Sibby Online

South Dakota's federal education dollars going to bankers!

Do you remember this from last summer:

What Congress giveth, governors taketh away.

Lawmakers gave cash-strapped states $10 billion last month to save 145,000 teachers' jobs. The funds were meant to reduce classroom crowding and restore programs lost to state budget cuts.

But some governors have other ideas for the money, namely using the funds to close their budget shortfalls. Several are planning to reduce state aid to school districts by the amount they receive from the feds. Others are looking to use the money for school construction and improvements.

And if state tax revenues fall short later this year, even more governors will likely slash state aid, figuring schools have the federal funds as a cushion.

The CNN report says this about Governor Rounds' plan:

South Dakota Gov. Mike Rounds is planning a similar move. He intends to reduce state aid by the $26.3 million that districts will receive from the federal government and spend it on other state needs.

In the Mount Rushmore State, which hasn't had many teacher layoffs, the plan is also tinged with political perspective. Rounds doesn't want schools to get used to the extra funds since they won't be available next year, said his spokesman, Joe Kafka.

Legally, governors can reduce state aid as long as certain criteria are met. They are not allowed the add to the state's rainy day accounts, nor can they let their state education funding fall below a certain level. But federal officials are encouraging states to support their schools.

During Saturday's District 20 cracker barrell in Mitchell, Rep. Lance Carson, who is Vice Chair of the House Appropriations committee, admitted that the $26.3 million is not going to be used to reduce state aid. Instead they are going to use it to fund a one-time $27,475,000 bank franchise tax refund. Here is a link to the Governor's budget summary PDF file where you will find that on page 19. So far the Mitchell Daily Republic has not reported on this important revelation let alone provide details on the bank franchise tax refund. Here is what they are saying about the meeting so far.

More on Daugaard's fabricated $127 million structural budget deficit

Sad that the Argus Leader, the Mitchell Daily Republic, and the Aberdeen News continue to repeat the Daugaard propaganda that there is a $127 million budget deficit due to the supposedly ongoing recession. If you look at page 19 of the Governor's budget summary who will see that General fund revenue projections for FY2012 are going up from FY2010. Sales tax receipts were $652,115,527 in 2010, and are expected to increases nearly 9% to $709,340,328. That is a $57 million increases in sales tax revenues, which means the recession is over. National GDP numbers confirm that point.

The FY2010 revenue from continuing receipts (excludes one-time receipts) was $1,109,795,746 for the General Fund. Actual FY2010 General Fund spending was $1,121,828,785. So the structural deficit in FY2010 was only $12 million, not even close to the $127 million figure everyone (politicians and their media cohorrs) is repeating to South Dakotans. Those same ongoing revenues are expected to be $1,165,243,298 for FY2012, up $60 million from 2010. As noted before, spending is going down $2 million in the FY2012 budget versus actual FY2010 spending at $1,119.988.080. So the FY2012 budget has a $45 million surplus (1.165 billion less 1.120 billion) Therefore, we can increase the FY2012 budget $45 million before we begin to create a structural deficit.

The above analysis completely destroys the point Bob Mercer is making accross the state:

Q. What caused the $127 million structural deficit?

A. State government ran deficits most of the eight years that the previous governor, Mike Rounds, was in office. These were covered at first by budgeting maneuvers. Legislators repeatedly succumbed to pressure by public school lobbyists for extra money in various forms while Rounds was governor.

The deficit problem's roots can be found in several circumstances. There was the repeal of the inheritance tax by voters in 2000, the post 9/11 recession and the loss of much of the gold-mining industry in the Black Hills. The structural deficit then mushroomed as the recession took grip in 2009. State sales tax revenue, for example, actually went backward in 2010.

But as the numbers show, the 2012 estimates on sales tax shows a huge 9% rebound, there is not $127 million structural deficit (in fact we have a huge surplus), and the federal government continues to poor 100s of millions of extra dollars we never had before the recession (a recession that is now over and has been for a while). Not sure why Bob Mercer continues to carry water for the tax and spend liberals of the SDGOP. Last week I tried to reason with him (I even apologized), but this latest piece of work is very disappointing. His analysis has a lot of detail, but there is much that is missing. And those parts to not fit into the fairytale that South Dakota has a budget crisis due to a recession that has reduced revenues. South Dakota state govermemnt was a $3 billion monster in 2008, now is is nearing $4 billion.

