Sibby Online

Is Pat Powers still involved with South Dakota War College?

[UPDATE: As of this morning it appears that the SDWC has removed from its sidebar feeds from this web site.]

Instead of dealing with the substance of votes made that violate the SDGOP platform, the SDGOP Establishment uses the SDWC blog to redirect the discussion to who was behind the work. One comment begged the question:

Doesn’t it seem like PP is back?

Would it not be strange that a staff person in the South Dakota Secretary of State's office would work on a project to attack those behind exposing the voting records of legislators?

Clearly the mission for the SDGOP Establishment is to personally harm those involved with exposing their Big Governemnt/Big Business political system in Pierre. Afterall a spouse of political figure lost her job at the SDGOP headquarters after standing up to the corrupt system in Pierre and the special interests that control it...such as the Chamber of Commerce and the National Education Association.

Val Rausch going after Stace Nelson to protect the SDGOP Big Ag special interest?

[UPDATE: Stace says this via comment at Madville:

Sibby,
It is my understanding that he actually denied that he had a conversation with me on Monday evening when he told me he was removing me an in which he chastised me about my involvement with the community in fighting the dairy, to a reporter!

The problem is that I had already told the reporter of the call and that I had texts from Rausch in which he even mentioned the conversation of Monday & the discussion of what he called “the CAFO.”

He also told the reporter, and KELO, that he had not made the decision yet! Not nice to lie to reporters when I have his text message saying the opposite.

I am not so naive as to think that this is all about Hanson Co’s dairy fight. I know that House leadership were upset with me for my pushing to have cumalaitve votes online (remember Daily Republic & RCJ articles), complaining about the hiding of the final vote of HB-1198, my bitter complaints of their OBVIOUS gerrmandering of Rep. Lora Hubbel out of her district, AND my complaints to House members of House Leadership pressuring LRC staff to provide them advance notice of legislators’ bills in research that are SUPPOSED to be confidential. I threatened a disciplinary committee motion in open session.

In his comments Monday night, Rausch made it very clear the action was personal, and that it was as he put it with my opposition to the dairy “on his mind” in making the decision.

Of further Note, Cory, realize that Rep. Rausch could move 1 of the 2 Democrats off of Ag committee if this was actually not the personal retaliation that it is. Local government only has 3 Democrats, as per the legislative pecking order that you have already alluded to.

Mr. Rausch made it very clear though that this was not about anything other than screwing with me. He admitted that he had not even talked with Mr. Scott to see what committees he was interested in and he was unaware of the news reports that Mr. Scott has 26 years of local government involvement and was unconcerned when I pointed out I had none.]

Keloland news has the latest controversy brewing over the fight to protect the small guy in South Dakota versus Big Ag:

A controversy is brewing between two South Dakota lawmakers over a committee assignment in the state legislature.

Representative Stace Nelson, who lives just outside of Mitchell in Hanson County, says he is being moved off the House Agriculture Committee because he opposes a large dairy operation proposed in his county.

The Speaker of the South Dakota House of Representatives says that claim is false.

Speaker Val Rausch says he hasn't moved anybody on any committee yet but he needs to make room for Dave Scott, a new legislator who was just appointed by Governor Dennis Daugaard to fill a vacant seat.

But Nelson says he was informed Tuesday that he is being moved off the Agriculture Committee because of his opposition to a 7,000 head dairy operation, and he’s calling it ‘Chicago-style politics.’

"The action itself I think is rank corruption at its worst," Nelson, a Republican from Fulton, said.

Nelson even sent out a Tweet on his Twitter account Tuesday afternoon that said he is being removed from the House Agriculture Committee by Rausch because of his opposition to the dairy operation.

"In the conversation of this, (Nelson said) 'It looks like I'm being relieved of my position because of my opposition to this dairy.'  He (Rausch) made it very clear that his feelings were of that sort," Nelson said.

If you look at the recetly released 2011 South Dakota Legislative voting scorecard, Rausch supported the SDGOP platform only 35% of the time. And he is given the power to detemine the makeup of legislative committees? This is just another example of the types that get put into leadership positions within the SDGOP Establishment. RINOs reign in Pierre.

South Dakota Republican Platform being trashed in a legislature that is dominated by Republicans In Name Only

[Wonder if the South Dakota War College will cover this issue?]

