Scott Heidepreim plays divide and conquer in today's Sioux Falls Argus Leader

Scott Heidepreim had a guest column in today's Sioux Falls Argus Leader where he's doing his best to continue the Democrat's tactics of divide the GOP to conquer.

It's pretty ironic, because to try to split the GOP, he's claiming that somehow, the "bad" House Republicans were working against a unified Senate where Republicans and Democrats skip and sing kumbaya as they hug each other and work together:
* Senate Republicans, Senate Democrats and House Democrats were united in a sweeping and positive agenda for K-12 funding with an index factor, endorsed by the Sioux Falls Chamber of Commerce. This index factor, for the first time, would link the idea that adequate education funding is a tool for economic development. The House Republicans killed the proposal. Our teachers are paid the least in the country.

* Senate Republicans, Senate Democrats and House Democrats were united in support of early childhood development, a concept supported by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis as carrying a return on investment of 16.7 percent, for every dollar invested in children, in an entirely voluntarily private-public partnership. The primary sponsor was Republican Sen. Tom Dempster. House Republicans killed it. Only eight states lack such a plan.

* Senate Republicans, Senate Democrats and House Democrats were united in support of a bill I proposed to establish a written code of ethics for the Legislature. Every Republican on the House State Affairs Committee voted to table the proposal, including Rep. Rhoden.

* Senate Republicans, Senate Democrats and House Democrats were united in support of a fundamental change in the way we govern vocational education. This progressive step was sponsored by GOP Senate Leader Dave Knudson of Sioux Falls. The bill was vetoed by the governor, and guess where his veto was sustained? Not in the Senate and not among House Democrats. House Republicans sustained the veto, killing the bill.

Read it at the Argus Leader, if you can hold your stomach.

The key challenge for the next legislative session is holding it together amongst ourselves, as Democrats do their best to divide the GOP. Especially in the legislature, we can win without them, but they can't win without us.

And when we let them win, no matter what the promises are, if they achieve more seats in the legislature, they aren't going to share governance.

If some Senate Republicans are aligning themselves with Senate Democrats - then those Senators need to take a good hard look in the mirror and decide what party and what values they represent.

Otherwise, their voters may do it for them.


Anonymous said…
Heidepriem is just preparing his run for governor or senator. nothing more, nothing less
Anonymous said…
In my opinion I was so, very, very, sick of listening to the Seante Dems and Reps complimenting each other so much i got SICK to my stomach!
I mean compliments were handed out like there was no tommorow and it seemed so phony and I am not joking!
I also kow that i am not the only voter to feel this way.
Anonymous said…
Share Governance? That hasn't happened in SD in over 30 years. The GOP loved Scott when he was a repub, now they're just bitter he got sick of the bs going on within the ranks and bolted.
Pierre's been run by the same tired career appointees for too long. It's time for a centrist like Knudson or Heideprim to end the one-party lockout and PP's fear mongering is a disservice to progress in SD.

P.S. PP sorry you had to resign as Ambassador to Mike Rounds ass to actually go live with your family.
Anonymous said…
will dave knudson stand up for the GOP or will he side with Scotty H and the dems?
Johns said…
Anon 8:01:

Yeah, the Republicans really loved Scott when he was a Republican. That must be why Dale Bell beat him in the primary by 20,000 votes last time he ran statewide. Sounds like a true love affair, huh?
Anonymous said…
8:01 you think you are so good why don't you come out of the closet say who you are and run for office!
Go ahead and lay your platform right out here. Let's see if you line up with most of the South Dakotans that vote. Let's see your progress for SD.
Haggs said…
PP, this is why I'm so wary of both political parties. They get so wrapped up in trying to win, that they forget why they were elected in the first place: to help the people of this state.

I think a lot of SD voters liked seeing both parties in the Senate working together. It was nice to see them coming together to try and get something accomplished. Unfortunately, partisans like Joel Dykstra put a stop to it because they were more interested in winning than actually helping people.

