By Bill Harlan

Now that the iniative-and-referendum world has discovered SDCL 12-13-16, there’s no stopping them. The law, say those who invoke it, makes it illegal to lie about ballot measures — at least in print. First the opponents of the Referred Law 6 cited the law, saying … well, you know what they said. See Kevin’s story. Now comes the Amendment E folks, who, irony of ironies, are taking the matter before a judge. They say opponents of E shouldn’t say the amendment could “make it a crime to serve on a jury.” In fact, they say putting that statement in an ad is a crime. The issue goes before Judge Max Gors tomorrow morning. (Wednesday morning.)

Here’s the law:

12-13-16. Publication of false or erroneous information on constitutional amendment or submitted question as misdemeanor. Any person knowingly printing, publishing, or delivering to any voter of this state a document containing any purported constitutional amendment, question, law, or measure to be submitted to the voters at any election, in which such constitutional amendment, question, law, or measure is misstated, erroneously printed, or by which false or misleading information is given to the voters, is guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.

Bill Stegmeier, the Amendment E guy, told me this afternoon if the judge doesn’t give him an injunction and if the measure loses, he’ll go to court. See my story for some context.

By Bill Harlan

I asked for photos of Blogmorites in costume. Don Frankenfeld responded.

SuperEconomist whisks damsel to the Fortress of Statistical Discrepancies.”

If only the voters had listened.

Incoming! Kevin W. (left) and Bill H.

Alert Blogmorites have noted our new flag, minus the departed Denise R. By the way, Kevin and I are not in costume. This is how we dress when we approve comments on Mount Blogmore. And still we get shot.

By Bill Harlan

A Sioux Falls Argus-Leader suggests video lottery will survive yet another election, absent a groundswell this week. The cell-phone tax — I don’t know how that’s doing, but a couple sources tell me Amentment D faces an uphill battle this past week. The Big “D” would sharply limit increases in valuation. One theory I heard this afternoon is that other parts of the state are not as hard hit by skyrocketing valuations.

Mount Blogmore doesn’t want to stick a fork in any ballot measures or candidates. (OK, maybe a couple of each.) Still, for all our griping South Dakotans seem unwilling, so far, to make changes in our tax structure. Truth be told, South Dakota still ranks dead last among 50 states in per capita state taxes, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Our individual bill, by the way, is $1,430.46.

By Bill Harlan

What a bummer. It’s Halloween, the RCJ in-house costume parade is an hour from now and all of my costume ideas have fallen through — victims of cowardice (my one), sloth (me again) and fate (Kevin W). Not to worry. Mount Blogmore is a theater of the mind. Here are my ideas:

-I tried to persuade Kevin W. to march in the RCJ costume parade with me as “a gay married couple,” with a big red international circle-and-slash sign. (Amendment C. Get it?) Despite a loud voice-vote of approval in the newsroom, I couldn’t get a commitment out of Kevin. (Men!)

-Then I was going to dress up as “Charlie Tennyson,” the anonymous alleged RCJ employee trying to organize a boycott of his (or her) own employer. My idea was a “CT” nametag, a big blue dot in front of my face and a bloody foot where I had “shot” myself. Then I realized how much I like my own job.

-Then I was going to go as a “brutally sodomized religious virgin,” but .. well, if you aren’t familiar with state Sen. Bill Napoli’s famous remark earlier this year the humor might be lost on you. In fact, the humor probably is lost to you even if you ARE familiar with what he said.

-My best idea, I thought, was to dress as Janus, the two-faced Roman god — with a Blogmorite twist. I’d have a Steve Sibson mask on the front and a Bill Fleming mask on the back. But this would have required lots of work for a small chuckle from the X number of Blogmorites who would get the joke.

Are any Blogmorites dressing up? Got a political theme? Send me a picture at bill.harlan@rapidcityjournal.com. I’ll post it.

By Kevin Woster

OK, Nelson, this one’s for you.

Somewhere down below, Nelson wondered - as a subject for a thread - why school administrators make four times the salaries of teachers.

