Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Keep the Trains On Time

The Daily Planet reports today that Senate Bill 60 passed out of the South Dakota Senate Commerce and Energy Committee yesterday. Senate Bill 60 would set Daylight Savings Time as the permanent year-round time for the State of South Dakota.

This proposed law has not been thought out and is ill advised if not bordering on stupid. Where are common sense and those people who say government is the problem not the solution on this one? Standard Time is one great example of where government actually works.

This is the explanation of Standard Time from Wikipedia: Standard time is the synchronization of clocks within a geographical area or region to a single time standard, rather than using solar time or a locally chosen meridian (longitude) to establish a local time mean time standard. Historically, the concept was established during the 19th century to aid weather forecasting and train travel. Applied globally in the 20th century, the geographical areas became extended around evenly spaced meridians into time zones which (usually) centered on them. The standard time set in each time zone has come to be defined in terms of offsets from Universal Time.

In 1966 a Federal Daylight Savings Time law was adopted across the United States. I don’t know if there was a time limit or not (someone can check me out) but I seem to recall that States either had to opt in or opt out. I believe that Indiana and Arizona in the Continental 48 States chose not to adopt federal daylight time. My recollection is the start and stop dates of daylight time were extended several yeas ago by federal law.

In large part Standard Time was adopted so that the trains could run on time and there would be uniformity for commerce. Local time was abolished during the mid to late 19th Century where local clocks were set at noon each day (the time when the sun was at it’s highest point). Thus each locale had their own time.

Changing time uniformity in South Dakota would cause disruption of economic and social order. Having time in South Dakota different from surrounding states would make life more difficult. I am referring specifically to eastern South Dakota but the same would be true in the West as well. During part of the year for example Sioux City, Fargo, Minneapolis and Omaha would have different times than North Sioux City or Sioux Falls, as would Denver or Cheyenne be different from Rapid City. Many people work in South Dakota who live nearby but out of state. They would be in different time zones. Schools would start at different times. How would national radio and television broadcast times be affected? What effect would it have on local tourism, for example where people are encouraged to attend events (speaking locally) at such venues at the new Sioux Falls Events Center, Sanford Pentagon, or Washington Pavilion?

There is an old adage thrown around a lot in politics – If its not broke don’t fix it. It is Not Broken.

Endbar – While writing this it looks like I am late to the party and common sense prevailed. It may? be moot as the full Senate killed the bill 17 Yea, 16Nay. (a majority of the members elect (18) being required). I am posting this anyway.

Monday, January 25, 2016

Unpredictable Election

2016 Presidential election sweepstakes is shaping up as the strangest I’ve ever seen.

Several factors in play.

1. Many Voters are mad! They are anti establishment and want change from the status quo. This is true of both Republicans and Democrats.

2. There is no incumbent – an open seat. In the last Century with the exception of Franklin Roosevelt (4 termer, itself a historic exception) only twice has a party held the White House more than eight years. Truman, we know that story and George H.W. Bush where voters thought they were voting for Reagan II. Voters just get tired of the party in power and turn them out. Thus this election is the Republicans to lose.

3. Culmination of the elimination of public finance of Presidential primaries. Candidates are opting out of public finance and the associated spending limits, overall and specified limits in each State.

4. The ability to take unlimited contributions for candidate associated PACs.

5. New Media – Social media and an abundance of cable news networks. Candidates reach voters in new ways and campaigns can be organized without the need for an Army of volunteers.

6. Favorable voter opinion and support is swayed more than ever by sound bites without substantive proposals.

As a consequence Republicans at one point had 17 candidates, the Democrats had an heir apparent who now challenged by a self avowed Socialist, and now perhaps a Democrat, Republican, Independent Michael Bloomberg.

So… What’s going to happen?

Your guess is as good as mine, but I offer a few speculations. Our country is very divided both right and left. For Republicans to win they have to win a few of the big Electoral College states beyond the Lone Star State.

To effect real change, you have to win the election. Being mad doesn’t change anything. An Outsider without some compromise is unlikely to change much or bridge the divide in America.

On the Democrat side Bernie Sanders is extreme and outspoken. He wants income redistribution and is a pacifist. Hillary Clinton is scandal prone and for the most part is more Obama.

On the Republican side from the Iowa Caucuses thru the South Carolina primary there should be some consolidation into the ideological voter camps. Far right self anointed Tea Partiers who hate government and old line Conservatives (now branded as moderates).

