SOUTH DAKOTA STRAIGHT TALK

Former State Representative Bill Peterson's recent announcement that he would be a candidate for Mayor brought the number of candidates with their hat in the ring for the job as Mayor of Sioux Falls to three. Peterson joins Councilman Vernon Brown and business executive Mike Huether.

All three are formidable candidates who bring their individual talents and perspectives to the race. Certainly they will be joined by several or many more. Expected to certainly join the race is Councilman Kermit Staggers. Political talk around the town speculates that Minnehaha County Commissioner Jeff Barth is in and Councilmen Greg Jamison, Pat Costello, and Gerald Beninga are considering the City's Top Spot. Former Mayors Rick Knobe and Gary Hanson have also raised their name up the “I am interested again” flag pole hoping someone salutes. I also hear that former Sioux Falls School Board Major Domo Roger Risty is seriously considering joining the fray.

The election is in April of 2010 and the winning candidate must receive 50% of the vote to win. If no candidate receives 50% then there is a runoff election two weeks later when the top two vote getters face off.

Candidate Observations

Bill Peterson is a politician and has considerable political skills. Bill grew up in Vermillion and lived in Pierre for a time before locating in the mid 1980s to Sioux Falls. He has worked in public affairs and been active in Sioux Falls and South Dakota politics for his entire adult life. He currently works for Western Surety / CNA Surety in Public Affairs and Lobbying where he has been for about 20 years. Prior Bill worked in public affairs for the South Dakota Chamber of Commerce, the Sioux Falls Chamber, and a brief stint with Colle - Mc Voy a Minneapolis base ad agency. Bill also has served as Chairman of the Minnehaha County Republican Party, Majority Leader of the South Dakota House of Representatives, and as a mover and shaker (I am not sure exactly what his official position was if any) in the effort to move the City of Sioux Falls from the City Commission form of government to the current Home Rule Charter - Mayor and Council form. Remaking City government was a big priority for one of Peterson's former bosses, Joe Kirby, though in addition to that Bill has intense personal interest in government and was mentored of USD legend Bill Farber a strong proponent of streamlined government. Peterson has flirted and suggested frequently that County governments and governmental services in South Dakota should be consolidated.

Bill's business executive skills are unknown (at least to me) but he has excellent political skills that a Mayor of an increasingly diverse city requires. His management of the three or if not more caucuses among his Republican House Caucus was nothing short of masterful. Majority Leader Peterson often described leading the GOP House Caucus like herding cats. Bill Peterson is also one of the best communicators in South Dakota.

Most recently he served as President of Downtown Sioux Falls. This is both a plus and a minus. It is a plus because it gives a coalition that offers a strong base of support. The other side of the two edged knife of support from the Downtowners is that he will be marked as representing just one area rather than s the broader interest of the City at large. Another negative may be the suggestion of his possible lack of administrative experience. Though this should be offset by his strong political skills and voters may not care as Mayor's Hanson and Munson did not bring strong admin skills to the job either. The fact that his name ends in "son" is a plus.

In the last few months at various several functions I have seen Peterson and political guru and advisor to political campaigns Lee Brown with their heads together. While I do not know if it is a fact this leads me to suspect that Lee is advising the Peterson Campaign. Bill's wife Sue also is political and been through many campaigns. Her support will add vitality to his reach for the golden chair at 9th & Dakota.

Vernon Brown has been actively running for Mayor for about six months. He has been raising money and building coalitions. Vernon who came in a strong third in the 2006 race in my opinion would have easily been elected Mayor had not Dave Munson changed his mind to be a candidate and filed for re election at literally the last possible minute. Vernon has high name identification both as a popular current Councilor and a former television news reporter for KELO. Like Peterson, Brown is also a great communicator. Brown's quotient of personality and likeability are off the charts.

Brown is an Arlington native who after SDSU located in Sioux Falls. He is politically and independent though formerly a Republican. He is fairly representative of South Dakota conservatism though often finds a government solution to most every issue or problem. Vernon Brown is working with Georgia Hanson an experienced Sioux Falls and South Dakota consultant who previously worked on Dave Munson's and Pat Costello's campaigns.

