If they pass this, I don't want to hear another thing about paying for vaccinations.

As you might have noted, I've taken a little bit of poking from a few of my conservative friends over my support of the Governor's proposal for the HPV vaccinations. I've gotten it privately, and I also see that in the Yankton paper that others have come out against it.

Some are going after it on the basis of the abstinence argument (which is utterly ridiculous), and others are doing so on basis of a spending argument. Although I might not agree with the latter argument, at least I can respect that.

And funny, as KELO is reporting, at the same time some people are grumbling about the propriety of the state paying for vaccinations, others have put a bill in the hopper to pay for something "vitally more important":
A bill has been introduced that would provide $100,000 in state funds to the hall.

The Hall of Fame was established in 1974 at Fort Pierre, but a fund-raising drive was started in 1993 for a central location at Chamberlain.
Read it all here, and pinch me after you've done so. They're kidding, right? If you look at the bill, the specific language is "one hundred thousand dollars ($ 100,000), or so much thereof as may be necessary..." So it could be more?

Now, I don't want to give the bill's sponsors too hard of a time. I'm sure they mean well. I've known a couple of them for years, and I consider them top notch guys. But I'm not seeing the broad public good that's being served by pumping up the South Dakota Hall of Fame.

Yes, they inducted one of the legislature's own last year. But at the end of the day, it's a tourist attraction, isn't it? Much like the Murdo Auto Museum, the Corn Palace, or Wild Water West. Imagine the outcry if the state kicked in $100,000 for a new dinosaur at Wall.

Just because SDCL 1-6-1.6 says "The South Dakota Hall of Fame in Chamberlain is the official Hall of Fame of South Dakota," I don't see how that imparts a responsibility from the public to fund it. If it's to expand the Hall of Fame operation, why don't they go to a bank and get a loan? Or they might impose upon a regional or state loan authority.

So, at the same time people are complaining about paying for a public good, we're faced with legislation to help a private organization.

Next time I advocate for something like vaccinating kids, I just don't want to hear about it.

Comments

Anonymous said…
"one hundred thousand dollars ($ 100,000), or so much thereof as may be necessary..." So it could be more?

No, so it could be less. "So much thereof" means of the $100K.
Anonymous said…
How is Chamberlain more central than Fort Pierre? Did these people have maps?
lexrex said…
both bad ideas if you're a fiscal conservative and a respector of the constitutional principle of general welfare.

both ideas use taxpayer dollars for specific, private individuals or organizations, as opposed to being used for the general welfare (i.e, things that affect all people rather than some people).

at this rate, the state might as well fund gastric bypass surgeries and the local bowling league.
Anonymous said…
So lexrex (Rob) I can assume you have contacted Senator Thune and chastised him for the DM&E loan?
Todd Epp said…
PP:

Nice to see at least one conservative in the state renounce the crony capitalism that is rampant in our state. And I agree, your conservative buddies shouldn't give you crap if they support this idea.

I think the Hall of Fame is a good thing. I love South Dakota history and the fact the Hall tells the stories of many wonderful South Dakotans. But it has decided to be a private enterprise. I could only see funding them if the Hall is moved to Pierre to the Cultural Heritage Center or turned into a state museum.

And in the guns or butter realm, publc health wins out over history when the state is spending money.

Best regards,

Todd Epp
Senior Fiscal Matters Editor
S.D. Watch
http://thunewatch.squarespace.com
Todd Epp said…
PP:

Nice to see at least one conservative in the state renounce the crony capitalism that is rampant in our state. And I agree, your conservative buddies shouldn't give you crap if they support this idea.

I think the Hall of Fame is a good thing. I love South Dakota history and the fact the Hall tells the stories of many wonderful South Dakotans. But it has decided to be a private enterprise. I could only see funding them if the Hall is moved to Pierre to the Cultural Heritage Center or turned into a state museum.

And in the guns or butter realm, publc health wins out over history when the state is spending money.