Is it because they have so much more responsibility? So much more training and education? Are so much more valuable to the education process?

I’m not saying, one way or the other….

But while we’re on salaries, do you think teachers are underpaid in South Dakota? Are they any more underpaid than the rest of us? Is teacher pay an important issue to most SouthD akotans? Does low pay hurt education?

And, in the bonus round: Has Mike Rounds been good for education? Would Jack Billion, Tom Gerber of Steve Willis be better?

And, for additional points, which moderator of Mount Blogmore has neither a college degree nor a high school diploma?

By Kevin Woster

Sibby often suggests that one blogger or another have a look in the mirror.

OK, so how about we all do?

Back a thread or two, I asked about the different ways to refer to opposing sides in the battle over abortion. It was a minor point of interest that really didn’t have much potential for expansive discussion, or anything that hasn’t been hashed and rehasehd here before.

But it drew 77 responses - at last count.

Just after that, I raised the Dan Sutton story, using reporting by capital newshound Bob Mercer to look at some key points within that drama and the ultimate decision by Gov. Mike Rounds to call a special session.

Our pal Ghoti also added admirably to the debate by asking why Rounds would call a special session over the Sutton deal but not over the Elijah Page execution flub in August.

That thread - which I thought was filled with a great many possible side discussions - attracted 16 posts.

Now, part of the dramatic difference in responses - a large part, I’m afraid - was simply that Sibby, Fleming and DL didn’t get engaged on the Sutton matter.

And while I haven’t done a scientific study, it’s becoming increasingly clear that those three posters can and often do make the difference between a busy thread and an ignored one here on the mountain.

That says something about our notion that Mount Blogmore is a meaningful meeting place of many minds. I’m not sure exactly what.

But beyond that, I wonder about the sharp and - to me - surprising difference in apparent interest on those two very differed threads.

What does that say about the rest of us?

By Kevin Woster

“It’s an unfair tax. And we’ll be stuck with it.”

That’s the billboard message that blared out at me today as I sat on Main Street near the gap, waiting for the light to change at the Baken Park corner. The billboard by opponents of Amendment D, a proposed constitutional amendment to limit the growth of property tax assessments, offered a clear, compelling argument against the amendment.

It’s a misleading argument, too, of course.

It implies that Amendment D is a tax. And with the “we’ll be stuck with it” part, it also implies that it’s a new tax. It says to an uniformed voter, “This is a new, unfair tax - don’t vote for it.”

In truth, of course, Amendment D isn’t a tax at all. It’s a limitation. In limiting the rate of assessment growth on property, Amendment D would benefit owners who keep their property for long periods of time and place more tax burden on owners who sell and buy new property. You can argue that’s an unfair effect, just as people already argue that our existing property tax system is unfair.

But you can’t argue that Amendment D is a tax. It’s not.

There are a number of reasonable arguments against Amendment D. But the add message isn’t among them.

Is it a lie? Well, sort of. But we’ve established that truth manipulation is an expected part of political campaigns. And part of our constitutional guarantees of free speech is the right to lie during those campaigns.

That’s nothing new.

My question is, do these kinds of misleading advertisements work, or might they backfire among voters who really understand the ballot issues and don’t particularly like feeling manipulated?

By Kevin Woster

If you want to get the inside story dealing with South Dakota politics and state government, it’s tough to beat Bob Mercer.

He’s a bird dog of a reporter who loves to flush hidden stories or lost story angles out of the deep weeds of bureaucracy.

Mercer’s latest flush involves the messy story about Democratic state Sen. Dan Sutton of Flandreau. You know, the guy facing hazy accusations that he groped an 18-year-old male legislative page in a Fort Pierre motel room last winter.

Obviously that makes Sutton look mighty bad, even though he hasn’t been convicted - or even charged - with any criminal violation. But Mercer’s coverage shines an unflattering light well beyond Sutton.

Mike Butler of Sioux Falls, Sutton’s lawyer in this mess, said in Mercer’s story that the father of the page, unsuccessful Democratic candidate Dennis Wiese of Flandreau, sought Sutton’s endorsement for his governor’s campaign - AFTER a criminal investigation into the allgations against Sutton had begun.

