By Denise Ross

All weekend long, I thought I had missed something, some salient, insightful point of law that would snap the funhouse mirror back into focus. Pundits from every point on the spectrum and elected officials and anybody, it seemed, who got in front of a TV camera, a radio microphone or a reporter’s notebook to address the issue couldn’t say enough about the blunder, at least, — perhaps even a constitutional crisis — that had arisen from the FBI’s search of Congressman William Jefferson’s Capitol Hill office.

The highlights reel includes Jefferson, a Louisiana Democrat and bribery investigation target, on videotape accepting a briefcase full of cash, which recently was found in the freezer during a search of his home.

The well publicized 10-month investigation had not grabbed the attention of House leaders. But an FBI search of Jefferson’s Capitol Hill office — conducted under the authority of a search warrant from a federal court — elicited a joint statement from outraged House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi. They were perhaps the first to cry constitutional crisis, claiming the search amounted to an unconstitutional infringement of the executive branch on the legislative branch. They said — I couldn’t make this up — that the FBI should have checked with Hastert first.

(Good grief, what if this were a murder investigation and the murder weapon was in the congressman’s desk drawer? What if the congressman in question was the House Speaker? )

The best rundown on the 10-month chronology of the criminal investigation into Jefferson’s alleged bribery activities — (I guess the House Ethics Committee has been doing something else. Wait … no.) — and the most on-point dissection of the big picture questions at issue here comes from Andrew C. McCarthy at the National Review Online.

Here’s a sample:

Speaker Hastert, according to a memorandum filed by the Justice department on Tuesday, was notified about the subpoenas by Jefferson on September 15, 2005, and again on November 18, 2005. The Justice department has been trying to get production on those subpoenas ever since—to no avail.

There are more analyses out there, all chock full of links to others and most centered on what’s called the Speech and Debate clause in the constitution (the SD Legislature has something similar), which, as I read it, says people can’t haul you into court for what you say on the floor or what you do as part of your official duties.

The Slate article.

The More Soft Money Hard Law analysis.

The TCS Daily artcle, quoted in part below.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner has decided to institute hearings on the issue — claiming that the FBI search of Rep. Jefferson’s office was just as inappropriate as a Capitol Hill police search of the Oval Office would be. This argument is nonsensical on its face; the Capitol Hill police’s jurisdiction does not extend beyond Capitol Hill while the FBI was well within its rights to conduct its search of Rep. Jefferson’s office in light of the allegations that Rep. Jefferson broke federal law by accepting bribes. Alas, even patently nonsensical claims such as the ones proffered by Chairman Sensenbrenner are finding their place in the discourse surrounding this issue instead of being laughed out of the realm of respectable opinion.

The ACLU was the online source that turned up in my search that takes the view of all those pundits I heard over the weekend. An ACLU spokeswoman said:

The executive’s search of a congressional office, even with a warrant, could have the effect of chilling congressional oversight of administration conduct. We applaud Chairman Sensenbrenner for examining this issue, and we urge him to call hearings on the many examples of the administration’s abuse of power.

Here’s the AP coverage of those hearings, held Tuesday.

So the online world has done what none of my favored media outlets could, offered me both a sense of relief that not everyone believes the search amounted to a blunder or unconstitutional act, and laid out in undeniable starkness the current state of Congress.

By Bill Harlan

A backchannel communique from a Blogmorite pointed out that a couple of letters to the editor today violate Ronald Reagan’s 11th Commandment: “Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican.” State Sen. Jerry Apa of Lead blasts state Sen. Stan Adelstein of Rapid Cityi and supports Adelstein’s Republican primary opponent, Elli Schwiesow. State Rep. Elizabeth Kraus of Rapid City also says it’s “time for a change” — the change being Stan out and Elli in.

Republicans going after Republicans really isn’t new. Just ask John McCain how the South Carolina primary went in 2000. Here in Rapid City, the “relationship” between Stan A. and fellow Republican legislator Bill Napoli would be more accurately described as a “duel.” And it IS the primary season, the time for intraparty squabbling.

Still, the HB1215 abortion ban has changed the political debate in South Dakota.