Of the three announced candidates Mike Huether is the new face on the block. Clearly Huether has the proven management skills to lead City Hall. As executive vice president of First Premier Bank Card, Huether commanded an army of business executives counting to nearly 120 persons. Assuming modern day business practice, he probably had a group of top level lieutenants perhaps 10 to 15 reporting directly to him. This would parallel the organizational chart at City Hall with its departments and division directors.

The unknown about Huether is what kind of communicator and campaigner is he. His campaign appears well organized and thought out. Unlike Brown and Peterson, Huether has never campaigned for himself before nor won an election. A big plus for Huether is that he is well networked throughout the City. Because of his extensive networking Mike will raise a significant war chest.

At first look it appears he is building his name identification by stressing Mike rather than the troublesome to pronounce Huether (heather, heater, heether?). Rather than adopt the triter, I Like Mike, he has chosen My Man Mike. This is inventive and appears to be an adaptation of Governor of Indiana (and former Budget Chief (OMB) for President Bush) Mitch Daniels, who use My Man Mitch.

I will offer more commentary on the candidates as they officially announce or file the requisite papers with the City Clerk.

Who’s In and Out?

Kermit Staggers as noted above is in. Pat Costello is in. Greg Jamison is working his checklist and is on the fence. Gerald Beninga is out (it is also rumored he is considering running for a seat on the Minnehaha County Commission.

Political intel is that Jeff Barth is running for Mayor but I am reticent. His election chances may have seemed better when he was the only Democrat in the race (despite that the Mayor’s office is non partisan). Huether’s candidacy takes that distinction away from Barth. Thus Barth who enjoys public service will stand for reelection rather than run against the heavy odds of being elected Mayor.

Rick Knobe is out. Gary Hanson is out, not because he wouldn’t like to be Mayor again but doesn’t have the political courage. Roger Risty I don’t think will run but he may surprise. Roger is widely known and though not currently on the political scene is active in the community and well known. His wife Julie, Minnehaha County Register of Deeds, is a plus.

There are certainly a couple of more persons looking at the race and I wouldn’t be surprised if the field of candidates is not six or even more.

For a short period late next winter and early next spring all eyes will be on the Queen City’s mayoral election just before next year’s Big Enchilada, the primary election for the GOP nomination for Governor.

Finding a fair protocol to determine which College football team is the National Champion seems to be looking for a government solution like just about every other problem. Talk about socialism – whew!

President Obama has mentioned on several occasions both as a candidate and as President that we need a playoff system. And two weeks ago Utah U S Senator Orrin Hatch held a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee where he lambasted the BCS system calling it a violation of the Sherman Anti Trust act and then calling for change.

Considering totally nationalizing health care, revolutionizing national environmental and energy policy (climate change / cap & trade), and a Supreme Court nomination confirmation are all on the Congressional plate, do you think our Congress might have something better to do than investigate college football championships?

Given this background and a short piece in this week’s “Sports Illustrated” I began thinking about The Big Shootout in 1969 where President Nixon took it on himself to go to the University of Texas Longhorns vs. Arkansas Razorbacks football game and award the National Championship in the winner’s locker room on live on national television after the game. Fifty Million viewers watched ABC on that Saturday afternoon.

The Longhorns of course won. Final score was 15-14. By way of background of the game following is an excerpt from the book jacket of “Horn’s, Hogs, & Nixon Coming” a social history of the game (I will be reading this soon):

”On December 6, 1969, the Texas Longhorns and Arkansas Razorbacks met in what many consider the Game of the Century. In the centennial season of college football, both teams were undefeated; both featured devastating and innovative offenses; both boasted cerebral, stingy defenses; and both were coached by superior tacticians and stirring motivators, Texas's Darrell Royal and Arkansas's Frank Broyles. On that day in Fayetteville, the poll-leading Horns and second-ranked Hogs battled for the Southwest Conference title -- and President Nixon was coming to present his own national championship plaque to the winners.

