In December 2008, International Code Council CEO Rick Weiland sent a letter to incoming Energy Secretary Dr. Steven Chu encouraging the Obama Administration to include $100 million for "grants to local governments to upgrade their building code enforcement to new energy-efficient standards" in the economic stimulus bill. President Obama went Weiland one better—actually, 30 better, giving $3 billion to states for energy efficiency improvements.
Every state in the Union thought that was a great idea:
All 50 governors — including Weiland's Senate rival Mike Rounds — ultimately accepted their share of this energy efficiency money. South Dakota received $23.7 million and used it to make state buildings more energy efficient.
"I have requested our public utility commission to consider additional actions to promote energy efficiency, consistent with the federal statutory language contained in (the stimulus)," Rounds wrote in a four-paragraph assurance to the federal government that qualified South Dakota for the energy efficiency money. "I have also written a letter to the South Dakota Legislature and requested they consider actions to improve building energy code."
At the request of the Public Utilities Commission, the 2009 Legislature adopted the 2006 IECC as the state's "voluntary standard" [David Montgomery, "Rick Weiland Requested $100M in Federal Stimulus," that Sioux Falls paper, 2014.10.26].
That money also had the ancillary effect of improving the non-profit ICC's financial situation, as it stimulated flagging sales of the ICC's code books. That's how stimulus works, kickstarting economic activity that keeps people working and buying.
The South Dakota Republican Party is now ginning this story up as some sign of nefariousness on Weiland's part. But remember: South Dakota non-profits, businesses, and public agencies happily received $1.3 billion in stimulus dollars. Governor Mike Rounds used $300 million in stimulus to help road builders, food service providers, and others make money and plugged another $81 million in stimulus to cover his own fiscal backside and patch his budget deficit.
If asking for stimulus dollars makes one unfit for U.S. Senate, Mike Rounds's use of stimulus dollars for political gain should drive every Republican to vote for Gordon Howie.
New poll out, Cory. Time to pop the Pressler bubble. Rick can do this, but it's time to focus, Dems. 1/3 of us turning our noses up at a nearly perfect campaign effort? Come on!
http://www.argusleader.com/story/davidmontgomery/2014/10/27/argus-kelo-poll/17975803/
Right on, Bill! Party unity: I said last December that was Job #1 for Weiland. Throw all in for the base, Rick! Every Democrat in the state, get up and vote! It's time to win!
That Sioux Falls paper, is trying to win the election for the entrenched, even though they always bellyache about how bad the entrenched are about open government laws. Because I discontinued my subscription, every time I try to take a link from one of the posts on this blog, I get denied with a message that says it is a bad request. I am sure that is because when I discontinued their rag, I told them what I thought of their editorial policies. What does that latest poll show, Bill F?
Rounds 42
Weiland 33
Pressler 13
Howie 2
Undecided 10
70% of Repubs support Rounds 66%of Dems support Rick.
You can also see the poll on KELO website.
Another note, those 30% of Repubs walking away from their guy are heros! Be nice to theme, guys and gals. They are gonna feel real disappointed in us if we can't pull this off.
http://www.keloland.com/newsdetail.cfm/kelo-tvargus-leader-poll-rounds-has-nine-point-lead/?id=171087
Here's the whole story and number breakdown on KELO.
Thanks Bill. So in other words, 55% of Republicans supported Rounds in the primary, and now 15% of those who did not support him in the primary, are going to hold their nose and vote for him in the general, baggage and all. Party comes first in this State and Country. What a shame.
I said that wrong. A third of those who did not support him in the primary, now will hold their nose and vote for him in the general.
It's not too late, Lanny, those 15% can help Rick win, now that it's become clear which candidate they need to vote for. As long as they're holding their nose anyway, they might as well cast that vote for Mr. Weiland. South Dakota needs both parties on their side in Washington.
If you guys can even pull 1/4th of the Rounds vote away, Lanny, he's toast.
Plus, look at the point difference between men and women on Rounds vs Weiland. Wow! Go ladies!
Republicans whine about Weiland taking stimulus money and Cory whines about Noem taking federal farm bill money. And now Cory is whining about the GOP's whining. I have the solution that will stop the whining on both sides, shrink the size and scope of the federal government. Or will that idea just create more whining from the two entrenched parties?
Would that include the Defense for you, Sibster?
Sibby, who are you going to vote for in the Senate race? Are you a Howie 2%er?
