money like a drunken Democrat. He used his position to fly all over the place to promote himself and receive speaking fees of up to $20,000 an appearance. That is something no other RNC chairman has ever done. Perhaps if he spent more time on his job, Harry Reid might be unemployed today.

Steele certainly does not share the tea-party fiscal philosophy. When he took over in 2009, the RNC had a $23 million surplus. Now, it only has $3.4 million in the bank and debt of almost $6 million. Four years ago, the Republican Congressional Committee and the Republican Senate Committee received $40 million from the RNC. This year, they only received $4 million from the RNC. Had Michael Steele been doing his job, we might be looking at a Sen. Angle, Sen. O'Donnell, a Sen. Miller and perhaps a Sen. McMahon. We might be looking at a 75 seat gain against the party of socialism.

The ultimate goal of the tea-party movement is to change the government and the way government works. There are some in the tea-party movement who say that both parties are bad. They say that they are both flip sides of the same coin.

The simple fact of the matter is, we have a two-party system. We need to win. The simple fact of the matter is, in order for the tea party to win and not the RINOs or the statists, we must take over the GOP. The best place to start is the RNC. Michael Steele is a RINO, and he needs to go.

Who is the tea-party candidate to step up and run for the chairmanship of the RNC?

District 20 sends an Obama Democrat to State Senate

Even though Mike Vehle is a registered Republican, his policy positions and voting record [see how the Davison County GOP establishment tried to hide his voting record from District 20 Republicans] would make the Obama far-left secular socialists happy and proud. So while many voted for Kristi Noem and her message that the stimulus package was wrong, Vehle defended South Dakota spending it and still does not think the extra half billion of federal pork is enough. He plans to raise taxes and fees on South Dakota citizens. Here is the report from The Mitchell Daily Republic:

Vehle, who also served two terms in the state House, received 4,828 votes to defeat Democrat Susan Thie, who received 1,868 votes, and independent Steve “Sibby” Sibson, who had 1,726 votes. The percentages were 57-22-21.

The senator said he feels his moderate beliefs and approach were appreciated and supported by voters. [Moderate: a Republican who believes in the far-left secular socialist agenda of the Democrats?]

“I am always trying to find a solution to the problem,” he said. “You need to find common ground.” [And Vehle is going to Pierre promoting government being the solution. What was Reagan's position on that?]

Vehle, 60, said two issues, funding education and balancing the state budget, will be the primary concerns in Pierre.

“Education and budget will be the two biggest fights,” he said. “You would expect that, since education is the biggest share of the budget.

“I think we all are going to have to work really hard to balance the budget,” he said. “I think one of the issues is being able to work together so we get Democrats and Republicans working together on issues.”

Vehle said he hopes to be reappointed as chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee and wants to ensure the state’s highways and roads are kept in good shape. [In other words, we need to raise the gas tax and license plate feeds. Like I said, the Obama Democrats would be very happy if Vehle is successful.]

He said while the national trend was encouraging for Republicans, there was a bigger message in the votes.

“Remember two years ago they elected Obama because he promised change. Now they’re voting in a lot of Republicans because they want change,” Vehle said. “We need to make sure we make changes that are the best for the country. [Like Obama he means government is the solution. What was Reagan's position on that?]

“We can’t do this every two years. Once you win, then you’ve got to govern. It’s real easy to throw stones.”

Vehle said having two opponents made the race more challenging.

“That’s always a concern, anytime you had a three-way race,” he said. “No win is easy. I always am concerned about a race.”

Thie, 47, had gone to bed when she saw the election numbers going against her in her first race for office.

“They had Mr. Vehle in mind and I support that,” she said. “No regrets, that’s for sure.

“It was a great learning experience and next time I will be better prepared. It will definitely be a family decision, but I may give it another go.”

Sibson, 54, said while he wanted to congratulate Vehle, he planned to return to Pierre as a citizen lobbyist and will strongly consider another run for office.

“I think 20 percent — there’s a significant minority that feels my message was the right message,” he said.

“Definitely something to build upon,” he said. “I felt really good about the message and the people were connecting to that message. Each day I was picking up votes — I just simply ran out of votes.[time]” [In two years I will have way more time to campaign than I had this year. Plus I will have the experience from this year and a foundation of a base. All I need is Vehle to continue to vote to the far-left as he has in the past.]

Davison County GOP trying to hide Vehle's radical far-left secular socialist voting record

Pat Powers has a post regarding the Thune/Noem rally in Rapid City. That same tour was in Mitchell Friday night where the Davison County GOP tried to stop the South Dakota Family Council from handing out their voter guides. Why would they want to hide from GOP voters Vehle's radical far-left secular socialist voting record that would make the Obama Democrats proud as John Thune and Kristi Noem criticize that very same Obama agenda in order to rally for votes? Not at all logical, unless you care more about GOP power than you do GOP principles.

Food for votes also applies to South Dakota's Legislature

From Bob Mercer:

The topic of South Dakota’s voter-bribery ban deserves further coverage in this space this week for two reasons.

