Press "Enter" to skip to content

Democratic Legislation: Less Culture War, More Right and Practical Help

I write a lot about the time-wasting culture-war bills that Republicans use to distract us from real problems and bully non-conforming minorities out of our state, largely because Republican bills have a far greater chance of passing than Democratic bills, but also because Democrats just don’t file as many spectacularly bad ideas. Democrats propose things like protecting initiative and referendum rights from Legislative interference and redundant paperwork (Do Pass!), protecting interns from workplace rights violations (I’m having a hard time seeing any reasonable down side to that one), and mandating that clergy report suspicions of child abuse (I don’t like that idea, but it’s reasonably debatable).

What else are our superminority Democrats up to this Session? Here’s a sampling of bills whose sponsors are all or almost all Democrats:

  • Rep. Shawn Bordeaux (D-26A/Mission) and Senator Troy Heinert (D-26/Mission), both Rosebud Sioux tribal members, propose House Bill 1143 to prohibit public school districts from using Native American team names and mascots. Schools with racially offensive icons get five years to phase them out. HB 1143 exempts schools that are on or near a reservation, have a majority Native American population, and get written permission for their tribal iconography from the nearest tribal government.
  • Senator Heinert leads almost the entire Democratic caucus in sponsoring Senate Resolution 701, calling for the rescinding of the Medals of Honor awarded to the butchers of the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre.
  • Senator Heinert sponsors Senate Bill 128 to revise the prohibition on the use of public dollars in political campaigns. Current law prohibits candidates and political committees from taking contributions from any “Indian tribal entity as defined in the Federal Register Vol. 72, No. 55 as of March 22, 2007 the federal funds received by any Indian tribe.” SB 128 revises that line to prohibit accepting political contributions from “the federal funds received by any Indian tribe.”
  • Senator Heinert tries again to write protection of health insurance for folks with preëxisting conditions into South Dakota law with SB 129.
  • Representative Ryan Cwach (R-18/Yankton) proposes HB 1141 to require a feasibility study and actuarial analysis of long-term care to produce models for long-term care benefits and a “public-private reinsurance or risk-sharing pool.” (One Republican, Rep. Carl Perry, R-3/Aberdeen, has signed on as a co-sponsor.)
  • Rep. Cwach offers HB 1142 to add post-traumatic stress disorder to the conditions for which firefighters, cops, EMTs, and emergency dispatch staff can claim workers’ compensation.
  • Senator Reynold Nesiba (D-15/Sioux Falls) proposes SB 96 to stop using felony conviction of controlled substance possession, use, or distribution as a sole reason for denial of public assistance. (The sole Republican co-sponsor is Congressional candidate Rep. Scyller Borglum, R-32/Rapid City.)
  • Senator Nesiba offers SB 97 to tighten the rules for titling old undocumented automobiles. Currently, the state will issue a new title for any car at least eleven years old on a simple application and affidavit from the seller and clean results from a nationwide title search and check of the National Crime Information Center. SB 97 says that, for undocumented cars more than thirty years old, the new owner has to file a bond for 50% more than the value of the car to cover legitimate claims by “any prior owner, subsequent purchaser, secured party, and their respective successor in interest.” If three years pass with no claim, the Department of Revenue can release the bond. (Four Republicans co-sponsor SB 97: Senators Bolin, Kolbeck, and Schoenfish and Representative Zikmund.)
  • Senator Craig Kennedy (D-18/Yankton) proposes SB 115 to revise our unique felony drug ingestion law. SB 115 would reduce the penalty for ingestion of illegal drugs from Class 5 and 6 felonies to Class 1 misdemeanor. A drug user wouldn’t get a felony until the third ingestion conviction. (Kennedy and his six Democratic co-sponsors have four Republican co-sponsors: Senators Monroe and Partridge and Representatives Johns and Finck.)
  • Senator Susan Wismer (D-1/Britton) proposes SB 141 to make the Bobolink (dolichonyx oryzivorus) the official songbird of South Dakota.

There’s not a lot of culture war in those bills. Senator Wismer’s Bobolink bill is trivial but harmless; Senator Heinert’s Wounded Knee resolution seeks historical justice. Senator Heinert’s campaign finance reform is worth debate: does it open the door for questionable campaign donations, or does it put tribal entities on an equal footing with other organizations that can influence politics with private dollars?

By and large, these Democratic proposals don’t seek to single out or marginalize anyone. Someone reading these bills wold conclude that Democrats just want to protect people’s rights and help people out.