If so, do you think you can push that up to around 10% or so? If you can do that, maybe some of us might start taking what you say a little more seriously.
Hey, I remember how you used to be an internet hero for bringing down Tom Daschle. Time to shine again, Steve. Get your name back into the history books. Go. Go. Go.
My complaint about Rounds accepting the stimulus money, is not the fact that he accepted it, but that he accepted the federal dollars, and is now complaining about the federal debt. Sounds hypocritical to me.
I do have an issue with Rounds using of the last of the stimulus money that was intended to be use to support education was instead used to "balance" the state budget so that he can brag about how he balanced the budget.
I'm waiting for your answer, Sibs.
Yep, I knew it. Sibby is for big Govt on the things he believes in. Hypocrisy at its worse.
Steve, Then I suppose you definitely won't be voting for MMR, since he grew South Dakota State government by more than 1,000 employees in his 8 years as governor. Have you ever looked at the following statistics from Politics USA archives?
http://archives.politicususa.com/2011/08/24/big-government-obama-reagan.html
Every single Republican today talks about being a Reagan conservative. This is a conservative that believes in small government, reducing federal spending and ultimately runs a lean and mean government. They talk about this stuff in campaigns, but in practice they failed miserably.
In fact HISTORICALLY, it is has been Democratic presidents who have reduced the size of the federal government. The Republicans have lied to the people so much that I believe the current crop somehow BELIEVES the history as they have been told, rather than researching the facts for themselves. This may be a stretch, but I am trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.
According to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, which tracks the number of employees per year, the data shows that the “conservatives” for small government are really just big government conservatives. I know that is an oxymoron, but numbers don’t lie.
Let’s start with President Carter.
On December 31st 1976 (Not Carter’s term yet), total nonmilitary personnel was 2,883,000. By December 31st 1980 the end of his term (minus a month), the total in nonmilitary personnel was 2,875,000.
Federal government nonmilitary employees shrunk by 8,000 employees under Carter.
On January 21st, 1981, President Reagan started with 2,875,000 nonmilitary federal employees.
By the end of Reagan’s terms the total number of nonmilitary federal employees was 3,113,000. That is an INCREASE of 238,000
Let’s move on to President George H.W. Bush.
On January 20th, 1989, total federal nonmilitary employment was 3,113,000
by the end of his only term, President George H.W. Bush had 3,083,000 federal nonmilitary employees on the books. That is a REDUCTION of 30,000 employees.
President Bill Clinton came into office with 3,083,000 and by the END of his TWO TERMS he reduced the number of Federal employees to 2,703,000. That is a reduction of 380,000 federal employees.
Now finally, President George W. Bush came into office with 2,703,000 nonmilitary employees and by the time his terms were through, the total nonmilitary federal employees on the books were 2,756,000, which is an INCREASE of 53,000 employees.
The small government, lean and mean political party, seems to be the Democratic Party. President Clinton reduced the size of the federal government’s nonmilitary employees by OVER 10%.
The “so called” small government President Reagan INCREASED the nonmilitary size of government by almost 10%.
In fact, Democratic president Bill Clinton reduced the size of the federal government employee size to PRE- REAGAN levels.
Clinton left office with 2,703,000 and Reagan started his term in 1981 with 2,875,000
The Reagan conservatives, in fact the entire GOP TODAY are trying to frame President Obama as a big government liberal but again, the numbers don’t lie.
By the end of 2010, the United States STILL has less employees on the books than we did back in 1980 even though the population has grown from 226,545,805 to approximately 330,000,000 in 2010.
TOTAL NONMILITARY EMPLOYEES IN 1980 — 2,875,000
TOTAL NONMILITARY EMPLOYEES IN 2010 — 2,840,000
We have 35,000 less nonmilitary employees under President Obama than we had 30 years ago.
So it comes to mind that those who claim to be Reagan small government conservatives and blame Democrats for growing government are either lying to the American people or are themselves willfully ignorant.
When a stimulus package works like it did in 2009 after Obama's election, you get to see that first hand and know what success is. In other words, you can spend your way out of debt if it is done correctly. Without Obama, South Dakota would have gone belly up as the Rounds/Daugaard regime had stolen all the working capital. South Dakota is one of several states that take much more than they give and then bitch and moan that the federal government is out of control because of South Dakota mismanagement.
I knew Sibby was a closet Neo-Marxist. The worst kind.
Ladies and Gentlemen, you all should know by now, when republicans are confronted with the facts they do one of two things, they either clam up and try to change the subject or they start calling people names. In this case so far, crickets, I expect the name calling to be in full force when I get home from work.