Cory Heidelberger has coverage on an analysis performed on the 2011 South Dakota's Legislature's level of support to the SDGOP Platform. The most interesting part of the work is the PDF sorted by the highest percentage of SDGOP Platform support to the lowest within each chamber. The work proves what I already knew from by time spent in Pierre, the House chamber defends the SDGOP to a much larger degree than the Senate chamber. Here is Cory's take on the Senate Chamber:

Only five Senators manage to score higher than 50% fidelity with the GOP platform. Amazingly, the second-highest score, 57%, goes to Democrat leader Senator Jason Frerichs. 13 of the Senate’s 30 Republicans score worse than all of the Senate Democrats in fidelity to their own platform.

The Democrat Minority leader is a bigger defender of the SDGOP Platform than all but one Republican! And Tim Rave, at 33%, is among those 13 Repubicans who fall below all Democrats in fidelity to the SDGOP Platform. And isn't he the Chairman of the SDGOP?

And if you look at the House Chamber, Tad Perry is tied with two Democrats at the bottom with a 15% ranking. Clearly Tad Perry clearly deserves the Trophy RINO award.

 

 

SD Board of Education approves free job training for huge corporations

The South Dakota Board of Education was in Mitchell on Monday and decided to approve this:

The South Dakota Board of Education approved Monday the implementation of a new program next fall at Mitchell Technical Institute.

The board gathered at MTI’s south campus for its November meeting, after which the board toured the facility.

MTI proposed a farm power technology two-year program to provide skilled workers for farm equipment dealerships.

The program will train students for entry-level positions. Existing agricultural courses will play a significant role in the program, pushing students forward to work at businesses that build, service and sell farming equipment.

“It’s a growing industry,” said Mark Wilson, director of the office of learning and instruction at the South Dakota Department of Education.

“It’s a good opportunity for Mitchell Tech to utilize existing programs for some of the course work and to provide specific training for an area of need.”

MTI President Greg Von Wald said the program will provide many with good careers and skills, even to take back to the family farm.

For the last two years, ag equipment dealers have been corresponding with MTI about starting this type of program, because there is a shortage of farm equipment mechanics, Von Wald said.

According to the proposal, students will gain skills in repair, diagnostics and troubleshooting while taking classes in electronic controls, GPS, hydraulics, harvesting equipment, service management and customer service, among others.

A projected budget for the 2012-13 academic year is $183,500, which includes $60,000 for salaries/benefits, $100,000 for equipment and $23,500 for supplies, travel and marketing.

So South Dakota's state budget had to cut education, put there is still enough money to subsidize Big Ag. Why shouldn't John Deere and other huge manufacturers of Ag equipment pay the costs of training their service technicians?

Sin of coveting dominates the political arena

On Saturday, The Mitchell Daily Republic published my latest editorial:

On Oct. 29, Dave Mitchell responded to my Oct. 18 letter by accusing me of denying the fact that South Dakota has one of the lowest and most regressive tax structures in the nation. It is not that I deny those facts, it is that my religious beliefs prevent me from fostering the sin of coveting.

Second, I am not promoting a 25 percent increase in sales tax, which will only make the regressive tax structure worse. In fact, I am against the ballot issue that is being promoted by the teachers’ union and the corporate medical establishment, who are among the wealthiest. It was obvious that on Oct. 17, the Voices for Children advocates and the SDSU Extension representative were using the Delphi Technique to get the rest of us to go along with that plan.

This paper is also in favor of adding the 25 percent sales tax as it runs editorials arguing their advertising revenues should remain exempt from the sales tax. The idea that the only just tax is one that someone else pays is more evidence of the degree to which the sin of coveting has taken over the political discussions of today.

Dr. Mitchell went on to accuse me (due to denying facts) of not fostering an “informed public discussion.” I invite him to try on those shoes as he, this paper and politicians refuse to address “[t]he fact that South Dakota’s state budget has exploded from $3.1 billion to nearly $4 billion since the recession started in 2008” as quoted from my Oct. 18 letter. Why do we not have an informed discussion “on where did all that extra money go if not for fixing roads, paying teachers and taking care of the disabled?”

I invite Dr. Mitchell to end his straw man arguments and join me in having an informed discussion on the economic impact a sales tax increase, resulting in $180 million less goods and services being purchased in South Dakota and instead sent to Pierre where coveting is in vogue, will have. And I ask: what sense is it to fix a supposed budget crisis that was supposedly caused by a recession, with policies that will adversely impact the economy?