By Kevin Woster

The Associated Press reports this morning, in a story picked up from the Argus Leader, that the Oglala Sioux Tribal Council yesterday voted to ban abortions on the Pine Ridge Reservation and also to suspend President Cecelia Fire Thunder for soliciting donations for a proposed abortion clinic without council approval.

Fire Thunder calls the council’s action an “ambush.” She now tells the Argus that her idea was never to open an abortion clinic, but rather to open a women’s health facility that would offer family planning information and emergency and traditional contraceptives. (THIS JUST IN FROM HARLAN: JUST GOT OFF THE PHONE WITH CECEILIA FIRE THUNDER. SHE READILY AGREED SHE HAD OFFERED HER OWN LAND FOR A CLINIC THAT WOULD PROVIDE ABORTIONS — IF HB1215 BECOMES LAW. THIS CONTROVERSY MIGHT END UP BEING A CASE OF MISCOMMUNICATON.)

That’s not what she told Journal reporter Bill Harlan, however, in a Journal story that ran March 24. Here are the first couple paragraphs of that story:

Oglala Sioux Tribe President Cecelia Fire Thunder says a clinic on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation could provide abortions if South Dakota’s new abortion ban goes into effect.

“We’re working on it,” Fire Thunder said in a telephone interview Friday. “This is a free-choice issue. If I were in that situation, I’d want somewhere to go where I’d be taken care of.”

In a subsequent news conferent in Pine Ridge, also covered by Harlan, Fire Thunder said she had prayed about abortion and concluded that the decision whether to terminate a pregnancy was “between a woman and God.”

Fire Thunder announced the clinic idea after the state Legislature approved and Gov. Mike Rounds signed HB1215, which would ban abortions except when needed to save the pregnant woman’s life. She is a co-chair of the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families, which coordinated a petition drive to put HB1215 on the November ballot.

Because of the tribe’s sovereign status, the provisions of HB1215 wouldn’t apply on the reservation, Fire Thunder said.

“It’s about choice,” she told Harlan in his April 1 story about her idea for an abortion clinic, which she said also would offer reproductive health services.

Although Fire Thunder now tells the Argus that she never intended the clinic to perform abortions, Tribal Council member Will Peters said in the same story that wasn’t the way Fire Thunder presented the idea previously. (AGAIN, MISCOMMUNICATION MIGHT BE AN ISSUE. BH)

“Her stand, by what we read and what we hear from all accounts, was to support abortion,” he said. “I’ve never seen such a turnaround.”

Fire Thunder, who was out of state Tuesday, told the Argus that the people who brought the impeachment complaint were the same people who have opposed her presidency since she was elected in November 2004.

SORRY TO JUMP ALL OVER KEVIN W’S POST. I’M WORKING ON A STORY FOR TOMORROW’S PAPER. BH

By Denise Ross

In this week’s edition of Talkin’ Smack: The South Dakota Political Junkies’ Weekly Fix on the Inside Dope, state Rep. Alan Hanks talks about his successful bill, HB1134, which will be SD law in a month. HB1134 addresses whether people can legally use force — sometimes deadly force — to fight back against intruders in their home, their vehicles or their general person in a public place.

Alan Hanks

HB1134, which Hanks calls a “castle law” (as in your home is … ) and which critics call a “shoot first” (ask questions later) law says people can legally match force for force. A burglar brings a gun, the homeowner can, too. A burglar brings only his fists, Hanks’ bill doesn’t give the homeowner explicit cover for gunplay.

As you might imagine, this is controversial and SD isn’t the only state to adopt such a law. The RC Journal ran a front page AP story on the trend last week. Here’s a similar story from the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Critics of legislation like HB1134 contend current law already allows homeowners to protect themselves — doesn’t require retreat, in other words — and that such bills are aimed at exciting the NRA’s base during an election cycle. Hanks takes another view.

After we got done talking about guns and self defense, we moved on to a topic which has had its profile rise along with that of the abortion ban, HB1215. That is Hanks’ unsuccessful bill, HB1132, which sought to nearly automatically terminate a rapist’s parental rights. HB1132 got killed in committee, largely because of what other lawmakers saw as unintended consequences. (You can listen to streaming audio of the committee hearing and debate by going to the bill’s site.)