So what's more important? Winning or helping people?
PP said…
8:01, that's mildly humorous. Clearly, you don't know me. Not at all.

Otherwise, When I was a much younger politico, I personally thought Scott was a flaming liberal. My opinion has never changed.
Anonymous said…
Haha... get this, PP, Scott H. is actually RIGHT. He's right that it was the House Republicans that killed all those things.

I mean, it stretches back a couple years with the full Senate and House Dems, but, the House Republicans have been been a little right of sane for a while.

And, just one note, I hear that Rhoden has lost some juice because he - thier words not mine - LIED to his caucus last year. I've heard more than one House Republican call Rhoden a "Lying SOB" because of some of his antics and the end of last session.

Word is, Rhoden is going to have a much harder time putting the sissies in line next year.

Too bad, too, I am almost tired of hearing him stumble through logic with is po-dunk kind of logic.

Rhoden can sing, though.
Anonymous said…
8:16 Was that in 1986?

8:29 No thanks, politics are too nasty. You ought to think about running though.

PP - your right - that was mildly funny, and maybe a little harsh, and I don't know you personally. I'm glad for you that you're not commuting anymore.
Anonymous said…
8:53 - You been smokin' something?

I'm in that caucus you just quoted, and I can't imagine where the whole lie business comes from.

I know the folks there well enough, that I'm confident in saying that you're making all that up.

One thing none of us question is Larry Rhoden's integrity.... Yours, obviously, is a different story.

If Larry wanted to pull some crap, he could have made a deal with Hargens on the final week, and got his property tax bill passed.

To me, that sounds like the dems were the ones trying to create a lie.
Anonymous said…
8:54p this is 8:29 you bet I have thought about it and more than once to be honest.
One never knows if I will throw my hat in the ring.
Anonymous said…
Everything Heidepriem said is true. And 9:04, thank you for making Heidepriem's point.

Hargens offered support for Rhoden's property tax bill in exchange for house republicans supporting the school funding bill. Instead, as Heidepriem said, Rhoden and the house republicans - 9:04 included no doubt - peed in your own lemonade and killed both property tax and school funding.

When house republicans went against senate democrats, senate republicans, and house democrats to kill the bi-partisan education funding bill (resulting in an increase in education funding that is LESS than the inflation rate and less than state government got) you pissed off the chamber of commerce, you pissed off every single one of your school superintendents and most of your school board members, you likely forced more schools to opt out, and in all likelihood you got yourself beat in 2008. If you thought you were safe - think again. And good riddance!
Anonymous said…
PP, you are a boob. But, I have to hand it to you, your comment section is a lot more fun than blogmore.
Anonymous said…
To the legislator who said he didn't feel that way about Rhoden.

Either the person I talked to is making that up, or you are so aligned with Rhoden that you don't know what's going on in your own Caucus.

I talked to a new member from one of the larger communities, and this person told me that they expected Rhoden and Deadrick to hike school funding for them in conference committee. It was Rhoden that took the hard line, told them to vote against amendments and just get the bill into conference committee, and he'd make sure that schools were taken care of.

But, they got to conference committee and didn't do anything real for schools. Sure... they say they did some good for schools... but, the people expected to do a lot more, because they ran on being able to do more, and the legislature was creamed after session for not doing anything about school funding. So creamed, that they had to have the Governor bail them out on a series of editorial board visits. So creamed that Rhoden had to write editorials to the Aurgus to give the illusion that the caucus did something.

They called Rhoden out for his lack of leadership, and he had to respond by providing more and more cover.

Fact is, news got out that the property tax bill would have went out if school funding came out - and Rhoden was AGAINST it. He is being seen as the most anti school legislator out there right now, because he's so committed to not giving schools any more money, that he actually wouldn't accept a compromise on the tax bill he said was the most important thing they could do.