From my view Ted Cruz will make some showing in Iowa. He has the endorsement of the Bob Vander Plaats and thus the Christian Coalition. He should rule in Iowa’s Bible Belt of Northwestern Iowa. Donald Trump has tremendous name identification. Trump’s ability and willingness to say anything to keep media attention on him and off others certainly is working.  He is riding high in the polls and we will see if this attention delivers for him at the Iowa Caucus and at the polls. Does he have a grassroots following that will actually turn out for him? After Iowa will the attention still be focused in a positive way on Trump?

Who will coalesce the non Tea Partiers? Will Marco Rubio pickup the pieces? Which other non Tea Partier’s will come out of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina? Bush? Kasich? Christie?  Rubio? When these questions begin to be answered there will be a clearer picture.

So I still don’t know. What I believe is the most electable Republican candidate in the General Election currently in the race is former Congressman and Ohio Governor John Kasich. Kasich will win Ohio, a Must Win State for the GOP. He also would be extremely competitive in big states, Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and would make the Dems or others have to work in states  like New Jersey and Virginia. It is unlikely that Kasich will get the nomination but he might get a jump-start in the Granite State.

My personal extreme long shot hope is that the nominating process goes to the GOP convention in Cleveland in July where a deadlocked Party once again gives the job (nomination) to Speaker Paul Ryan. Ryan is a Conservative who wants to govern and understands politics and governing are about addition not subtraction. My choice for the Vice Presidential nomination is Carly!

Bloomberg who may become an Independent candidate will appeal to many Centrists. There is not much chance he can win but his candidacy has the potential to help the Republicans. If Mayor Mike can take just a few wins in big States away from Democrats, it is theoretically possible the election could be thrown into the U S House of Representatives, if no candidate receives a majority of the Electoral College. If a third party candidate winning Electoral College votes seems unlikely, which it probably is; Remember in 1968 George Wallace, the American Independent Party candidate, won 46 Electoral College votes.

If an election is conducted in the U. S. House each State has one vote. Thus for example South Dakota would have the same vote as California or Massachusetts. The State’s vote is determined by a vote of each State’s Congressional delegation.

Yes this year is politically strange and unpredictable!

Saturday, June 20, 2015

2018 Election Sweepstakes

Based on the current increase in political activity, I have been contemplating for several weeks posting a few thoughts about what is on the 2018 political horizon. One of South Dakota’s Top political reporters, Bob Mercer, on his PurePierre Politics blog put his oar in the water first. At Bob’s prompting and since I have been thinking about the 2018 landscape, I thought this is a good time to jump in.

It is important to note that the primary election is in three years and much will change before the primary.

First the GOP - Since the GOP Lincoln Day Dinner circuit began last winter it’s obvious Attorney General Marty Jackley and Statehouse Speaker Pro-Tem, Representative Mark Mickelson are gearing up their efforts to win their parties’ 2018 Governor nomination. I have spotted both working the political circles in Sioux Falls and reports are they are both working to find and develop support across the State. Perhaps more in the Attorney General’s case he has been working a tad longer because of his longstanding fundraising efforts. Specifically his General’s Club (fundraising for his political account) and the campaign cash he raised for an almost non existent 2014 election.

Representative Mickelson who I have noted in a previous post is as well connected across South Dakota as anyone and is an able fundraiser, perhaps Goliath might be a better word given his bank in his two previous Statehouse races.

When discussing the upcoming GOP primary with my political acquaintances the other name that continually comes up is U S Representative Kristi Noem. While I have a hard time understanding why she would consider giving up such a secure and important political position, my sources indicate she is serious and is going to run. If being Governor is something she is possessed to do I totally accept it. If she is doing it to serve the people and the State, I do not understand. 

Rep. Noem is doing a good job. Defeating incumbents is difficult enough but given the current state of South Dakota Democrats her position is secure. Equally important she is gaining influential seniority and sits on the (I love saying this) important and powerful House Ways and Means Committee. From this point in time it appears the Republican majority in the U S House is also secure. When asking why she might want to be Governor, it might be asked if her desire to run for Governor isn’t being reinforced and urged by her cadre of top political supporters who favor the influence of a Governor over a U S Representative?  (Or a Senator if she chose to step up to the U S Senate and challenge Mike Rounds in 2020?) It might also be asked why she would forfeit the increasing value of a coveted Congressional pension if she chose to leave Congress?

I would add that it might be expected a fourth or fifth candidate to enter the GOP Governor primary. Will there be an extremist Howielike candidate in the race? Will another current officeholder enter the race (read here Lieutenant Governor Matt Michels) or a political outsider?