Even if it had been just a game, it would still have been memorable today. The bitter rivals played a game for the ages before a frenzied, hog-callin' crowd that included not only an enthralled President Nixon -- a noted football fan -- but also Texas congressman George Bush. And the game turned, improbably, on an outrageously daring fourth-down pass.”

If memory serves me right, going into the final week of the season the four top teams all undefeated were the Horns, Razorbacks, Penn State, and Ohio State. Penn State had already declined the opportunity to play the winner of the Texas / Arkansas game preferring to wait on a Rose Bowl bid to meet (they thought at the time) undefeated current National Champion Ohio State. It turned out that Michigan defeated Ohio State and went to the Rose Bowl. Penn State then went to the Orange Bowl. Texas then defeated Notre Dame in the Cotton Bowl. This was the first appearance ever by Notre Dame in a post season bowl game who had never chosen to participate. It should be remembered than in the pre TV big money days there were only four major bowl games (Rose, Cotton, Sugar, and Orange – all played in warmer climates.)

One other factoid too good not to mention was that the game winning extra point was kicked by Texas field goal kicker (I love this name) Happy Feller.

A personal reflection – A former colleague at the Republican National committee was John Paul Hammerschmidt. Hammerschmidt was a former U S Representative from Arkansas. Besides serving 13 terms in the Congress, he also served a couple of stints as State Republican Chairman and National Committeeman from Arkansas. The Congressman is a great story teller and a man of vast experience. He was a great man to share a story with.

Congressman Hammerschmidt is best noted for defeating post Watergate in a huge Democrat year, 1974, a challenge from then 28 year old Bill Clinton who was fresh off leading George McGovern’s campaign for President in Texas.

One of the great stories that Congressman Hammerschmidt shared with me was his trip with President Nixon to The Big Shootout.

The President took as many members of Congress from Texas and Arkansas that wanted to go to the game with him on Air Force One. The college town of Fayetteville did not have an airport that could service a plane as large as Air Force One. Consequently the President’s plane put down at a nearby Air Force Base and the President and guests were helicoptered over to the practice field adjoining Razorback Stadium in Fayetteville.

The pecking order in the helicopters was strictly partisan. The Republicans rode with the President and the Democrats rode in the other helicopter. Riding with the President were Texas Senator John Tower and Congressmen George H. W. Bush and Hammerschmidt. Both Bush and Hammerschmidt were the only Republicans in the U S House from their respective States and I am guessing at the time, Texas had as many as 20 members. Even Senator Fullbright of Arkansas rode with the Dems. Hammerschmidt was a close friend of Bush’s as both started their terms in the U S House in 1967.

President Richard Nixon in the Razorback Stadium stands at the Big Shootout. At left in his row are Arkansas Congressman John Paul Hammerschmidt, also a decorated World War II pilot; and Arkansas Governor Winthrop Rockefeller. Farther down the row, facing the camera, is a very young-looking Texas Congressman, George Bush, who was (and still is) one of Hammerschmidt's close friends. If you look real hard in the row behind them, you can spotthe top of Henry Kissinger's head and his glasses. (Comment taken from terryfrei.com/_wsn/page3.html )

Additional comment on July 11^th - If you look real close at the head and brow just above Arkansas governor Rockefeller, it appears to be none other than former Speaker of the House and then Congressman from Fort Worth Jim Wright.

A pair of news reports this week has me wondering – do the Bureaucrats really have a tin ear to what is happening in America with average hard working folks that are sending in a big chunk of their earnings to Uncle Sam?

This week the Social Security Administration held a training session for 700 of their managers at the Frank Lloyd Wright designed swank Arizona Biltmore Resort & Spa. Apparently the bureaucrats got a good deal (85 bucks a night). But throw in travel and Casino Night festivities and you can’t help but believe they are a little out of touch. Not being aware of the public outrage over AIG bonuses and bailout paid for golf outings and Stadium naming is political deafness.

