Barack Obama’s campaign website has an incredibly powerful and innovative area called my.barackobama.com.

It is a social media site that is every bit as powerful and connecting as Facebook.

You can start a blog (Heck, what’s one more? Todd Epp’s Barackified Blog), find fellow Barackites, join various Barackian groups (My personal favorite: Bruce Springsteen Fans for Barack), and it’s even competitive. You earn points for being active on the site.

I’m currently in the 116,000s or so, but climbing fast. Who says progressives and Democrats don’t like competition?

Whether you like Barack or not, if you’re at looking political website design and getting supporters involved, the Man Crush is definitely in the realm of 2.0.

Technorati Tags: Barack Obama, political websites, web 2.0, blogs, social media

I just thought this photo of Representatives Bill Thompson and Marc Feinstein, both of Sioux Falls, at the start of their talk to the Democratic Forum at the Minnesota Avenue Hy-Vee was kind of fun. They and the audience were not so jovial after the two legislators started talking about the failings of the 2008 S.D. Legislature, however.

Technorati Tags: Bill Thompson, Marc Feinstein, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Legislature, Democratic Forum

Pierre, S.D. - March 13, 2008 - Today the Governor cast his first veto of the 2008 legislative session on HB1233, a bill that received bipartisan support from the South Dakota legislature. This bill would have required the Bureau of Finance and Management to publish all transactions on an easy to navigate website.

“As South Dakota’s taxpayer watch dog group, we were disappointed to see our Governor veto a bill that would simply give the public easy access into how the government spends our tax dollars,” said Lora Hubbel, Founding Board Member of the South Dakota Conservative Action Council.

“HB1233 was a modern day practical approach to government oversight,” said Hubbel. “Who should have more access to the government check book than the hard working citizens that deposit the funds?” 24 states across America have published their financial records on public websites and more are doing so every year.

The website can be built with current programmers and employees at little or no cost to the taxpayers. This is common sense reform. Imagine how much money we could save when thousands of South Dakotans are reviewing government expenses.

“Our state government used cost and format as the red herrings to stop this bill in its tracks,” said Lee Breard, Executive Director of the South Dakota Conservative Action Council.

“We as taxpayers cannot get caught up in this political ploy. Alaska’s Governor created their website, the Alaska Open Check Book, through executive order using current employees. The project was completed in 3 weeks with no out of pocket expense. HB1233 allows 17 months to complete the website and frankly it should be a matter of priority.”

Breard stated that if you look back at every issue that came through the legislature over the past two months, better decisions would have been made if the public were allowed to be part of the process. How can we be part of this democracy if the state government’s detailed finances are private?

For more a complete history on HB1233 and to find out how each legislator voted, please follow this link to the LRC website and type in HB1233: http://legis.state.sd.us/sessions/2008/index.aspx

Technorati Tags: open government, South Dakota, South Dakota, Gov. Mike Rounds, veto, website, accountability, taxpayers

The Associated Press story that covered yesterday’s senate committee testimony of the open government bills in Pierre has an interesting twist.

Not just were journalists covering the hearing, at least one testified.

Bob Mercer, who currently reports for several South Dakota newspapers, covered the SD Legislature for the Aberdeen American News and Rapid City Journal, and was Gov. Bill Janklow’s press secretary, has a unique perspective on open government.

And, according to the AP story in today’s Mitchell Daily Republic, he didn’t pull any punches with the committee:

 

Bob Mercer, a reporter who works for a number of South Dakota newspapers, urged the committee to take action to improve the state’s open records law.

“Failure is not an option this year because of the Supreme Court decision last year,” Mercer said. The high court last year ruled that current state law means a record is public only if there is a separate law requiring that record to be kept.

Mercer said the law also should include as open records a governor’s executive orders, written government policies and established verbal policies.

Bob and I haven’t seen eye to eye on many things in recent years.  But I greatly appreciate him going to bat for open government in Pierre, the company town where he lives, works, and raises his family.  I think this is an act of not just good citizenship but personal bravery as well.

