And another legislator resigning early?

Gov. Dennis Daugaard’s work load keeps getting heavier as he seeks replacements for resigning lawmakers.

First Rep. Patty Miller, a McCook Lake Republican who resigned in March. Then came Rep. Jon Hansen of Dell Rapids, another Republican who is leaving in August to attend law school.

Now word comes that a Republican in the state Senate is leaving early. Keep in mind, the last election to which they all won their seats was only six months ago.

But I guess lives change, things come up. And the measly $6,000 a year that lawmakers earn isn’t a huge inducement to hang around when something bigger comes up.

ALEC and lawmaker travel a familiar controversy

Some controversies never seem to go away. Democrats are upset about taxpayers supporting the dues and travel to ALEC, a conservative organization financed by corporations. David Montgomery has a good story on the issue here.

By request, I’m posting a story that we ran on Feb. 28, 2010.

No telling who pays for lawmaker travel

S.D. doesn’t require reporting of trips paid by private groups

South Dakota taxpayers spent almost $220,000 in the past five years sending lawmakers to meetings sponsored by a conservative group that supports free-market policies.

That money didn’t cover all the travel costs, however.

The American Legislative Exchange Council, with the help of business partners, also helped pay for state lawmakers to attend conferences where proposals for new laws are developed.

How much they spent, and which corporations are involved, is not known.

That’s because South Dakota - unlike many other states - doesn’t require lawmakers to report the money, or even the existence of these trips.

Driven by a growing budget deficit, legislators in recent weeks debated whether to put more restrictions on taxpayer-funded out-of-state travel.

Missing from that debate was discussion of travel paid for by business or special-interest groups. South Dakota lawmakers in recent years have traveled to Taiwan, Saudi Arabia and conferences in the U.S. - all without any documentation.

The lack of reporting can make lawmakers susceptible to influence from special interests, an open government advocate said.

“We should know who writes checks, or who gives gifts to our elected officials, and that should be public record,” said Reynold Nesiba, an economics professor at Augustana College.

Participants at the ALEC gatherings don’t merely influence legislation, they help create it. Lawmakers sit side-by-side with industry representatives to draft proposals. They bring those proposals back and try to make them laws.

Trips sponsored by ALEC offer a glimpse into the travel practices of some South Dakota lawmakers. Some of the legislators cite their value.

Industry’s stake in writing legislation

Former state Rep. Hal Wick said it’s important that industry groups are at the table when legislation is created.

The South Dakota Legislature has a cap on the number of lawmakers who can use taxpayer money to attend ALEC conferences. So ALEC - through its business members - paid for some lawmakers to go to conferences.

Wick wanted more lawmakers to have the opportunity to attend, so he set out to raise what he calls scholarship money. He sent letters to businesses asking for their help: Pharmacy companies, automotive manufacturers, utilities, tobacco companies and the alcohol industry all were on the list.

He also organized an annual hunt in South Dakota. There’s no charge for the hunt, but lobbyists are asked for donations of $100 to $500.

“I raised dollars from anywhere I could,” Wick said.

No requirement to report trips in S.D.

The difficulty in finding out details of the trips extends beyond ALEC or any other single group. Lobbyists, trade groups, businesses and foreign governments can pay to fly lawmakers around the nation or the world. But there are no records of those trips because lobbyists and lawmakers are not required to report them under South Dakota law.

5 years, $900,000 in taxpayer-paid trips

Earlier this month, Rep. Shantel Krebs, R-Renner, proposed a two-year suspension of taxpayer-funded, out-of-state trips. Since 2005, lawmakers have spent about $900,000 on such travel.

Republicans in the House State Affairs Committee killed Krebs’ bill 8-4 in a hearing where the pros and cons of taxpayer-funded travel were debated. But travel paid by special interest groups was not part of the debate.

Though it’s impossible to know whether the groups paying to fly lawmakers are trying to influence public policy, it’s clear that lawmakers - particularly those in leadership positions - get solicitations to attend.

Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson said he gets invitations, but he’s rejected them. “Going out of state for legislative boondoggles is not in the cards,” he said.

“I’ve gotten invitations to this deal or that deal that typically say some group is willing to pay for it,” Knudson said. “I can say I’ve never attended anything like that, but I can say there are some opportunities. I don’t know how widespread they are.”

Former Rep. Joel Dykstra took a trip financed by the International Association for the Wireless Telecommunications Industry to participate in a panel discussion in Florida. Dykstra, who left the House in 2008, did not recall the exact time of the trip, but he said it happened after voters rejected a measure that would have repealed the gross receipts tax on wireless companies in 2006.

Dykstra, one of the leaders in the fight to repeal the tax, said he was invited to share his perspective on the issue during two panel discussions. The association paid for his airfare and a couple nights in a hotel.

The experience, he said, helped him better understand issues in the industry.

“It’s all about providing information on issues,” Dykstra said. “It is valuable to talk to regulators and industry representatives.”

‘You get a lot of offers’ to travel

The government of Taiwan also has paid for South Dakota lawmakers to travel there. Senate President Bob Gray said he’s been invited but never has gone. Because of the lack of reporting requirements, it is not known exactly how many South Dakota lawmakers have traveled to Taiwan or other countries.

“You get a lot of offers,” Gray said. Many come through the state’s membership with the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Rep. Joni Cutler traveled to Saudi Arabia for 10 days in October and November with a grant sponsored by the NCSL through the U.S. Department of State and the Saudi government. She was among 10 state legislators from across the country who participated.

The delegation met with government officials, business leaders, university officials and others, Cutler said. They talked about business opportunities and women’s issues. She still e-mails friends she met there.

“It was such an amazing trip, and one that impacted me personally so much that once I get talking about it, it’s hard for me to shut up,” she said.

Legislator doubts policy influenced

Cutler said she learned that while Saudi Arabia has plenty of money, it needs educated professionals and experts to help build its economy. That’s where South Dakota business leaders can help.

Cutler said she doubts lobbyists or interest groups are trying to influence policy here.

“As far as junkets with lobbyists, I can’t think of anybody who has been on a trip like that, and maybe that’s why we’ve never bothered about it,” she said of reporting requirements.

“Maybe lobbyists just don’t care that much about South Dakota. That kind of thing, as far as I know, just doesn’t happen.”

But influence peddling through travel has happened elsewhere. At the national level, lobbyist Jack Abramoff flew elected officials, their families and staffers to exotic locations around the world in a bid to influence policy.

Corporate and lobbyist-paid trips for state lawmakers are becoming more common as states cut their budgets for taxpayer-funded trips, said Robert Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies. And that’s troubling, he said, because the sponsors of those trips want something in return.

“I actually think it’s a bigger problem than when the taxpayers pay for it,” Stern said.

Other states require disclosure of trips

Many states require lawmakers to disclose those trips. In California, for example, lawmakers must file annual disclosure forms in which they detail personal finances and whether they took any trips sponsored by a group or organization. They also must report any gifts. Some states bar the practice.

In South Dakota, financial disclosure documents are required only of candidates for office. Legislators are not barred from flying, eating, drinking or playing golf on a lobbyist’s dime.

“As long as it’s not in the nature of a bribe - if it’s not in that context, there’s no prohibition,” said Secretary of State Chris Nelson.

Conservative group prompts skepticism

The conferences sponsored by the American Legislative Exchange Council offer a window into the world of third-party financed trips for South Dakota lawmakers.

ALEC describes itself as an alternative organization to the National Conference of State Legislatures and the Council of State Governments. The three groups all work on policy proposals, and lawmakers in South Dakota are members of all groups.

But ALEC is different in a couple of ways. Business can buy memberships into the group for $7,000 a year, and nonprofits for $3,500 a year, said Jorge Amselle, the group’s spokesman. Memberships on task forces cost thousands more. Lawmakers, meanwhile, pay just $50 a year.

The names of the businesses that belong to ALEC are confidential. But what isn’t secret is the group’s political stance.

