Senate Majority Leader Russell Olson (R-8/Wentworth) has a pretty big (if fragile) ego... but apparently not as big as the House GOP leadership.
Just three days ago, Senator Russell Olson (R-8/Wentworth) was tooting his horn about SB 77, the Technical School Scholarship bill that he created with his District 8 neighbor Rep. Mitch Fargen (D-8/Flandreau).
The Technical School Scholarship fund bill that I teamed up with fellow District 8 Representative Mitch Fargen on has also been successful. This bill allows for students attending our technical schools to take advantage of a $5,000 forgivable note, if they work in a field considered of critical need and stay in South Dakota at least four years after graduation. This bill is tied very well to the Governor's SD Wins initiative which looks to grow our skilled labor force and add 1,000 new South Dakota residents in the near future [Senator Russell Olson, "Week 7, 2012 Session Update," RussellOlson.com, 2012.02.29].
Sen. Olson's Leap Day post leapt ahead of political reality. At that point, his tolerably good idea (and you know how much it pains me to admit that even Russ can broken-clockedly stumble upon a good idea) had only $100 written into it. Olson was assuming that he could take the bill into conference committee with Senators Frerichs and Vehle and turn it into a real funded program.
But then egos of the House leadership intervened. As I hear it, House Speaker pro tempore Brian Gosch (R-32/Rapid City) and House Assistant Majority Leader Justin Cronin (R-23/Gettysburg) decided they needed to poop on Senator Olson's parade (hey, isn't that my job?). They pooped on Russ not because of some grave flaw in SB 77—it embraces the same use of scholarships to recruit young talent to spend the first few years of their career filling critical needs in South Dakota that they thought made the atrocious, widely hated HB 1234 into model legislation worthy of their votes.
Oh no: the House leadership's effort to block SB 77 was pure ego trip. It was a ploy to show the Senate who's boss. Defying Governor Daugaard's stated dedication to promoting jobs and technical education, the House GOP walked away from conference negotiations with the Senate, let SB 77 die, and chose instead to throw more money at the tech schools, $500,000 in one-time money, with no long-term goals or vision... all to show they are tougher hombres than those wussy senators.
Childishness abounds in the South Dakota Legislature, and it allows good bills to die and bad bills to pass. Voters, it's time for us to send in some adults.
In the closing minutes of the committee process they left at least $4 million, a VERY conservative estimate, on the table to add to the new $20 Medicaid planning cushion, existing $43 million budget reserve, $63 property tax reserve, and over $700 million in trust funds. They looked for every rock they could find to hide money under, so that they could keep the education and Medicaid base low, just in case the voters pass the sales tax initiative, and state government is forced to put that new money into those two areas. So far we are on target to collect $50 million more in revenue this fiscal year than our very conservative estimate of a year ago. Furthermore, GOP House members were not informed by their leaders of the $4 million left on the floor until Democrats raised the issue in the House debate on the appropriations bill.
Hey, Rep. Wismer, didn't Governor Daugaard say something about how education ought to get the "first dollar" and the "last dollar"?
http://bfm.sd.gov/budget/rec13/GovLetter2013.pdf
This version of events on SB77 is quite different than what I witnessed yesterday. FYI, what matters is that $500,000 for tech schools went into the general bill after we killed SB77. SB77 was unfortunately used as a pawn in a chess game being played by the Senate sponsor. And Rep Wismer, your last sentence just isn't true. What is true is that this $4 million doesn't exist as it's a mere projection of revenue, not actual dollars. What is true is that $12.8 million in ongoing increases plus $21 million in one-time increases were put back into education. The reserves we have would not fund 3 months of government.
Oh really? Fill us in on that chess game, Rep. Hickey. What checkmate was Senate sponsor Olson playing?