Butler said Sutton declined the endorsement deal from Wiese because he found the situation “extremely odd,” Mercer’s story said.

Mercer also outlines the connections between Sutton and Wiese and an apparently failed beef project at Flandreau. And he reviews how state senators, especially Republican Lee Schoenbeck of Watertown, pushed for a special session on the issue, which Gov. Mike Rounds this week agreed to set - if Sutton doesn’t get beat in his reelection bid - in late November.

Mercer provides news coverage for daily papers in Watertown, Mitchell, Pierre, Aberdeen and Spearfish - as well as the Rapid City Weekly News, which carried his coverage this week.

It’s a very sad tale, beyond what did or didn’t happen in that motel room.

And it surely begs the question offered by Ghoti in the special-session thread below:

Why would the governor call a special session for this but not call one to fix the lethal-injection problem that he says required him to postpone the execution of Elijah Page for almost a year?

Go figure.

By Kevin Woster

In a discussion somewhere below about Referred Law 6, one of our esteemed blogmorites uses the terms “pro-choice” and “anti-choice” for the two sides of the issue.

Is that a good way to frame them?

We struggle as journalists - or at least I do - with the naming of things on this issue: pro-life, anti-abortion, pro-choice, anti-choice, pro-abortion.

It’s tough, trying to find something that’s fair and fairly accurate and still generally well recognized by the readers of the newspaper.

We tend not to use pro-abortion. Is anybody really pro-abortion? Could anybody really be pro-abortion?

We tend not to use pro-life, although it’s such a part of our lexicon that sometimes I slip. But aren’t most of us pro-life, regardless of our position on the right to choose?

We tend to go pro-choice and anti-abortion. But that’s not entirely accurate, especially with this specific bill. I know people who truly are anti-abortion, who truly find it abhorrent, but say they can’t bring themselves to vote for this particular bill.

Pro-choice seems accurate and understandable. Anti-choice seems accurate but kind of vague - or at least, less familiar to the average Journal reader.

Suggestions? Direction? Thesaurus?

By Kevin Woster

Sorry.

Gutzon Harlan placed the responsibility of managing the mount in my hands for a couple of days, and I dropped the rock.

Hang in there, folks. I’m working feverishly now to catch up on the submitted comments. Then I’ll try to add another thread.

Then, I’ll see if I can get a plumber in to fix the leaking faucet at home.

By Kevin Woster

Am I the only one who’s surprised that Gov. Mike Rounds is calling a special session of the state Senate to investigate allegations that Sen. Dan Sutton of Flandreau wrongly touched an 18-year-old page last winter?

Well, he sort of called a special session. Maybe.

Unless, of course, Sutton loses the election. Then the Nov. 27th session would be off.

I guess.

At least, that’s what they say.

Which makes you wonder - or at least it makes me wonder - why the governor would set the special session now, instead of after the election, when we actually know whether it would be needed.

Any suggestions?

By Kevin Woster

Anybody watch the KELO debate tonight between Rounds and Billion.

Pretty good, I thought. Better than many of the “debates,” that are actually forums that offer little chance to examine the issues or challenge statements by the candidates.

I love public broadcasting, and Rich Mueller is as good as it gets as a moderator - if not necessarily as a competitive bike racer. But I got two questions in one hour last week on their debate, with no chance for a follow-up.

I also admire minority party candidates like Tom Gerber - who sparkled during that debate - for having the courage to make a run for it. But sometimes having all the candidates in tightly scripted forum makes it awfully difficult to flush real issues responses out of the candidates that are actually boxing in the ring of possibilities.

So far, I liked KELO’s format best.

You?

By Bill Harlan

The sprawling 30th (courtesy SD LRC)

See RCJ reporter Steve Miller’s story about District 30 legislative candidates.

Steve’s nutgraf:

The three Democratic candidates say the Legislature should find more money to fund public schools. The three Republican incumbents say they and the Legislature have done everything possible to increase education funding without raising property taxes.

