Pastor Shel Boese takes a look at the politics of marriage in the world’s best Babylon (remember that Tony Campolo line?) and comes to the conclusion that gay-marriage bans fritter around the edges of a robust “defense” of marriage:

IF you are going to “defend marriage” through ballots, borders, bombs,  then we REALLY should be working on laws that end divorce and strongly prosecute any alienation of affection, repeal all “no-fault” divorces, go after adulterers with prison time, and generally insist on tracking everyone’s sexual activity.   Focusing on 1.7% to 10% of the population through defining marriage as a one man/one woman – is just a grand distraction from the real enemies of marriage.  (Those are in your heart – what laws will change YOUR heart? hmm…  ) [emphasis in original; Shel Boese, "Be Like Jesus, Not a Politician," ShelBoese.org, 2012.05.11].

I don’t really want our Legislature or Congress to go there, and I don’t think Pastor Shel does, either:

Now for a (not so ?) radical suggestion: I believe the church should work at REMOVING all legal forms of Marriage.  Marriage is NOT a civil contract – it is spiritual and religious.  Therefore should be protected as worship is and who religious groups can hire is, but not sanctioned by the law.  Instead we can advocate for legal civil union/domestic partnerships for all people defining contractual obligations when such arrangements go south and to protect children from destructive/abusive situations [Boese, 2012.05.11].

Two people should not have to get the state’s permission to love and make a lifelong commitment to each other (wait: love and lifelong commitment are the same thing, aren’t they?). The state should get out of reinforcing some folks’ religious definition of marriage and focus on its primary purpose of protecting equality and justice (including economic justice) for all citizens.

A number of my Madison neighbors tell KELO they plan to hit the Madison City Commission meeting tonight to demand some flood control action. Frequent Madville Times commenter Tim Higgins, Kelli Stout, and Heather Roling all got heavy flood damage, and they lay some blame on the city:

“I think they should just hear our stories and what we went through and find out why something hasn’t been done to prevent this from happening again. We were told this was not supposed to happen. Last time in 1993, when this town flooded, they told us they fixed the problem and that was a 100 year flood. Twice now, since then we’ve had water,” Roling said.

After that major flood in 1993, Higgins says city leaders proposed a water retention facility to control heavy rains down Memorial Creek, but nothing was built.

“I honestly believe if they had that detention facility in place, this event would not have happened. I do believe it’s time to revisit putting up a detention facility north of town,” Higgins said [Hailey Higgins, "Madison Storm Victims Say Damage Preventable," KELOLand.com, 2012.05.12].

The folks KELO talked to also complain that the city didn’t get the word out about the rising water fast enough. It’s not that the city wasn’t trying: Arlyce Freet told KJAM she learned about the flood from a firefighter who knocked on her door at 2:45 a.m. But Roling thinks the city should implement a phone notification system like the schools use for snow days.

Now Higgins, Roling, and Stout aren’t on the official agenda yet, but I hope the city can squeeze them in and have engineer Chad Comes come in to talk about the fabled detention pond and why the city hasn’t taken on that project yet. It could well be that no pond is going to be big enough to keep six-plus inches of rain from overflowing Memorial Creek. But if Madison can do more flood mitigation, acquiring land for a new detention pond or widening and deepening the creek channel could do more for enhancing Madison’s quality of life than subsidizing the country club.

Related: Folks concerned with emergency management procedures during the May 5–6 flood may want to drop by the Lake County Commission meeting Tuesday around noon: that’s when Don Thomson will present information on the flood and how the county responded.

Agriculture Secretary Walt Bones is boosting the state’s propaganda effort to force local governments into line with the state’s “Get Big or Get Out” ag-industrial policy. For years, South Dakota has given preferential treatment to massive concentrated animal feeding operations. That policy has driven numerous small operators out of business, concentrating agricultural wealth and fostering resentment among West River agriculturalists.