“We are unique in that we involve the private sector as equal members in drafting model legislation,” Amselle said. “We’re free-market oriented. We don’t make any secret about that.”

Lawmakers and business representatives work together to draft proposals that go to legislatures across the country. Democrats in South Dakota are suspicious of the group. Earlier this month, they tried to end taxpayer-funded trips to ALEC conferences.

But Wick sees the group as a positive. ALEC, he said, is different than other groups because of its conservative leanings, and that’s a good thing. Other groups include government bureaucrats as members, while ALEC doesn’t. ALEC is interested in trimming government while the other groups want to grow government, Wick said.

“To me it’s a counterbalance that’s really necessary,” he said. “We don’t want to put every business out of business.”

The New York Times might have helped Rep. Steve King

Rep. Steve King, the outspoken and extremely conservative member of Congress from northwest Iowa, has been kicking around the idea of running for his party’s nomination for next year’s open seat in the U.S. Senate. To more mainstream conservatives, the prospect is alarming. King might win among Republicans, but he would have a tougher slog in the general.

And he’s said some colorful things in the past that would be dug up and used against him. To many Republicans, King would cost the party another U.S. Senate seat in the way the GOP lost them last year in Missouri and Indiana.

Well, King, who is also a fiscal conservative, just got a boost of sorts from The New York Times. Friday, the Times published a massive investigation into the Pigford settlements made first with black farmers, and later expanded to include Hispanics, women and Native Americans, who claimed they had been discriminated against by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The piece was first-rate investigative journalism.

King, it pointed out, was raising questions about fraudulent claims years ago. And it turns out, the Times found, that there was a lot of fraud. Indeed, this is the kind of story that will likely generate calls for congressional investigations.

And King was an early critic, warning of problems. This gives King a boost in his bid to win his party’s Senate nomination, should he run.

Robocall case is about to blow

Word comes that major developments in the GOP robocall case against Daniel Willard are in the offing.

According to two of my sources, a person deposed in the case implicated a certain state lawmaker as the ringleader in the calls, which were anonymously made last year attacking GOP legislative leaders.

The lawmaker has already publicly denied being involved, but sworn testimony of a person deposed in the case contradicts that.

The lawmaker in question likes steak and eggs for breakfast, and he’s publicly mulled a run for U.S. Senate in the last week.

In addition, others could be implicated, including at least one GOP party official.

Stay tuned.

Another lawmaker bites the dust

State Rep. Jon Hansen of Dell Rapids is resigning his office to attend law school, the governor’s office announced this afternoon.

The Republican is one of the Legislature’s younger members, and he’ll turn 28 this year. He was first elected in 2010.

Hansen was the prime sponsor of HB 1237 this year, one of the most controversial bills of the session. It expanded the 72-hour waiting period that women must undergo before they can have an abortion. Hansen’s bill didn’t allow weekends or holidays to count as part of the 72 hours.

Abortion rights groups nationally lambasted the bill, saying it implied that women were not capable of thinking for themselves on weekends or holidays.

The governor signed it on March 8.

So abortion rights groups will likely cheer Hansen’s exit from the Legislature.

Abortion was obviously a big issue for him. But he was also good on open records issues. And, in fact, he got into a fight with the city of Sioux Falls over some legal billings that he was attempting to get from the city.

Hansen’s resignation will become final in August. Gov. Dennis Daugaard is seeking public input for his replacement. District 25 is in northern Minnehaha County.

What’s really going on in the Dem Senate showdown

A couple weeks ago, I predicted that Brendan Johnson would have announced his candidacy by Saturday’s McGovern Day Dinner. Well, that didn’t happen. Johnson was far from the scene on vacation in Las Vegas.

What happened? After all, this would have been the perfect veunue to launch a campaign. Heidi Heitkamp, memories of George McGovern. Hundreds of enthusiastic Democrats and a chance to introduce yourself to them.

Problem is, there are grave concerns among national Democrats about Johnson’s viability. Since he’s an unknown quantity in national circles, the powers that be in the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee are leaning, perhaps even heavily leaning, for Stephanie Herseth Sandlin.