Not to be outdone, incredibly President Obama’s Recovery.gov is getting another $9.5 Million for the operation of their website bringing their stimulus money total to $18 Million for just the website. Holy transparency – didn’t anyone tell them the government is broke?

Government it supposed to be part of the solution not the part of the problem. It really isn’t news to anyone who has been thinking about it or paying attention since the credit meltdown last Fall, but the U S House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, (that is a mouthful) issued a report this week on the Government’s genesis, involvement, and subsequent complacency in its role of fostering mortgages to people who were not credit worthy or could not afford them.

The Committee report is important and interesting reading to get real perspective on the housing bubble and credit meltdown. It is important to note as does the report that the government is not totally responsible as there were bad actors in the markets; though they were in large part responding to government sponsored opportunities.

Government is playing an oversize role in our economy and with expanded government control on the horizon we need to slow down and ask how much more personal responsibility do we want to turn over to a faceless government that only sees rules and regulations not the people whom they are paid to serve?

Citizens expect at a minimum when they elect Legislators either State or Federal that they would take the effort to understand what is in the laws they are enacting.

Lately our Congress has taken inattention to new heights. Last February when Congress finalized the Stimulus Bill, the President and Democrat majority in the Congress told us that the bill had to be passed immediately and sent to the President for his signature post haste.

The bill was passed on Friday rather than let Congress and the Public see and digest the legislative sausage before say voting on it the following Tuesday. No sunshine was allowed. This bill that had to be now was the $800 plus Billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. After the bill was passed on Friday the President then decided he was not in such a hurry to sign the bill. Rather he waited until the following Wednesday for a full blown ceremony and press oppity.

Last week with the U S House passage of the so called Climate Bill (cap and trade et al) similar shenanigans took place.

While in this latest round Democrats are railroading their favorite projects and policies, Republicans have not always been innocent bystanders. Most everyone who pays attention to current events and our federal Congress are very used to seeing Committee hearings that are attended by only two or three Senators or Representative. How many times have you seen on CSPAN floor debate in the U S House or Senate with just a minimum of Members present?

Shouldn’t we expect more attention?

I have been an observer and what might be described as adjunct participant in our State Legislator for almost thirty years. I understand that not all Legislators read every bill. They do depend (at least on the GOP side and I presume the Dem side as well) the Caucus to review legislation. But in Pierre, hearings and session is attended at near 100 percent levels.

Having not attended Session for the past 6 years I was somewhat surprised to hear a new term. “Reader” Recently I was introduced to State Representative R. Blake Curd. As part of his introduction to me by another legislator I was told ‘he is a Reader.” When I inquired what that was, it was explained he was one of the few members that actually read the bills. While I was disappointed to hear that the process and consequently understanding of the impacts and consequences of legislation in South Dakota may be deteriorating, I was impressed by Representative Curd’s intellect and work ethic.

In a Representative Democracy we should expect no less of all our solons and especially our Federal Reps.

Sidebar – It was also pointed out to me that in our last Legislative session because of impacts of the “Stimulus Bill” (referenced above) at the initiation of Representative Curd a Special Legislative Committee was organized to study and understand the federal rules and mandates that came as “rules” with the cash the Feds are sending. Representative Curd was appointed Chairman of Stimulus Committee. This is an impressive recognition of respect for a first year Legislator.

Highlighting what a PR machine the White House has become an economist friend sent me a video that simply yet eloquently demonstrates how the Obama administration places perception over real substance.

The Rahm Emanuel led White House spin machine at the time the President released his Budget Proposal with its $1.6 plus Billion deficit, held the first Cabinet meeting of the Obama administration to tell Americans how fiscally tough and conservative the President is. The White House message of the day was - the President had a Cabinet Meeting. He instructed his Cabinet to collectively find cuts of $100 Million – thus demonstrated that the President was fiscally responsible and making good on his campaign promises to pay as you go, go through the Federal budget line by line, and cut the federal deficit.

