Tag Archives: state

Is 60% really all that high for a Republican gov in SD?

Posted on by
1

SD Gov. Dennis Daugaard earned a solid 60% job approval rating in a recent poll, but other Republicans have outshined him. Is that really a good number for a SD Republican in his first year in office?

Dennis Daugaard is just about the nicest guy you will ever meet. South Dakota has its share of nice politicians, but this one tops them in my book. (Isn’t there a Twitter person going by Denny Do-good?)

So when I ask if the governor’s 60% job approval rating in a recent poll is really all that high, I’m not asking if Denny is likeable. He most certainly is. So is Barack Obama, but that hasn’t helped his job approval ratings of late, either.

I remember Mike Rounds scoring an off-the-charts 75 or something, the highest approval rating in all the land. John Thune got re-elected to Congress a few times by that very comfortable margin.

And while many a politician would give a year’s worth of campaign contributions to get even close to 60%, the number struck me as low for a Republican on the Second Floor in his first year.

So I wonder aloud if anyone else had the same reaction.

Could it be the budget cuts? I know I winced when nobody blinked on cutting 10% across the board, being the mother of 2 toddlers and caring very  much about the school down the street. (I know schools didn’t suffer the entire 10%; it was still rough.)

Could it be somehow the flood? I have heard through the grapevine that some residents of the northeastern lakes territory felt a bit chagrinned that so much focus went to the Mighty Mo while they, too, faced rising waters. I have also heard grumbling about disproportionate use of National Guard resources in the tony Dakota Dunes community.

Even if these complaints are unwarranted – and I must confess I have not followed up, the perception is certainly out there. And, you know, people talk.

Could it be a lawyerly, perhaps professorial speaking style that, for all of Denny’s niceness, lacks a bit in the broad charisma that is the currency of modern-day politics?

Could it be that the stepped-up rhetoric coming from the Dems is having an impact?

Could it be that I’m simply all wet? That 60% is really quite high in the current electoral climate?

Cameras in court would have cast different light on Janklow case

Posted on by
2

Few people were less surprised than I was that Bill Janklow got caught speeding. Again.

His statements at sentencing portended his recent spate of speeding tickets.

I have no insider knowledge or extra dim view of Janklow, despite some of his protests about my coverage while he was in office. What I do have is a memory shared by a few dozen others who were in the courtroom in Flandreau on Jan. 22, 2004, when a judge sentenced Janklow to serve 100 days in jail for manslaughter.

I remember him standing up to speak to the judge before the sentence was issued. I remember him pointing his finger in the air, punctuating his points. I remember his tone and struggle still to put the right word to it – petulant, defiant, perhaps Janklovian is the best. It was not humble or contrite, that is for sure, even though he used the word “sorry” multiple times.

But that is my point. South Dakota law did not allow cameras in the courtroom in 2004, and hundreds of thousands of South Dakotans must rely on dry court transcprits and press accounts from people like me to get a sense of what happened that day. History has been cheated, and eight years on, my memory has blurred the details. I have only the press accounts of the day for reference.

I went back and re-read the story I wrote for the Rapid City Journal. Despite my memory of Janklow’s demeanor, some of his quotations still took my breath away as I read them anew in 2011.

“I can tell you this, judge. All my driving tickets were before 1995. While I was governor, I drove fast, really fast. I had a lot of places to go and things to do. I lived in Pierre,” Janklow said. “I’m not making excuses. I’m just telling you, that’s reality. Since I left that office, I’ve been stopped one time and was given a warning ticket in Nebraska. I drove thousands and thousands of miles, and nobody complained about my driving.”

At the time, what captured the collective imagination was the sentence itself – no prison time, but still jail, and the matter would be wiped from his record if he successfully completed probation. That’s what folks were talking about in January 2004. Far less attention was paid to Janklow’s own remarks, which to be fair also included passages in which, in word at least, he took responsibility for having killed a man.