Thanks, Bob!

Technorati Tags: Bob Mercer, open government, open records, South Dakota Legislature, Pierre, sunshine laws

Powered by ScribeFire.

I have to hand it to my Republican friends.  They have come up with a great—but fake—reason to oppose more open government in South Dakota.

Republicans are protecting you, my dear fellow South Dakotans, from identity theft.

Don’t believe me?  Here’s it is from Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson today in a senate committee in Pierre as reported by KELOLAND.

“We also need to chart the course of the principles of open governmenton one hand and the rightful expectations of privacy of our citizens on the other.”

Yes, the Grand Old Party has been fighting—and continues to fight—open government because it cares about you and your private information,South Dakota.

If you believe that, I have a bridge in Yankton I’d like to sell you.

No.  Many Republicans oppose open government—including Gov. Mike “My Door Is Always Open” Rounds because they don’t want you to know what is REALLY going on in your government.

Like what cronies go to the Governor’s Pheasant Hunt on our dime.

Like if the Governor is using the state airplane for his own our or business.

Like if a corporation with no track record of building or running an oil refinery is sniffing around our state to set up shop.

Like if state economic development loans are really being paid back.

Like who is getting state contracts.

Of course none of this matters.  The boogey man to guard against is the assault on your privacy.

Talk about a strawman in a strong wind.  But nice try, Dave. We’re just not buying it.


Technorati Tags: open government, privacy, cronyism, Sen. Dave Knudson, Pierre, South Dakota Legislature, South Dakota, openness

Powered by ScribeFire.

From Kate Looby at Planned Parenthood:

South Dakota Legislature Passes Divisive Sonogram Bill

(Pierre, SD) Today the South Dakota legislature passed two bills requiring physicians ask women to view ultrasounds prior to obtaining an abortion. SB88 passed through the Senate and HB1193 passed through the House.

“These decisions are best made between women and their doctors, not by legislators in Pierre,” Looby said. “At a time when South Dakotans are looking for concrete, common sense solutions, the same group of legislators are mandating even more restrictions in a state that already has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country,” said Looby.

“These bills won’t prevent even one unintended pregnancy and won’t do anything to reduce the need for abortion. It’s another example of Roger Hunt and a small group of legislators fixated on intruding into the personal, private matters of South Dakotans rather than providing authentic solutions,” Looby said.

Polling released in November shows that 75% of South Dakotans surveyed support an approach that gets to the root of the problem – working together to take practical and meaningful steps to prevent unintended pregnancy thereby reducing the need for abortion.

Technorati Tags: Kate Looby, abortion, sonograms, pregnancy, South Dakota Legislature, right to lifers, Planned Parenthood

Powered by ScribeFire.

KELOLAND News reports that a bill removing the restriction on cameras in the state’s non-Supreme Court courtrooms passed its first legislative challenge.

Read: Panel Approves Cameras In Court Measure

Excerpt:

… The Senate Judiciary Committee voted unanimously to approve the bill.

The state Supreme Court has allowed television cameras, still cameras and microphones to cover its oral arguments in appeals since 2001, but cameras and sound recorders are not allowed at the trial level… .

This is a good bill for several reasons.

First, it is good from a separation of powers perspective.  The Legislature ought not be able to tell an independent third branch of government how it must conduct its daily procedures.

Second, and more importantly, this is another step toward more openness in our government.

Allowing cameras to cover South Dakota Supreme Court oral arguments hasn’t ruined the Court or harmed justice.  Instead, it has enhanced the public’s view of the judiciary and how disputes are resolved.

The great boogey man that is brought up when it comes to cameras in the courts is the O.J. Simpson murder trial.  Critics point to the attorneys grandstanding for the cameras and Judge Ito losing control.

As an attorney with some trial experience, I would submit that the cameras only accurately reflected what was going on.  Given the personalities on both sides, I think the same thing would have happened.  And frankly, Judge Ito failed to control his courtroom.  I cannot see South Dakota trial court judges—who command and demand respect from attorneys, litigants, and spectators—from ever allowing such a free for all.

