Freshman Representative Kathy Tyler (D-4/Big Stone City) vents her frustration at the insider politics she went to Pierre to fight:
A young, very respectable representative (not me; I don’t fit the first description) introduced a bill to allow schools to use their pension fund money to pay for health insurance. (Please leave your opinions off to the side for a minute; just look at the process here.) The bill passed out of committee, got through the House, and passed through the respective Senate committee. When it got to the Senate floor, it was hoghoused (gutted) and amended to pay part of the Regent’s health insurance cost increase—a totally different bill. We supported the representative in his motion to not concur and appoint. The motion passed, and the bill went to conference committee. That committee returned the bill to its original form (the conference committee process is another article) and sent it back to the Houses. The Senate defeated it.
Here’s the interesting part: since the bill was hoghoused on the floor, the new version never went to committee where it could be ‘vetted’ (new vocab word) or discussed. And if you’re not doing your homework,…. (And yes, it happened more than once.)
Ah, yes, there is politics in South Dakota, and as I heard twice from legislators from the majority party, “If you’re not in the inner circle, your bills will not be supported or funded, no matter how good they are.” Maybe I’ll be cooled down by next week [link added; Kathy Tyler, "Last Man-Woman Standing," Kathy's Corner, 2013.03.10].
The "inner circle"? In South Dakota? Isn't the inner circle supposed to be all 833,000 residents of this state? I'd love to see a rundown of which districts have representatives in the inner circle... and which districts are being left with no voice in Pierre, due strictly to the high-school hijinks of the Pierre power pretenders.
I'd also suggest to Rep. Kyle Schoenfish (R-19/Scotland) that switching parties didn't really help get a bill passed. It must take time to get into the inner circle... and it must be a hard soul-crushing process to get there.
What Kathy is explaining is EXACTLY what happened to us in 2009.....right down to the Concurrence and Conference Committee. Our bill, SB115, (which was a very 'common-sense' one) was also gutted and amended. That way, the 'powers-that-be' (top Republicans) got another shot at killing it, just in case we had been fortunate enough to persuade a majority of legislators to pass it.
We passed SB115 in two Committees, the Senate floor, and the House floor, but still lost because a few of the top Republicans got another shot at it ALONE.
This has been a few years ago, but it lights a spark yet when we realize the same 'under-the-table' practices are still being used today by those in power.
The Schoenfish bill originally was an attempt to increase the maximum levy for pensions and expand the use of the levy to also cover health insurance. That bill lost. He revived it through reconsideration and then amended out the levy increase, so that it only was an expanded use for health insurance. That the Senate eventually killed it wasn't inconsistent with the Senate's defeat of the Tulson bill to allow townships to establish a levy for road and bridge work. The Senate also struggled over the special-education levy increase but eventually accepted that. On the other hand the Senate brought forward about $6 million of additional one-time funding for K-12 as well as the establishment of the critical-needs teaching scholarship program to assist K-12 schools. Some of the legislators who went through the 2011 budget cutting are poised to pursue more state in 2014 session, because the balance between state funding and local property for schools was tipped more in the direction of property taxes so that schools didn't get cut more than they did. Many of those same legislators are hesitant to spend beyond the reasonably certain levels of revenue, because they don't want to get into a structural deficit again as happened during much of the previous administration.
My issue isn't with the bill, but the method. I understand the budgeting process. But should we take millions out of the general fund to set up trusts for scholarships or just fund the scholarships on an annual basis? The Opportunity Scholarship is funded annually.
If the legislature is "poised" to help education but can't or won't-then perhaps they need to find a new a revenue stream for k-12 education. Also they need to explain a lot of "wasteful" last minue spending out of the general fund--like monies to Bel Brand, legislative increases, money into the new SD Building fund, etc. They have a commitment to education--time to "Cowboy Up".
Schoenbeck: "he who names the war, wins the war. “regressive” is used to describe a tax code that rewards success. if you punish success, your system is called “regressive”. the government’s taxation system only measures success one way – revenue generated per year. But you raise an interesting point. maybe there are other ways to meaure taxable success."
http://dakotawarcollege.com/pro-income-tax-group-says-south-dakota-has-a-regressive-tax-system-and-so-does-everyone-else/comment-page-1/#comment-152008
"poised"? Charlie, I think Bob meant "posed." You know, like posers do... fawning education lobbyists be darned.
Every year a freshman harps on the "insiders circle." Every year I laugh because every such freshman thinks all will be well when they get there and they cant deal with a simple reality - they aren't the Messiah and they don't realize they don't know anything.
There is a maxim I have always used. If you want to find the stupidest person in the room, find the one who thinks he is the smartest.
That was a ridiciulous post, Troy. First of all, Kathy is a humble and hard working person-not one looking for a power grab. She along with others were working to help a fellow legislator from the other side of aisle move along a meaningful piece of legislation. Nothing excuses the behavior of certain leadership to play childhood games with issues or the process including out your out of whack perspective.