Undaunted, Secretary Bones announces a marketing effort to get counties to back off on zoning regulations that hinder big livestock operations:

The South Dakota Department of Agriculture is going on the offensive to grow the livestock industry in the state.  State Ag Secretary Walt Bones says counties need to become more livestock friendly.  As a result his agency is working on a plan that will among many things improve the image of the industry among decision makers on county commissions and zoning boards.

Bones says they’re focusing on four areas including improved communications, using the media to gain public trust in the livestock industry and increased education of decision makers ["SD Developing Comprehensive Livestock Marketing Plan," WNAX Radio, April 2012].

When Walt Bones talks about “education”, he really means marketing. Secretary Bones has already been using (abusing?) his official position to persuade local boards to support the state’s preferred CAFO clients. Earlier this month he surprised the Davison County Planning and Zoning Board by dropping in to urge them to approve the Jackrabbit Family Farms’ proposed 5400-head sow facility south of Mount Vernon. (Davison County Commissioners, facing a packed house of opponents who like breathing and proponents last week, postponed a decision until May 1.) Secretary Bones also intervened in a Water Management Board hearing last summer on Michael Crinion’s proposed mega-dairy in Hanson County (a process now sent back to square one by circuit court).

When Walt Bones talks about education, he also appears to be talking about spreading false information. In response to the Food and Drug Administration’s call for voluntary restrictions on non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in livestock (a practice CAFOs can’t live without but which causes serious public health concerns), CAFO operator Bones says limiting antibiotics is bad for agriculture:

He cites European agriculture as an example where restricting production methods has hurt livestock industries without resulting in a demonstrated reduction in drug-resistant bacteria.

“It has not been effective. It has not done what they wanted to do,” Bones says. “Denmark used to be one of the leading pork producers with top genetics, top production. Their swine industry is just fading because of some of the production restraints put on them” [Peter Harriman, "FDA Calls for Voluntary Restrictions on Use of Antibiotics in Livestock," that Sioux Falls paper, 2012.04.11].

The Danes take exception to Secretary Bones’s hogwash:

This is a blatant case of deliberate misinformation, unfortunately something we often experience in this area. Your readers need to know the following three facts:

1. Denmark is the biggest exporter of pork in the world; we only have 5 million human inhabitants, but through the efficient production of a population of 20 million pigs, we actually now export more pork than the U.S.

2. Danish pork production has increased dramatically since the ban of antibiotic growth promoters through more efficient animal management.

3. Denmark produces pork with — at average — eight times less antimicrobials per kilogram of pork produced than the U.S. (and most other big pork producers).

We hope this important debate in the U.S. can continue with sober — and truthful — information, also from good experience abroad. Denmark has learned much from the U.S. over the years, not the least in the veterinary area. For once we can give some good experience back — but only if the facts are reported truthfully [Jørgen Schlundt, "Letter: Denmark's Swine Industry Is Thriving," that Sioux Falls paper, 2012.04.17].

Secretary Bones can’t get his facts straight about antibiotics and the global swine industry. We shouldn’t trust him to “educate” local officials on livestock and zoning issues that directly affect their citizens.

Poor Gordon Howie. No, really, I mean this: I sympathize with Gordon Howie, who is seeing property he co-owns torn up by thoughtless motorists:

A few Rapid Valley residents are frustrated that freewheeling drivers turned the area near their neighborhood pond into a rutted mess this weekend.

Turtle Pond property manager and part owner Gordon Howie shares the neighbors’ irritations but says the destruction is not a new problem for the undeveloped park, especially after a rainstorm.

“It’s disappointing, but not a surprise,” said Howie, a former state senator. “We’ve tried to put obstacles in the way, huge rocks and other obstacles to keep people off. The people who are intent on being destructive just find a way around them.”

Although privately owned, the Turtle Pond area, at the corner of Long View Drive and Reservoir Road, north of S.D. Highway 44, is open for public fishing. South Dakota Game Fish & Parks has stocked the pond with fish in the past, Howie said.