"If you can do that, maybe some of us might start taking what you say a little more seriously."
Bill, I am not a crony capitalist who will spend huge sums of money to finance ads that will take Howie's performance from 2% to 10%. And because I am principled, I will vote for Howie and not even consider any of the three liberal big government liberals.
Lanny, I just answered your question on MMR. Yes, I agree that the GOP establishment is for big government. Where I differ is on the premise that the Democrats are for smaller government. I believe both entrenched parties want a bigger government, and they are only fighting over the reins of that bigger government. The question I am researching is if the fight is really in regard to different special interests, or is the fight fake and the special interests control both parties.
Jenny, stay on topic.
Sibby, you don't need any money, you just need to get out there on the intertubes and hustle up some more Howie votes, brotherman. Better get to it. Time's a waistin'.
Steve to your last question, " or is the fight fake and the special interests control both parties."
I think we all know the answer to that question if we have been paying attention. But, that still does not explain how Republicans can possibly be voting for MMR and or DD.
Remember when the Berlin wall came down and the Soviet Union disintegrated? We got a peace dividend. What happened to it? We immediately went to war in, Grenada, then Mogadishu, then Iraq, then Kosovo and Serbia, then Afghanistan, then Iraq again, then Libya, Syria and now back to Iraq, and some in our government would have us at war in Ukraine. That does not even include our covert actions against foreign governments. Until I hear people rail against that part of our expenditures of our national treasure, I guess I really don't think they have any room to talk about expenditures here at home.
God bless the Argus for their political coverage. I know they have been getting hit hard for just talking about Mike Rounds' indiscretions and mismanagement.
This seems to be a pretty good example of false balance and false equivalency. That they wouldn't include even one paragraph of the stimulus money that Rounds' took while he was governor is sloppy.
Bill, the reason Howie's numbers are low is because you do not see campaign ads. How many times in an hour do you see Pressler, Rounds, and Weiland ads, plus those finance my special interest PACS? Crony capitalism is for liberals.
Take a look at the Argus KELOLAND polling on the effect of EB-5.
http://www.keloland.com/newsdetail.cfm/kelo-tvargus-leader-poll-eb-5-has-little-effect-on-voters/?id=171090
It seems to be a bigger issue with women and Pressler voters, but discouraging to see that this crony-fraud-mismanagement and malfeasance isn't more important to voters.
I'll let the more experienced give a better analysis.
The "big" versus "small" issue is a bogus issue for several reasons. First, you have no point from which to measure - does "small" mean zero government employees? one? a thousand? Second, would firing all federal health care workers and monitors to make government "smaller" be consistent with the principle of "small" government, or would it be pure idiocy given the the ebola and other health issues that could jeopardize humanity?
Instead of using meaningless terms like "big" or "small" to drive your thinking, why not focus on public policies and priorities that you believe are important for our government to address?
5 Trillion reasons to vote democratic. Here are those pesky facts that republicans hate to have published. http://www.thecharlottepost.com/news/2014/10/26/state-national/upside-of-affordable-care-act-health-care-costs-down/
Obamacare works as do Democratic ideas. Instead of working together with an idea that first started to peculate with republicans, they reversed themselves very cynically and now seek to destroy their brainchild. You can tell they are not serious about governing they are only serious about stealing taxpayer money.
"First, you have no point from which to measure"
Yes, we do, the Original Constitution that has been placed aside in order to grow big government.
"why not focus on public policies and priorities that you believe are important for our government to address?"
Like the TransCanada pipeline? Looks like the Democrats are using deception in order play crony capitalist on this issue:
President Barack Obama’s decision to withhold approval of the Keystone XL pipeline will hugely benefit one of his largest supporters – Warren Buffett.
Buffett made a $34 billion dollar investment in the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad (BNSF) one year after Obama was elected. BNSF essentially invented the business of carrying crude oil by rail when it launched its first long oil train in 2009. Rail shipments from North Dakota have surged from fewer than 100,000 barrels a day in 2010 to 800,000 barrels a day last October.
No wonder Buffet has such a good friend in the White House.
Mr. Obama sites environmental issues as the key reason to hold up the Keystone XL Pipeline. But his rhetoric is more fiction than fact.