Then see Chet Brokaw’s AP story headlined “Schools sue state for more funding.”

An excerpt:

PIERRE — About a third of South Dakota’s school districts filed a lawsuit Thursday that seeks to force the state to provide substantially more financial aid to public school districts.
The lawsuit, filed in circuit court in Pierre, argues that the current state funding system violates a constitutional provision that guarantees all children access to a free, adequate and quality public education. The constitution also requires the Legislature to use suitable means to provide that public education, the suit says.

Pam Hemmingsen, Democratic candidate for the House in District 32, also raised the question of this lawsuit in a debate.

By Bill Harlan

Here’s a comment from Holy Cow! that deserves elevation to its own topic:

Holy Cow! Over 90 some posts on Alan Keyes being in Rapid City. 2 posts on McCain being in Sioux Falls.

Now just what the heck does that mean?

What indeed.

By Bill Harlan

Here’s a letter that came in a press release from the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families — the “Vote No on 6″ folks.

Dear Attorney General Long:

In an effort to allow the voters to hear honest debate over Referred Law 6, I would like to bring your attention to a very serious legal concern. I added the boldface.

The Vote Yes for Life ballot committee has run television and radio advertising in which Dr. Mark Rector states Referred Law Six “does provide exception for the life and the health of the mother.” As you know, you describe HB1215/Referred Law 6 in the official ballot question guide as containing only an exception for those abortions performed “to prevent the death of the pregnant woman. ” Dr. Rector erroneously asserts that a health exception exists in the ban.

In a mass mailing paid for and authorized by the Vote Yes for Life ballot committee, the following statement is presented as fact: “under this law women have the option of terminating pregnancies that are the result of rape and incest.” In the official ballot question, however, you state, “1215 would prohibit any person, at any time, from providing any medicine or other substance to a pregnant woman for the specific purpose of terminating her pregnancy.”

Apart from simply misleading the voters, Campaign Manager Leslee Unruh, Campaign Treasurer Jim Miles and ad spokesman Dr. Mark Rector have broken the law. According to South Dakota law: “Any person knowingly printing, publishing, or delivering to any voter of this state a document containing any purported constitutional amendment, question, law, or measure to be submitted to the voters at any election, in which such constitutional amendment, question, law, or measure is misstated, erroneously printed, or by which false or misleading information is given to the voters, is guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.” [SDCL 12-13-16]

The people of South Dakota gathered the required number of signatures to refer this law to the ballot and allow the voters to decide whether HB 1215 should remain in effect. The voters expected – and deserve – an honest debate. The Vote Yes for Life ballot committee has failed to do so. They’ve purposefully distorted the truth for political benefit and in the process of lying to the public they have broken the law.

We ask that you take this criminal offense seriously, address it immediately and set the record straight with the voters.

Sincerely,
Jan Nicolay

The existence of this law — SDCL 12-13-16 — has been raised from time to time on Mount Blogmore. My question: is this law even remotely constitutional? (Remember the law that made it a crime to insult vegetables?) I realize I’m putting myself at risk here, as a reporter. If I’m ever called upon to report on SDCL 12-13-16 supporters of the law could question my objectivity. But come on! A law against writing something “misleading” about a ballot measure? That would be the end of Mount Blogmore as we know it.

And, oh yeah, there’s the original question of the misleading advertisement from Vote Yes for Life folks. See Kevin W’s story.

By Bill Harlan

…. Into the Valley of Referred Law 6 rode the six hundred.

By now, everyone in South Dakota with an e-mail account will have received a message allegedly from an RCJ employee identifying himself (or herself) as “Charlie Tennyson.” The so-called “Charlie” (no “Tennyson” works here) urges people to boycott us because the wrapper that the paper comes in on election day will carry a political ad. “Charlie” doesn’t agree with the position taken by the ad.

The Journal’s wrapper is not a new issue. Our wrapper carried a political ad on election day in 2004. We had a lively internal discussion about that in the newsroom, after the fact. (Reporters don’t get copies of ads before they run.) The “pro” arguement is, Hey, it’s an ad. The “anti” argument is that because the entire paper is “wrapped” in the ad it gives the impression the paper is … uh, “in the bag” on a particular issue.