Neighbor Pat Cromwell said she called the Pennington County Sheriff’s Office four times over the weekend to report mud-bogging ATVs and pickups.

“They are ripping the daylights out of the pond here,” Cromwell said. “People are having fun without thinking about what they are doing to it. It’s mindless vandalism” [Holly Meyer, "Mud Boggers Making a Mess of Rapid Valley Pond," Rapid City Journal, 2012.04.16].

Attentive readers will recall that I’ll have no truck with motorheads who can’t have fun and tread lightly. Sportsmen (and I suspect we have to use the term loosely here) have an obligation to respect the land, whether that land is owned by all of us or by a few private landholders who generously allow public use of their property.

But note that even arch-Tea Partier Gordon Howie has to admit that sometimes he needs more government. It takes a strong man to admit that his philosophy is incomplete.

As my commenters eagerly point out, it’s election day in Madison! Residents have five candidates from whom to choose for two city commission spots.

From the press I enjoy from my safe vantage point in Spearfish, it strikes me that the best two men to help run my hometown are incumbent commissioner Nick Abraham and newcomer Jeremiah Corbin. As noted in previous posts, Abraham and Corbin have done the best job articulating nuts-and-bolts policy positions that indicate specific actions they would take to improve Madison.

The responses excerpted by KJAM to a question on new ideas epitomize this distinction. Abraham suggested using the city’s revolving loan fund downtown revitalization. Corbin floated using a tax increment finance (TIF) district for the same purpose. Mike Waldner offered no new idea but said he’d champion “anything that supports quality of life and economic development,” principles we can hardly disagree with but which don’t constitute an answer to the specific question about new ideas. Similarly, Pat Mullen expressed reasonable fiscal caution, but watching our budget isn’t a “new idea” either.

Downtown development is one of the most pressing issues facing Madison. The city has ignored the physical and commercial health of Main Street in favor of its peripheral industrial parks and the Washington Avenue TIF district. The city has resisted using downtown for new cultural events. Visitors want a walkable downtown, and they gauge the quality of a community by what they find on Main Street. At the heart of Madison, they currently find a big vacant Masonic temple, several crumbling buildings with boarded up windows, and a dearth of retail stores.

Rebuilding a thriving city center as a destination for shoppers and tourists could be one of the most fruitful changes Madison could make. Nick Abraham and Jeremiah Corbin sound most tuned in to taking specific action to make downtown revitalization happen. Vote for them, and then hold them accountable for following through.

Dr. Blanchard will not be pleased.

From the “Credit Where Credit Is Due” Department, I note that Governor Dennis Daugaard is at least consistent in his expressed desire to expand energy jobs. Last week he cosigned a letter on behalf of the National Governors Association urging Congress to extend the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind energy.

Governors are pursuing a wide variety of strategies to promote job creation and economic development in their states. Continued development of renewable energy resources and manufacturing is an important component of these efforts. Renewable energy provides Americans with high-tech manufacturing jobs, secure sources of energy, and our states with crucial economic development opportunities.

To supplement state efforts, governors support the continuation of the production tax credit (PTC) for wind and renewable energy and the investment tax credit (ITC) for wind as well as the recent legislative proposal to institute ITC’s for the first 3,000 megawatts of offshore wind facilities placed into service. Such measures can help promote environmentally responsible, efficient, and secure affordable energy to fuel America’s future [Governors Dannel P. Malloy and Dennis Daugaard, letter to Congressional leaders, National Governors Association, 2012.04.04].

Even though the governors’ statement undermines her and Daugaard’s prior contention that government doesn’t create jobs, Rep. Kristi Noem has shown support for extending the PTC. Senator Tim Johnson backs PTC. So does Senator John Thune… even though some conservatives call the PTC pure corporate welfare. The wind industry says it was catching up in price competitiveness until gas prices plummeted; they say extending the PTC would help them sustain jobs and development through their current recessionary period and not have to start over from scratch when the gas bubble bursts in a few years.

