Last updated on 2017-02-16
Senator Stace Nelson has rounded up some fellow cranky conservatives to challenge the practice of “vehicle bills” or “carcasses.” Nelson and eleven other Republican legislators* have asked Attorney General Marty Jackley for an official opinion on the legislative practice of filing and passing empty bills as placeholders for policies they’re still brewing.
Alas, Nelson and friends don’t challenge carcasses themselves on the Legislative rules and constitutional provisions carcasses may violate; they ask the Attorney General to rule on whether the vote-trading that they allege has taken place to get carcass SB 106 through the Senate violates SDCL 2-12-9 or any other state law.
SDCL 2-12-9 reads as follows:
Improper influence of legislation or legislators as misdemeanor. Any person who threatens, harms, offers to make bribes of money or other inducements, offers or gives gifts or other types of consideration to any person for the purpose of obtaining sponsorship or introduction of legislation, influencing the form of legislation, attempting to influence any member of the Legislature to vote for or against any measure pending therein, or for or against any candidate for any office to be elected or appointed by the Legislature, attempting to influence any officer of either house of the Legislature in naming of members and officers of committees, or in the performance of any of his duties, or attempting to influence or control the action of any member in relation to any matter coming before the Legislature, or any of its committees is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. [SDCL 2-12-9, with misdemeanor penalty restored by 2017 HB 1069 repeal of IM 22].
I’m a little surprised: I thought vote/horse-trading was standard operating procedure in any legislative body. I’ll vote for yours if you vote for mine—that’s how work gets done in Pierre, Washington, and every other seat of democracy, isn’t it?
But other inducements… other types of consideration… do the Nelson Twelve have a point? And if they do, what are they and the Attorney General willing to do to stop it?
*The letter shown by Dana Ferguson on her Twitter feed carries the signatures of Senators Stace Nelson, Phil Jensen, and Lance Russell and Representatives Drew Dennert, Tom Pischke, Blaine Campbell, Steve Livermont, Sam Marty, Elizabeth May, Dan Kaiser, Julie Frye-Mueller, and Timothy Goodwin. They do not name which of the 22 Senators—21 Republicans, 1 Democrat—who voted for SB 106 on February 8 they think engaged in vote trading on that carcass.
I don’t think that’s the “Nelson Twelve”, I think that’s the “Tinfoil Hat Dozen.”
That bunch is more worried about boogey-men stealing their eye pictures and recognizing their faces than an other group of insanser-than-mosts. I have heard that young Ms. Hubbel is behind their entire agenda and is calling all their shots.
If not the Tinfoil Hat Dozen, perhaps they are The Hubbel Crew. THC.
Clearly Ms. Hubbel is controlling all the THC.
Mr. H, I am not as lawyerly as you but I just bet you if Mr. Jackley doesn’t just laugh and send this letter back with a postage due not he might reply that votes are not being traded, these fellows are just agreeing to introduce these law bills on each side of the legislatures and hope everybody agrees to bounce them around.
I mean, I might say “Oh, I promise you that my seat fellow Mr. H will vote for your empty vehicle so you should vote for mine” but in practical matters of daily living no one can garuntee the actions of another. Mr. H just might, but since I can’t promise you his vote what am I the introductor of the law bill really trading.
Just more silliness by the big fellow and his sanctioned puppet master from Hot Springs.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/sd-supreme-court/1564780.html
Much ado about nothing
Mr. Rorschach, you know darnedly well the more ado these things get the less damage is done to the citizens of the Great State of South Dakota. Mr. Nelson serves a great, bloviating purpose in this regard. He is a true patriot.
Actually, I all our carping about corruption in South Dakota, the state does have some good statutes, such as the one above, which bans logrolling, bribes, etc., that are anti-corruption measures. The problem is that you can, wink, wink, nod, nod offer money to a political party or a candidate committee and it amounts to about the same thing. But, yeah, I think these guys might have a valid issue here.
One good anti-corruption measure that South Dakota has is that every bill gets a hearing. That’s really pretty rare. Most states allow committee chairs to bottle up and prevent hearings on bills. Although we all carp about how many bills get short shrift, they do at least get heard in at least one committee.
Point of Clarification … Why does SDCL 2-12-9 say felony at the beginning and misdemeanor at the end?
Nelson’s ilk masturbates while contriving any arguement about government being in itself illegal. Rural conservatives can’t help but touch themselves when they listen to it, because they don’t know how to read, they can only listen.
Oops! Sorry, Porter! That’s my error, trying to piece the text back together accurately from the IM22/HB1069 flip-flop. It should say misdemeanor.
I’m inclined to agree that the A.G. will offer no useful response. The vote-trading alleged here is like unprovable and thus unprosecutable. There is no documentation, and no legislators can testify that vote-trading happened without implicating themselves in the crime
This what I received from Julie.FryeMueller@sdlegislature.gov. Where is this coming from?
Please visit constitutionalalliance.org. The REAL ID is global data mining – plain and simple. I have been on this issue for years. Too much information for me to get into over email so please check out this website.
Thank you.
Julie
The vote-trading alleged here is like unprovable and thus unprosecutable
Seems like a job for the railroad. Like the Mette case . Innocents lost. Twice?
This is Senator Nelson’s response to my concern about HB 1129. He does not seem to care about being in compliance with Federal Regulations. The current CDL regulations were put in place as a result of 9-11.
—————————
Thank you for writing. I am not a big fan of federal mandates on states rights. I will do my best to work through this issue. God bless.
Stace Nelson
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 11, 2017, at 16:50, SNIP wrote:
> Senator Nelson,
>
> RE:House Bill 1129
>
> I have a Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) and am concerned that the State of South Dakota remains in compliance with Federal Regulations.
>
> https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/registration/commercial-drivers-license/states
> SNIP
> Per Federal regulations, all CDLs must contain the following information:
>
> The words “Commercial Driver’s License” or “CDL;”
> The driver’s full name, signature, and mailing address;
> The driver’s date of birth, sex, and height;
> Color photograph of the license holder;
> The driver’s State license number;
> The name of the issuing State;
> The date of issuance and the date of the expiration of the license or permit;
> The class(es) of vehicle that the driver is authorized to drive;
> Notation of the “air brake” restriction, if issued;
> The endorsement(s) for which the driver has qualified;
>
> Note: The Social Security Number must be provided on the application, but must not be printed on the CDL or CLP.
> SNIP
Ms. Frye-Mueller is even more paranoid than pretty young Ms. Hubbel, with an even larger closet full of tin-foil hats.
REAL ID? I wouldn’t mind easing back on that artifact of post-9/11 paranoia and police-statism. But how does that figure in the discussion of the allegations of vote-trading?