“I fully understand I killed somebody. I’m sorry for what’s happened. I wish I could change it. … I can only imagine how I’d feel if this happened to one of my children. I’m not sure I’d be forgiving, ever. If I could change places with him – and it’s easy for me to say that – but I would.”

None of us can ever know how Janklow felt and still feels in his heart about his role in that tragic traffic crash of Aug. 16, 2003, whatever the tone he took in court.  But had there been cameras allowed in courtrooms on Jan. 22, 2004, I am certain that South Dakotans would have been as fixated on Janklow’s statements as they were on his sentence.

I am thankful that South Dakota has begun the move to allow our state’s courtrooms to be truly open to the public as judges and other court officials grapple with real concerns over disruption to solemn proceedings. (As of this year, cameras can roll if both attorneys and the judge agree to it.)

I think the concerns can be addressed by the professionals involved. As Janklow’s case attests, the public misses key components of public trials when they cannot witness those events for themselves.

We’re in the home of the free

Posted on by
1

South Dakota, where living is free and easy.

Well, some say that, anyway. A new study from two college professors ranks South Dakota as second on a list of states where people are free to live as they wish.

In our favor, according to the professors: Limited gun control, low taxes and legalized gambling, among other factors.

Costing us a few points: Marijuana is outlawed, asset forfeiture is allowed in many cases and smoking is banned in most workplaces.

The freest state is New Hampshire, according to the study, which is weighed toward a conservative point of view, which explains why a Red State like South Dakota ranks so high.

To see the study, go to http://mercatus.org/freedom-50-states-2011/SD

How high will the water go?

Posted on by
3

There are quite a few South Dakota government officials in Pierre and Fort Pierre, along with federal workers and other public employees.

The heavy snowfall and rain of the last several months were well-reported and a constant topic of discussion in South Dakota.

So does it seem rather disturbing that this sudden rush to build barriers and alert people to the wall of water that will pass through Pierre and Fort Pierre?

From an AP article:

“The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ decision to release even more water from Missouri River dams will not only cause additional problems for the central South Dakota communities of Pierre and Fort Pierre, but also for the downstream cities of Yankton and Dakota Dunes in the state’s southeastern corner, Gov. Dennis Daugaard said Sunday.”

Was the state ready for this? Why weren’t the barriers erected or at least started weeks ago? How much damage will occur due to this? Does the Corps care what will happen or is it trying to do the best it can to cause the least damage?

The water had to pass through. We knew it was coming. Why the sudden rush rather than a well-designed plan?

Or perhaps is this nature erupting once more and man far too puny to deal with it? Could nothing have been done better, earlier, smarter?

Are you conflicted about video lottery?

Posted on by
Reply

The following sentence jumped out at me today from a story by our state Capitol reporter, Bob Mercer:

Video lottery is the second-largest single source of general revenue for state government after the sales tax.

The story is about the decision to allow lineup games, similar to those found on slot machines, on video lottery machines throughout the state. The mention of video lottery’s status as our state’s second-largest single source of revenue is just an aside, a kind of did-you-know. But it hits with a thud.

When I think of video lottery, I think of a particular place in Mitchell where I often stop to grab breakfast. Many mornings, people are there playing video lottery. This is happening around 8 a.m. Perhaps those people are not addicted, but I suspect they may have a serious problem if they’re gambling that early in the morning and doing so on a regular basis.

Scenes like that make me a little squeamish. I have no problem with video lottery being legal, but I do feel conflicted when I consider the extent to which our state has become dependent on gamblers and casino operators. I suppose I should be happy, because with all of those video lottery players helping to fund state government, I’m shouldering a far lighter burden than I otherwise would.

Still, I can’t help but feel uncomfortable when I see people hunched in front of a screen in a darkened video lottery parlor at 8 a.m. And when I hear that the money those people lose on gambling is the second-largest single source of our state’s general fund revenue, it makes me even more uncomfortable.