Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
SB 157 would affect the Conditional Use Permitting process, limiting the ability of citizens to legally fight huge agricultural developments like CAFOs (giant controlled animal feed facilities like hog confinements) at the county level. This one hits home for me, as an out of state company is trying to put in a CAFO upwind from me. Hey, let's stink up South Dakota! Who cares about small farmers? Noem and her repubelican supporters are becoming more and more blatant about state interference in county and local affairs, in addition to interfering in the lives of private citizens.
HB 1235 would remove the requirement for vaccinations to attend public school in SD. Anti-vaxers come on in to SD and let your children infect everyone else!/
SB 103 would allow the secretary of state to provide percentages of the statewide votes cast for each presidential candidate but not the actual vote totals, so anyone who wants to know who actually won the popular vote in a presidential election wouldn't be able to get those specific figures from SD. Smell some trump bootlicking here?
SB 54 PREVENTS the possibility of banning the use of plastic beverage containers, garbage bags, and garbage can liners, auxiliary containers, and uniform recycling codes for plastic containers. Hey, we luvs us some perlution in SD!/
HB 1096 prohibits surrogacy contracts. Because if people can't have kids the good old fashioned way they shouldn't have kids at all!/
HB 1215 would make it illegal for two people of the same gender to marry. It would also ban benefits from being given to existing married same-sex couples, ban protections for LGBTQ people, ban any recognition of transgender people, and ban conversion therapy.
HB 1078 would exempt guns and ammo from sales tax.
Also, the House rejected an amendment to allow the use of Tribal IDs as valid IDs for voter registration. repubelicans sure love vote suppression when it comes to probably democratic votes!
Sure, many of these bills won't make it through the whole legislative process, but some will. And the fact that they were introduced at all shows you the very backwards mindset of many in this state.
Many of these bills were instigated by legislators who are influenced by ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, which is is an organization of extreme conservatives that drafts model state-level legislation that can be boilerplated in any state in our country. Sadly, SD legislators seem to be particularly suckered by this organization.
SB 157 would affect the Conditional Use Permitting process, limiting the ability of citizens to legally fight huge agricultural developments like CAFOs (giant controlled animal feed facilities like hog confinements) at the county level. This one hits home for me, as an out of state company is trying to put in a CAFO upwind from me. Hey, let's stink up South Dakota! Who cares about small farmers? Noem and her repubelican supporters are becoming more and more blatant about state interference in county and local affairs, in addition to interfering in the lives of private citizens.
HB 1235 would remove the requirement for vaccinations to attend public school in SD. Anti-vaxers come on in to SD and let your children infect everyone else!/
SB 103 would allow the secretary of state to provide percentages of the statewide votes cast for each presidential candidate but not the actual vote totals, so anyone who wants to know who actually won the popular vote in a presidential election wouldn't be able to get those specific figures from SD. Smell some trump bootlicking here?
SB 54 PREVENTS the possibility of banning the use of plastic beverage containers, garbage bags, and garbage can liners, auxiliary containers, and uniform recycling codes for plastic containers. Hey, we luvs us some perlution in SD!/
HB 1096 prohibits surrogacy contracts. Because if people can't have kids the good old fashioned way they shouldn't have kids at all!/
HB 1215 would make it illegal for two people of the same gender to marry. It would also ban benefits from being given to existing married same-sex couples, ban protections for LGBTQ people, ban any recognition of transgender people, and ban conversion therapy.
HB 1078 would exempt guns and ammo from sales tax.
Also, the House rejected an amendment to allow the use of Tribal IDs as valid IDs for voter registration. repubelicans sure love vote suppression when it comes to probably democratic votes!
Sure, many of these bills won't make it through the whole legislative process, but some will. And the fact that they were introduced at all shows you the very backwards mindset of many in this state.
Many of these bills were instigated by legislators who are influenced by ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, which is is an organization of extreme conservatives that drafts model state-level legislation that can be boilerplated in any state in our country. Sadly, SD legislators seem to be particularly suckered by this organization.
i Am South Dakota resident now for close to two years. Never lived there. Should have a discussion HERE also about the SD law to allow legal residency to anyone even if not living there.
This helps permanent RVers and people like me who basically live out of the country. Check it out.
I love SOUTH DAKOTA. The trust thing discussed here sounds great also.
SB 147, which prohibits collective bargaining for employees of the state’s public universities. Anti-intellectualism is very alive and well in South Dakota, as is anti-unionism.
Typical, but sadly, it isn't just SD. A few wrong-headed legislators, a little (or a lot!) drunk with "power" and are beholden to the narrow view of a few key supporters. They toss aside their responsibility to represent "all" the people and doing the right thing. The bills cited above as examples, are outrageous and irresponsible and one has to wonder what else could be coming down the pike with this group. One has to think, surely, level-headed political servants will stand up and defeat the extremists. But will they? This is a unusual moment in history. Are there enough involved SD citizens paying attention that will hold them to account? What seems to make these circumstances more critical in SD is that the state is so sparsely populated and remote that many will assume someone else will fight the good fight.