Straight Talk commented contemporaneously that instructions to the Cabinet to find budget cuts of $100 million in cuts were so unbelievably small they were a joke.

Straight Talk commentary – On Monday President Obama held another Cabinet Meeting. His first Cabinet Meeting on April 20^th was the fiscal joke of instructing his Cabinet to be fiscally responsible and find $100 million in budget cuts collectively in their departments.

Monday’s Cabinet meeting dubbed Roadmap to Recovery is the continuation of the sham that his Stimulus Packaged rushed thru the Congress in early February is little more than a Democrat big Government giveaway. In January I posted about the so called American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 in Stimulus - What Stimulus?:

To be clear our Economy needs a real jump start and stimulus, but to be effective it must put people to work and quickly. The President and Congressional Democrats are using political sleight of hand by saying this “Package” will create or save 3 million jobs. Save jobs? Since they don’t say which jobs they are saving, I guess that means as long as 3 million people are still working – the stimulus package will be a success.

My primary objections are that the funds are not being put to use quickly enough and that overall too little of the money is being used for true stimulus (but rather spending for special projects and more government.)

This Democrat Trojan Horse so called “Stimulus Package” is a sham. It is old time government spending, very little stimulus and way too slow.

The President’s dog and pony show cabinet meeting (note from the picture that the meeting was not held in the Cabinet room at the White House but what appears to be the East Room (though I may be wrong on that) – clearly this was a photo op(porutnity) not serious business. The two important points here are that despite the Administration’s claims the money is not being spent or people being put back to work FAST enough and that little in the Stimulus Bill is real stimulus.

William McGurn’s opinion editorial in The Wall Street Journal titled, “The Media Fall for Phony “Jobs” Claims: McGurn accurately points out that President Obama is spinning his claim that HIS Stimulus Package is working.

At the heat of McGurn’s argument is his assertion –“Mr. Obama's comments yesterday are a perfect illustration of just such a claim. In the months since Congress approved the stimulus, our economy has lost nearly 1.6 million jobs and unemployment has hit 9.4%. Invoke the magic words, however, and -- presto! -- you have the president claiming he has "saved or created" 150,000 jobs. It all makes for a much nicer spin, and helps you forget this is the same team that only a few months ago promised us that passing the stimulus would prevent unemployment from rising over 8%.”

In concert with McGurn and Rosenthal that this is hocus pocus focus, Peter Morici, Professor of International Business at the University of Maryland said, “A lot of this is hokum. All along, (Obama’s) job numbers have kept changing according to the political environment.”

The Media Fall for Phony 'Jobs' Claims

By: William McGurn

The Wall Street Journal

June 10, 2009

The Obama Numbers Are Pure Fiction

Tony Fratto is envious.

Mr. Fratto was a colleague of mine in the Bush administration, and as a senior member of the White House communications shop, he knows just how difficult it can be to deal with a press corps skeptical about presidential economic claims. It now appears, however, that Mr. Fratto's problem was that he simply lacked the magic words -- jobs "saved or created."

"Saved or created" has become the signature phrase for Barack Obama as he describes what his stimulus is doing for American jobs. His latest invocation came yesterday, when the president declared that the stimulus had already saved or created at least 150,000 American jobs -- and announced he was ramping up some of the stimulus spending so he could "save or create" an additional 600,000 jobs this summer. These numbers come in the context of an earlier Obama promise that his recovery plan will "save or create three to four million jobs over the next two years."

Mr. Fratto sees a double standard at play. "We would never have used a formula like 'save or create,'" he tells me. "To begin with, the number is pure fiction -- the administration has no way to measure how many jobs are actually being 'saved.' And if we had tried to use something this flimsy, the press would never have let us get away with it."

Of course, the inability to measure Mr. Obama's jobs formula is part of its attraction. Never mind that no one -- not the Labor Department, not the Treasury, not the Bureau of Labor Statistics -- actually measures "jobs saved." As the New York Times delicately reports, Mr. Obama's jobs claims are "based on macroeconomic estimates, not an actual counting of jobs." Nice work if you can get away with it.