Hanks believes that, after the attention the parental rights of rapists have received in the past few months, he’ll have more success with next year’s version of HB1132.

To listen, click here.

By Kevin Woster

The South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families produced the expected this morning in announcing that volunteers had gathered plenty of petition signatures to refer HB1215 to a public vote.

Here are some of those petitions.

That sets the stage for a five-month campaign leading up to a statewide vote that will clarify where the majority of South Dakota voters stand on this bill, and - in a less definite way - on this issue.

At this point, and based at least in part on the poll done and reported a few weeks ago, the odds seem to be in favor of the pro-choice forces. But that’s a hunch and an impression, not a fact.

If there had been rape and incest exceptions in the bill, I’d guess that voters would have affirmed HB1215. Even though those cases represent only 1 or 2 percent of the abortions in the state, their exclusion drew the ire of a fair number of moderates who might otherwise have supported the bill.

As it stands now, I wouldn’t put money on the outcome of the vote, either way.

At least, not a lot of money.

Would you?

Awhile back we awarded Stan Bruce a topic of his choice for posting the 20,000th comment to Mount Blogmore. He offers a solid, local-politics issue. The Rapid City Council race in Ward 2 between Tom Hennies and incumbent Sam Kooiker is fascinating. See Scott Aust’s story. BH

By Stan Bruce

Let’s discuss the races for City Council right here in River City. Hennies v.
Kooiker is interesting. Should we dump a popular young councilman simply
because a former police chief thinks he needs something to do now that term
limits have ended his state legislative career? What kind of a job did
Hennies do when he was chief? Any old guys out there have any knowledge of
that?

And a second part, do we need a citizen review board to ” police the
police?” Who keeps tabs on the policies and goings on at the cop shop?
Larger cities have boards to investigate citizen complaints, internal
affairs sections to investigate the police, and a more open system. Does
Rapid need this?

That’s it, that’s all I’ve got. Maybe now Bill Fleming will give me some
peace!!

By Bill Harlan

Black Hills National Cemetery wreath laying, Memorial Day 2006

This is a South Dakota political blog, but as Carl von Clausewitz wrote, “War is nothing more than the continuation of politics by other means.” At Black Hills National Cemetery near Sturgis, 15,750 headstones memorialize participants in those “other means.” My mother and father (both World War II veterans) are buried there, and so are three of my uncles.

I attended two memorial services at the cemetery today — first the Lakota ceremony, then the general memorial. It was a beautiful morning in a beautiful spot, with a touch of irony. During the first ceremony, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Chairman Harold Frazier sang an honoring song originally created for warriors returning from the Little Big Horn. In the second ceremony, music was provided by Rapid City’s 7th Cavalry Drum and Bugle Corps.

More photos:

A Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe color guard and the Wakpa Waste drum group, also from Cheyenne River, participated in the first ceremony.

Francis Whitebird of Pierre, at right, a former state Indian affairs commissioner, takes a moment at his father’s grave. Darren Williams of Surrey, England (now of Rapid City) plays the bagpipes. Mel Gunderson of Black Hawk, in the middle, is active in Vietnam veterans issues.

The family of Easau Eagle Staff of Red Scaffold gathered at his grave Monday, as they do every year to honor this veteran of World War II. Just a few are pictured here. His wife, Margaret Eagle Staff, is seated. In back, left to right, son Thomas Eagle Staff, grandson Francis Eagle Staff, granddaughter Wambli Eagle Staff, daughter-in-law Etheleen Eagle Staff and great-niece Salacia Jewett.

The main ceremony Monday, set against the backdrop of the Black Hills.

By Bill Harlan

Rapid City voters will decide whether to allow rezoning for a Wal-Mart Supercenter on Tuesday, June 6, as the RCJ’s Scott Aust reports today.

Also today, the Washington Post has a Reuters story headlined “California town the latest to snub Wal-Mart.” Upscale Hercules, Calif., is is trying to use eminent domain to stop the giant retailer.

And finally today, The Morming News of Bentonville, Ark., Wal-Mart’s hometown, has an interesting piece about the history of the company, how it has changed and how it might have to change.