Typical, but sadly, it isn't just SD. A few wrong-headed legislators, a little (or a lot!) drunk with "power" and are beholden to the narrow view of a few key supporters. They toss aside their responsibility to represent "all" the people and doing the right thing. The bills cited above as examples, are outrageous and irresponsible and one has to wonder what else could be coming down the pike with this group. One has to think, surely, level-headed political servants will stand up and defeat the extremists. But will they? This is a unusual moment in history. Are there enough involved SD citizens paying attention that will hold them to account? What seems to make these circumstances more critical in SD is that the state is so sparsely populated and remote that many will assume someone else will fight the good fight.
Not sure what state you are from but maybe you could consider that the majority of SD voters actually do support most or many of the measures cited? They did vote these folks in to office.
Majority rules and the people have voted for the representatives that pass these laws.
Maybe have some respect for the citizens of SD and the democratic process.
Now I really want to know what the downside is. What are all the cons?
Google "South Dakota corruption" or something to that effect for some interesting reading.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainbowFamilyRedWhite&Blu
It's interesting that this thread is about the state providing trusts and family trusts for people in all 50 states and from countries all around the world. That makes for an extremely diverse customer base. How moronic would the legislature have to be to enact laws that offend the very constituents they are trying to attract.
The state really only cares about bringing the money here, not the people. I doubt they give a rat's behind about wooing people with feel-good equal rights stuff. They know people will never set foot here but will still put their money here anyway if it's in their best financial interest. The state has been in that general business for a long time. The trusts, removing the usury cap to get banks to charter, allowing non-residents to claim residence here, snaking jobs from Minnesota so employers can pay less and don't have to deal with unions, turning a blind eye to the Nebraskans registering their cars here for less money, etc.. It's their "side-hustle."
Google "South Dakota corruption" or something to that effect for some interesting reading.
The state really only cares about bringing the money here, not the people. I doubt they give a rat's behind about wooing people with feel-good equal rights stuff. They know people will never set foot here but will still put their money here anyway if it's in their best financial interest. The state has been in that general business for a long time. The trusts, removing the usury cap to get banks to charter, allowing non-residents to claim residence here, snaking jobs from Minnesota so employers can pay less and don't have to deal with unions, turning a blind eye to the Nebraskans registering their cars here for less money, etc.. It's their "side-hustle."
Thanks CoteauKid, very interesting. Of course no place is perfect. As always, "follow the money." The monies pouring into SD, much of it tied up in accounts, may not produce much of an impactful benefit for the people of SD. But I think it's a certainty that someone is benefiting locally. All of the jobs created in Sioux Falls might be one way to look at it.
Finally, on a number of threads I have expressed enthusiasm and support for SD. Let me make a comment on voters and yes, I believe ultimately voters are accountable for whom they put into office. I've railed against the public officials who pander for votes at the expense of all constituents. In New York, thousands of inmates were released from Rikers on January 1st. This satisfied the constituents who thought asking inmates to pay bail was too cumbersome. As a result of releasing them onto the streets of New York, crime has skyrocketed. Shootings overnight have increased by 30%. Attacks on elderly (seen as easy marks) and I'm referring to brutal, unprovoked attacks, have also increased drastically. Some men have robbed banks and because no one was killed or seriously injured they were released and went out and robbed another bank the very next day, only to once again, be released onto the streets! It is insanity! Those responsible for allowing this to happen to my and all other neighborhoods should be held to account, but voters forget or aren't concerned with the greater good.
It's uncomfortable having ones societal flaws pointed out. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and one thing I know is that people everywhere seem to have no problem criticizing NY, wherever they may be from. That's life. If that's the case and especially if the criticism is merited, fix the problem, don't silence the dissenter for not being respectful "enough." What's key is to insist on equal justice under the law and our officials must remember they represent ALL of us. Just my humble opinion but I'll stop here as it's off topic...
Taking the time to read the article a bit closer. Yes, Janklow was responsible for this environment. He was also the governor who sold a cement plant that was making a profit to buy a defunct gold mine. The gold mine is an underground laboratory looking at neutrinos and other subatomic particles.
Janklow was bombastic. He was also too smart. His speeches were brilliant, and often repeated from memory. He rarely carried notes or wrote it out in advance. He was very much hands on. He would question you until he could stump you. From a legal standpoint he was brilliant. It was a game he would run on me a few times when he was in office. He was also abrasive and blunt. He had our number of speed dial and had 2 way radios in all his cars and houses. There are some stories I could tell about that.
While the republicans are good for business, some of the social and equality stuff severely lacks. I wish the party platform would move more towards letting people be, letting everyone have the same rights.
Tony Randolph, a legislator from Rapid City has come up with many of the dumb bills in the legislature this year. It is shameful. Fortunately, they are being killed off. I hope someone runs against him and removes him from office.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
