Skip to comments.Daugaard issues new vetoes(SD)
Posted on 03/14/2012 8:07:54 PM PDT by marktwain
In a stretch of less than 24 hours, Gov. Dennis Daugaard issued his second and third vetoes of the 2012 legislative session Monday evening, including in one instance his own legislation, and announced Tuesday afternoon he had signed into law the Republicans teaching-reforms legislation that he originated.
The Republican governors decision to sign the heavily amended House Bill 1234 sets the stage for the South Dakota Education Association to begin its petition drive to refer the legislation to a statewide vote on the Nov. 6 general election ballot.
Meanwhile, the vetoes seek to make technical changes that the Legislature will consider Monday when lawmakers return for their final scheduled working day of the session.
As of mid-day Tuesday, there remained 21 Senate bills and four House bills on the governors desk awaiting his decision on each one whether to do one of five possibilities.
He can sign a bill into law, allow it to become law without his signature, issue a full veto to try to stop it altogether, issue a line-item veto to change the amount in a spending bill, or propose a style-and-form veto that asks the Legislature to agree to a small technical change.
Now begins the annual exercise of legislators and Legislature watchers trying to discern which of the bills that are left might be veto targets. The four House bills, for example, all carry some degrees of potential to invite vetoes.
One would essentially repeal South Dakotas requirement of a concealed weapon permit to carry a hidden handgun. The prime sponsor of House Bill 1248 is Rep. Betty Olson, R-Prairie City.
Another establishes the Legislatures planning committee. House Republican leader David Lust of Rapid City is prime sponsor of House Bill 1133.
A third grants tax breaks for large wind-energy projects and for the costs of purchasing and installing environmental technology at the Big Stone electricity plant. The measure was heavily amended. The original sponsor of House Bill 1228 was Rep. Nick Moser, R-Yankton.
The fourth repeals the states food-tax refund program for lower-income households and steers the remaining money instead into emergency food assistance grants for charities to use. The legislation was broadened from the original intent, which was to provide the money to Feeding South Dakota. The prime sponsor of House Bill 1206 was Rep. Susy Blake, D-Sioux Falls.
The concealed-permit repeal, the tax breaks for energy projects and the planning committee all passed the Senate by less than a two-thirds majority, however, a fact that suggests the governor might be able to have a veto on any of those three upheld there.
The House of Representatives and the Senate last week did mount two-thirds majorities to override the governors only full veto so far this year.
In what amounted to a repudiation of his Revenue Departments recent practices involving dairy farm audits, legislators approved a tax exemption for straw, corn stover and bean straw that is used for livestock bedding.
One of the two new vetoes issued Monday seeks a style and form change to repair an oversight by his staff in Senate Bill 194. One number mistakenly wasnt adjusted in the annual legislation that appropriates money for tax refunds to elderly and disabled people. The bill was introduced at the request of the governor.
The other new veto seeks to use the governors line-item power to remove three entire sections of House Bill 1058. The three sections deal with an appropriation of $1 to the Unified Judicial System for the court-automation system.
Those sections were inserted in the legislation as a place-holder to keep the bill alive, while legislators negotiated on whether to grant the court system an increase in the fee charged for searches of court records.
The Senate later amended the bill to allow the fee to increase to $20, from $15, starting Jan. 1, 2013. The fee would revert to $15 after June 30, 2017. Supreme Court Chief Justice David Gilbertson sought a permanent increase to $25.
The bills title didnt refer to a fee at the time of the Senate amendment, however. To avoid the possibility that the Senate presiding officer, Lt. Gov. Matt Michels, might rule the bills content didnt match the title, the three place-holder sections were purposely left in the bill by the Senate. After the bill passed, the title was amended to reflect the fee increase but the place-holder sections were left intact.
What an oathbreaker if he does.
It would be possible but difficult. They were a couple of votes short of those needed for override when they passed it in the senate.
I’m hoping he doesn’t veto it, but either way, I’m keeping my permit for reasons of reciprocity.
If it becomes law, 10 percent of the states and 25 percent of the land area of the United States will be covered by constitutional carry.
As a former lobbyist to the South Dakota Legislature, my experience is these even year short (35 day) sessions tend to produce some legislation that is hastily drawn up and not really adequately considered. I am certain a number of this newly passed legislation will come back next year for revisions requested by the Legislative Research Council to correct errors and conflicts with other statutes. The bill that would allow school districts to pay superior teachers cash bonuses is already being challenged by the state’s teachers union who will attempt to get enough signatures to place the measure on the November ballot ..a process that is relatively easy in South Dakota. Perhaps the only advantage to South Dakota’s legislative system is that the Legislature is given at most only 40 days to deprive us of our liberty and property.
“my experience is these even year short (35 day) sessions tend to produce some legislation that is hastily drawn up and not really adequately considered”.
The unintended consequences rule, is so alive. When what was it, 600 bills in a 35 day session are considered we end up with a real mess. Prearranged Obama care last year, what passes for Constitutional carry, but most assuredly isn’t, this year, and also last year the fee increase for vehicle license and the drivers license renewal debacle.
There is so much more, one can only be slightly grateful that the legislative session isn’t any longer than it now is, however with the “committee” being proposed to engineer legislation. The legislature could foreseeably be in session all year by virtue of the committee, with the actual legislative session being nothing more than a rubber stamp on the “committee” legislative proposals.
The problem as I see it is leadership. Very mainstream, and run not by the people of SD but by lobbyists, bureaucrats, the governors office, and unfortunately now the LRC (Legislative Research Council) is a factor having now been compromised by none other than Republican leaders in the house. There is much more, but that is my quick look.
“Perhaps the only advantage to South Dakotas legislative system is that the Legislature is given at most only 40 days to deprive us of our liberty and property”. Small consolation, when the damage is ongoing year after year. What hurts even more is the budget just crammed full of other states money. If we are unable to support ourselves without government infusion, we are doomed. The fall will come, the only question is when.
Unfortunately the real constitutional carry bill was defeated, and another brought to the floor with a drivers license requirement.
Better than nothing, but not constitutional carry. That bill was authored and championed by Don “Pete” Kopp a conservative Republican SD Congressman from my legislative district.
Considering state drivers licenses are being pushed by the fed as a national ID card, and many states are complying, this is not good.
“That bill” in second paragraph, should read “the original bill”...
28 states, including SD recognize my SD permit. I'll still keep it, even if it's not necessary to have, since I travel through 8 of those (contiguous) states to visit friends; and 5 others to visit relatives.
Ideally, NOBODY should need a permit anywhere in the country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.