Wal-Mart has risen to dominance on the power of low prices. Is price omnipotent? Will the local shopkeeper go extinct? Will the Wal-Mart-Microsoft-Googleopoly take over the world? The proposed Highway 16 Wal-Mart Supercenter, by the way, would be on the main route to Mount Rushmore. Correct me if I’m wrong, but won’t you be able to see the faces from the parking lot? What would the Fab Four Founders think?

By Bill Harlan

NOTE: GOT A CALL FROM JEFF MASTEN OF FOCUS SOUTH DAKOTA. THESE ADS WERE UNAPPROVED DRAFTS. SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN POSTED ON THEIR SITE.* THEY HAVE TAKEN THEM DOWN. (I’M LEAVING UP THE VIDCAPS, DESCRIPTION AND YOUR COMMENTS.)

FINAL CUTS COMING SOON, MASTEN TELLS ME. BH

A doctor struggles over recommending an abortion in a Focus South Dakota television ad, available now on the Web.

Get a preview Web preview of Focus South Dakota ads against the HB1215 abortion ban. (OOPS, TOO LATE. PREVIEW GONE.)

Note the “keep lawyers out of the exam room” theme in the ad pictured below. Also, note the scenario in the ad above. A doctor — or at least a guy who plays one on TV — struggles over recommending an abortion to a single, unemployed bipolar woman who can either take medication and risk fetal deformity or go off her meds and risk going nuts.

“Could I die?” a woman asks her doctor in a Focus South Dakota ad.

* The e-mail with the video links came to me from Nate de la Piedra, with a Focus South Dakota e-mail address and a Washington, D.C., telephone number.

By Kevin Woster

Denise’s interesting post below on Sen. Hillary Clinton and her comments about the work-ethic, or not, of today’s younger generation has me thinking about 2008.

As I said in an exchange with Hammer below, I think Hillary is a first-rate presidential candidate, the odds-on favorite to win the presidential nomination and a real possibility to win the White House.

Many conservative Republicans I know hate Hillary. But under that hate, I sometimes see fear. In their hearts, I think they believe she could win.

As Yogi might say, it could be Deja Clinton all over again.

Denis doesn’t agree with me on Hillary. And she thinks the lazy-youth comment was a serious gaff revealing more profound weaknesses in Hillary as a presidential candidate.

I didn’t think it was that big of a deal.

But then, I called it Daschle over Thune in 2004….

By Denise Ross

An Anna Quindlen column appearing in Friday’s RC Journal takes Hillary Clinton to task for calling young people lazy, branding the New York senator and presidential aspirant a “codger.”

“Hillary Rodham Clinton veered off the grid of common sense to complain in a speech recently that young people today ‘don’t know what work is,’” Quindlen wrote. “As she talked of an unfortunate sense of youthful entitlement and the good old days when there was only a single TV in her own home, it seemed as though any minute she would soar to the rhetorical heights of codger deluxe and describe walking five miles through snow to school.”

In a similar rebuke, Daniel Cirucci of the Philadelphia Daily News tags Clinton with “geezer.”

It’s said that the older you get, the tougher life was when you were a kid - and the easier life is for today’s generation. By that standard, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton must be ancient.

In case you missed the numerous airings of Clinton’s remarks on television — a device Clinton apparantly regards as the devil’s technological tool, and don’t even get her started on the Internets and iPods — here’s the direct quote:

“They don’t know what work is. They think work is a four-letter word. … Kids, for whatever reason, think they’re entitled to go right to the top with $50,000 or $75,000 jobs when they have not done anything to earn their way up.”

A cursory search for a full transcript was unsuccessful. (If you’re more determined and more adept at Google than I, send a link and I’ll post it. Wait, does this make me lazy? Whatever.)

Both Quindlen and Cirucci acknowledge that, yes, there might be more spoiled brats (see some cable TV programs for examples), but there are many more hard-working youngsters who must navigate a trickier world than did baby-boomers like Clinton.

Quindlen writes: “Maybe there is anecdotal evidence of absurd indulgence on television: teenage girls being gifted with BMWs at lavish birthday parties … but for every one of those you can find plenty of young people waiting tables to put themselves through college …”

Could any of those BMW teen queens be daughters of the US Chamber of Commerce crowd to which Clinton was speaking?

Even Clinton recanted, prodded on, she says, by daughter Chelsea, who is, according to the Clintons, NOT spoiled. Check.