The Pierre Politburo.
"If you want to find the stupidest person in the room, find the one who thinks he is the smartest."
Troy, you should say that while looking into a mirror.
Speaking of mirrors, Bob Mercer continues to provide the smoke for the SDGOP mirrors when it comes to structural deficits.
The contention that complaints about an insider cabal exercising complete control over the S.D. legislature is not limited to freshman legislators. At cracker barrels and summary reports at our Brown Co. Dollar-A-Month sessions, every legislator, which includes mostly old hands, for the past 20 years has reported on this problem. iThe
(Damn this borrowed lap top. I did not hit the publish button.)
To continue: The persistent observation is that an inside clique does not even extend the pretense of listening to anyone but their own. We had reports, too, from members of the controlling party that new legislators are informed that they are to go along to get along, and that includes keeping their mouths shut about the proceedings. In District 3, people of differing parties and ideas who approach any of the current legislators with concerns are quickly dismissed with derisive displays about their political affiliations. It's a successful tactic because people who bother to acquaint themselves with the realities of S.D. politics accept the futility of trying to have their interests heard, let alone given honest consideration. As one long-time party member put it at a recent meeting, one may reside in South Dakota physically, but take up residence elsewhere politically and mentally in order to survive.
Time to clean house, eh? Term limits are needed more than ever! 2 terms, your out. No jumping from hall to hall! Or party to party, no loop holes, 2x ,your out, period! No questions asked!
Term limits are the problem. The place is being run by the bureaucrats.
Ditch the term limits, engage the voters, keep them watching, and get them to vote on policy instead of personality. Can't be that hard... can it?
Cory, without a vigilant press ...I'm afraid it is that hard. So much for comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.
Of course, Representative Tyler forgot the rules.
The first rule of the Governor's Club is that you don't talk about the Governor's Club.
Cory, more to my point on the media.
Today they reported the outrage from Thune and the Governor that the campground at Wind Cave was cut due to sequestration and budget cuts.
Yet, South Dakota is the hardest hit state in the country and no one is incredulous that a campground is what they are worried about?!?
Did any of them even think to ask a follow up about what other cuts they were worried about? Give other examples to get a gauge of their concern level?
Nope!
There are other campgrounds in the Hills that people can stay at...but there are real people with real faces and real pain who will be hurt.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/sequester-factsheets/South-Dakota.pdf
OMG...campers' will be inconvenienced!!!
Stop the presses and break into regular programming! This is big! John and Dennis told us to report it.
I'm not surprised by Thune and Daugaard ignoring the pain of the poor, the children, the middle class and education...but when the media serves as their transcriptionists...that surprises me.
Or not.
I think bringing in differant people every 8 years would bring in fresh ideas! Maybe improve on what was thought about before them! Not to tear down "newbies" because they won't play ball with the "status quo"! "Newbies" have ideas also and I thought the "House" and the "Senate" were running for their positions to represent "the People"! To have a conversation ABOUT what is best for the people they represent! Not to fight, and better there personnel agenda for career politics and personnel gain! While conflict stimulates ideas or to cooperate to agree on a solution that serves the people in the best possible way! Sorry, since reading this great online blog, I don't witness "cooperation" and "leading" South Dakota into the future! I see "following" and ramming things down the throats of the voters and unopen style of governments processes! But at least now I'm paying more attention and voicing my thought, right or wrong! I am expressing my "freedom of speach"! What i'm really concerned about is the local control being slowly eroded away! Soon, there won't be township boards, (the higher ups tying there hands). County Commissioners hands are tied as the Governor is dictating to them what he want in their counties! Then the commissionors will be gone and only the Governor will make decisions for each county and he will be soooo far removed he won't have a clue! When will this stop! One day someone will say" how'd we get here"! Then it will be late! Local control IS important as they know what is best for themselves! Thats what i've learned from reading the Watertown paper and the Madville times! So what is wrong with this picture????????
Mark, I agree that newbies deserve equal voice with old hands. They are all elected by equal citizens. The people of District 4 shouldn't have less of a voice than people from District 32 just because the people in District 4 decide to elect new people.
It would be an interesting experiment to replace every member of the Legislature with someone new in the 2014 election and see what happens in 2015. To be fair, we'd need to replace the Governor as well, and the other statewide officers, so no one could walk in and claim seniority.
But we can make that happen now, without a constitutional rule forcing it to happen. I want voters to have the right to keep hiring someone they find is really good at the job.
I wonder what would require more effort: the documentation, education, and public participation necessary to maintain "institutional memory" under term limits, or similar efforts to mobilize more voters to make more informed choices about candidates (assuming not enough voters are reading up on candidates now)?