Press "Enter" to skip to content

HB 1048: Surprise! Legislature Authorizing Monsanto to Trespass on Your Land

The South Dakota Department of Agriculture and the Legislature are brewing up another scheme to favor Big Ag over small farmers. This time, they want to take away your property rights.

Take a look at House Bill 1048. It's innocuously branded an act " to revise and repeal certain provisions related to the Department of Agriculture." It eliminates South Dakota's rules on labeling potatoes and grading butter. (Mmm... potatoes... butter....)

But HB 1048 also repeals SDCL 38-1-44 through 38-1-50, some important property protections and due process rights for farmers. Current law says that if Monsanto or someone else holding a patent on genetically modified seed thinks a South Dakota farmer is infringing on that patent by saving seed, and if the patent-holder wants to gather evidence to use in hauling that farmer into court, the patent-holder must first contact the farmer, get the farmer's permission to enter his land and take samples, follow state rules in collecting the samples, and share the test results with the farmer.

HB 1048 repeals those rules. HB 1048 says Monsanto can enter a farmer's land any time, gather whatever seeds they want, and use the information they get from those seeds however they want. Wow: HB 1048 violates the Fourth Amendment by allowing a search of private property without court authorization or probable cause. It also violates the Fifth Amendment by infringing on a defendant's protection against self-incrimination.

Try this comparison: suppose Pat Powers thinks I'm violating his copyright. He can call me up and give me hell. He can take me to court and ask the cops to search my stuff for nefarious misappropriation of his intellectual property. But he can't climb in my window while I'm at work and grab my computer.

But the full House voted unanimously to allow Monsanto to jump your fence, tromp around on your corn and soybeans, and cut up your crops. Monsanto's intellectual property rights matter; South Dakota farmers' Constitutional rights... not so much.

Senate Agriculture, are you guys paying attention? Reread House Bill 1048, and see if you really want to subject South Dakota farmers to warrantless searches by corporate agents.


  1. testor15 2013.02.12

    The religious - corporate right wing, wholly owned by ALEC are continuing the work of destroying the US Constitution little piece by little piece until is is worthless.

  2. Rorschach 2013.02.12

    You know, I would prefer to keep these laws rather than repeal them. But if they are repealed, the general laws against trespassing and theft still apply. And the process Monsanto would need to follow to get a court order to go on someone's land would still apply. So it's arguable that these laws are unnecessarily duplicative of existing law.

    Bonus: According to the link, Monsanto's general counsel is named David Snively. Nice name for a lawyer.

  3. larry kurtz 2013.02.12

    Subscribers to the religion industry like 'PNR' and Sibby are becoming older and fewer therefore more abnormal, offensive and exclusive.

    Conservatism is unsustainable prima facie.

  4. Douglas Wiken 2013.02.12

    Wonder why the Pierre corporate shills, Democrat, Republican, know-nothing, TEA party, haven't been deluging farmers with news of this threatening pile of steaming crap legislation. This is a piece of crap that should be immediately referred as soon as possible if the idiots in Pierre put this on the books.

    Every road ditch should get a little bit of alfalfa seed with Monsanto's ripoff fees. They are apparently already using aerial photos to determine if combines are sitting in alfalfa fields. I was warned to tell renters not to park combines on my alfalfa.

    It is time for South Dakotans to require their legislators sign pledges to support them and not pass laws designed purely to make corporation plutocrats richer at our expense. This would be a Non-Norquist pledge.

  5. Stan Gibilisco 2013.02.12

    Next thing you know, some bioengineering corporation will start to patent human DNA, then claim the right to have you or me detained without consent, forced to give blood samples, and if our blood contains the patented DNA, haul us into court and sue us for everything we have, including the underwear on our butts, and bankrupt our children, our children's children, and our children's children's children, down to the seventh generation.

    I suppose their lawyer will bear the name Snidely Whiplash, or some such.