It’s hard to see how this wasn’t a huge gaffe. In trying to pander to Chamber types, Clinton alienated a huge swath of the Democratic base — not just aspiring young middle- and working-classers, but their parents, too. Maybe not a bad thing in a general election, but likely significant in what is sure to be a crowded primary.

By Kevin Woster

Apparently, I’m not the only one being ignored by Cecelia Fire Thunder.

The president of the Oglala Tribe stood up an assembly of 8th-graders Wednesday at North Middle School. She just didn’t show up for a scheduled meeting with the group, which included lots of American Indian kids.

No call or notice, according to the Journal reporter assigned to cover the event, which left lots of disappointed students and staff.

Do you think she doesn’t like them, either?

By Denise Ross

The SD Campaign for Healthy Families has concluded the petition-gathering portion of the program. The umbrella group working to put the abortion ban to a vote asked for all petitions to be turned in, like, now, in an effort to head off any legal challenges to the deadline for said petitions. (See Veto Day Blues if this is new to you.)

This message is posted on the Campaign’s website.

As a result of our great response – and because there is a threat of legal action from our opponents, the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families has decided to move up our filing deadline.

This is a sure sign that they have more than the required number of signatures. Whether they hit their goal of twice the required signatures, I guess time will tell.

Now, how long until the TV ads? And are we ready for them?

By Denise Ross

Sen. Tim Johnson is now tops in the land. Here’s Kevin’s story on that. Here’s a link to the survey page.

SurveyUSA, the outfit that once ranked Gov. Mike Rounds as the nation’s most popular governor, now has Johnson as the nation’s most popular senator.

With an ‘08 matchup between these two waiting in the wings, a substantial set of voters who apparantly like both of them will likely have to choose. Which was the case in Johnson’s 2002 race against challenger John Thune. How might 2008 be different? Same?

And why do SD’s politicians keep faring so well in these polls? I have my theories, but I want to hear yours first.

By Kevin Woster

Somebody asked me this week what ever happened to the idea by Oglala Sioux Tribe President Cecelia Fire Thunder to build a women’s health clinic featuring abortion services on the Pine Ridge Reservation.

Newshound or not, I had to admit that I didn’t have a clue. I tried to find out a few weeks back, but Fire Thunder ignored a string of my telephone calls seeking her response to comments by a former tribal judge that such a clinic would violate tribal code.

I called every day for a week, both at her office and on her cell phone - which soon became useless because the mail box was full. Fire Thunder was in the office when I called at least a couple of times. And I left her messages on her voicemail before it filled up. She never called me back.

I left messages for her assistant as well. She never called me back, either.

I felt like an Argus Leader reporter trying to get through to the governor.

So, anybody out there know what’s up with the clinic?

By Denise Ross

The Hotline, DC’s daily roundup of the news — a sort of vetted gossip sheet, assesses Daschle’s presidential positioning and his strategy. Read it here.

The author, Marc Ambinder, wonders if Daschle is angling for a sweet book deal or for an Al Gore-like persona makeover. But, he concludes otherwise.

Based on what he’s told his close friends, he’s clenched-jaw serious.

Ambinder casts Daschle’s participation - financial and public support of candidates — in the 2006 congressional elections as a bold move for someone with ‘08 aspirations. I had always seen that as a sign he was keeping and making friends for the next cycle. Ambinder finds what seems to me to be an obvious upside to Daschle’s role as campaign den leader.

If his candidates win, Daschle’s in chit city.

Most interesting is the list of names affiliated with Daschle’s presidential plans. You’ll recognize a few, Dan Pfeiffer and Jay Carson for sure.

And moreso his strategy.

A buzzword will probably be “security,” broadly incorporating energy independence, national security interdependence, and health care.

The thing I’m most grateful for is the absence of what I hear so often inside SD’s borders - that Daschle might be angling to be Hillary’s VP. Yeah, no. But, the Dakota inferiority complex lives on, and so many times I hear people lower their expectations for the native son who served as the country’s highest ranking Democrat for half a decade.

While I predict Hillary will go the way of Howard Dean, how well Daschle competes in what will surely be a crowded field will depend more on his own guile than geography. And so far, he’s managed to fly under the radar of just about everybody for more than a year.