Financial corruption found again in Pierre?

[UPDATE: anybody think South Dakota War College will touch this report?]

This morning, Bob Mercer reports this disturbing audit result:

The people who run governments for us sometimes need reminders they have to follow the rules, too. That’s one of the reasons South Dakota has a state Department of Legislative Audit.

Sometimes the accountants’ findings seem picky. Sometimes they uncover whoppers, such as the recent case of the engine rebuilds for one of state government’s King Air prop jets.

Nobody argues that scheduled maintenance shouldn’t be followed for the state fleet of aircraft. Three years ago, the state Department of Transportation knew it needed hundreds of thousands of dollars it didn’t have for the engine rebuilds.

The Rounds administration could have asked the Legislature for the money but didn’t.

There was too much history, such as the decision by then-Gov. Mike Rounds during his first term to purchase a second King Air for the state fleet, and his documented misuse of state aircraft for personal trips during his first term, and the state law passed by voters to rein in the practice, and his continuing propensity for piloting state aircraft on his official trips right up to the end in 2010.

Instead a different way was devised to get the money as Rounds was finishing up his second and final term. The state Bureau of Finance and Management set in motion a plan where the Department of Transportation sent jet-fuel bills and other aircraft bills to other state agencies that had cash that could be tapped.

The rationale was those other departments sometimes used state aircraft. Those other agencies picked up about $338,000 of aircraft expenses during the 2009 budget year. That freed up money within DOT’s budget to be applied toward the jet-engine rebuilds.

This plan might have been judged acceptable if the Legislature and the public knew upfront. Instead it was conducted in secret.

Well, almost in secret.

The Department of Legislative Audit in its review of the 2009 fiscal year spending didn’t catch onto what had happened. Feeling in the clear, the Bureau of Finance and Management did the same bill re-routing again in the 2010 fiscal year, except for more money.

This time Legislative Audit red-flagged it.

Legislative Audit issued an official finding on the 2010 shift. That June, the final month of the fiscal year, DOT initiated five documents to move $497,622.57 of aircraft costs to other state departments.

I put a question mark on my title because of this:

State Finance Commissioner Jason Dilges has continued to defend what was done. He was finance commissioner in the Rounds administration and received an even broader management role this year as a member of Gov. Dennis Daugaard’s executive team.

“I don’t know that it was wrong,” Dilges said a few days ago. “It is a matter of a difference of opinion.”

Technically he has an argument worth making.

The state law requiring approval from the Legislature’s interim committee covers transfers of money that is to be spent. The section of law doesn’t address what are known as expenditure corrections, which is the term for getting bills to be paid by the correct department or agency.

The eight years Dilges spent as budget director for the Rounds administration weren’t always pleasant for him, especially in dealing with the Legislature. In the past 11 months he clearly appears more relaxed and the defensiveness has vanished.

The change coincides with the arrival of a governor who so far can truly be described as forthright.

That couldn’t have been made more clear than by the answer Commissioner Dilges gave, when he was asked by a reporter whether he would engage in the future of using expenditure corrections to avoid the Legislature’s oversight.

“I doubt it,” he said.

Perhaps the corrent analysis here is that financial corruption is legal in Pierre, and when exposed, we get hints that they will stop. I don't believe it. Especially when the fake 2012 $127 million budget cut have gone unchallenged by the media. Even Bob Mercer continues to promote that myth.

The poor said no to the Sioux Falls Event Center, the well-to-do said yes

I saw this map on Keloland last night, and it confimed yesterday's post regarding the poor being taken advantage of by the wealthy with this Event Center. Cory over at Madville also commented on my post and that is where I found a link to South DaCola's web site where I found the above map and the rich versus the poor theme of the Sioux Falls Event Center issue also alluded to. Here is an excerpt from Keloland's coverage:

Red indicates the precincts that voted no. The precincts where the plan passed are green. As you can see the city is pretty much split in half north and south.

Only seven precincts north of 21st Street voted for the Events Center; otherwise, the north side of Sioux Falls was pretty much against borrowing the $115 million dollars to build it.

Look at all the green to the south. Virtually everything south of 21st Street voted for the Events Center.  The only exception is the 5-11 precinct, which is the polling place at South Dakota Achieve.