Again...the SDGOP is blowing smoke with the budget crisis myth (and we thought only the Democrats use the Cloward-Piven strategy), and later I will show that their aim is to push more of the state funding burden onto the backs of property owners, many of whom are not getting adequate governmental services in regard to road repair. The SDGOP and the South Dakota media has fabricated a crisis that does not exist in order to justify more taxes and more government. The strategy of getting the vast education lobby behind them is working. As Mercer pointed out, the Educrats are good at getting more money. Unfortunately is goes mainly to bureaucrats (Educrats) and not the teachers. The children are not benefiting. Instead they are going to be faced with with a huge National Debt that is funding this masquerade.

Pat Powers provides another example on how the SDGOP misleads and lacks credibility

Bob Mercer tells us what Pat Powers has been up to lately:

The face of Pat Powers keeps popping up on the latest Twitter feeds from the Dakota War College blog site. That’s Pat’s old site, the site he said he gave up last month when he took a $65,000 job with Secretary of State Jason Gant as director of operations.

That is not exactly what Pat Powers said. He actually said this in regard to deleting his web site last November:

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.”

So we have the SDGOP claiming to cut $127 million when it is only $2 million, point to invitation only meetings as actually open, and now they promote a guy like Pat Powers to a high ranking position in the Secretary of State office.

Dusty Johnson provides more propaganda for Daugaard's $127 million budget crisis myth

Keloland quotes Dusty Johnson:

"This budget is not the kind of thing everybody instantly embraces," Johnson said. "It takes a lot of thinking, a lot of asking, a lot of probing to try to figure out is this really the right approach for South Dakota. You're not going to do that unless you sit down with people honestly and openly."

Honestly and openly? I have already shown that the $127 million budget cut is actually only $2 million, so so much for honest. And in regard to open, let us not forget this:

Gov. Dennis Daugaard will tour the state to discuss his Fiscal Year 2012 budget proposal.

Daugaard will begin his meetings today and they will continue through Wednesday. He will speak to the Mitchell Chamber of Commerce at 4 p.m. Monday. The invitation-only meeting will be held at the Highland Conference Center.

I wasn't invited to the invitation only meeting, so I take issue with Dusty bragging about open meetings. I am more than willing to help the Governor with a plan to openly and honestly tell the people of South Dakota the truth about what is causing South Dakota's budget problem...too much federal borrowed money and too many special interests lobbyists fighting over it.

Last chance to see KCPO's coverage on South Dakota's state budget

Today at 5:30 is the last chance to see my analysis of the state budget. Here is a link to their schedule and here is a link to the channels where you can see the broadcast.  

How international bankers use the Federal Reserve to steal from Americans

Pay very close attention to what is being said here:

The vast majority of Americans, including many of those who believe that they are "educated" about the Federal Reserve, do not really understand how the Federal Reserve really makes money for the international banking elite.  Many of those opposed to the Federal Reserve will point to the record $80.9 billion in profits that the Federal Reserve made last year as evidence that they are robbing the American people blind.  But then those defending the Federal Reserve will point out that the Fed returned $78.4 billion to the U.S. Treasury.  As a result, the Fed only made a couple billion dollars last year.  Pretty harmless, eh?  Well, actually no.  You see, the money that the Federal Reserve directly makes is not the issue.  Rather, the "magic" of the Federal Reserve system is that it took the power of money creation away from the U.S. government and gave it to the bankers.  Now, the only way that the U.S. government can inject more money into the economy is by going into more debt.  But when new government debt is created, the amount of money to pay the interest on that debt is not also created.  In this way, it was intended by the international bankers that U.S. government debt would expand indefinitely and the U.S. money supply would also expand indefinitely.  In the process, the international bankers would become insanely wealthy by lending money to the U.S. government.

Every single year, hundreds of billions of dollars in profits are made lending money to the U.S. government.

But why in the world should the U.S. government be going into debt to anyone?

Why can't the U.S. government just print more money whenever it wants?

Well, that is not the way our system works.  The U.S. government has given the power of money creation over to a consortium of international private bankers.

Not only is this unconstitutional, but it is also one of the greatest ripoffs in human history.

In 1922, Henry Ford wrote the following....

"The people must be helped to think naturally about money. They must be told what it is, and what makes it money, and what are the possible tricks of the present system which put nations and peoples under control of the few."

It is important to try to understand how the international banking elite became so fabulously wealthy.  One of the primary ways that this was accomplished was by gaining control over the issuance of national currencies and by trapping large national governments in colossal debt spirals.

The U.S. national debt problem simply cannot be fixed under the current system.  U.S. government debt has been mathematically designed to expand forever.  It is a trap from which there is no escape.