Three years of State Department environmental impact studies have found “no significant impacts.” The truth is that the pipeline poses a far smaller environmental risk than moving oil by train.
http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/did-warren-buffett-railroad-president-obama/
And it is more costly to move oil by train because it uses more energy, thereby increasing the dreaded output of greenhouse gases.
I covered this on KCPO-TV yesterday in response to the front-page Argus Leader report that promoted Weiland's deceptions on this issue.
This election is not going to settle the issue of small or big government, like bear says, it is a bogus issue. Voters may have that in mind when they vote, but it is not a real issue.
Cory's statement of fact is not whining, Sibson's complaints about big government are whining.
As long as he goes out on the internet and brings in 10,000 more Howie votes from the Rounds camp, he can whine till the cows come home as far as I'm concerned, Roger.
Sibby, I can't find anything in our Constitution that identifies any specific number of people that should be employed by the federal government, thus, it simply does not provide a meaningful point of reference for the meaningless "big" verses "small" quarrel.
I like your pipeline argument much better, as it tends to focus on policy, although I wonder whether it makes sense to oppose a policy that might benefit the general public merely because an individual, such a Buffet, will also reap large benefits from that policy. If the question is whether the pipeline will help or hurt the public, then whether it benefits someone like Buffet is an unhelpful distraction.
Steve, what parts of the Constitution have been put aside to grow big government?
Steve do you have a link to a recording of your TV show on KCPO? I rarely ever watch KCPO with old reruns of UFO & Conspiracy shows and such.
I've re-read Craig Lawrence scribe D. Montgomery's "expose" five times. Where is the story, Dave? A CEO whose non-profit represents fire safety and building safety code officials and who is seeking stimulus funds to preserve these public protections would be commendable in anybody's book. Only a dupe like Monty can twist it into something resembling a scandal. The fact that renown hack Pat Powers further twists it into something worse should tell Monty's editors that it's time to send the boy back to working on weeklies ... but not the Mobridge Tribune. The Trib embraces truthful reporting and integrity.
"I wonder whether it makes sense to oppose a policy that might benefit the general public merely because an individual, such a Buffet, will also reap large benefits from that policy."
Paying more for energy is a benefit to the general public? And creating more green house gases in the process?
"Steve, what parts of the Constitution have been put aside to grow big government?"
All of it. It happened when military force was used to harass states into ratifying the 14th Amendment.
"A CEO whose non-profit represents fire safety and building safety code officials and who is seeking stimulus funds to preserve these public protections would be commendable in anybody's book."
And seeking federal subsidiaries so that less expensive food can be used to feed the poor is not commendable?
Yah sure, Steve. We can all see your freedom of speech and press have been revoked by the undoing of the Constitution in the name of big government. There are rational reasons to object to excessive government. Work on rational objectives and you might get some serious responses. As an example, Big Brother snooping should be a concern of both real liberals and real conservatives.
Not in the mood today, Steve. Can I have a rain check? Thanks dude!
Yes, that's right Steve. According to the original Constiution, you should be able to own all the slaves you want, and women should never, ever be allowed to vote. How in the hell do you come up with this insidious malarkey?
Ooops... I had a foot in the rabbit hole for a second there. Sorry.
So what part of the 14th amendment do you disagree with Steve, the Due Process clause?
Had it not been for the Fourteenth Amendment Alaska could still be in Russia.
96 It amazes me that these papers run stories on the EB-5 scandal, mismanagement, lack of oversight and then complain about the lack of open records yet they turn around and endorse these candidates.
The Argus Sanford is such a good name being located in Sanford Falls of course.
Rick Weiland has the obvious best shot of the major candidates running yet with all that has been exposed so far if Rounds wins it will be a poor reflection on our state.
Ahem, Steve... dear Sibby,
Sibby Wibby, poopy whoopy,
Do you think you can convince some Tea Party People to vote for Mr. Howie instead of Mr. Rounds by telling them you agree with them when they say that women shouldn't vote, and they should still be able to own slaves? And that your slave's 3/5 of a vote will add power to your vote?
And that you think if enough of you join together you can talk Mr. Howie, and eventually the rest of the country into it?
(...whew, this being nice to Sibson is really, really hard... I don't think I can do it.)
"Paying more for energy is a benefit to the general public? And creating more green house gases in the process?"
Sibby, now that is what I call focusing on meaningful issues. Whether Buffet benefits is simply a distraction, but studying and learning the factual effects of the proposed policy makes sense, as does debating the merits and accuracy of our conclusions about the factual effects. For example, I have seen arguments that the pipeline will cause an increase in fuel prices for the midwest, which contradicts your factual assertion that stopping the pipeline will increase energy costs.