Keloland failed to point out the economic difference between the north and south. For those who know, the folks in the north are not as well off as those in the south. If you go to the above link to South DaCola, that point is made very clear. So why didn't Keloland make that point clear to its viewers? And what about the point I made yesterday...42% (now confirmed to be of the poorest citizens) are forced to pay for what they don't want and not even able to afford the events that will come to the Center. Such is the hazard of a democracy and a government who has gone beyond its limited scope.

Mayor Mike Huether, Democrat banker blends socialism, capitalism, and democracy to take from the poor and give to the rich with a $115 million Event Center

Amazing that the Sioux Falls business elite can get 58% of the taxpayers to agree to paying for their pet project and force 42% to buy a $115 million Event Center they don't want. Such is the case when a democracy is used as a tyrannical tool to force citizens to pay for projects that largely benefit the business elite:

Business leaders in Sioux Falls are stepping up and giving the events center their stamp of approval. The Sioux Falls Chamber of Commerce supports the proposal.

At $115 million, the proposed events center is a major investment. But it's one this panel says Sioux Falls can't afford to reject.

"To those in our community who have said they are for progress, and yet they're against the events center, I would respectfully like to say both that I disagree with that, and more importantly, I strongly disagree with that," Michael Bender said.

The Chamber's Board of Directors represents more than 2,000 businesses and organizations. The board unanimously supports the events center, saying financing plans are responsible and the benefits will outweigh the cost.

The "financing plans are responsible"? 100% of the project is to be financed with debt! Of course you should expect that when you elect a banker to mayor. No wonder Huether, former Executive VP of First Premier Bank, had no trouble getting banks to provide $75,000 to fund the propaganda program that portrayed the benefit was going to our children. Unfortunately, the opposition did not have the money to counter that with the fact that passing on $115 million in debt to our children is not beneficial to them. Here is who really benefits:

Mike Sullivan of the Sioux Falls Sports Authority also highlighted the need for a new facility by reading a long list of events Sioux Falls cannot host because of restrictions at the current arena.

And here:

Best Buy is the first, major retail chain in Sioux Falls to support the "Build It Now" events center campaign.

Ryan Hutchinson is a business solutions advisor for Best Buy. We asked him why the company decided to formally join the campaign.

"We're absolutely interested in what the possibilities could be," Best Buy business solutions advisor Ryan Hutchinson said.

And here:

Some of Sioux Falls biggest businesses are throwing their support behind the proposed events center.

The latest campaign finance report shows that the Build It Now campaign, which is pushing for voters to approve the facility, has more than $145,000 in the bank right now.

A vote on the proposed facility is less than a month away and supporters of the project have the resources to make a big-time campaign push.

"It allows us to do what we're charged with doing and that's to educate the public on the benefits of a new events center here in Sioux Falls," Mike Sullivan with Build It Now said.

According to the latest campaign finance report, Build It Now has received more than $153,000 just in the last month. Sanford Health and First Premier Bank have donated a combined $100,000 of that total.
The President of the Sanford USD Medical Center says they're giving support because it helps in recruiting employees.

"As we're competitive for professionals and for staff people, it's getting important that they have those elements right here in town, and don't have to travel, and can have the entertainment and sports venues they want," Sanford USD Medical Center President Dr. Pat O'Brien said.

First National Bank has also given $20,000 in support of a 'yes' vote on the events center.

Other donors include Global Spectrum, which is the company that manages the current Sioux Falls Convention Center. They've contributed $5,000 to the cause.

The Ramada Hotel, which sits right across the street from the Convention Center and the proposed site for the events center, has given $2,500.

So we don't have enough money to pay K-12 teachers and take care of the disabled, elderly, and poor on Medicaid, but we can build a $115 million facility for having fun and games. And all in the name of economic development. Anybody consider the economic impact of increasing the sales tax 25% so that $175 million fewer services and products are purchased in South Dakota? I am sure the Educrats and the Medical Corporate Establishment will be able to fund an even larger proaganda program in 2012 to try and get the voters to pass their sales tax increase. 

This may sound like the crony capitalism that the GOP is known for, but Mayor Mike Huether is not only a former banker, he is also a Democrat. It takes a blend of capitalism with socialism, plus the help of mob rule through a democracy, to use a regressive sales tax to take from the poor and give to the wealthy business elites. Instead, why didn't the proponents set up a corporation and have these wealthy business leader buy stock and fund the Event Center privately? Could it be that that would not be economically feasible?