And... the new people... vets in tight races ... they ran on education. And they got duped into taking the Rhoden line by a promise Rhoden didn't deliver on.

But, you don't have to believe any of this - you can just wait until next session, when Rhoden can't round up the caucus like he used to.
VJ said…
"Ambassador to Mike Rounds ass"! So you left a good job like that?

What a unique employment opportunity. I do believe I have the qualifications for that position!

Where do I apply?
Anonymous said…
What are you people talking about?

The schools got the largest increase in the history of SD.

If the SD House republicans pissed off the Chamber of Commerce, superintendents, and school boards, you left out the most important group - taxpayers!

We're happier now than we would have been if all of Scotty's tax and spend bills would have passed.
Anonymous said…
You talked to ONE NEW member!!! Scientific research at it's best.

First of all, one of seventy ain't a bad average. Secondly, most first year legislators end up a little confused by the end of the session.

Blaming the leadership is easier than blaming yourself.
Anonymous said…
Well as usual the nurless wonders identified as anonymous are all over the map.
If you have the courage of your mis begotten words you would sign your name you chicken splatters.

Jerry Apa
Anonymous said…
Jerry Apa never has anything to say on this blog except for chiming in to talk about other people's testicles.

Why are you so obsessed with people's testicles, Jerry? It's not natural. Seek professional help.

By the way, you are irrelevant in Pierre.

Anonymous said…
anon 10:41PM and 1:29AM

I'm the legislator that posted earlier.

Couple thoughts, unless you were there, you wouldn't know that Rhoden was just carrying out the wishes of his caucus.

He wanted the property tax bill badly, but he fully knew that his caucus was opposed to putting an uncontrollable escalator inside the funding formula, so he chose to refuse a compromise (aka back room deal) rather than dumping the wishes of his caucus in order to feather his own nest.

Another thing you don't understand until you walk a mile in our shoes, is that we get much more feedback, on both sides of the issue, than you realize. Your side is obvious, and high profile media, like the Argus, agree with you. That leads you to believe that everyone agrees with you.

I'm here to tell you, that I hear more people tell me that the schools are actually funded adequately, if not overfunded...

They are flat-out angry about the lawsuit, and will vote against it, or the people supporting it, every chance they get.

As far as the one new legislator you talked to- It's really tough the first few years. You expect that everyone in your party will agree with your views, so you just don't understand how you can lose.

If he thought Rhoden was going into conference committee to support the 4.3% or greater annual increase, he simply weren't paying attention. There was virtually no support for that plan in our meetings. It wasn't Rhoden calling the shots, it was him doing his duty as a leader, negotiating the deal that the majority of his membership wanted.

Maybe we got "creamed" in the liberal media, but we got thanked by the majority of our constituents. I think you'll see that you are part of the vocal minority after the next elections.

Sorry, Jerry... I should put my name on this, but I don't have the time or desire to become the focus of these people's frustrations. I just thought it wasn't fair for them to make Larry their focus either. He was just doing what the majority of our party wanted, even at the expense of his own interests.
Anonymous said…
8:44 How do your constituents feel about all of the opt outs, while the state continues to stockpile money in the education enhancement fund?

They don't like the lawsuit, but they don't like you forcing their property taxes up either, while you stockpile money. When Rounds faults schools for putting one-time money in reserve, it makes it harder to defend all the money the state has in reserve.

As I said in the 10:41 comment, you peed in your own lemonade. You just don't know it yet because it still looks like lemonade. You and your house caucus will find out at the ballot box in 2008. Go ahead and remain oblivious until then if you like.
Anonymous said…
So you think locking in a 4.3% or greater escalator inside the formula wouldn't have made their taxes go up???? That's the point.

Better go drink more of that lemonade you seem to like so much.

Sioux Falls suddenly discovered that they could offer big raises without the tax increase. Wonder why they needed that tax increase so badly?
Anonymous said…
Why don't you ask your boss for at least a guaranteed 4.3% increase every year and see what his/her reaction is.
That is the same reaction that should be had to this proposal.
Anonymous said…
I don't think a majority of consituents agree with House Repubs.

