Tag Archives: political parties

South Dakota’s Purity Caucus

Posted on by
Reply

The State’s Republican governor, Kristi Noem, is being taken to task for—supposedly—overstepping State constitutional bounds in the way her executive branch agencies propose legislation and introduce it into the legislature.

South Dakota’s very own Purity Freedom Caucus is claiming that those agencies

“overstepped their authority” by exploiting a loophole in the state lawmaking process that allows agencies to introduce bills without a legislative sponsor….

In the present case, South Dakota’s Department of Labor and Regulations submitted two bills to the State’s House Commerce and Energy Committee, and the committee’s chairman then sent the bills directly to the House floor rather than first having it processed by his committee—debate and vote.

Congresswoman Tina Mulally (R), treasurer of the legislature’s Freedom Caucus, complained that all of this circumvents the power of the legislature, and

The governor and the executive agencies seem to conveniently forget we have three branches of government, not one[.]

There are a number of things about this. One is that the Caucus beef in the particular case is with the Commerce and Energy Committee chairman, not any entity in the Executive Branch. It was the committee chairman’s decision to skip the committee process, not that of anyone in the DLR.

Another is that South Dakota, indeed, has three branches of government, and they’re coequal; the Executive is not subordinate (nor superior) to the Legislative. Furthermore, the State’s legislature still has to act on the proposed legislation—to shelve it or debate it, and if debating, then to shelve it or vote it up or down. Nothing in the State’s constitution says otherwise.

But the largest thing is the internally contradictory business about executive agencies overstepping their authority by exploiting a loophole. If there is a loophole, there are no related boundaries. That’s pretty tautological.

If members of the self-identified Freedom Caucus doesn’t like the loophole being used, they should move to close it rather than whine about its being used.

The Tax Cut that Isn’t

Posted on by
2

Minnesota’s Progressive-Democratic (formally, Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor) governor, Tim Walz, is proposing a “tax cut” of up to $2,600 for Minnesotans. His plan calls for income tax credits, paid in the form of checks to recipients rather than reductions in taxes owed at tax filing time, for Minnesotans. The checks would be for

$2,000 for families with incomes below $150,000, and $1,000 for single filers making less than $75,000. They would be exempt from federal taxes. Taxpayers could also get an additional $200 for each dependent—up to three.

But only for some Minnesotans. Those of whom Walz and his government cronies disapprove, those earning more than those income caps would get…nothing. They’re the ones who will be paying those checks with their tax remittals.

If Walz, et al., were truly interested in a tax cut, those wonders would push for an across the board income tax rate reduction.

But, no—leave it to a Progressive-Democratic Party politician to masquerade an income redistribution scheme as a tax cut.

State Hotel California

Posted on by
Reply

The State of California wants to tax the Evil Rich even if they aren’t citizens of that State, but only visit or otherwise are there part-time.

California Democrats have introduced a bill in the state legislature that would impose a tax on the state’s highest earners that would include residents who live there part-time or have moved.

And

The tax will apply to every resident, regardless of whether they are in the state part-time or temporarily. It will also allow the state to pursue wealth taxes from former residents who built their wealth in California but moved.

The State’s determination of how and where an American’s wealth was built, of course.

It’s not just a waste of time to be in California—it’s destructive of anyone’s weal and prosperity.

Perino is Right, but….

Posted on by
Reply

Dana Perino, a Press Secretary for former President Bush the Younger (R) thinks President Joe Biden’s (D) Press Secretary Karine Jeanne-Pierre is being poorly used by her boss and by her boss’ Chief of Staff, Ron Klain. Her performance—leaving aside her inability to speak extempore—has been abysmal.

When asked back on 11 January whether the search for classified documents at Biden’s Delaware “residence” was finished, she responded You should assume it has been completed, yes. The next day more classified documents were found in Biden’s “residence” garage. Perino:

One, they either didn’t tell her. And I believe when she said she didn’t know, she found out the same day the press corps did[.]
So it looks like she was involved in a cover-up if she did know. But she didn’t know. So then they’re like, “Oh, wait, so you don’t know what you’re talking about? So you don’t have the confidence of the chief of staff?” And they just sit there and let her twist in the wind every single day.

Perino is right, but in the end, Jean-Pierre’s plight isn’t only on Biden, or even Klain. She’s not stuck on the White House plantation, nor is she bound by Biden’s chains. She can—and should—walk at any time; she lacks only her own moral courage to do so.

It’s Global?

Posted on by
Reply

HHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told the crowd at a DC conclave of city mayors that “global migration” is a…global…thing.

The challenge of migration is not unique to the United States nor to the border communities that confront it every day….
Around the world, there are more displaced people than at any time since World War II. Mass migration has gripped our hemisphere.

So, just suck up and deal. Tell that to the Progressive-Democratic mayors of Chicago and New York City, Lori Lightfoot and Eric Adams, though.

And, no. Migration may be global, but the hugely broad illegal alien flow into our nation is a national problem. Hiding behind global-ness is either dishonest or cowardly. Or both.