But you still have not answered or addressed my question of where in the Original Constitution does it say how many people should be employed by the newly created federal government, nor how many more should be added as the country grows and priorities change.
President Jefferson believed he violated the Constitution when he doubled the size of the nation and dooming 30 million indigenous to genocide.
But he did it with better sentence structure.
Lynn, don't be surprised to see one or both scribes follow Mitch Krebs' lead and ditch their reporter credentials to serve Rounds on the Senate staff. At least we'll know it's above board.
My complaint with these two is they took a Pulitzer important news story and made sure the bad news floated out gently without pinning the criminality to the Boss, Mike Rounds, and making any gesture by a Democrat in the last year to appear entirely political. I don't know what the future of the investigation will be. If it's within Jackley's purview alone, it will cease to be pursued immediately. If the feds are still in the hunt for truth, disclosure and justice, there will be a sizeable perp walk.
I remain hopeful Weiland would win, but seeing the poll result that the vast majority of Republicans in South Dakota find the Rounds Racketeering Scam to be of no importance, I shudder for the future of this state. Lesson learned: If you're a Republican office holder, you can commit any crime and the vast majority of Republicans will continue to embrace you. Criminals, your future career and your first million can be reaped by holding office in Pierre, South Dakota!
Sibson is still too damn lazy to write his own blog.
96 I was thinking the same thing a while back that these guys will eventually work for Rounds or someone in the establishment.
Rick wins there is hope. Rick loses my red state escape plan will go forward. I have been in a holding pattern to see how things turn out.
Lynn, I have been thinking the same thing, but not because of the red state angle. It is because if the citizenry is willing to award crooks with more shots at the pie, and in Rounds case a helluva lot bigger pie if he goes to DC, I don't want to live neighbors to people like that.
"But you still have not answered or addressed my question of where in the Original Constitution does it say how many people should be employed by the newly created federal government, nor how many more should be added as the country grows and priorities change."
It doesn't, it provides enumerated powers. The Constitution had to be put aside so those powers not enumerated can be taken over by the government and implemented by as many workers that is desired. Today a government employee can do more with a computer than what a government employee did in the past. That is why the "big government" has to be determined based on scope. For example, the Original Tenth Amendment, that has been destroyed by the 14th Amendment, would have prevented the commerce clause from being used to control economic activity within a state. So how many employees are currently being used to infringe upon the state's "original" Tenth Amendment rights? It doesn't matter if it is one or one million, the government is bigger in scope that originally allowed.
Sibson,
If you disagree and don't like the 14th Amendment, rather than whine about it, take the lead and repeal it. Have fun with it.
CO2 from rail pales in comparison to Canadian tar sands/heavy oil, and then when the world temp. is up enough, methane, many times more volatile than CO2 will raise its ugly head. Streams of methane bubbles from frozen under seabeds are under scrutiny. Then the global ocean current stops as Greenland and the rest of the Arctic melt off over the summer. That's pretty much the end, so NOT OKing KXL is kinda prescient. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2014/9
Just google/youtube Marshall Islands ocean surges wiping out towns/ flooding airstrips that have been there for a long time.
Lanny your right I should of been more specific. There are many Republican legislators I was aware of growing up and had a great deal of respect for. Peg Lamont for example was a trailblazer.
I purposely registered as a Republican for the first time in my life and voted for Rep. Nelson during the primary and am proud of my vote. He and I have very different perspectives on the role of government but I trust him and have a great deal of respect for having the courage to stand up to the corruption and abuse of power in Pierre. Look at the abuse he went thru and anyone else who has stood up and challenged those who have contributed to the mess our state is in today.
I will not support corruption and the very bad policies that are going on in our state. It especially is frustrating when it is your home state and you know who the players are behind the scenes that are benefitting from cronyism. With what has happened this past year with EB-5 I know that my family and I look at the people we have long known very differently now and they have lost our respect.
"According to the original Constiution, you should be able to own all the slaves you want"
No it does not. The SCOTUS excluded blacks from the definition of "We the People" because they incorrectly ruled they are not persons. Just like they are now excluding those persons are have yet to exit the womb form "We the People".
Does the Constitution say that fellow Masons are above the law? But that has, and probably still, happened in the courts. There is one thing to establish a principle and it is another to implement it. The principles of the Constitution were not fully implemented at the beginning and even less so today.