Both Jackley and Mickelson are capable and serious men both capable of serving as Governor. Unlike many of these primaries, these two candidates seem to be less dominated by geography. Marty Jackley is a Sturgis native, has lived in Vermillion (USD Law School), Sioux Falls (U S Attorney), Rapid City (law practice) and Pierre (Attorney General). Mark Mickelson grew up in Brookings, lived in Vermillion (USD), and Sioux Falls (entrepreneurship). The Mickelson family also has strong roots in Selby and Pierre. I touched on it in my previous post but it should not be discounted that both Mickelson’s father and grandfather served as Governor. The Mickelsons are well connected. Nobody on the scene has the Mickelson political DNA.

If the race has three top horses, geography may come into play in deciding the outcome. For instance would Noem cut into important West River support?  Kristi plays best on offense, not so much defense. How would her campaign style contrast to Jackly’s or Mickelson’s. Jackley’s campaign style is slightly more formal with people than the more relaxed style of Mickelson. Kristi Noem’s primary advantage is that she is well known. Being well known is essential but hard work can overcome it. That both Jackley and Mickelson are out beating the bushes early shows they understand. It would be foolhardy to forget Mickelson is a very successful businessman and Jackley was a long distance runner and like a great race horse doesn’t quit.

Jackley and Mickelson both have good political instincts. Jackley it seems to me is a more conventional conservative that would be popular with S D Republican primary voters. While Mickelson a down the line conservative is more open to the important and growing Independents (who are generally conservative on economic issues) who have the power to win General Elections. Keep in mind that the Democrats have not won the Governorship since 1972.

An Open House Seat – As Bob Mercer notes a Noem Governor candidacy would throw open the door to the U S House race. When the federal seats become open expect lots of action (think 1986, 2002, and 2010). Mercer speculates that if there is an open seat, he considers State Senator Deb Peters a possible candidate. This is the first I have heard her name in this role and it could make sense. Other possibles looking at the race - candidates may be former Secretary of State and current Public Utility Commissioner Chris Nelson, former Public Utilities Commissioner and Governor’s Chief of Staff Dusty Johnson, former State House Majority Leader David Lust, former State Senator and Secretary of State Shantel Krebs, former State Senator Dan Lederman, Senate Majority Leader Corey Brown, former Sioux Falls City Councilor and Commissioner of Governor’s Office of Economic Development Pat Costello, and Assistant State House Majority Leader Steve Westra. Of course there could be many more (and probably would be). You might also find Howlike in this race as well.

The one name I think may be a real possibility and likely an instant favorite is Governor Dennis Daugaard. History shows the Governor would be very well positioned to consider serving in Congress and winning a primary. Remember he would have the GOP establishment behind him and tons of name id. Recently Governors have taken a prominent role in these open seats: Governor Janklow in 2002 (he announced in February of 2002 for a June primary) and Governor Rounds in 2014. Mike Rounds did the political Texas two-step and announced in November (I think) or December of 2012 that he was running for Senator Tim Johnson’s seat despite what Johnson decided for 2014. Rounds thus forced Kristi Noem or for that matter any really serious candidate from getting into the primary. The 2014 primary was bizarre for a lot of reasons. Would Governor Daugaard as sitting Governor announce like Janklow or Rounds? Or for that matter announce he is not considering seeking the seat?

Open seats are attractive to Democrats too. Would there be a possibility of a return of Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, an entrance by Brendan Johnson or perhaps a new Democrat face? History also shows Dems can exploit these opportunities and win these federal races.

Mike Huether – Mayor Huether is the third candidate working already to position himself for a run for Governor in 2018, all be it from the left side of the plate. He is always busy planning his work and working his plan. In the last few weeks he is actively touring the state. While I don’t think any Democrat can easily win the Governorship, Huether is persistent. I am not sure a Mayor from Sioux Falls who has worked in concert to host the High School Basketball Tournaments to Sioux Falls on a permanent basis will generate the love.  One trait Mike Huether has demonstrated is his ability (despite his methods) of overcoming objections (the classic trait of a great salesman). BTW the last great salesman who was Governor of South Dakota was Dick Kneip, the last Democrat to serve. Kneip was a Dairy salesman.

Should Noem’s House seat open up, given that Huether is not a fool, when he looks at the polling he may in fact re consider Governor and jump into the U S House race instead.

Other 2018 Actions and Collaterals – Given the forgone speculation two other races become interesting; South Dakota Attorney General and Sioux Falls Mayor.

It looks like Jason Ravnsborg who finished last in a five way race for the 2014 GOP US Senate nomination is again acting like a candidate for office. I suspect it is the Attorney General nomination but it could be that U S House seat and a possible two step. Another possibility for Attorney General is Tony Venhuizen the Governor’s Chief of Staff who is politically active. On the Democrat seat for the open seat is possibly Minnehaha County States Attorney Aaron McGowan. While Venhizen and McGowan are solely my speculations keep your eyes on them.