Further, even if the legislature passes the law and the Governor signs it, the Supreme Court will issue rules concerning placement of cameras, when courtrooms can be closed to cameras, discipline for attorneys who play to the cameras, and the like.

Sunshine belongs in our government—and in our courts.  This is a step in the right direction.  Case closed.


Technorati Tags: South Dakota, South Dakota Legislature, cameras in the courts, open government

Powered by ScribeFire.

My good friend PP at South Dakota War College is off on one of his semi-daily rants about “nanny state” bills in the state legislature.

• Read: What do I consider a nanny state measure?
  

PP’s flailing about nanny-statism reminds of the light-in-the-loafers character Johnny from the Airplane! movie series.  Pat kind of sounds like this:

Ted Striker: Mayday! Mayday!
Steve McCroskey: What the heck is that?
Johnny: Why, that’s the Russian New Year. We can have a parade and serve hot hors d’oeuvres…

And this: 

Johnny: The tower, the tower! Rapunzel, Rapunzel!

And Pat, you know I kid because I love.

But on the chance that you might think I am channeling my dark side lower companion Bob Ellis over at Dakota Voice, consider this: The Russians say that wouldn’t really think twice about nuking us if Mother Russia (or its little Rooskie buddies) felt threatened.  Like, we’re just sayin’.

Don’t believe me? Here’s the story from AOL News: 

Russia Says Nuke Strikes Possible  In the latest of a series of aggressive remarks from Russian leaders, the country’s military chief of staff says Moscow is prepared to use preventive military strikes to protect itself and its allies. > Full Coverage

Now, I don’t know about you, but the fact that the Russians wouldn’t think twice of pushing The Button if they’re feeling a little insecure and blowing up the United States and most of the Free World sure bothers me a lot more than if some legislator thinks my 13 year old son needs a permission slip to go to a tanning salon.

Technorati Tags: Airplane!, South Dakota War College, Dakota Voice, Johnny, high pucker factor, sphincter, Russia, nuclear war

Powered by ScribeFire.

Technorati Tags: South Dakota Legislature, crackerbarrels, Sioux Falls, legislators, South Dakota

Powered by ScribeFire.

I have no inside information on this but I think Gov. Mike Rounds’ proposal to make drastic cuts in the South Dakota Highway Patrol budget is proof positive that Mike is NOT going to run for the U.S. Senate against Sen. Tim Johnson.

Why?

Most Republican politicians never see a criminal penalty they didn’t want to increase; a new prison they didn’t want to build; and a law enforcement budget that they didn’t want to increase.

And frankly, no politician ever went wrong by being tougher on crime and more supportive of law enforcement.

So, besides being really bad public policy to not give our Smokeys the funds they need to do their jobs of protecting our citizens, patrolling our many miles of roads, helping other law enforcement agencies, and catching the meth makers and traffickers that travel through the state, it is also a politically inept move.  The proposed cuts look penny-ante and small minded.

Besides giving Sen. Johnson a great campaign issue against him, it also gives Democratic legislative candidates this fall a great issue.  Further, Gov. Rounds has torked off a number of Republican legislators, including former HiPo head Sen. Gene Abdallah.

While Geno and I don’t agree on many issues, in law enforcement circles, he is highly, highly regarded.  The guy was a good cop.  And, he knows what he’s talking about in this issue.

So, because of this bonehead move, I think it is clear that there will be no Mike for Senate in 2008.



Technorati Tags: Gov. Mike Rounds. Sen. Tim Johnson, Mike Rounds, Tim Johnson 2008 Election, 2008 Senate races, South Dakota, South Dakota Highway Patrol, SDHP, law enforcement, cops, South Dakota Legislature

Powered by ScribeFire.

One of my progressive friends sends me the following take:

 

This is from Chet Brokaw’s AP story re the legislators’ support for putting abortion on the ballot in ’08.