No scandal Cory, it's just what it comes down to the last week - leveraging and compromise. The tension started earlier in the week in trying to settle the matter of a 5% bonus to state employees. The Gov's office, the Senate and the GOP leadership (and me) wanted 5% but a majority of the GOP House wanted somewhere between 0% and 4% and that's what the GOP leadership took as "the House position." I can't play the new guy card here much longer but I'm not sure yet that ego and power grabs are what we are seeing as you or Mercer suggest. I'd think it's more frustration and even some miscommunication and conflicting leadership styles - mostly I saw the tension of normal negotiations on big issues. On all these pieces of the puzzle, the Senate has their non-negotiables, so does the House, so does the Gov's office and several bills were up in the air until the last minute - lots of conference committees to sort these things out (maybe we set a record??). A couple bills died, one to the dismay of the House, another to the dismay of the Senate (SB77), key aspects of them were dropped as amendments into surviving bills and if you can keep up with all of it you are pretty sharp. This year I think everyone got most of what they wanted which means extra money for ed and providers, money for tech ed, raises for state employees, etc..
Darn, hazard of blog commenting. Let me rephrase: The GOP House member with whom I spoke indicated that their caucus was not informed of the $4 million left on the floor until the House debate on the appropriations bill. For purposes of revenue projection shortage risk comparison, in the very worst year of the very worst recession since the 1930’s, our actual continuing receipts for FY2010: $1,109,359,945, (http://bfm.sd.gov/econ/Revenueestimates2011.pdf, page 28,)were $21 million less than our conservative budgeted estimates for FY10 : $1,130,101,479 (http://bfm.sd.gov/econ/revenueestimates2010.pdf, page 28,) a shortage our current reserves could cover five times without touching trust funds.
Excellent Steve. Sometimes the truth really hurts going down without a spoonful of sugar coated spin
Rep Wismer I will say you are very appreciated as an appropriator and I'd think there are many more than myself who are all ears when you speak on the floor about these numbers or other matters. Perhaps your professional expertise has something to do with it but whatever it is I know your numbers are good. Particularly this $4 million, you are probably correct that our projections are too conservative but the reason most House members are ok leaving money on the bottom line is because we see big problems ahead. Fed dollars to the tune of $56+ million, as you know, may not materialize next year. Bigger than that, I strongly believe Greece will default and the powers that be are holding that off until after our November election because that will shake our economy/nation to the core. I spend about a month a year in Greece and I've watched this closely for a few years and America is not immune to those problems happening here. SD is a welfare state and any major shake up in our national economy will be felt strongly here. I'm in agreement with those who want to get our house in order to minimize what will certainly devastate other states. I don't mean to be a pessimist and surely I don't speak for anyone else in the GOP House. Perhaps those comments will communicate our reticence to use reserves, raise taxes or spend too much more money. I wish I could bring myself to believe that national economic policy changes (democrat or republican) would be able to avert what is coming. America is in trouble and those who remain from the Great Depression generation have seen it before. The rest of us think we can charge our way through hard times and borrow ourselves into prosperity. In SD we do see some evidence of recovery and if that continues another year you'll see us next year (provided we all get re-elected) having more than this $4 million to put back in. Hopefully the surpluses will be as large as you forecast. I think the difference between your side of the aisle and mine is whether or not we should wait and see.
Aw shucks...I don’t suppose I can instill any more confidence with a reference to Matthew 8:26, could I? (for the Bible literacy challenged ones, that’s one of the “Why are ye fearful, Oh ye of little faith†verses).
SB 77 was just one of many bills that showed that we have a terrible problem of legislators NOT voting on individual bills based of the merits of that bill.
If SB 77 was bad economics, than paying for a $1.1 Million dollar building to be built on LEASED land surely should have incited the same wrath? http://legis.state.sd.us/sessions/2012/Bill.aspx?Bill=46
Rep. Nelson,
I am confused. Was your opposition to the building and SDSU's justification for the building or is it because it is built on the airport grounds?
Regarding the decision about ego's or not against the merits of the bill, I would like to hear more justification for this bill than I can read here.
Similarly, I'd like to hear more justification for Cronin and Gosch's standing so stubbronly against Senator Olson's proposal. Proponents appear to have made the case Troy is asking for in Senate Appropriations and House Appropriations, without challenge from any opponent testimony.
Mr. Jones,
If you click on the little eagles to the right, those are the audio recordings of the hearings and session. Please feel free to afford yourself of that immediate information.