And get away with it he has. However dubious it may be as an economic measure, as a political formula "save or create" allows the president to invoke numbers that convey an illusion of precision. Harvard economist and former Bush economic adviser Greg Mankiw calls it a "non-measurable metric." And on his blog, he acknowledges the political attraction.

"The expression 'create or save,' which has been used regularly by the President and his economic team, is an act of political genius," writes Mr. Mankiw. "You can measure how many jobs are created between two points in time. But there is no way to measure how many jobs are saved. Even if things get much, much worse, the President can say that there would have been 4 million fewer jobs without the stimulus."

Mr. Obama's comments yesterday are a perfect illustration of just such a claim. In the months since Congress approved the stimulus, our economy has lost nearly 1.6 million jobs and unemployment has hit 9.4%. Invoke the magic words, however, and -- presto! -- you have the president claiming he has "saved or created" 150,000 jobs. It all makes for a much nicer spin, and helps you forget this is the same team that only a few months ago promised us that passing the stimulus would prevent unemployment from rising over 8%.

It's not only former Bush staffers such as Messrs. Fratto and Mankiw who have noted the political convenience here. During a March hearing of the Senate Finance Committee, Chairman Max Baucus challenged Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on the formula.

"You created a situation where you cannot be wrong," said the Montana Democrat. "If the economy loses two million jobs over the next few years, you can say yes, but it would've lost 5.5 million jobs. If we create a million jobs, you can say, well, it would have lost 2.5 million jobs. You've given yourself complete leverage where you cannot be wrong, because you can take any scenario and make yourself look correct."

Now, something's wrong when the president invokes a formula that makes it impossible for him to be wrong and it goes largely unchallenged. It's true that almost any government spending will create some jobs and save others. But as Milton Friedman once pointed out, that doesn't tell you much: The government, after all, can create jobs by hiring people to dig holes and fill them in.

If the "saved or created" formula looks brilliant, it's only because Mr. Obama and his team are not being called on their claims. And don't expect much to change. So long as the news continues to repeat the administration's line that the stimulus has already "saved or created" 150,000 jobs over a time period when the U.S. economy suffered an overall job loss 10 times that number, the White House would be insane to give up a formula that allows them to spin job losses into jobs saved.

"You would think that any self-respecting White House press corps would show some of the same skepticism toward President Obama's jobs claims that they did toward President Bush's tax cuts," says Mr. Fratto. "But I'm still waiting."

Note: This post should be considered venting and is not intended to reach the level of a full blown rant. (additional disclaimer – I am an intense user of USPS services and speaking specifically of their service find their pricing competitive, service fast and reliable for small parcels. Besides getting mail pickup and delivery at my place of business, I am generally at the Downtown Post Office twice each day picking up my mail and posting parcels. The window personnel I deal with are professional, knowledgeable, friendly, and relatively efficient (waiting as they wrap packages for patrons can be a little trying).

The United States Postal Service has not had much good news lately with a decrease in mail volume in 2008 of 9 billion pieces or 4½% and it is expected to double in 2009. Losses this year are expected to be $6 Billion. Pretty easy to understand really – the private package delivery services (that cherry pick the business without having to deliver Universal Service and of course Electronic Communications (email), and the recession has crippled mail volume and the junk mailers.

To remedy the decline the Postal Service’s management must change their business plan. To deliver the mail using the model developed by the first Postmaster General Benjamin Franklin (under the Continental Congress from 1785 – 1788) (sorting the mail into little pigeon holes and hand delivering the mail to each patron’s door) does not comport with modern technologies and capability.

Rather than reforming the business plan and reforming management practice to cut expenses, Management are further diminishing revenues by cutting Service. Nationally the Postal Service has had layoffs, consolidations and the Postmaster General has proposed cutting mail delivery from 6 days a week to 5. Do not expect Congress to grant the necessary waiver the Stamp General wants.