11 Comments

  1. Mark 2020-02-04 10:26

    Let’s hope that SB96 and as important ,
    SB115 pass.
    One can only hope that compassion
    instead of cruelty will break out in Pierre
    The ingestion law is so Neanderthal and
    Supported by The Dope Queen, Ravnsbut and a whole pack of GOP
    hypocrites.
    They claim that they profess Liberty
    Freedom and limited Government.
    B. S.
    Vote the bastards out.

  2. Porter Lansing 2020-02-04 13:43

    South Dakota doesn’t need legal weed in any form. It’s too big a change for the majority to puff on, at this time. But, Craig Kennedy’s SB115 would align SD with every other state in America, USA. Look for those who profit in the millions from selling bail bonds to college kid’s parents (Lederman and Powers) to throw a stinky fit about their loss of … whatever you’d call the unconstitutional invasion of privacy the piss test is.

  3. MD 2020-02-04 14:16

    SB115 is a huge incremental step forward. The felony drug ingestion law has been getting increasingly used since 2014 to incarcerate people instead of treating them – primarily because the state has failed in creating a mature behavioral health system due to a lack of third party payment sources such as Medicaid Expansion.

    Still, I live one state to the north and on a daily basis, I provide syringes and clean injecting supplies to people who use drugs as an opportunity to reduce disease spread and encourage positive change (treatment connections, healthcare/behavioral health connections, etc). It has been life changing to engage with people directly where they are at, supporting them through their lows and being there and making a plan when they are ready for change.

    In South Dakota, that would make me a felon – here it makes me a government employee.

    The policy that makes my work possible was passed through a legislature that is just as red as South Dakota.

  4. Porter Lansing 2020-02-04 14:48

    In only one state can a cop say he smelled pot on a person, make that person take a urine test which will light up positive if that person smoked pot two weeks ago. That person is arrested and then must post a bail bond, several hundred to a thousand dollars of which goes to Dan Lederman to keep for doing what? Using his power as the head of SDGOP to make sure the law doesn’t change? That’s injustice, breach of privacy, and criminal intent by an officer of the law.

  5. Eve Fisher 2020-02-04 16:18

    I’ve heard some people say that the ingestion law is a money-maker, and that it’s necessary to prevent people from heavy drug use, which proves that they don’t understand incarceration (which costs a lot of tax-payer dollars) or addiction (which cannot be cured by incarceration).

    But of course, we’re also one of only two states in which you can be sentenced to life without parole for manslaughter (!), and one of only two states in which all life sentences are without parole. Way to go, SD.
    The other two are Oklahoma and Maine, respectively.

  6. bearcreekbat 2020-02-04 17:05

    Porter is right about how “smelling pot” gave rise to the necessary probable cause for a search of someone’s urine for evidence of illegal pot use.

    With the recent federal legalization of hemp and prohibition against states from interfering with interstate transportation of legal hemp, however, along with the Governor and law enforcement claiming they cannot distinguish legal hemp from illegal pot by smell, I am waiting for our courts to rule that an officer smelling what only the officer speculates “might be” pot no longer has probable cause for any search of the person, property, vehicle or urine.

  7. Porter Lansing 2020-02-04 17:15

    Two Words: Decriminalize Marijuana – Only two states haven’t. One grows potatoes and one grows hate.
    *If an adult is discovered with a small amount of wacky tobacky it’s a written ticket and a hundred dollar fine. Nothing on their criminal record. Caught a second time? Same penalty except a two hundred dollar fine for being stupid and not leaving your pot locked up at home, where it belongs.”

  8. Debbo 2020-02-04 17:42

    Under the heading of “More Right and Practical Help” of this post, I found a very thought provoking and fairly brief article on how to ration health care.

    The author, Carl Coleman, says rationing is ongoing and inevitable. He cites as an example, organ transplants limited by the number of organs available.

    Here is the type of health care rationing he explores:
    “rationing through inconvenience”

    Yes. Coleman lists 5 issues in regard to this rationing that might be of interest to you.

    is.gd/1eTESF

  9. Debbo 2020-02-04 20:48

    It’s striking the kinds of laws the SDDP promises compared to to venality of SDGOP bills. One party wants to do governing for the citizens->Democrats.

    Republicans like to push their grimy thumbprint hard into the back of every South Dakotan who isn’t a white male regressive. What is wrong with the GOP? Have they always been this hateful?

  10. leslie 2020-02-04 21:53

    Meadowlark!!

  11. Eve Fisher 2020-02-05 09:38

    Debbo, the simple answer is, “Yes.” They just wrap it up in the nice clean linen of God’s will.

Comments are closed.