It's sad that you, the legislators, take our voter's apathy as an endorsement that you are doing your job. They simply know that you can't get anything done, so they've stopped caring.

I find it hard to believe that everything is OK in the Republican caucus. I have never seen the kind of ass-covering that is going on out there.

Everything is, and should be, focused on the House Republicans that are holding the state hostage.

We have a group of a 105 legislators, and about 40 are holding the entire state back while they sit back under the control of the Governor.

I've heard that Rhoden won't have the pull again - especially since he is termed out and likely can't win a Senate seat. He's done. And that leaves people looking to who is next.

Everyone sees Dykstra talking about a run for House - his fiture is in doubt.

I've heard of a few people - vets of a few years - that are interested in stepping up and getting things done. Someone is going to have to - because from now until the next session, you'll hear more and more and more and more about obstructionist House Republicans...

And then you'll hear about it at the ballot box.
Haggs said…
6:59 said "The schools got the largest increase in the history of SD."

Wrong. Schools got a 3% increase, which the state is required to give every year. Plus several million in one time money. I'll say it again because it bears repeating.

One. Time. Money.

That's money that schools will only get once, or over a period of a couple years. Then it stops. There's no guarantee that it will continue. And Republicans seem to like it that way. So they're able to say "Look, we gave extra money to schools this year" while knowing it's not actually going to help schools.

I think Republicans in out state legislature need to seriously think about why they wanted to be legislators in the first place. Because if they're not there to help people, then they're just wasting out time.
Anonymous said…
explain to me how raising the taxes on everyone is South Dakota, can be described as "helping people" ?

You'd rather they wasted your money instead of your time?
Anonymous said…
I don't know what this tax raising talk is about. Republicans raised a bunch of taxes in 2003, but no taxes would have to be raised to provide the 4.3% index factor to schools. Here's why:

First, Democrats proposed funding the school funding increase by capping the growth of the general fund portion of state government to the same rate of growth as schools. Republicans killed that bill. They don't want to cap the growth of state government. SB 117 - look it up.

Second, Democrats proposed using the INTEREST ONLY from the education enhancement fund to provide an extra $12 million or so annually to schools. That would not involve a tax increase. Republicans killed that too.

It's pathetic when all the Republicans have is their false scare tactic that Democrats want to raise taxes, when the facts are that Republicans raised taxes over the objections of most Democrats, and Republicans opposed the Democratic plan to cap the growth of state government.

At this point, the Republican party has no ideas, no vision, and no leadership. You can't even see that Scott Heidepriem is very effectively setting you up for an electoral bloodbath. Just keep following Rhoden - what has he gotten you? I'll take Heidepriem on my team any day.

And keep practicing: "tax increase! tax increase! tax increase!" You're going to get that shoved down your throat in '08 because Democrats have not offered one and will not offer one. How many more fee increases is Rounds going to ask you to vote for next year as he does every year?
Anonymous said…

You have completely discredited yourself with your display of ignorance. Let's correct you and explain the facts.

The schools are NOT guaranteed 3% every year because the formual is 3% or inflation, whichever is less.

4 million dollars will go into the formula or base for the next 5 years that will grow with inflation forever and that is NOT. ONE. TIME. MONEY!

Yes there is money for the next 5 years that doesn't go into the formula and after that we will see what the tobacco tax revenue is at that time.

It is a fact that the schools' increase from last year is the largest increase in state history. You can say it wasn't enough but it is still the largest increase from one year to the next.

Republicans are unphased by all you liberals on here. Republicans only spend what we can afford without raising taxes and that clearly is what the majority of the people in this state want. You can criticize and whine all you want but Republicans have the mandate and we are going to act like it.

If the people of SD want a change, they can make it.
Anonymous said…

Watch out now.