So the principles of a limited government is no longer in place, so now the contest is based on who can garner the most money from the piles that are being printed by the Federal Reserve today. Both parties are in favor of that political system. Noem wants farm subsidies, Weiland wants stimulus program money. Cory whines about one, and whines about those who whine about the other.
Sibby, I agree that the Original Constitution did not place a numerical limit on the number of employees that could work for the federal government. That omission supports my point that use of "big" or "small" when describing our government is simply meaningless jargon.
The discussion of whether a particular governmental employee, agency or institution acts within the authority provided by the Constitution is an important issue, but the terms "big" or "small" are really entirely unrelated to such issue, as suggested by your observation that "it doesn't matter" whether it is one or a million employees. "Big" or "small" government is not the question when analyzing our compliance with Constitutional limits on the power of government officials to act.
Sibson, just HOW big a federal gov't would YOU like? You/others keep yelling/crying "shrink it! SHRINK IT''!!!! Yet, you want wars (Bush/Cheney") tax cuts for the 'job-creators' that don't create jobs, tax cuts for millionaires like the Kochs/Rounds/Fischers et al that want to want to hedge the game their way and hold out the $$$$ to buy the influence that they think they deserve because of the $$$ they seem to have??? You want us to influence the world to go 'our-USA way' but don't have the morals to do so.
Warning: Approaching gravity well of Sibby Blackhole. Reverse thrusters.
Sibby, why are you even on Cory's blog?. You just twist people's answers around and never answer our questions. I asked you a specific question in regards to defense spending and you never answered it. The amount we spend on defense is one trillion dollars a year and growing. Do you support cuts in it? Fair question.
Sounds good, Sib, lets go back to when blacks and women weren't people. Heck, maybe get rid of ALL real people. Let's just let corporations and fertilized zygotes and blastocyst in petri dishes be people. All nice and legal like. And computers. Biology Inc. Grow your own selfie.
Sibby's just stalling because he doesn't want to actually go out and hustle up Tea Party votes. He just wants to hang around here and be a pain in our collective a$$.
Lanny
Another reason for a corrupt red state escape is some of the bills these legislators put forth that would discriminate and every time it hits the news some hate crime pops up here in the state with one that we know of in Rapid City. When I moved back to SD a few years ago it was like going back 30 years.
"Do you support cuts in it?"
Yes. I support bringing all the troops home and put them on the borders.
Jaka, whoever you are. I do not support Crony Capitalism, including Warren Buffet.
' "Big" or "small" government is not the question when analyzing our compliance with Constitutional limits on the power of government officials to act.'
It does it takes more and more debt to finance its claim to create jobs. Where in the Constitution does the feds have the power to create jobs? To keep GDP growth above zero? To keep unemployment below 5% and then call that full employment?
President Jefferson believed government was little more than a referee:
http://bismarcktribune.com/news/columnists/clay-jenkinson/somewhere-below-the-bombast-real-issues-await-us/article_7160d462-5b92-11e4-ba93-0b7f636ccd9f.html
Sibson's hobby horse is sucking people in.
Good one Larry, the Bismark paper is right on.
"Where in the Constitution does the feds have the power to create jobs?"
Art. I, Section 8 provides Congress with the power "to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or any Department or Officer thereof".
In 1790, the federal Department of Foreign Affairs was headed by Thomas Jefferson. They had the following federal employees: "In June 1790 Jefferson's staff consisted of two principal clerks, three clerks, one part-time translator of French, and two office keeper messengers."
http://history.state.gov/departmenthistory/buildings/section13
To suggest that the federal government did not have the authority to hire employees from the time of the adoption of the Constitution is a true "rabbit hole" argument, Sibby, and I think you know better.
Jerry, Clay Jenkinson has become one of my favorite thinkers: he's consulting to Ken Burns' work on the Roosevelts, too.
Jefferson deplored the christian fatalists Hobbes, Calvin and Augustine for forcing religion on the masses.
You know, sometimes the American public stands up to the corporate goons that do their very best to not pay their fair share by using tactics like inversion to beat the system. Chiquita tried to do that with an Irish company but in the end allowed themselves to be sold because of the shareholders revolting. Maybe, just maybe the kinds of crap we see here in South Dakota with the corruption of the EB-5, as an example, will not be rewarded and the voting public will say enough. Enough of the corruption and enough of the low wages and enough of the lack of something so basic as the healthcare expansion of Medicaid.