Rhoden said after a similar measure was debated in last year’s legislative session, Attorney General Larry Long offered to help draft a proposal that could be more easily defended in a court challenge. He said the language in the proposed ballot measure was developed with input from Long and other lawyers.

Does anyone else think it’s odd that our AG is getting that involved in writing initiated measures? Isn’t that crossing the line just a tad bit? I wonder if the “JAIL” supporters asked Larry to help them out if he would be so accommodating?

I think Larry has done a pretty good job as AG. But I don’t think he should be helping legislators write initiated measures. That is not a service he offers other South Dakotans. Also, it can put him in a tough spot since the AG’s office is supposed to write a non-partisan synopsis and explanation of all ballot issues. His office can hardly be unbiased when it is also drafting measures.

 

That this is also done on an abortion referendum compounds the problem, given the issue’s controversy.

Photo: AG Larry Long.

Technorati Tags: Larry Long, AG Larry Long, attorney general, abortion, South Dakota Legislature, referendums

Powered by ScribeFire.

Over the noon hour today at the Sioux Falls Holiday Inn City Centre, I attended a lunch sponsored by the SD Newspaper Association and the SD Media Club on upcoming open government issues.

I have posted Carson Walker’s email on the proceedings below.

A few highlights/thoughts first:

• Expect legislation in 2008 setting up a similar review for public documents as we see for open meetings.  A state hearing officer would hear complaints.

• Expect legislation in 2008 that would strike language in state law banning cameras in the state’s other courts (they are currently allowed in the SD Supreme Court), allowing the judicial branch to decide whether or not cameras are allowed.

• From the attendees list, you can see it was a very bi-partisan group in attendance.

• Apparently I was the only blogger there.  If you want to attend the Rapid City meeting in January, fellow bloggers, contact Carson Walker at the AP.
  

Senators Frank Kloucek and Sandy Jerstad both told the group that they were firmly behind more openness in government. One attendee was concerned about releasing too much information from law enforcement.  Rep. Manny Steele wanted proof that South Dakota is indeed 50th in open government laws.

It was a very interesting affair that will hopefully spur more discussions—and positive actions for more openness—in the future.

Here’s Carson’s synopsis as well as the handout we received (click here for the handout (.pdf)

2008 Open Government Legislative Issues handout):

Journalists, Broadcasters, Educators, Lawmakers and Other Interested Parties:
 
There was great turnout for the first South Dakota Media Club-South Dakota Newspaper Association program on Freedom of Information issues facing the 2008 Legislature, held Thursday, Dec. 20, 2007, in Sioux Falls. More than 30 people, including 10 lawmakers, joined print and broadcast journalists, librarians and other interested persons for lunch.
 
Those who attended included: Todd Quinn and Chuck Baldwin of South Dakotans for Open Government; Deb Hagemeier of the South Dakota Library Association; Jeremy Fugelberg and Jerry Steinley of the Watertown Public Opinion; Rep. Mary Glenski; Rep. Tim Rave; Sen.. Ken Albers; Rep. Manny Steele; Tom Sorensen of the University of South Dakota School of Law; Rep. Bill Thompson; Rep. Rich Engels; J.P. Skelly of KORN Radio; Michelle Van Maanen of USD; Mark Millage and Beth Jensen of KELO-TV; Sen.. Sandy Jerstad; Travis Gulbrandson of the Yankton Press & Dakotan; Todd Epp, blogger and lawyer; Rep. Russ Olson; Dick Gregerson, lawyer; Rep. Joel Dykstra; Sen.. Frank Kloucek; Dave Bordewyk of SDNA; Joe Tlustos, Melissa Hamersma Sievers, Stephanie Rissler and Rina Bellew of South Dakota Public Broadcasting; Tena Haraldson, Dirk Lammers and Carson Walker of The Associated Press.
 
Haraldson said the lawmakers could expect to see bills in the 2008 Legislature to change the state open records law, create an appeals process when records are denied, and to repeal the ban on cameras in lower courts.
 
Handouts included a summary of FOI issues, a chronology of FOI events for the past 20 years, talking points about government openness and a list of persons to contact about the issue.
 