That would indicate to me that Herseth Sandlin has expressed interest in the race, but that she is reluctant to face Johnson in a primary. If the DSCC can keep Johnson out of the race, Herseth Sandlin would be the candidate.

Herseth Sandlin likely knows that she would have a tough primary against Johnson, and a loss to him would not only be embarrassing, but potentially fatal to her future in politics.

The DSCC has poll numbers showing that Herseth Sandlin is the stronger general election match up against Mike Rounds. There is no question in my mind that Herseth Sandlin is still popular with a large swath of the electorate, and she would be a good candidate.

Johnson would be a strong candidate, too. But he would have to make up ground where Herseth Sandlin is already a known quantity among the state’s voters. Still, being an outsider to the state’s political system might be a benefit in the race. No one can accuse him of being a lobbyist.

So if you want to know why the Democrats didn’t have an announced candidate at the McGovern Day Dinner Saturday, blame the DSCC.

Thune and Obama have dinner

Sen. John Thune was one of a dozen GOP senators to have dinner with the president Wednesday. Politico has an account of the dinner here.

The dinner took place in the Old Family Dining Room at the White House. The menu consisted of steak, salad and vegetables.

Thune pushed for the president to approve the Keystone XL pipeline proposal. The main topic of conversation focused on the budget and deficits.

And tax policy. The president said he wanted more taxes. That probably didn’t go over well with his dinner companions.

When Brendan Johnson resigns

Let’s go into wild speculation mode.

U.S. Attorney Brendan Johnson could be days away from resigning and launching a bid for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by his father. His office is currently in the concluding stages of a high-profile prosecution of a sex trafficing case, an issue that has been one of Johnson’s strongest priorities as U.S. attorney.

His resignation would create an opening for U.S. attorney, which would be filled by President Obama.

So who are some prominent Democratic lawyers that might get the nod to replace Johnson? Remember, the U.S. attorney spot could be a place to groom a future Democratic politician, which in South Dakota they need. Any suggestions?

Obama won’t be the only person looking to fill an open political position in South Dakota. As David Montgomery points out at Political Smokeout, Gov. Dennis Daugaard has an appointment to make as well.

Herseth Sandlin and swinging dead cats

If there’s one thing that’s true among Democrats in northeastern South Dakota, it’s that Stephanie Herseth Sandlin is still very popular, according to South Dakota Farmers Union President Doug Sombke.

“You couldn’t swing a dead cat in the town of Groton and not hit someone who likes her,” he said.

Argus political reporter David Montgomery has a good post of the shadow primary taking place between supporters of Herseth Sandlin and Brendan Johnson at his Politicalsmokeout blog.

Sombke says he doesn’t have a dog in the fight, but if pressed he’d have to lean toward Herseth Sandlin, in part because she served on the Farmers Union Foundation and because she was a strong supporter of ag while in Congress.

Brendan’s drawback is that he isn’t as well known across the state, but he’d still make a good candidate, Sombke said.

“I’ve had some good working relationships with Brendan, too, and he’s done an excellent job,” Sombke said. “He’s very thorough and hard working. He’s like his dad.”

Regardless of who wins the nomination, primary or not, Sombke predicts that the one who isn’t the nominee will work very hard for the nominee.

How Barack Obama helped Kristi Noem

The president was in San Francisco yesterday and today raising money for Democratic efforts to retake the House next year, according to this story from USA Today.

The story notes that Obama achieved his biggest successes when Rep. Nancy Pelosi was speaker in the first two years of his presidency. Those two years saw the passage of the Affordable Care Act, financial reform, and an $840 billion stimulus package.

And to line up more of those achievements, Obama wants Pelosi back at the helm in his final two years.

“My job is to make sure we move the country forward, and I think we can best do that if Nancy Pelosi is speaker of the House once again,” USA Today quoted him as saying.

Well, it’s quotes like those from the president that will be a big help to Kristi Noem if she decides to seek another term in 2014.