  6. Stan Gibilisco 2013.02.12

    Just got the idea for a really bad sci-fi novel! Thanks, Monsanto! Want a cut of the proceeds when I sell the movie rights?

  7. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    (NaturalNews) During his 2008 campaign for president, Barack Obama transmitted signals that he understood the GMO issue. Several key anti-GMO activists were impressed. They thought Obama, once in the White House, would listen to their concerns and act on them.

    These activists weren't just reading tea leaves. On the campaign trail, Obama said: "Let folks know when their food is genetically modified, because Americans have a right to know what they're buying."

    Making the distinction between GMO and non-GMO was certainly an indication that Obama, unlike the FDA and USDA, saw there was an important line to draw in the sand.

    Beyond that, Obama was promising a new era of transparency in government. He was adamant in promising that, if elected, his administration wouldn't do business in "the old way." He would be "responsive to people's needs."

    Then came the reality.

    After the election, and during Obama's term as president, people who had been working to label GMO food and warn the public of its huge dangers were shocked to the core. They saw Obama had been pulling a bait and switch.

    The new president filled key posts with Monsanto people, in federal agencies that wield tremendous force in food issues, the USDA and the FDA:

    At the USDA, as the director of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Roger Beachy, former director of the Monsanto Danforth Center.

    As deputy commissioner of the FDA, the new food-safety-issues czar, the infamous Michael Taylor, former vice-president for public policy for Monsanto. Taylor had been instrumental in getting approval for Monsanto's genetically engineered bovine growth hormone.

    Learn more:

  8. larry kurtz 2013.02.12

    Natural News is a rag run by pyramid schemers, Herbalife and the Church of Scientology: don't you have anything constructive to do, Sibby?

  9. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    "Natural News is a rag run by pyramid schemers, Herbalife and the Church of Scientology"

    What does that have to do with Obama's appointment of Monsanto operatives. Does those allegations automatically prove those appointments never happened?

    It seems to me that it is moral relativists who are always right and others are always wrong, no matter what side of the issue they decide to fall on.

  10. larry kurtz 2013.02.12

    Pick a lane, Sibby: you're swerving again.

  11. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    LK, is also wrog:

    President Obama, I oppose your appointment of Michael Taylor, a former VP and lobbyist for Monsanto, the widely criticized genetically modified (GM) food multinational, as senior advisor to the commissioner at the FDA. Taylor is the same person who as a high-ranking official at the FDA in the 1990s promoted allowing genetically modified organisms into the U.S. food supply without undergoing a single test to determine their safety or risks. This is a travesty.

    Taylor was in charge of policy for Monsanto's now-discredited GM bovine growth hormone (rBGH), which is opposed by many medical and hospital organizations. It was Michael Taylor who pursued a policy that milk from rBGH-treated cows should not be labeled with disclosures. Michael Taylor and Monsanto do not belong in our government.

    President Obama, Monsanto has been seen as a foe to family-based agriculture, the backbone of America, by introducing dangerous changes to plants and animals and by using strong-arm legal tactics against farmers for decades. Naturally occurring plant and animal species are permanently threatened by the introduction of DNA and hormonal modification, Monsanto's core businesses.

    FDA scientists once regarded genetic modification of the food supply as the single most radical and potentially dangerous threat to public health in history. As early as the 1991, a body of scientific research began to form which now includes articles in over 600 journals. As a whole, these offer scientific evidence that GM foods, hormones, and related pesticides are the root cause for the increase of many serious diseases in the U.S. Since GM foods were introduced, diagnosis of multiple chronic illnesses in the U.S. has skyrocketed. These illnesses include changes in major organs and in hormonal, immune, digestive, and reproductive systems. These modifications to foods and food production may also be contributors to colon, breast, lymphatic, and prostate cancers.

    Experts are discouraged that regulators and GM companies systematically overlook potential side effects of GM. Monsanto's objective to use biotechnology to change the world's food supply is the opposite policy direction your administration should pursue. Your legacy of supporting Monsanto to have free rein in U.S. food policy is a nightmare scenario that is against the interest of all Americans and world citizens.

