Last updated on 2016-02-12
Majority Leader Brian Gosch (R-32/Rapid City) launched a slightly more subtle attack on House Bill 1182 this afternoon. Before the Stalzer Stall, but right after his neighbor Blue Ribbon K-12 panel co-leader Rep. Jacqueline Sly (R-33/Rapid City) Rep. Gosch offered an amendment to remove the “emergency clause” (Section 18) from the Governor Dennis Daugaard’s proposed sales tax increase. The Governor wants to enact the bill on June 1, rather than waiting for the normal July 1 enactment date.
Rep. Gosch noted that removing the emergency clause would not change the vote total required to pass HB 1182. HB 1182 raises taxes, so emergency or not, passage requires a two-thirds vote. Rep. Gosch said he simply wanted to prevent anyone challenging the bill in court by contending that the need to raise the sales tax in order to fund higher teacher pay in the FY2017 budget isn’t really an emergency.
Reps. Jim Werner (R-22/Huron) stood to oppose Rep. Gosch’s amendment. Rep. Werner explained that the sales tax collected in June is the first sales tax that goes into the state coffers in July 1, the beginning of the new fiscal year. Waiting until July 1 to enact means waiting until August 1 to collect. With tourism season hitting full swing, June is our second-biggest sales tax month; according to Rep. Werner, striking the emergency clause could strike $10 million from the $67.4 million the Governor hopes to put toward teacher pay, cutting the feasible raises from $8,000 to $6,800.
Rep. Thomas Brunner (R-29/Nisland) stood for Rep. Gosch’s amendment. He muttered something about learning a lesson from last year’s road bill tax hike. He said retailers need the extra month to adjust their machines to handle the higher sales tax rate. As I sat wondering just how long it takes to type “0.045” in the little box in your software that asks “sales tax rate,” Rep. Tona Rozum (R-20/Mitchell) got up and said retailers don’t need a whole extra month to rejigger their cash registers. (And frankly, I’m thinking all those retailers about whom Rep. Brunner worries won’t get around to checking their cash register instruction manual until May 30, anyway.)
Rep. Scott Munsterman (R-7/Brookings) threw in against striking the emergency clause. He said raising teacher pay to market rates is an emergency. That’s debatable—don’t pass HB 1182, and every teacher in our public schools won’t suddenly go poof (although all of our legislators might on November 8!)—but precedent says the courts will leave that debate to the Legislature. As long as HB 1182 deals with state government and its existing institutions (yup, schools exist!), the Legislature can decide its an emergency without much fear of judicial review.
Rep. Gosch grumbled back that his opponents had only said they want the emergency clause but hadn’t addressed whether HB 1182 really is dealing with an emergency (hey, Rep. Munsterman did… kinda… sorta…briefly) so his amendment ought to pass. The majority disagreed, and the amendment died.
The folks who stood for Rep. Gosch’s amendment appear to include those who stood to support the impending Stalzer stall:
What do we read from this? The Gosch amendment didn’t change one dollar in the bill or the vote count needed to pass it. The Gosch amendment did offer opponents one reason to consider voting yes: without the emergency clause, HB 1182 could be referred to a public vote. Skittish conservatives could give up their opposition to the sales tax hike and leave it to some well-funded group—the South Dakota Retailers? Americans for Prosperity? Grover Norquist?—to storm in with a referendum petition and big-money ad campaign to overturn the sales tax hike at the polls. “We tried to raise teacher pay,” those conservatives could claim, “but it turns out you the voters turned down the sales tax hike.”
If that was the plan, it didn’t work, and the conservative Republicans who don’t support this plan had to pull the Stalzer Stall to take the long weekend to figure what to try next.
These people who stood up for these amendments need to be identified. Their names need to be put into the record.
What surprised me was after the voice votes couldn’t decide the outcome they told the representatives to stand up.
I’m not up on my parliamentarian procedures but why wasn’t a role call vote taken? It seemed they went out of their way to make sure people didn’t know who was voting for the amendments.
Owen, under House Rules, if it’s a vote that doesn’t have to be recorded in the journal, then the Speaker decides how to call it. But if someone called Division, a roll call vote may have been in order. Check out Rule H5-3:
I’m opposed to throwing even more money down the public “education” rat-hole.