Several lawmakers said they believe government should be as open as possible so the taxpayers and voters can see for themselves how government functions are carried out. Others were surprised that anyone has trouble seeing government information, but more than one lawmaker gave examples of problems they’ve had getting information.
 
Other lawmakers raised concerns about identity theft and personal information that should be private. SDOG Executive Director Chuck Baldwin said it is reasonable to keep some information confidential to protect privacy, but other states and the federal government have found ways to do that without restricting public access.
 
Dave Bordewyk, general manager of the SDNA, thanked lawmakers for their willingness to hear about the open records issue. He said he was ready to work with all legislators and consider any bills that would improve record access for the public.
 
Haraldson said South Dakota’s open records law is the worst in the nation, based on studies by watchdog groups. It fails to recognize a presumption that government information is open to the public unless there’s a good reason to keep something confidential. Instead, South Dakota law says the only records that must be open are the ones required by law to be available for public inspection.
 
SD Media Club is working to educate lawmakers and the public about the importance of openness in good government.
 
The next meeting is 11:30, Thursday, Jan. 3, 2008, at the Radisson in Rapid City.

(Cross-posted to SD Watch and SDW @ KELOLAND.com.)

Technorati Tags: open government, openness, open meetings, open records, public meetings, public records, South Dakota, FOIA, freedom of information, right to know, South Dakota Legislature, South Dakota Newspaper Association, South Dakota Media Club

Powered by ScribeFire.

Apparently even Rep. Mark Kirkeby's fellow fraternity partiers in Pierre think the idea of closing a state college is a wacky idea.  The Rapid City Journal follows up:

Read: Kirkeby calls for study on closing a university

Excerpt:

State Rep. Mark Kirkeby, R-Rapid City, says other legislators have called his proposal to consider closing some state universities "political suicide," but he's not sorry he raised the issue.

Kirkeby floated the idea during a legislative crackerbarrel in Rapid City earlier this month.

South Dakota has six universities, and Kirkeby suggested the state's low population might not justify keeping all of them open.

"It might be the craziest idea that any legislator has publicly opened his mouth about," Kirkeby acknowledged Wednesday.

But he also said it wasn't a new idea.

"There have been some discussions behind the scenes in the past, but I don't know anybody who has the backbone to go public with it," he said.Kirkeby emphasized he was not suggesting closing any particular university. . . .

Hey Mark.  Unless Gov. Mike Rounds is behind this idea, which I highly doubt, perhaps you should go back to your back bench and learn a thing or two about state government.  You've gotten your fifteen minutes of fame.  Now, it's time to work on the more mundane issues that aren't as flashy but actually make state government go round and round.  Ok?  Good.

Meanwhile, DSU is losing (or winning, depending upon your point of view) in the Epp Poll on which state college you, our esteemed readers would close.

Photo: Rep. Mark Kirkeby (R-Rapid City)--No State college for you, Madison!

Technorati Tags: Rep. Mark Kikeby, Mark Kirkeby, South Dakota Legislature, education, higher education, colleges, South Dakota, Rapid City, fraternity parties

Powered by ScribeFire.

My son Matt and I made the trek to Vermillion last night to tape The This Was The Year That Was episode for SDPTV's SD Focus.  My Buddy PP was also a panelist and has more bloody details about the The Big Show.

The show airs 8 p.m. CT, Thursday, December 27th.  I hope Sibby enjoys the shout out Pat and I gave him during the show.

I think the big stories this year were economic development--Sanford gift, DUSEL, Hyperion, and TransCanada.  For better or worse, how these events play out will have profound impacts on our state's future.  I also think Sen. Tim Johson's health and the upcoming Senate campaign are really big too.

Tune in and see what you think.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Denise Ross over at The Hog House and Cory Heidelberger at the Madville Times both have well written and researched stories on one legislator’s proposed bill to shutter one of South Dakota’s state institutions of higher learning.

The theory is that if small K-12 schools need to close for economy sake, why not higher ed giving up some tenure?