  12. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    I suppose you liberals don't trust the Huffington Post:

    President Obama knows that agribusiness cannot be trusted with the policy and regulatory powers of government. On the campaign trail in 2007, he promised:

    We'll tell ConAgra that it's not the Department of Agribusiness. It's the Department of Agriculture. We're going to put the people's interests ahead of the special interests.

    But, starting with his choice for USDA Secretary, the pro-biotech former governor of Iowa, Tom Vilsack, President Obama has let Monsanto, Dupont and the other pesticide and genetic engineering companies know they'll have plenty of friends and supporters within his administration.

    President Obama has taken his team of food and farming leaders directly from the biotech companies and their lobbying, research, and philanthropic arms.

    Michael Taylor, former Monsanto Vice President, is now the FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods.

    Roger Beachy, former director of the Monsanto-funded Danforth Plant Science Center, is now the director of the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

    Islam Siddiqui, Vice President of the Monsanto and Dupont-funded pesticide-promoting lobbying group, CropLife, is now the Agriculture Negotiator for the US Trade Representative.

    Rajiv Shah, former agricultural-development director for the pro-biotech Gates Foundation (a frequent Monsanto partner), served as Obama's USDA Under Secretary for Research Education and Economics and Chief Scientist and is now head of USAID.

    Solicitor General Elena Kagan, who took Monsanto's side against organic farmers in the Roundup Ready alfalfa case, has been nominated to the Supreme Court.

    Now, Ramona Romero, corporate counsel to DuPont, has been nominated by President Obama to serve as General Counsel for the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    DuPont's lengthy record of lies, crimes and misdeeds are well known, and the company's efforts to deceive the public and cover-up risks of its products continue to this day.

  13. larry kurtz 2013.02.12

    Sibby: since Monsanto's patents are going before SCOTUS the Obama Administration is seeking to put the case in the worst possible light to a conservative court.

  14. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    You liberals still think that I am just a conspiracy theory nut:

    Michael R Taylor, started off as a partner at the law firm that represented Monsanto on GBH issues. Then, as the FDA’s deputy commissioner for policy, he wrote the FDA’s rBGH labelling guidelines – the ones that insisted there was no difference between rGBH and regular milk. He also deleted references to problems with GMO foods, over the objection of staff scientists. Then he spent a few years working directly for Monsanto. And now? Barak Obama brought him back to the FDA to oversee Monsanto again, as his food safety issues czar!

  15. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    Let this be a lesson:

    The Corporatists control both political parties.

  16. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    In case you still don't believe me:

    Even Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is tied to Monsanto! She was a Monsanto counsel when she worked at the Rose Law firm because she represented them among many other corporate interests.

    The revolving door in the Obama Administration is small compared to the corruption in Congress by Monsanto. OpenSecrets wrote last month that they spent over “$1.4 million lobbying Washington… and spent about $6.3 million total last year, more than any other agribusiness firm except the tobacco company Altria.” This is not a good sign for a country that is supposed to value democracy. But as privileged “Founder” James Madison pointed out in Federalist 10, “the most powerful faction must be expected to prevail.” There is hope, however, in Federalist 51 (also written by Madison) that “the more powerful faction… [will] wish for a government which shall protect all parties, the weaker [and]… the more powerful.”

    In this case, Monsanto does not wish for a government to protect all parties. For them, a pro-GMO government would be their interest which is enforced by the fact that they are “the most powerful faction” and can “be expected to prevail.” Proposed legislation written by anti-GMO legislator Dennis Kucinich to label GM foods has not been received well in Congress. Grassroots petitions telling President Obama to cease corporate influence of the FDA, ten petitions on against Monsanto (ranging from 10 to about 25,000 supporters), and more than one million people petitioning the FDA to label GMOs have been equally unsuccessful.