By Denise Ross

The latest event on the HB1215 front — that someone might want to claim that the Legislature’s final day was March 1 instead of March 21, thereby whacking about 20 days off the petition-referendum effort — has broader ramifications.

First, here’s Steve Miller’s story on the more immediate HB1215 concerns.

How significant the Veto Day fallout would be in the event that anyone with the authority to do so sides with the March 1 theory depends somewhat on your vantage point. However, I can’t find evidence that any irreparable harm is sure to follow, vis a vis the 81st legislative session.

If you’re at SD Public Broadcasting, it would, at the least, be highly inconvenient. The $500k in funding that the Legislature restored to SDPB’s budget on March 21 would vanish. While it could be re-reinstated during the 2007 session — probably as a special appropriation — who knows how the political winds will be blowing at that time?

After that, we’re talking about a bill that would, at some point in the distant future, re-imburse retailers for collecting the sales tax. And a bill to regulate people who interpret for the deaf. Both pretty easy do-overs.

-The Legislature overrode Gov. Rounds’ veto of HB1110, to reimburse the retailers.

-On Veto Day, the Legislature introduced and the governor signed HB1248, which regulates the interpreters.

Beyond the business of the 2006 Legislature, the legal wranglings could hamper future Legislatures, if the Supreme Court were to side with the March 1 theory. Covering of the clocks could once again be before the justices.

If the anti-HB1215 forces get their petitions in before June 1, as Jan Nicolay says they might, then these questions probably won’t get further than forums like this one.

By Denise Ross

South Dakota’s two Democratic gubernatorial candidates clashed over social issues — gay marriage and abortion — during their appearance on SD Public TV’s Focus program Thursday night.

Dennis Wiese and Jack Billion — with two weeks until the primary — got cranky on air, according to the AP story. (There’s no site that posted the story, so I posted it at the end of this post, for those interested. ) Before this, press accounts made their joint campaign appearances sound like this was more of a friendly rivalry.

It appears as though issues that GOP strategists use to excite that party’s base is also causing a family feud in the opposition party.

Here’s the lead from the AP story.

The two Democratic candidates for governor differed sharply Thursday night on gay marriage, abortion and their plans for boosting state spending on education.

On gay marriage.

“I think that’s a private matter between individuals,” Billion said.
“I do not support same-sex marriage,” Wiese said.

On abortion, it appears that Billion does not favor government limitations, while Wiese would be comfortable limiting abortions to cases of rape, incest, life and health of the mother.

“I really think that government should be out of the business of dealing with personal health decisions, personal family and moral decisions,” Billion said.

“If any bill came forward, it would have to have exceptions for rape and incest. It would have to have exceptions for the life and the health of the mother,” Wiese said. “That’s the only kind of bill I would sign.”

Is this a sign that SD Dems are divided on these social issues, and the candidates are trying to play to that? Is it a sign that, after agreeing on so many other issues, they are trying to distinguish themselves from each other? Does this debate affect how one or the other would fare against Rounds in November?

Here’s the link to the Focus page, which has links to pages devoted to recent Focus programs. It appears that, sometime soon, they will post the video from the show, as previous shows have links to play media.

_______
The AP story is included in full below.
_______

Candidates differ on gay marriage, abortion, other issues
By CHET BROKAW, Associated Press Writer
PIERRE — The two Democratic candidates for governor differed sharply Thursday night on gay marriage, abortion and their plans for boosting state spending on education.

As they answered questions on South Dakota Public Television, retired surgeon Jack Billion of Sioux Falls and former South Dakota Farmers Union President Dennis Wiese of Flandreau had some of their sharpest exchanges of the primary campaign.

When the candidates were asked if they support a proposed constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would ban same-sex marriages, Billion said he would allow same-sex marriages.

“I think that’s a private matter between individuals,” Billion said.

“I do not support same-sex marriage,” Wiese said.

The winner of the June 6 Democratic gubernatorial primary will face Republican Gov. Mike Rounds in the November election. Throughout the campaign, Wiese and Billion have spent a lot of time criticizing Rounds for what they call a lack of leadership, but during the Thursday night event each sought to make the case for why he is the Democrats’ best choice to run against Rounds.