I’m opposed to flagrant abuses of the emergency clause.
I deeply regret trusting and voting for Dennis Daugaard.
He’s not at all who I thought he was.
Dennis Daugaard has earned my respect.
Larry Kurtz writes:
He apparently values yours more than mine. You win.
Lets just take some of that money in the slush fund and not do anything else that will fund it the first year.
Mr. reitzel, the record is hereby blogged. There are pictures.
Mr. Evans, the personality issues that some people fear might rise again ultimately come back to haunt you more than they do Lar, mostly because you are so much younger than he and not as locked in your insanities.
“Grudznick” writes:
The tip of Larry’s left pinky has more sanity than you have. And I’m not talking about your fake “grudznick” persona. I’m talking about the person behind it.
This is not the bill that Gosch should be concerned about being challenged in court if it passes.
ouch
BJS—good point! Given all the other bills grossly violating the U.S. Constitution and fundamental human rights, Gosch’s concern for hewing to the letter of one minor state-level constitutional technicality is hard to take seriously. The thin justification for his action suggests a larger game orchestrated by the majority leader. Daugaard’s problem isn’t the hard-right mugwumps of his party who won’t be rational about anything; it’s his own party’s leadership trying to play tricks with his plan.
Kurt, anyone who puts public “education” in mock quote marks and calls it a rat-hole won’t get my vote. But that attitude could peel away a good chunk of the votes for John Thune—there’s still time to file that Independent petition….
Mr. Evans:
Apparently, you wish our current excellent public education system here in South Dakota to “cruz” to that of an average system and not “trump” those of other states.
Shame, shame!
Cory writes:
The quote marks aren’t mockery, Cory. They’re an expression of my genuine belief as a still-certified former high school math and science teacher that most of the money spent in the name of public education does little or nothing to educate anyone.
I’m pretty sure I’d run against Thune in a heartbeat—as an independent candidate or for any party—if I could afford the petition drive.
“Paladn” writes:
The suggestion that I support Ted Cruz and Donald Trump is false.
@cah: “without the emergency clause, HB 1182 could be referred to a public vote”
I’m surprised that such a passionate proponent of direct democracy (initiative/referendum) as yourself would be so agreeable to denying the People their right to place this issue on the ballot for debate and resolution. I would think that such a great debater as yourself would relish the chance to champion the urgent need of raising teachers salaries in the public square.
Mr. Evans, I am sorry for your disorders but expect your law bill to be voted down by the most sane.
Kurt, you need 2,774 signatures by April 26. That costs time for volunteers, but not much money. Get 100 people to each collect 30 signatures for you, go get 500 of your own, and you’re on.
There you go again, Don, just playing word games and trying to score a hit on me while not giving a pigeon’s dropping about the real issue.
I didn’t say I want to deny the people their right to vote on this issue. I’m encouraging all sorts of public participation in the process right now (call and write your legislators!). I’m outraged that Stalzer and friends were afraid to debate and vote yesterday under the mere scrutiny of all the interested members of the public in attendance. I support Doug Kronaizl’s proposal to subject even emergency-clause bills to referendum.
But I recognize the fact that, under current law, removing the emergency clause opens the door for citizens (or, more likely conservative special interests) to refer HB 1182 and delay the implementation of high teacher pay until at best midway through the coming school year, too late to help teacher recruitment this spring.
I do relish the opportunity to champion the urgent need of raising teacher salaries in the public square. Whether or not HB 1182 passes, that issue will be central to my campaign, because I recognize paying teachers more is an urgent need. Do you?
I may not agree with a lot of your views on here Kurt , but I would sign a petition to get you in the race.
Cory writes:
When I mounted my independent campaign for the U.S. House in 1996, I collected about 1,700 signatures myself and had 22 volunteers who collected an average of about 100 each. Chris Nelson (elections supervisor at the time) validated over 93 percent of our signatures and said it was probably the cleanest statewide petition drive he’d ever seen.
The catch is that we didn’t finish until the beginning of August, and as you know, our Republican legislators have moved up the deadline at least three times since then, probably with Thune’s strong encouragement.
Arbitrary ballot-access restrictions: immoral, harmful to society, and downright sucky.