    The reason for these unsuccessful efforts is because the political process is awash with Monsanto money.

  17. larry kurtz 2013.02.12

    So, you believe Monsanto should have carte blanche access to private property, Sib?

  18. larry kurtz 2013.02.12

    Should people applying for conceal/carry permits consent to checks for opioids and cannabis?

  19. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    "So, you believe Monsanto should have carte blanche access to private property, Sib?"

    Absolutely not!!!

    Do you agree with Obama's appointments?

  20. larry kurtz 2013.02.12

    Sibby, again: since Monsanto's patents are going before SCOTUS the Obama Administration is seeking to put the case in the worst possible light to a conservative court.

  21. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    Larry, why are you now putting forth conspiracy theories? Ever hear about Hegelian Dialectics?

  22. larry kurtz 2013.02.12

    just reporting the future, sib.

  23. joelie hicks 2013.02.12

    The tie of both Republican and Democrat administrations goes back at least as far as Bush I, and has been documented in movies such as Food Inc., hardly a conservative movie. I am a Conservative with a little Libertarian thrown in to the mix. What makes me sad is that some of you posters must look and see who wrote something before you decide where you stand. I do not believe you can patent life, on this issue the SCOTUS was wrong, Clarence Thomas was wrong, and yes, not just Hilary Clinton but Clarence Thomas also has ties to Monsanto et al. Don't find excuses for the person of your party when they are wrong. I am ashamed of Dennis Daugaard for example. He is selling out the salt of the earth regular farm folks to the people who will eat up the land and spit it out when they are done. He is doing it by going against the very principles of conservatism,with hand outs, and looking the other way on environmental issues.

  24. LK 2013.02.12

    [CAH: please note that I have deleted much of the nuttiness with which Steve started us down the rat hole again, for the reasons LK states below.]


    Let's just run through this as simply as one can.

    I am not contending and never have contended that corporate America does not have undue influence on federal and state government. There’s a revolving door between corporate America and government. That revolving door harms our nation and state.

    Arguing that the revolving door is evidence of a Masonic New Age Lesbian Theocrat Hegalian United Nations conspiracy hinders the making of a valid point. In fact, that assertion makes the proponent appear ridiculous. If you want people to take your conservatism seriously, be serious. By the way, I think that liberals who accuse every political opponent of being fascists are wrong too. It’s just a lot less funny than labels that are devoid of meaning strung together to obfuscate.

    When one quotes Scientologists, one loses all credibility. Had you quoted the Washington Post article or another legitimate source first, I would not have responded at all.

  25. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    LK, listen to joelie

  26. Steve Sibson 2013.02.12

    "When one quotes Scientologists, one loses all credibility."

    LK, funny many of your far-left activists (MoveOn, Huffington) said the same thing that the Scientologists said...Obama is in bed with Monsanto. Do you still refuse to accept the truth?

  27. Douglas Wiken 2013.02.12

    Steve, this is not a post about Washington, DC corruption and incompetence or links to secret organizations or corporations, this is about the South Dakota legislature.

    Frankly, I tend to agree with you that both parties are corrupted by corporate and organization "contributions", but just for once, perhaps you might stay on topic.

  28. bret clanton 2013.02.12

    The corporatists control both political parties. You hit that nail on the head......

  29. Steve Sibson 2013.02.13

    "CAH: please note that I have deleted much of the nuttiness with which Steve started us down the rat hole again, for the reasons LK states below."

    So Cory, do you agree with Obama's appointments?

    "Steve, this is not a post about Washington, DC corruption and incompetence or links to secret organizations or corporations, this is about the South Dakota legislature."

    Doug, the issue is Monsanto. I am on topic. Because the truth exposes the propaganda means that the truth needs to be deleted and/or ignored and the attention is directed at the person who has the courage to say the way it is. As long as this political environment remains, the United States, including South Dakota, will be controlled by the wealthy ruling class...who control both parties.