Both said they would have refused to sign the bill passed by this year’s Legislature that would ban nearly all abortions in South Dakota. The measure is intended to prompt a court fight that seeks to overturn the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, but opponents are collecting signatures to force a statewide vote on the measure.

Billion said state government should stay out of the abortion issue and instead focus on education, economic development, health care and other issues.

“I really think that government should be out of the business of dealing with personal health decisions, personal family and moral decisions,” Billion said.
Wiese said Rounds’ decision to sign the abortion bill showed a lack of leadership. He said he would not have signed the measure, which has no exceptions for rape, incest and the health of a pregnant woman.
“If any bill came forward, it would have to have exceptions for rape and incest. It would have to have exceptions for the life and the health of the mother,” Wiese said. “That’s the only kind of bill I would sign.”

Both candidates said the decision by 56 school districts to file a lawsuit seeking additional state funding for education is an indication that the Legislature and governor have failed to deal with the issue.

Wiese and Billion both indicated support for a study funded by school districts that said that the state needs to provide at least an additional $102 million a year, or $820 a student, to bring funding for public schools to an adequate level. A bill sponsored by Democratic legislators would have boosted spending on state aid to schools over a number of years.

Wiese said no new taxes would be needed to increase state aid to schools because state government already has more than $1 billion in a variety of reserve funds.

“I think we have the reserves to do it,” Wiese said.

Billion said some reserve funds can only be used for specified purposes, so all that money cannot be tapped for schools, and he said he believes the principal in those funds generally should not be touched. But he said he believes an additional $20 million or $30 million a year could be given to schools by increasing the amount of earnings taken out of those reserve funds each year.

At the end of the debate, each candidate was asked why Democrats should pick him to be the party’s gubernatorial candidate in the fall election.

Billion said he was a doctor for 30 years, served two terms in the Legislature and helped recruit legislative candidates as chairman of the Minnehaha County Democrats. He said he also has the right proposals for improving education, boosting the economy and dealing with other problems.
“I feel I have the ideas and I have the qualifications,” Billion said. “I also have the ability to listen to people, I think.”

Wiese said his years as a farmer and president of the South Dakota Farmers Union gave him experience in economic development and the administrative skills to run an organization.

“I’ve done that. I’m prepared to do that on a bigger basis now as governor,” Wiese said.

“We have to have bold ideas, new ideas,” Wiese added.

By Denise Ross

It’s not the rarefied air he once breathed, but it is one healthy approval rating.

Mike Rounds gets a 65 percent thumbs up from the SD electorate. Here’s the link to Survey USA’s latest. That compares to the 70-plus ratings he sustained up until he signed the abortion ban bill in March, when his rating dropped to 58 percent and then recovered slightly in April to 60 percent.

Now the question seems how close will he get to his pre HB1215 numbers? With two Democratic challengers on the campaign trail, his numbers have improved 5 points.

One suggestion to the pollsters. On the racial breakdown, White, Black, Hispanic and Other aren’t the most helpful categories in SoDak. American Indian needs its own category. They are the state’s largest racial minority and its fastest growing population.

And, as we’ve seen in past elections, a crucial voting bloc.

By Kevin Woster

Five words had some of us news weasels salivating with anticipation for the big story this morning:

New Hampshire, Michigan, Iowa.

Wait, that’s only four. Uh, what was the fifth one? Let me think. Hmm. I had it here just a minute ago…uh… oh yeah, there it is : Daschle.

What do you get when you put Daschle, New Hampshire, Michigan and Iowa all together? Why, a presidential campaign.

Or not.

Or maybe.

Or not yet.

That was the less-than-fulfilling (for a hungry news hound anyway) nature of former Sen. Tom Daschle’s, uh, announcement today that he would be heading for those three important primary states next month. He’s going to help candidates, but also to discuss national policy, direction and new leadership poossibilities with the voters there.

He’s also going to edge himself closer to the Democratic presidential primary starting blocks, where Sen. Hillary Clinton already appears to be at her mark.

Daschle says his three-day, three-state swing will be another step in his “thoughtful consideration of a presidential campaign.”

Anybody out there doubt he’s going to step up to the starting line?