Sibby Online

South Dakota House members use South Dakota's Constitution to take a stand against back room deals being cut during the legislative session and bypassing public input

From my email:

DISSENT AND PROTEST PASSAGE OF SB 53

 

                Pursuant to Joint Rule 1-10, we, the undersigned Representatives, do hereby respectfully dissent and protest the passage of SB 53. The bill was amended in its entirety on the House floor to include four objects of one time appropriations, that were not subjected to public committee hearings, and which clearly violate the explicit requirements of South Dakota Constitution Article XII, Section 2 which states: ".. All other appropriations shall be made by separate bills, each embracing but one object, and shall require a two-thirds vote of all the members of each branch of the Legislature "  After being defeated, the bill was discussed in closed meeting by a quorum of House members in which the public and minority party legislators were specifically excluded, and the bill was subsequently reconsidered and passed.  We believe that this is in contravention of South Dakota Constitution Article III, Section 15 which states “The sessions of each house and of the committee of the whole shall be open, unless when the business is such as ought to be kept secret.”  The reasons for appropriation and disbursement of tax payer dollars should NOT be kept secret.  For these reasons, we believe that the passage of the bill is in contravention of South Dakota’s Constitution, is injurious to the rights of the people of South Dakota, and is therefore null and void. We respectfully request that this dissent be printed in the House Journal as required by Joint Rule 1-10.

 

Respectfully submitted,                   

Stace Nelson                                                                                                     

Lance Russell

Elizabeth May                                                                                                   

Dan Kaiser

Troy Heinert                                                                                                      

Kevin Killer

Paula Hawks                                                                                                      

Dean Schrempp

Patrick Kirschman                                                                                           

Dennis Feickert

Feminist activist Cory Heidelberger says it is OK to kill a woman just because she is female

The latest illogical argument from Cory Heidelberger's Madville:

South Dakota's anti-abortion legislation is bad enough. When it takes a racist turn, it's worse.

House Bill 1162 seeks to make it illegal to abort a fetus because of the fetus's sex. Like other abortion laws on South Dakota's books, the law insults women by declaring abortion a crime but refusing to recognize women's responsibility for committing that crime.

But the laws backers are going further and insulting a specific group of women: Asian-American women. During House debate on HB 1162, Rep. Stace Nelson (R-19/Fulton) argued that we need to ban sex-selective abortions to check the evil cultural tendencies of South Dakota's burgeoning immigrant population:

Speaking in favor of the bill, Stace Nelson, a Republican state representative running for the US Senate, hearkened back to his time living in Asia as a Marine. "Many of you know I spent 18 years in Asia," Nelson said. "And sadly, I can tell you that the rest of the world does not value the lives of women as much as I value the lives of my daughters" [Molly Redden, "GOP Lawmaker: We Need to Ban Sex-Selective Abortions Because of Asian Immigrants," Mother Jones, 2014.02.25].

Rep. Don Haggar (R-10/Sioux Falls), proud papa of HB 1162 prime sponsor Rep. Jenna Haggar (R-10/Sioux Falls), jumped on the evil-Asian bandwagon:

Don Haggar, another Republican state representative, warned that the values Nelson observed in Asia had already taken root in South Dakota. "Let me tell you, our population in South Dakota is a lot more diverse than it ever was," Haggar said. "There are cultures that look at a sex-selection abortion as being culturally okay. And I will suggest to you that we are embracing individuals from some of those cultures in this country, or in this state. And I think that's a good thing that we invite them to come, but I think it's also important that we send a message that this is a state that values life, regardless of its sex" [Redden, 2014.02.25].

Shivana Jorawar of the National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum says this anti-Asian stereotyping has been going on in anti-abortion crusades for years. She testified yesterday before Senate Health and Human Services to ask South Dakota not to go down this racist path.

So Heidelberger thinks the color of ones skin justifies killing a human being, just because it is a female? You would think the feminists would be up in arms protesting Heidelberger for being a misogynist.