Incumbent Madison city commissioner Nick Abraham gets the last of five candidate profiles in the Madison Daily Leader. He says just enough of the right things to make me feel comfortable with my Madison neighbors re-electing him tomorrow.

Commissioner Abraham offers cautious praise of the Chamber and the Lake Area Improvement Corporation. I’m uneasy with his statement that “A lot of what they accomplish goes unnoticed.” Why not use this interview to tell us some of those unnoticed things instead of expecting us to just imagine that the LAIC is doing wonderful things?

Abraham salvages his economic development commentary by sending perhaps the clearest signal a Madison politician that the LAIC expects too much from taxpayers:

However, Abraham said the partnerships among Madison, the Chamber and LAIC don’t mean that support needs to be universal.

“The city can’t be playing a major part with all of their projects,” Abraham said. “They need to realize that we don’t need to fund everything that they do.

“For example, they came and asked us to support about a third of Forward Madison II — and that’s a lot” [Chuck Clement, "Abraham Seeks Second Term with City," Madison Daily Leader, 2012.04.02].

That’s a lot—please, please tell me that we can interpret that comment as a signal that Abraham will not vote to give the LAIC more free taxpayer subsidies with no accountability… and that he will push his fellow commission members to follow suit.

Abraham mentions a couple of other policies, which is a couple more than some other candidates mentioned in their profiles. Abraham mentions the challenge of making urgent upgrades to the city’s water system as we struggle with maxed-out bonding capacity. He also mentions the need to strengthen the city’s revolving loan fund to support a downtown improvement project.

Off policy, Abraham makes an apt mention of his ability and willingness to talk to citizens while he’s at his day job:

Up to this point in his adult life, he’s worked as a mechanic at F&M Co-op in Madison, and it’s a job that gives local residents the opportunity to talk to Abraham about his other responsibilities as a city commissioner.

“People will ask questions more often than make complaints,” Abraham said. “It’s a very easy atmosphere for someone to ask for information.

“Many people find that asking informally, face-to-face is a lot easier than coming to a (city) meeting” [Clement, 2012.04.02].

With regret, I’ve had to ding Abraham in the past for being a little too open with some bigoted language about Muslims that isn’t acceptable from a public official trying to put Madison’s best face forward (language for which the commissioner subsequently apologized). But his comments above highlight an important sensitivity to the nature of his political job: as commissioner, he works for the voters, and when they ask him questions, he has an obligation to respond. He may be elbow-deep in grease and grit, fixing their flats or wrestling with fan belts, but he also recognizes that citizens may strike up useful conversations with him at the F&M shop that they won’t have the chance or the courage to start in more formal settings.

Nick Abraham is the only blue-collar worker currently serving on the Madison City Commission. He’s the only blue-collar worker among the five candidates on the ballot tomorrow. Abraham’s working-class background has likely contributed to his willingness to call out the crony capitalism that other commissioners so blithely cheer.

I had the very unpleasant experience during my petitioneering last weekend of trying to pierce the illogic of a rancher from Nebraska who avers that President Obama is a Muslim. Again, the proper response to that myth is (1) what’s wrong with a public official being a Muslim? and (2) Barack Obama is a Christian. The rancher responds that I he can tell I’m a teacher, which he considers a bad thing.

While I’m in the mood, here’s some more teaching against some other common anti-Obama myths:

1. The Obama Administration has issued fewer new federal rules in its first three years than did the Bush Administration.
2. Despite fighting the worst recession since the 1930s, the Obama Administration has overseen less per capita growth in per capita government spending than any recent president but one, President Clinton.
3. AP confirms that more U.S. oil drilling hasn’t reduced gasoline prices… just as new tar sands pipelines don’t.

I don’t expect to convince my Nebraska interlocutor or other underinformed Tea Party shouters to be swayed by facts. But I’ll keep trying.