  30. Steve Sibson 2013.02.13

    Thanks Bret, this is why I continue to tell the truth even though I am attacked. A few, a very few, finally see the light.

  31. caheidelberger Post author | 2013.02.13

    Steve, I do not support government actions that subject citizens to warrantless searches and seizures or self-incrimination at the hands of for-profit corporations that drive small farmers into corporate servitude. That's why I want us to tell the South Dakota Senate not to pass HB 1048.

    R, if the statutes in question are redundant, do you have any idea what motivated the 2002 Legislature to enact them? Was there any history of Monsanto finding loopholes in normal trespass/theft law? Might farmers need these statutes to make absolutely clear their rights against the intimidating legalese that Monsanto inspectors would bring to their doorsteps?

  32. Bill Dithmer 2013.02.13

    joelie hicks Great post.

    The Blindman

  33. Steve Sibson 2013.02.13

    Cory, I agree that we need to stand up the the SDGOP for their corporatism and cronyism. The biggest effort in that regard is dairies for the French cheese maker that is setting up their operation in Brookings. With that said, we need Democrats to also understand that their leadership is also to blame for the takeover of our country by international interests.

  34. Testor15 2013.02.13

    Sibby, I concur. We the people are also part of the problem by way of leaving the corporatists in office.

  35. Bill Fleming 2013.02.13

    Ha. Funny.

    The "corporatists" control everything because "we the people" keep buying their stuff. Don't like it? Quit shopping at WalMart, drinking Coke and Budweiser, eating at McDonald's and Snickers bars, and buying guns, cars, computers, gasoline, and plastics, and fighting wars.

  36. Steve Sibson 2013.02.13

    Bill, thanks for proving my point. Most cannot stop buying from corporatists in a monopolistic economic system that has been set up with the help of governmental intervention.

  37. larry kurtz 2013.02.13

    yeah, bill: we should be settling trade disputes with clubs and rocks.

  38. Bill Fleming 2013.02.13

    Sibby, it's impossible to prove your point, because basically, you don't have one. By the way, do you still work for Toshiba? We just bought a Toshiba printer/copier last week. Works pretty good. Better than having the "scribes" here copy everything by hand, I'm thinking.

  39. Steve Sibson 2013.02.13

    Bill, the point is the wealthy ruling elite corporatists controll both parties.

    Which model of copier?

  40. grudznick 2013.02.13

    Bill buys the more expensive models of things because he's a little boodwadjish at times. But Mr. Sibby, you are wrong about French Cheese makers in Brookings. You need to give them a fair shake and you can tell your step brother I said so.

  41. caheidelberger Post author | 2013.02.13

    We can talk all about the common guilt of buying stuff from bastards. I shop at Wal-Mart. All are punished, cries the Prince at the end of Romeo and Juliet.

    It's hard to undo our dependence on the global economy. It's not hard for legislators to say no to HB 1048. It's not hard for legislators to say no to a five-million-dollar handout to Grand Fromage (that's French for Big Cheese), which lies waiting for rushed action in the FY2013 revision bill. We can make practical progress on the corporate threat Sibby rightly fears by blocking these bills in Pierre now.

  42. Bill Fleming 2013.02.13

    Sibby, an e-studio color MFPS. Can't remember the model right now. Nice. Works good for what we do, and prints a ledger size sheet. In the old days I used to draw that stuff with magic markers and getting a good color
    copy of it was next to impossible.

  43. Bill Fleming 2013.02.13

    Grudz, I got yer boodwad right here, pal.

  44. grudznick 2013.02.13

    Keep that thing in your pants, you got nothing for me, Bill.
    Your sister knows how to dance, she might be more my speed, yeah.

  45. Bill Fleming 2013.02.13

    Well, I don't have any sisters. But no matter. I wouldn't introduce you to anyone's sister, GN. ...just sayin'.