Oddly, the Journal already has editorialized against the position of the alleged upcoming ad.

Alert Blogmorites will notice that I’m avoiding saying what position the ad will take — even though everyone in South Dakota with an e-mail account already knows what it is. The RCJ has a strict policy about not revealing in advance the contents of ANY ad — whether it’s for a political group or for a burrito supreme. It’s a firing offense.

I’ll also add that in my 20 years at the Rapid City Journal I have NEVER been approached by a publisher, an advertising person or an editorial-page editor to slant or change news coverage in any way. A number of editors have suggested I spell things correctly, but I’ve never seen the kind of Machiavellian mindset “Charlie” alleges.

Political advertising and the placement thereof in newspapers are legitimate issues. However, “Charlie,” if there is such a person, committed an ethical breach. A bad one.

And as for calling for a boycott of your own employer … well, let’s just say our “Mr. Tennyson” is half a league short of a Light Brigade.

By Bill Harlan

Jeff Trandahl, the former House clerk who grew up in Spearfish, testified this morning in the Foley case. See the AP story. Jeff — not accused of any wrongdoing — is a key figure in the case.

On the other side of South Dakota, state Sen. Dan Sutton, through his lawyer, is denying inappropriate behavior with a state Legislature page. See the other AP story.

It’s the year of the page, I guess.

By Bill Harlan

See the AP story on posters that threaten a trip to Yankton as a deterrent to crime. An excerpt:

“Commit a gun crime and we won’t send you to prison, we’ll send you to Yankton,” is the caption on one poster that describes it as the middle of nowhere without an airport, a bus station or Amtrak.

“In summer, the mosquitoes are mean and hungry because there aren’t a whole lot of people around,” it says.

Tim Johnson is so mad he wrote Attorney General Alberto Gonzales urging him to pull the posters. I think Yankton should order about a thousand of them. Put them up around town. Heck, put them up along highways, like Wall Drug signs. Maybe even start a new ad campaign for tourism and economic development. Just off the top of my head:

-Yankton. We’ll make your day!
-Yankton, Guantanamo of the Great Plains!
-Yankton: it’s what’s for felons.
-Relax. We’re just YANKton your CHAINgang. (OK, this one needs work)

No, wait. I’ve got it. The sign at city limits should read “AbuYankton.” … No, no, no. There should be a billboard at city limits that reads “Got guns?”

OK, I’ll stop. But Blogmorites are invited to continue.

By Bill Harlan

An AP story in Wednesday’s RCJ (sorry, the link was bad) reported how Indian tribes may endorse a rejection of video lottery if they think the state isn’t negotiating a gaming compact in good faith. An interesting twist to the video lottery debate.

The lede:

SIOUX FALLS (AP) — The state’s American Indian tribes might endorse repeal of video lottery as part of their effort to get Gov. Mike Rounds to approve new tribal compacts that allow expanded gambling at Indian casinos.
Representatives from the nine tribes will meet Thursday in Pierre to form what they’ll call the South Dakota Indian Gaming Association.

Walt Big Crow, an Oglala Sioux Tribe council member who also sits on the tribe’s business and economic development committee, said Rounds has been invited to the session and his willingness to give tribal casinos more gambling machines could determine how Indians respond to Initiative 7, a Nov. 7 ballot measure that would repeal video lottery.

“You know the vote statewide is going to be pretty tight. The 10 percent of (the state electorate who are) Indian voters is going to make the difference,” Big Crow said.

By Bill Harlan

Republican Sen. John McCain was in Sioux Falls last night. SD Public Radio has it archived here. Very pre-presidential run. Praise for fellow Republican Sen. John Thune? Natch. Mike Rounds, McCain said, might be the most popular gov in America. I also though it was interesting he singled out Democrat Tim Johnson for his bipartisan work with Thune. Also of note, what to do next in Iraq. Plus some criticism of Hillary C.