First, nobody seems to mind that the ban doesn’t seem apply to the people elected by the voters to state office in South Dakota. We’ll visit that point at length in a few moments.

Second, new information has surfaced from state Attorney General Marty Jackley regarding the allegations of offering food as an inducement to get people to participate in early voting.

In this space last week this columnist focused solely on the Democratic-organized chili feeds and early voting rallies, which were held contrary to the high-profile warnings issued a decade ago that the practice was illegal.

In recent days Attorney General Jackley issued a statement that his office has received continuing complaints about offering of food in exchange for or to induce voting.

“Complaints have been submitted by both Republican and Democratic political parties, local law enforcement, and private citizens,” his statement said.

A few days later 18 Republican legislators publicly endorsed the proposal from Sen. Jason Gant of Sioux Falls, the Republican candidate for secretary of state, to make voter bribery a Class 6 felony punishable by up to two years in prison and a $2,000 fine.

Voter bribery currently is a Class 2 misdemeanor punishable by 30 days in jail and a $500 fine.

The idea of increasing the penalty as a deterrent was first suggested in this space last week. It wasn’t made in conjunction with Gant or the Republican legislators.

Since they’re in the mood to look at bribery reforms, perhaps they would be willing to consider cleaning up similar practices during the legislative sessions.

Offering food, and drink, is a daily event during the annual sessions. In fact, the Legislative Research Council has helped coordinate the scheduling.

On most mornings and most noons, buffet-style spreads are offered behind the Senate and the House chambers. Organizations provide the food, coffee and water.

These are opportunities for organizations with interest in legislation to meet and greet legislators and other state officials who come for the food.

Many organizations also provide small gifts to legislators such as jars of candy for their desks and coffee mugs and other tokens.

Many organizations also hold evening meals for legislators at locations away from the Capitol including banquets and come-and-go buffets.

Rarely does a legislator need to pay for a meal if she or he doesn’t want to use the perdiem expense payment all legislators receive in addition to their salaries.

There are other less-visible practices that are perhaps much more influential.

Some lobbyists host “drink rooms” at local motels, or in private homes, where legislators know they can routinely stop after each day’s work ends at the Capitol.

This practice likely dates back to the territorial Legislature.

Some lobbyists take individual legislators to breakfast or lunch or dinner to discuss matters. Some lobbyists actually host entire committees for dinner prior to hearings on bills in which the lobbyists have an interest.

Governors also host meals and gatherings for legislators to discuss strategy and to make the pitches for legislation.

And legislators in turn host events each session for lobbyists to attend and pay money. The Republicans and the Democrats both do this to raise campaign contributions.

One of the simmering controversies among members of the Legislature are taxpayerfunded trips for legislators to meetings of the American Legislative Exchange Council, a pro-business national organization that is largely funded by corporations.

Private sponsorships in large amounts also help underwrite national meetings of the National Governors Association, the Council of State Governments and the National Conference of State Legislatures that are attended by South Dakota officials and legislators.

The murkiness extends into political contributions. Take an assortment of examples from the current election cycle – all legal under South Dakota’s current laws.

Two legislators received unusually large contributions from political action committees.

The South Dakota Trial Lawyers gave $15,000 to one of their members, Sen. Nancy Turbak Berry, D-Watertown.

She succeeded in winning the Legislature’s approval of a measure last year that insurance companies opposed and trial lawyers supported. Only a veto by Gov. Mike Rounds prevented it from becoming law.

Rep. Deb Peters, RHartford, received $10,000 from the Warner PAC, whose only contributors this year were Tom and Sharon Warner of Rapid City.

Years of records show the Warners normally support Democratic candidates and specific social causes, such as the Equality South Dakota organization, which promotes an equal-rights agenda for gays, lesbians and other sexual orientations.

The Warners strongly support the Equality group, and Sharon Warner filed the group’s PAC report as well as the Warner PAC’s report. Peters sponsored the Equality group’s legislation during the 2010 session. It was defeated in its first committee hearing.

Peters was the only recipient of a donation from the Warner PAC this fall, and the only other one this year was Sen.-elect Angie Buhl of Sioux Falls, who won a Democratic primary and is unopposed this fall.

Loopholes in state laws on PACs have allowed very large contributions to flow from a handful of big givers such as the Warners, Gary and April Wenzel of Rapid City, state Sen. Stan Adelstein of Rapid City and banker T. Denny Sanford of Sioux Falls to candidates this year, including three running for governor, Republicans Gordon Howie and Dave Knudson and Democrat Scott Heidepriem.

Big money has been routed through PACs even to secretary of state candidates Gant and Democrat Ben Nesselhuf, who are running for the office that oversees campaign finance reporting and elections.

Rep. Jason Frerichs, DSisseton, is unopposed for election to his district’s Senate seat. He reported receiving $2,375 from nine PACs and three other candidates’ committees this fall. Altogether he reported receiving $4,885 in direct contributions.