Best regards,

Todd Epp
Senior Fiscal Matters Editor
S.D. Watch
http://thunewatch.squarespace.com
lexrex said…
loans are different, though it could be argued that our founders never intended the federal government to become a financial lender, either. and i might argue such a loan runs counter to the general welfare clause.

someone might throw in the claim that the commerce clause gives the federal gov't the right to give out such loans. i'd have to think about that one.

as i've said in previous posts, the days of constitutional purity are gone. and i'm left having to split hairs between loans, grants, and giveaways. awfully frustrating. somebody hug me.
Anonymous said…
lexrex,

How is giving money to the SD Hall of Fame different than funding The Abstinence Clearinghouse?
Anonymous said…
So are we appropriating money for Wal l Drug next week?

They need more jackelopes and animated T-rex.
Anonymous said…
$100k for the Hall of Fame is stupid. It is the beginning of "pork projects" that our legislature should try to avoid.

In contrast, HPV vaccine addresses a health issue that affects all women, and potentially will save the state money years from now by preventing cervical cancer in potential Medicaid recipients.

I am a conservative and appreciate the value of "small government." But if the government is going to be in the business of paying for health care (and I don't see that changing), it should take steps to promote preventative health care to mitigate costs down the road. That is what the state is doing.

And by the way, the HPV vaccine is VOLUNTARY - no one is being forced to take it. It is simply a subsidy to make it more widely available.
Anonymous said…
I think this whole thing is comparing apples to oranges. Shouldn't even be in the same breath.
Bob Ellis said…
For the record, I think this Hall of Fame idea is a stupid waste of money at taxpayer expense (but at least it's not fostering anything other than fiscal irresponsibility). :-)
Anonymous said…
But Bob, The Hall of Fame could foster problems too. More people might aspire to greatness so they could be included in it. Good heavens, one or more of the selections might even be a pro-choice, gay Democrat!

After all, South Dakota is supposed to be the land of infinite variety. :-))))
Anonymous said…
Ellis, you are truly an idiot. Your comments rank right up there with your theory about the age of the earth. Go home.
Anonymous said…
As a long time healthcare provider I am wondering if anyone is really considering all of the possible negative health risks of the HPV vaccine.

When polio vaccine first came out it was a wonderful thing but a certain amount of people got the disease FROM the vaccine. At first your chances of avoiding the disease were better with vaccination but within a decade or two the vaccine was actually causing more death and disability than the "wild" disease!

This was when we changed from the live--inexpensive and oral--vaccine, to the killed--expensive and injectable vaccine.

Personally, I would not use the HPV vaccine on my children until it has been in use for at least ten years. There is SO MUCH that we just don't know about new vaccines until they have been in use for a while.

For our government to PAY for something that have not been on the market long enough for us to know the short term risks--let alone the long term ones is silly and stupid.
Douglas said…
Somebody posting as "a long-term healthcare provider" better include a real name and professional status. I see no reason to take the information in that post seriously without reference to source information and the actual identity of the poster.

The standard joke in forums about "Anonymous" posters is that they are all brain surgeons, astronauts, and movie stars.
Anonymous said…
considering who actually does sign their names to these posts, it's hard to see anonymity as a liability
Douglas said…
I tried to convince the execs at Gateway (when it was still in SD) that they should buy the T-Rex Sue and put it in a "Gateway" to the west near the current hall of fame and in the process compare their modern PC's with "dinosaur" house size computers of yesteryear that had less power than a PC.

Unfortunately, they did not see the wisdom of that idea.
Anonymous said…
This should not be funded by state money!
Let them fundraise like the rest.

By the way when the money orchard is found could you please let me know as I need some more $$$$$ in my wallet too.
Patti Martinson said…
I'm all for saving women's lives by protecting them against cancer. Who on earth would oppose that?

I see someone had to reach all the way back to the polio vaccine to argue against this.

How about all those other vaccines they give to babies when they are born?
Anonymous said…
We have a double blog posting going on here.
Hall of Fame vs vaccination.
hummmm.....
lexrex said…
3:34, "How is giving money to the SD Hall of Fame different than funding The Abstinence Clearinghouse?"

it's not. i actually am opposed to abstinence funding, unless it's part of an actual public school curriculum. i'm also opposed to comdom funding, which our dept. of health does.

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: After the television commercial salvo fired at them, Vote Yes For Life Fires back.

Heidepreim: Republicans are the party of hate

The Day in politics - October 24th