"To suggest that the federal government did not have the authority to hire employees "
I did not say "hire employees", I said "create jobs". Meaning creating jobs for those of us in the private sector with corporate welfare financed with federal debt. Where in the Constitution does it give those powers to the feds?
President Jefferson believed cities were destined to become hellholes of wage slavery and debauchery: he proposed everyone in Virginia get 50A. to raise enough food to store and sell plus give them the right to vote as landownership was the law of the land.
...to cast ballots. He spoke in parables and aphorisms, that it was his duty to keep slaves and protect them from those who might treat them inhumanely.
@Jerry and enough of refusing to fund education at the levels to which you have been committed by both the State Constitution and by legislature passed and governor signed State law.
"I did not say "hire employees", I said "create jobs"."
Come on Sibby, no one can hire employees, including the federal government, unless they first "create jobs" for those people it intends to hire. And the people Jefferson hired for those jobs created by our early government came out of the "private sector."
Again, this is looking more and more like one of your "bait and switch" rabbit holes. You no longer seem to be talking about the size of the federal government being "too big" because they have too many employees in violation of your view of the original Constitution, but are now trying to switch the argument to "corporate welfare financed with federal debt." Apparently, you are now arguing that by "creating jobs,' you really meant helping private corporation create private jobs rather than growing the size of government with more and more government jobs.
As our friend Bill has said, "choose a lane."
Steve while you are railing about the Feds creating jobs, the population of the country has increased by 50% since the beginning of Jimmy Carter's election to the Presidency. The number of federal employees while going up a lot under Ronald Reagan, has declined back down under other succeeding Presidents to where it is about the same as it was when Carter was elected.
By the same token, while the population of South Dakota has remained pretty steady since Mike Rounds was first elected Governor, we have lost teachers and he hired more than a thousand more State employees, and like the current Governor, many of them were/are relatives, which is called nepotism and may be illegal, I know it is in some companies.
Agreed Lanny, the education funding should be a no brainer, pun intended. For some reason there is a hate on for educators that borders on insanity with this regime. Or maybe it is the children themselves whom the educators educate.
Jerry, you wrote, "Or maybe it is the children themselves whom the educators educate." Naw it couldn't be, as much as they fight abortion to protect every child before they are born and as much as they provide for prenatal care for mothers and for medicaid for parent of children who work but don't make enough to pay for health insurance, as much as they love the Native American children and take them away from their own families and put them in State funded institutions such as South Dakota Children's Home on a no bid contract You know they love children.
Lanny, can it be that Daugaard and his cohorts in the legislature are the same crew as the evil witch the Brothers Grimm speak of in Hansel and Gretel? Sounds like it in a way. The state gives you just enough to prevent you from starving while they prepare you for your life of indentured servitude. In this case though, it is not safe passage to the new world, it is the passage to do slave labor for masters in Pierre so they can complain about your lack of knowledge due to the poor teaching habits of the educators. Fits rather nicely don't you think?
So according to Rory King, Rounds put 400 million into South Dakota's economy with the EB-5, why would Rounds have a need for the stimulus in the first place? King also said that Rounds and the EB-5 generated 8,000 jobs so again, why would Rounds need the stimulus money? Rick Weiland clearly was not aware of the tremendous success that Rounds was having with the EB-5 to generate all kinds of success stories.
Absolutely Jerry, it took me awhile to recover from laughing so hard to Les' comment to Grudz on another link.
https://madvilletimes.com/2014/10/bollen-made-13m-freelancing-on-illegal-eb-5-contract-take-it-back/#comment-361642
bcb: 'pick a lane' belongs to me.
larry, sorry about the incorrect reference. I really liked the phrase "pick a lane" so I should have been more aware of the origin.
Indeed, good one.
We can win this, people.
Yes we can! Lets not loose sight of the goal, it is within reach!
Yup. Pick a lane is a Kurtzism. At least that's where I swiped it. Not sure where he did. LOL
Will be in Rapid Wednesday night, Fleming: pick a lunch or breakfast date thereafter?
Gentlemen, if you choose Talley's sit in my old booth. It will stimulate your conversation like the old days.
Sure Larry. They have a new lunch place in our building.
David Newquist has once again posted an excellent article on his blog. http://northernbeacon.blogspot.com/
I will not support corruption, incompetence and reward those candidates with an elected office in my home state. That also means those businesses and that actively support those candidates with campaign contributions or have signs on their property. It's that bad and all of this makes my blood boil!