Many liberals won't listen because they don't really care about ever paying off the debt, and most conservatives won't listen because they are convinced we can solve the national debt problem if we just get a bunch of "good conservatives" into positions of power, but the truth is that we have such a horrific debt problem because it was designed to be this way from the beginning.

KCPO to cover South Dakota budget

I just returned form a filming session regarding South Dakota's budget for "The Facts" that will air on KCPO-TV tomorrow at 10:30AM, 2:30PM, 10:30PM, and on Monday at 5:30PM. Here is a link to their schedule and here is a link to the channels where you can see the broadcast.  

Daugaard worried about campaign money needed for re-election already?

So Governor Daugaard is going on the trail to explain his budget proposal:

Gov. Dennis Daugaard will tour the state to discuss his Fiscal Year 2012 budget proposal.

Daugaard will begin his meetings today and they will continue through Wednesday. He will speak to the Mitchell Chamber of Commerce at 4 p.m. Monday. The invitation-only meeting will be held at the Highland Conference Center.

So why is the "invitation-only"? And why is it directed at Chamber of Commerce and Rotary organizations? Isn't there you would find your country club Republicans who largely fund campaigns?

Don't get me wrong, I do applaud the Governor for reducing the amount of money former Governor Rounds wanted to spend. But I don't think we are getting straight reasons as to what is causing the need to reduce education funding. He may argue that he is being fair by cutting everyone 10%, but like I said earlier, the reduction is only $2 million and not the $127 million...so what is being cut out of education is going somewhere else. And those many South Dakotans who are not invited to hear his explanations deserve to know the truth about what is really going on. It doesn't look like we are going to get the truth out of the media and unfortunately, not enough people read blogs.

The supposed $127 million budget cut is actually less than $2 million

[UPDATE: Bob Mercer has a response to this post. I will respond in more detail tonight. But for now I want all to know that I did not mean to take a shot at Bob. He, by far, has the best media coverage on South Dakota government. My analysis brings into play the need to hold politicans accountable to the last "actual' spending level...an not let them get away with playing games by comparing two budgets.]

The media is again helping a South Dakota Republican governor mislead the people of South Dakota. Here is an example:

Two weeks into his new administration, Gov. Dennis Daugaard stood alone before a joint assembly of the Legislature Wednesday and called for budget cuts of at least 10 percent throughout the state government departments and offices under his control.

“The gun is at our head,” he said. “I’m tired of looking at death from a thousand paper cuts.”

He said spending from the state’s general fund must be reduced $127 million in order to bring the budget back into balance with the estimated amounts of tax revenues.

Here is a link to the actual numbers and you will see that the govenor's proposed budget for the general fund is $1,119,988,080. We actually spend $1,121,828,785 last year that ended June 30, 2010. So the real cut is just under $2 million, not the $127 million that is being repeated over and over by the media. He did eliminate the "increased spending" that former Governor Rounds proposed.

More details to come.

 

Saying no to special interests in Pierre

I wrote a letter that was published by the Mitchell Daily Republic last Saturday:

I would like to acknowledge the 21 percent of District 20 voters who supported my independent Sibby for Senate to Serve campaign. If you compare those results to the 2008 District 20 Senate final tally, you will see that I took about 10 percent from Mike Vehle and I took nearly 11 percent from the Democrat side.

So, it was wrong-headed for conservative, limited-government, fiscally responsible Republicans to vote for Vehle instead of me out of fear that a big government tax and spend Democrat would win the race.

So District 20 sent three Republicans to represent them in Pierre. In a recent report, Sen. Vehle said we needed to find “new forms of revenue” and continued to promote raising gas taxes and license-plate fees. Lance Carson said “I think the license plate fees need to go up.” And Tona Rozum also said new forms of revenue need to be on the table and that “there seems to be positive feelings for potential increase in state sales tax.”

When will conservative Republicans wake up and understand that there are big government tax and spend liberals in both parties? That is why South Dakota’s state government has grown from $3 billion in 2008 to $4 billion today, and the South Dakota GOP leadership fabricates a budget crisis to fool us into paying even more taxes.

The truth is that the 2012 proposed budget is $247 million higher than what was spent in the year ended June 30, 2010, from state and federal sources. Reducing those increases should not be called “cuts.” Instead, saying no to the special interests who are in Pierre to feed on those spending increases should be called “fiscal responsibility.” If we don’t do what is responsible, then the real crisis will be the financial peril we are placing on future generations via the massive debt created in D.C.