This week in an effort to cut costs, the Postal Service put the Sioux Falls Downtown Post Office up for sale. I am not privileged to their logic nor their operating numbers but this seems crazy. This is the same building that there was spent undoubtedly hundreds of thousands of dollars removing asbestos and remodeling two years ago. It may be remembered at the time the furor over changing rental box numbers and sizes and the related expense caused to their patrons. At the time of the reopening Saturday morning business hours were eliminated as was the stamp vending machine in the lobby (try to understanding the logic of that in light of cost cutting). Recently morning service to box holders from 7am to 8am was also eliminated as stated for security reasons. The Meadows Station is still open on Saturday though their hours of service were also recently reduced.

I am not a management expert or efficiency expert but I offer a few suggestions worth considering.

Rather than selling the Downtown location, utilize the large empty plant and offices there by eliminating other properties that are being leased for mail processing and office space for clerical work, marketing and management personnel.

Install at their box locations and Post Offices stamp vending machines, particularly ones that accept credit cards.

For residential mail delivery use box sections on corners, city wide like those found in some newer neighborhoods or like those found in apartments.

Standardize the envelope sizes as an example to #10 and #6 envelopes. Other sizes that are not as machine able for sorting would carry a significant surcharge. Likewise require mailers to use standardized mail labels with 9 digit zip codes. Others too would require a surcharge. Keep in mind that 80% of homes and an even larger % of businesses have access to a personal computer and the Internet. (BTW www.usps.com is a pretty good website and a great way to purchase postage). For those without Internet access, USPS could provide machines in their locations that provide labeling and even put them in other libraries and government buildings.

At the end of the day Good Service will solve their problems not lack thereof. In context of the Government now owning General Motors should we expect that GM will be managed with the vision and execution of the Post Office?

That might be something to think about as we embark on Government sponsored Universal Health Care.

I visited the South Dakota State University campus this week and was briefed on several of the changes taking place on the campus.

Included were briefings and tours of the SDSU / Brookings Research Park otherwise known as Innovation Campus and the new Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences building. Included were presentations about technology transfers and recruitment of research and development partners.

Currently about $45 million in federal government funded research is taking place at State. This is out of a total of (if my numbers are correct) approximately $77 million being spent in South Dakota. SDSU being number one among the South Dakota Universities makes sense because of the emphasis on agriculture and engineering.

There is a real economic development emphasis to the efforts of SDSU, the State of South Dakota, the City of Brookings, and private enterprise who are partners in the Innovation Campus.

While overall I am impressed with the efforts being made and believe it is good for South Dakota. I question fostering applied research with public monies for the benefit of private interests.

Thomas A Edison, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, Bill Gates, and many others transformed their worlds with innovation without an incubator. William Hewlett and David Packard founded their business in Packard’s garage with an investment of $538.

However I was most impressed with my first real look at David Chicoine the new President of South Dakota State University. Chicoine received his Undergraduate Degree from SDSU and several degrees later earned a PhD in Economics from the University of Illinois (Champaign – Urbana). He became a member of the faculty at Illinois where he later served as Dean of the College of Agriculture where he remained for 30 years ultimately becoming a Vice President for Technology and Economic Development and Interim Vice President of Academic Affairs of the University. Over the years he published four books and wrote or peer reviewed more than 100 academic journal articles.

Chicoine was a originally an Elk Point Pointer and is the son of long time Democrat South Dakota Legislator (he served in both the State House and Senate) Roland Chicoine. Chicoine met his wife at SDSU and one of his sons was born in Brookings. His wife was originally from nearby Volga.

From his words and actions (and resume) it is extremely clear that Chicoine is no stranger to the world of Politics. What impressed me most is that he has vision but (perhaps because he is a trained economist) while also focused on both persistence and results. Though I found him very focused he has an easy touch.

His comments at his Investiture as President show insight to his political bent and his vision and understanding of a University education. Of particular note is his belief that Universities are an important engine of the Knowledge Economy.