Republican office holders can commit crimes and the vast majority of Republicans will continue to embrace them. Criminals, your future career and your first million can be reaped by serving the power structure in Pierre, South Dakota.
Bill, does Hay Camp serve food now too?
Excellent Newquist article, Lynn. He should really forward it over to the Minn Star Tribune. The corrupt political one party operation of SD is a sad story that needs to be told.
Thanks for that link Lynn. Mr. Newquist is correct about the corrupted party coming after you if they know you are not one of them. There is a reason I go by the name I go by and that is to keep them off my ass. I think that we citizens should make it our business to boycott the business places that put their support for candidates up so proudly. Screw them, they do not need my money any longer. I will go without or go to somebody that is neutral.
Oh, okay, Lanny. I was beginning to think a lot of the guys on here have gravy taters with Mr Grudz every morning!
Oops this was meant for the other thread. The Bollen made 13 million one. Sorry.
Great idea Jenny. That may be the only way to get this thing into high gear before the election. From the EB-5 and its denials, to Skjonsberg approving funds to his own company as a director on the Redi fund to Joop donating many ancient Egyptian artifacts to a museum and being praised as one of their top donors, this smells worse than the hog farm that Rounds defended the Iowa company that brought that hog farm two miles above Marty.
It's usually just on the weekends, Ms. Jenny, and it's only a few of the guys on here. Most of them are pretty swell, but some are not.
few = 3
most of few = 2
some of few = 1
goes home hungry = 0
Here is an article about a judge, Tom Wolfgram, in Wisconsin that signed the recall petition of Gov. Scott Walker. http://www.jsonline.com/news/ozwash/ozaukee-judge-wolfgram-appears-to-be-ousted-6e9cr5g-201166271.html
The corruption we are seeing here in South Dakota is kind of a mirror of Wisconsin. Thankfully, we have Minnesota to buffer us from the stench of combining both Wisconsin and South Dakota. The one party system of politics that republicans have here is the reason the white settlers moved here in the first place to rid themselves of. It has gone full circle and we are now in the same situation as it was in Europe and Russia when this place was a territory. What was old is now new, welcome to the new old country.
@Lynn, there should be a list of honest business owners that could be accessed to do business with. A reversed Angie list as she is in on the fix as well.
Yes, the government should keep a list of honest business owners. They should have department of people to decide who is honest and who is not and it would be headed by a bureaucrat. An honest bureaucrat. And they should put this list on the internet.
LOL, you sure as hell would not make the list mr. grudznick and neither would I. I am speaking of those that do not support this bullshit kind of political system we have here. Nothing that a bureaucrat could handle, just someone who drives down the road looking for things like taters and gravy but pays attention to what places have political signs up of support for their corrupt candidates. I think you know which ones I dare speak of, correct?
Jerry it's not just signs at their businesses but looking at FEC reports.
Yes, you can see the list of contributors to the future fund, a virtual list of right wing nuts that approve of corruption as they benefit from it. Combine the two and you get the real picture of how it all comes together in all corners of the state. Pretty revealing actually the acceptance of it all.
Jerry-here is an article about the judge that shut down the Walker "John Doe"investigation before charges were even filed,and then ordered all evidence to be destroyed immediately.
http://www.prwatch.org/news/2014/05/12489/federal-judge-who-halted-walker-dark-money-criminal-probe-attends-koch-judicial
" Apparently, you are now arguing that by "creating jobs,' you really meant helping private corporation create private jobs rather than growing the size of government with more and more government jobs."
So BCB, you seem not to understand that the feds have to hire employees in order to unconstitutionally plan and control the economy, in the name of creating jobs (in the private sector). Thanks for providing more evidence that liberals also favor crony capitalism to go along with the Warren Buffet's railroad job being conducted by Obama.
fire 'em all and let dog sort 'em out.
" It has gone full circle and we are now in the same situation as it was in Europe and Russia when this place was a territory."
Jerry, thanks for seeing the conspiracy theories I have uncovered. Europeans and communists from Russia have infiltrated our governments for many decades. Check out the Committee of 300.
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/johncolemangoalsofIlluminati.shtml
http://interested-party.blogspot.com/2011/12/illuminati-for-romney.html
How did wingnuts create jobs after running their campaign in 2010 as job creators and winning back the house? They constantly and consistently went after abortion laws and providers. How many jobs did that create?
Don't trust the polls in these five states:
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-10-28/don-t-trust-the-polls-in-these-five-states
Thanks Larry, how true