With Mayor Mike Huether term limited in 2018, Sioux Falls Mayor open seat will once again be a free for all. Current councilors who have Mayor desires are Greg Jamison, Dean Karsky, and Kenny Anderson, Jr. Undoubtedly there are others but I might look for the aforementioned Pat Costello to again look at running for Sioux Falls Mayor. Clearly Development Director Darrin Smith is setting himself up for another run hoping to capitalize on Huether coattails.

Like Ravnsborg, Darrin did not get the message in his 2006 run for Mayor when he even failed to make the playoffs. Smith subsequently resigned his Council seat because his office was not as important to him anymore.

The Mayor’s race could also attract others.

In all events 2018 is starting to shape up. It will be interesting and perhaps even a wild ride.

June 21 Post It Note - BIG Oops (just forgot) Councilor Michelle Erpenbach is also reported to be expressing an interest in the SF Mayor's job and it has been mentioned that Councilor Christine Erickson should be thinking about it. - Could be a crowded field. 

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

What Are We Doing?

This post and my outrage is not about my personal support of certain issues but rather the time our governmental bodies are dithering on the relatively less important issues.

I am leaving any thoughts on solutions to perhaps a later post.

My frustrations permeate almost all levels of government.

Our school board is bogged downed squabbling about school start dates. The City is yacking about restricting food trucks. County government is bogged down figuring out how to have fair elections. (It isn’t that complicated We know how to do it. We have had fair elections in South Dakota since statehood. Election problems were caused by unpreparedness and election officials’ mistakes – some who took responsibility and some who did not.)  

The State Legislature spends inordinate time on concealed weapons. We have one of the most pro gun concealed carry laws in the nation.  Is security in the State Capitol in jeopardy? Our Legislature wants to abolish the U S Department of Education (which they have zero power to do) and they are spending lots of committee time, discussion and public engagement on restricting rare almost non-existent abortions. Our federal government is playing political one upsmanship putting national security at risk over the debate on the immigration issue.  

Feelings on these issues vary greatly. Feelings on some are intense, some issues are very personal, and some issues are simply political wedge issues. A lot of time, energy, and political capital are being wasted at the expense of much bigger problems.

South Dakota K-12 education is not doing their job. (Before my school and educator friends put me on their unwelcome list remember School people play the hand they are dealt. It’s up to the Legislature and School Boards to effect policy and change. Taxpayers provide the money.) At South Dakota Universities, about 30 percent of South Dakota High School graduates require remedial work. Should not our Legislature and School Boards be having discussions and taking significant action on high school grads not being ready for higher ed?. Maybe our School Board ought to be working not on when school starts but why the school year isn’t longer or standards higher?

In South Dakota our jails are full. Minnehaha County increasingly is spending more of its budget on incarceration costs. The County has noticed some of the neighboring tenant Counties and they may be turning away their prisoners. Brown County also has said they are nearing over capacity. While all the evidence is not in on our Criminal Justice reforms (and they must be given a chance), new jails may still have to be built or criminals turned lose.

Locally exacerbating the jail problem, the crime rates in the City of Sioux Falls have risen dramatically. The City has been reluctant to admit there is even a problem and public safety has been given a lower priority than development issues.  Despite a 58% growth rate in crime, little focus and less discussion has been given this important basic problem?

Federally our most important issue seems to be a pipeline (that I support and think is a no brainer) while foreign policy is dismissed. We may be on the brink or WWIII (or maybe its already started and we just have not recognized it yet). No one seems to be working of finding solutions to our persistent federal deficits or needed social security reforms  whose fiscal magnitude is overwhelming

Particularly frustrating to me is that despite all the effort (public and private) and the billions of dollars that are spent, people are hungry in America. We have literally thousands of federal programs and grants for practically every imagined and even unimagined purposes yet many people among us including large numbers of children remain hungry.

With all the smart people and our smart elected officials why can’t we even fix this most basic welfare need? For perspective, as a national problem where does hunger rate say compared to the 17 percent default rate on Student Loans over $100,000, the oil depletion allowance, or the space program?

The point of this rant is that we need to focus government and politics on our Big Problems not sideshows. Way too much time is being spent on the mice while we ignore the elephants. The elephants being America’s  kids are falling behind in education, our jails are full, and the world is a dangerous place. And Oh Yes, we are spending billions on food assistance but people are still hungry.

We can solve these problems but we must first give them priority; and then summon the political courage, dedication, and statesmanship to solve them