South Dakota State is fortunate in convincing David Chicoine to return home. The Board of Regents has done a good job in recruiting talent. Not only have they recruited Chicoine but Robert Wharton, the new President of South Dakota School of Mines and Technology a good catch.

Worth noting – President Chicoine while with the Fighting Illini served for eleven years as the University’s representative to the Big 10 Athletic Conference and the NCAA. I acknowledge he was not the Athletic Director but why Mr. President did you ever let Bill Self get away? The answer I suspect is the same reason that Chicoine left Illinois. – The pull of home was too great.

President Chicoine created a little controversy recently when he joined the Monsanto Company’s Board of Directors. Reportedly he will receive compensation including stock options next year of $390,000. Perhaps his new sports car is a celebration of his Monsanto position?

Sonia Sotomayor was nominated by President Obama on Tuesday to be a Justice on the U S Supreme Court.

Her confirmation process should move smoothly through the Senate Judiciary Committee and she will receive the Senate’s consent easily. The President is popular and the Democrats have a substantial Senate majority. Despite Ms. Sotomayor’s political views or judicial philosophy unless there is a dramatic character flaw discovered, her confirmation is pretty much assured. Republicans just don’t have the political juice to block or stall her confirmation.

Extremist both liberal and conservative however are in overdrive encouraging their base to work and particularly contribute to exhort their point of view. Both groups see this as an opportunity to rally the troops.

Fundamentally I do not have a big problem with her nomination. The Democrats won the Big Enchilada. Elections have consequences and while I would have preferred a conservative Republican, Judge Sotomayor is the result of Republican election failure.

Surely it is old news already among the GOP pundits and talking heads, but I read the following in today’s USA today that gave me pause.

“Our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging” Sotomayor said, speaking broadly in 2001 at the University of California-Berkeley. “Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see… I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.”

Without question a Judge brings her background, upbringing, and culture to their thinking. After all it is who they are. Perhaps it is semantic but STATING your gender or heritage would have an effect on your judging I think is over the line. This is troubling, Justice must be blind. Judges rule on Law, not gender, not social position, not economic status, not race. Doing otherwise undermines American Jurisprudence.

Since Americans seem to keep track of these sort of things. Judge Sotomayor will be the 6^th Catholic on the Supreme Court, joining Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and the Chief Justice, John G. Roberts Jr. (note - more Americans are Catholic than any other single religion). Also serving are two Jews, Ruth Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer and one Protestant, John Paul Stevens.

Endbar- Justice Stevens is a Chicago native. In 1932 he attended the World Series game at Wrigley Field where he watched Babe Ruth call his shot. Stevens also is a graduate of the University of Chicago Laboratory School, his Bachelor’s degree is from the University of Chicago, and his Law Degree from Northwestern University where he has the highest GPA in the history of the school.

Voter turnout in the Sioux Falls School Board election was way beyond disappointing.

School Board Elections are Important! The Sioux Falls School District has in round numbers 20,000 students, 3,000 employees and a $170 Million budget. School taxes make up the largest share of real property taxes. While the money is important, even more important are the students and their education. The role the School Board plays in assuring our children’s education with all that implies overshadows the important financial aspects of the School Board.

That only a little more than 3200 citizens went to the polls is a big civic problem. There were good candidates to choose from, Tuesday’s election was not one of those lesser of the evils elections.

Perhaps there may be several reasons voter turnouts have been low in recent local and special elections. I suspect that voter apathy is encouraged by the coarseness of our politics, the lack of controversy, and complacency.

Beyond us partisans many voters are turned off by the name calling, partisanship, and negativity. Unless an election is controversial, either a personality or a hot button issues, voters stay at home. Finally the general public has become complacent. Because of the government’s seeming inability to address problems, voters are saying what difference who is elected. Why should I take my time to vote?

If we are to have political accountability and if we want our communities to progress, Citizen interest in public affairs needs to improve.