He’s used the money for other political purposes, which is legal. Nor is it uncommon for unopposed candidates to receive campaign donations.

Special Interest funding a hot issue in the District 20 State Senate race

From The Mitchell Daily Republic:

District 20 legislative candidates show a great disparity on how they raised money — and how much they raised — to run for office this year.

The pre-election filing deadline for campaign finance reports was Oct. 22.

State Sen. Mike Vehle, R-Mitchell, raised nearly $15,000, with almost half of that coming from political action committees (PACs).

Independent Steve “Sibby” Sibson, one of Vehle’s two opponents in the race for the district’s one state Senate seat, has completely self-funded his campaign, contributing $7,953.50.

The third candidate in the race, Democrat Susan Thie, has raised nearly $4,000, with almost all of that coming from the Davison County Democratic Party.

District 20 consists of Davison and Aurora counties. The election is Tuesday.

Vehle had received $14,693.63 in cash and in-kind donations and spent $9,908.10 by the reporting deadline. He had $7,155.74 cash on hand.

Vehle raised $7,200 from PACS, including $1,000 from a PAC called Independent Community Bankers of South Dakota that is based in Mitchell.

He also received $750 from South Dakota RPAC, a Realtors PAC, and $500 from a South Dakota Association of Healthcare Organizations PAC.

Aside from the Mitchell PAC, almost all the PACs are based in Pierre. Vehle did receive donations from PACs in Rapid City, Sioux Falls and Deadwood.

He also received $650 from three PAC donations outside the state: $300 from the Burlington Northern Santa Fe PAC based in Fort Worth, Texas; $250 from WellPAC in Des Moines, Iowa; and $100 from the Otter Tail PAC in Wahpeton, N.D.

Vehle raised $6,140 in direct contributions, including $200 from former U.S. Sen. Jim Abdnor, R-S.D. Vehle worked for Abdnor in the 1970s.

Davison County Republicans gave him an in-kind donation of $1,175 by allowing him to use billboards. Vehle did not contribute any money to his campaign.

As of her report, Thie had raised $2,075 and had spent $395.66 of that at the reporting deadline, leaving her with $1,679.34 cash on hand.

Thie received $1,525 from the Davison County Democratic Central Committee.

She also received $250 from Cheryl Chapman of Rapid City, the chairwoman of the state Democratic Party, and $250 from the South Dakota Educators Political Involvement Committee. She contributed $50 herself.

Sibson had spent all $7,953.50 he contributed to his campaign by the reporting deadline.

Funding my own campaign so that I am also independent from the special interests

The Mitchell Daily Republic reports on the Sibby for Senate to Serve campaign:

Steve “Sibby” Sibson said he wants to give voters a choice Tuesday.

Sibson is running as an independent candidate for state Senate in District 20, which consists of Davison and Aurora counties. Susan Thie is the Democratic candidate and the Republican candidate is state Sen. Mike Vehle.

“I am running to give the good people of District 20 a real choice for state senator,” he said. “In the recent past, the seat has either been filled by one who was unopposed, or by a choice between two party-establishment candidates whose goal is to grow government bureaucracy.

“I am running for those who want to reduce government bureaucracy and return control back to the citizens.”

The Mitchell native has stayed close to home. He works four blocks from where he was born.

Sibson, 54, is a division controller for Toshiba. He received a master’s degree in accounting from the University of South Dakota in 1983. His wife’s name is Kathy.

This is Sibson’s first run for office, but he has been a close observer of South Dakota politics for years.

“Since 2000 I have been involved in the state’s Legislature as an unpaid volunteer citizen lobbyist,” he said. “So I do understand the process well.”

Sibson is well known in the South Dakota political community for his at-times fiery conservative views. He is campaigning by going door-todoor and handing out small booklets that include the Constitution and other historic political documents.

“I am running independent from both parties and am funding my own campaign so that I am also independent from the special interests who want a bigger piece of the ever-growing budget,” he said.

“They help fund the party establishment candidates and also have the resources to lobby them in Pierre,” Sibson said.

“I will be able to say no to them and use my accounting education and experience to give South Dakota something they have not had in Pierre in regard to decisions made on spending taxes and borrowed money from our children.”

The main issue at the Capitol next year will be money, as usual, he said.

“Of course the budget is a big issue of the day,” Sibson said. “I plan to get to the bottom of the programs that the money is being spent on and look to shift from less important programs that special interests want and instead reallocate to fundamental government services such as maintaining our roads.

“Once fundamental services are funded, then funding of unneeded programs are put into reserve for the next rainy day, or used to reduce taxes, or pay down the federal debt. We need to come together as Americans and make those decisions.”

Sibson said he views himself as a representative of the people.

“I can’t make a difference, but we the citizens can. If the government is to be returned to the citizens, then the citizens need to take charge and demand it back,” he said. “I am willing to lead that work.

“By voting for me, you are sending the message that you are ready to do more for yourself, and rely less on government.”