  46. Linda McIntyre 2013.02.13

    Good catch on HB 1048! I urge everyone who is concerned about this to contact their respective senator and all members on the Senate Ag and Natural Resources Committee. These committee members are:

    Ewing, Bob
    Frerichs, Jason
    Krebs, Shantel, Chair
    Lucas, Larry
    Omdahl, David
    Otten, Ernie
    Rampelberg, Bruce, Vice Chair
    Rhoden, Larry
    Vehle, Mike

    It's easy to contact them by going to this website, --
    select the senator, fill in the blanks and send the email, then just change the name of the senator and send it to the next one.

    Let them know we are watching and care!

  47. caheidelberger Post author | 2013.02.13

    Good to hear from you, Linda. This is another in the long list of issues where we liberals and you conservatives ought to be able to find common ground and make the vote an easy call for all legislators.

  48. Steve Sibson 2013.02.14

    "But Mr. Sibby, you are wrong about French Cheese makers in Brookings. You need to give them a fair shake and you can tell your step brother I said so."

    I do beleive the French Cheese maker deserves a fair shake. What I oppose is for the taxpayers of South Dakota giving them an unfair advantage over South Dakota's cheese makers. Big Ag is wiping out small Ag. This is a prime example of how government intervention creates monopolistic economic systems that are not as efficient as a competitive free market enterprise systems.

  49. Testor15 2013.02.14

    So I ask the question again: "The religious - corporate right wing, wholly owned by ALEC are continuing the work of destroying the US Constitution little piece by little piece until is is worthless."

    The Koch Brother's organization, ALEC, is the organizational mastermind of this offensive piece of this and many more rights stealing legislation. At what point will the people rise up and do something about them?

  50. Steve Sibson 2013.02.14

    Follow up question, since I have established Obama's habit of nominating top Monsanto operatives in key governmental positions on this thread, is Dictator Obama also part of the ALEC conspiracy?

  51. Testor15 2013.02.14

    I see a indictment of both parties in the corporatist domination of both parties. The Koch Brothers have long established their dominance of the right winger movement through their ownership of ALEC. ALEC and their model legislation are designed to control the debate and eventual ownership of the results they can go to the bank with, i.e. money and power.
    I also do not trust the corporatist wing of the Democratic party. Both of these movements are designed to destroy the very fabric of our system, the US Constitution.
    These are things most on this blog seem to understand if the comments here are to be believed. Monsanto is part of the problem. Why should an international corporation of any type have more rights than me? They are trying to control the people by overruling the Constitution because they cannot control their invention.

  52. Steve Sibson 2013.02.14

    "Sib: you rail against corporatists and support the Koch-funded teabagging tobacco industry in the same breath"

    Larry, I understand why you came to that conclusion, but it is wrong. I testified against funding ALEC, CSG, National Governors Association ond othe such organizations on SB121 a couple of weeks ago. I waiting for it to show up in House Local Government to further the argument. Sadly many will charge me with being a "conspiracy nut"...Cory is not alone.

  53. Steve Sibson 2013.02.14

    Testor15, don't know who you are, but you have the correct insight. How do we inform the rest of America without being attacked for being conspiracy nuts? Are you anonymous because you don't want such attacks directed at you personally and concerned about retaliation from those who control our jobs?

  54. Testor15 2013.02.14

    Sibby, I am a private citizen of the state of South Dakota who has endured many variations of this discussion / topic for over 40 years. I am not in a position to broadcast who I am nor is it important. If there is a problem with the facts and details I discuss on these forums, I can be excluded.
    There was a time in my life where I was wrapped up in both 'sides' of South Dakota politics. I currently do not have much to do with either due to the weak kneed corporatist behavior of the copycat Democrats and the Christianist / right wing / Koch Brothers lead GOP. We could have quite a conversation over these movements at a different time.
    Through our gracious host Cory and DL over at I have been able to get real news, not just cute headlines. In return I am able vent my frustrations with our system in South Dakota and hopefully add to the reader discussions.
    I have no plans to ever run for an office but I wish to impart positive movement to those who are planning or already there. It is amazing how many people are only concerned with finding ways to line their pockets instead of protecting the Constitution. My plans are always wrapped around the US Constitution and all its amendments.