Also, with the University Center (formerly USDSU) in Sioux Falls essentially becoming a seventh state university, is the state spreading its resources too thin?

My own thoughts on this is Rep. Mark Kirkeby (R-Rapid City) may (repeat MAY) have a good idea, but unless Gov. Mike Rounds is willing to expend a huge amount of political capital to close a school—which would likely be one of the smaller schools, such as Mines, BHSU, NSU, or DSU—it is not going to happen.

There are still plenty of people smarting over the closure of USD-Springfield in the early 1980s when Gov. Bill Janklow spent considerable time, effort, and political capital to turn the college into a prison.  I would argue that only someone of Janklow’s political skills, single-mindedness, and toughness could get a college closed.  I don’t see the current Governor wanting to take on such a battle—particularly if he has any inkling of running for the U.S. Senate this year or if he wants to spend the rest of his term mired in the nastiness of such a fight.

It was one thing to take on a small school like USDS in a small town like Springfield.  But take on Rapid City and Mines?  Fuggettaboutit!  Take on Spearfish over BHSU?  Nah.  Take on Aberdeen over NSU?  Nope.  Take on Madison over DSU?  Well, maybe, but doubtful.

Frankly, as higher education and technical education becomes even more important as our economy continues to change and grow, I think there is a good argument that our citizens—not just college aged citizens—need more, not less access to higher education.  Higher ed and technical education also draw research and economic development.  So, personally, I would hate to see any of the current colleges get axed.

But still, this Washburn University of Topeka and University of Houston graduate thinks it would be fun to ponder which school is the weak sister in the family of South Dakota higher education.

Here’s my school by school analysis in order of non-closeability:

1.  SDSU—No brainer.  Our only DI school that’s also a land grant college in an agricultural state.  Also, too many alums to let it happen.

2.  USD—No brainer.  A soon to be DI school with most of the state’s professional schools in business, law, and medicine.  Again, too many alums to screw with.

3.  University Center—No brainer.  The powers that be have made this happen.  Sioux Falls is a growing community that needs more (and cheaper) educational opportunities for a metropolitan area.  In ten years, this will be South Dakota’s largest university.

Now it gets tougher.

4.  SDSM&T—Perhaps a surprise.  But as Gov. Rounds pushes for more research, its proximity to SDUSEL, and its tremendous reputation as an engineering and scientific school, I think it is safe.  Or at least it should be.  If I were a smart kid who loved math and science, no matter where I was from, this is where I’d go to school.

5. DSU—A small school in a small town but it has an extremely focused mission that puts it in the forefront of today’s technology, use of computing, and integration of computing across all disciplines.  Also highly regarded for what it does nationally.  Also, Heidelberger would be forced to enter the real world and no one wants that.

6. NSU—The best thing it has going for it is that it provides higher education in the state’s third largest community.  The state would be stupid to leave that corner of the state without a college.  Plus, I’d hate to see Schaff and Blanchard have to find real jobs.

7. BHSU—This is not a knock on the school or its quality but it seems to have the least focus of any of the state’s colleges.  It’s programs could be moved to Rapid City at Mines and give Mines a college of Liberal Arts.  However, Spearfish is going to be a community that continues to grow.  It will likely be a place where the SDUSEL scientists and staffers live.  And those smarty-pants like college towns. 

Again, I would hate to see any of the schools close because more higher ed, not less, will make South Dakota and South Dakotans more competitive as well as smarter.

My guess is that the closure issue will get some debate but it will die well before the end of the 2008 session.

In the meantime, vote for which school you think should close if push comes to shove.

(Cross-posted to SD Watch and SDW @ KELOLAND.com.)

Technorati Tags: South Dakota, higher education, legislature, Gov. Mike Rounds, Rep. Mark Kirkeby, DSU, NSU, BHSU, SDSU, USD, SDSM&T, University Center, Sioux Falls, Rapid City, Madison, Aberdeen, Spearfish, Springfield

Powered by ScribeFire.