  55. Steve Sibson 2013.02.14

    Testor15, thanks for your service. I mean that with all sincerity. I would like to point out that your observation in regard to the Christian right is well directed in regard to those that push Dominion Theology. Some of us have seen the error and have moved away from such thinking.

    A second point. Not sure if I agree with "all its amendments". I am looking at the possibility that the 14th set the stage to undue the Constitution and have in fact opened the door for the corporatists to take over. Don't mean to open a can of worms.

  56. Testor15 2013.02.14

    I have been of the thought and action, no group or point of view is always the right one. The abuse of the system is too easy to accomplish if those of us not in the spotlight do not keep our elected officials on their toes.
    We could get into discussions concerning each of the Amendments. Each has pros and cons if we dig deep enough. What has happened with the the Amendments still in effect is the public's understanding of them has changed over the years and we have allowed them to be hijacked by corporate interests. These corporate interests have always had the money available to own and game the system. Watch the movie Lincoln and see how the system was gamed for a beautiful 'cause'.
    Now corporations are people because super rich individuals gamed the system. We now need to amend the constitution to rid us of this travesty.
    Thanks for all you do Sibby, we do not agree on somethings but I understand where you come from. It is much easier to discuss and come to agreements when you have someone who actually understands where their personal starting point is.

  57. Steve Sibson 2013.02.14

    "Through our gracious host Cory and DL over at I have been able to get real news, not just cute headlines."

    Not long ago, when I was too contolled by the SDGOP corporatists, I said things and used approaches that I am now ashamed of. My current spat with Cory over my research should not go down the same path of old. Unfortunately, when you present information, such as Obama's Monsanto ties, the true believers refuse to take a serious look and instead go after those of us who are pointing them to seeing more of the whole story. I know this is easier said than done, but it is those who can show you where you are wrong who are your best friends. Who wants to continue on in error?

  58. Testor15 2013.02.14

    I have been in many rooms over the past 40+ years where things were done and then heard the public explanations. I lost a great deal of respect for many of these individuals and this caused me to reexamine their points of view. Power and money were the usual issues. When a person experiences this enough, you lose faith in those elected and also look at the reasons why people run for office. What I gained from these experiences now make me more effective as an observer / commenter.
    The Monsanto / ALEC companies / individuals are infiltrated through many layers of all government. I was invited to meetings 30 years ago to be part of this process. I did not partake and have done nothing to encourage these proceedings. There is no conspiracy theory, it is conspiracy fact. The process could have made a RICO case if these people had not been so connected. Those who do not want to understand are hiding their collective heads in the sand.

  59. larry kurtz 2013.02.14

    "Whereas the original Sanskrit work and its early translations do not contain any fable resembling The Scorpion and the Frog, an earlier version of it, The Scorpion and the Turtle, is to be found as an interpolated fable in Islamic variants of the Panchatantra.[6][7] The study suggests that the interpolation occurred between the 12th and 13th century in the Persian language area[8] and offers a constructive frame of orientation for further research on the question of the fable's origin."

  60. Kathy Tyler 2013.02.17

    We were given a bit of misinformation on this bill. I contacted ag department's legal person and received this response:

    The issues are covered by criminal trespass statutes under SDCL 22-35. However, I will tell you we are internally meeting on this very issue and are considering an amendment to remove those section from consideration based on some constituent concerns. I will keep you informed.

    Thank you


    Courtney L. De La Rosa
    General Counsel/Director of Ag Policy
    South Dakota Department of Agriculture
    Joe Foss Building - 523 E. Capitol
    Pierre, SD 57501
    (605) 773-4234

Comments are closed.