That tired talking point about the largest increase from one year to the next - just get off it.

It's the same for everything in state government. This was the largest single-year increase in tax revenue taken in. This was the largest single-year increase given to just about every area of state government.

Last year, the Legislature came up with about $30 million for schools. This year, they came up with about $31 million. But, the Rs could have done more - because they had more than 27 million in new, never-exiting revenue. 27 million in new money that the state didn't expect, or couldn't project. Tobacco tax money.

I'd argue this year's Republican House Caucus took a step back from what they MIGHT have been able to call progress from the previous year.

About the only thing they did right was make it so the extra $33 for schools was not one-time money.

Let's not forget, the House Republicans also rammed down consolidation and the cut in small school funding.

The Senate passed out a bill without those factors in it. House Dems repeatedly tried to make that the bill that the House would send out.

House Republicans - under "same song second verse" Rhoden - led the charge FOR closing schools, FOR taking away small school funding, and AGAINST more funding for all schools.

If you think the pressure was on next year, go ahead and let those House Republicans dismiss a chamber bill again. Let it happen. Let's see when people involved with the chamber don't contribute to their campaigns. Let's see who gets reelected.

There's a group of 30 or so House Republicans that go lock step with Rounds and Rhoden - but they have to remember, neither of them have to get reelected next year.

People that do will face consequences. This isn't a school issue anymore. This is a economic development issue.

That's why the House Republicans better watch their behinds next year, and not run lock step with whatever Rhoden says.

He's got a free pass. They don't.
Anonymous said…
12:46 (Sioux Falls Democrat Chamber Member)

Democrats aren't that stupid to propose a tax increase, they just want to pass spending bills that will lead to tax increases because we can't pay for them.
It is so laughable that we can fund all this by capping the general fund growth and taking more interest from the trust funds. Since you seem to be so smart, tell me what expenses you are going to cut from the general fund to keep the growth down? Medicaid? Prisons/Law Enforcement? Education? because that is most of the budget. Let's not forget that if the Democrats had their way, we wouldn't have any trust funds or reserves to spend.
Again, if you told your boss you wanted at least a 4.3% increase every year, what would his/her reaction be?
This is how Democrats raise taxes by supporting programs with unrealistic ways to pay for them.
Anonymous said…
Anons 8:55, 10:02, 12:46, and 1:03

All of you preach like you've got your fingers on the heartbeat of society. We better watch out, cause we're gonna get it at the ballot box next year, or we don't don't understand what our constituents want...Scotty's going to give us a "bloodbath".

You know, the education funding issue has been going on for 100 years. It's old news. The voters of SD have spoken over and over again at the ballot box.

I understand your passion, and I commend it, but you are out of touch with the majority. That's who decides elections.
Anonymous said…
4:53, you just won't talk about the facts will you. State employees got 3% across the board raises this year as they do every year. Plus, on top of that, those below midpoint for their salary range got an additional 2.5% (which raises the midpoint for next year). This means that half of state employees got 5.5% raises this year, and they have gotten the same 5.5% raises year after year.

So while you whine about demanding a 4.3% raise for schools (which is less than the inflation rate this past year), you're giving state employees a 5.5% raise every year. Add to that the 1,000 new employees under Rounds. This is what republicans have done for 5 years. GROW STATE GOVERNMENT.

This year, Democrats proposed to cap that. Did Republicans propose to cap the growth of state government? No they just continued the trend.

Again you hypocrite, you say we can't afford a 4.3% raise for schools while at the same time you give 5.5% raise to state employees - you hypocrite.

Then you make up more lies. Once again -you liar - democrats proposed to use the interest off of the education enhancement fund for education enhancement. You claim the democrats would do away with the trust funds - no we'd just use the interest for the purpose it's intended. Show me where democrats ever said they'd do away with the trust funds or admit you're a lying ass chicken@#$&
Anonymous said…
Time to take your meds and go to bed 10:41.

They already do use the interest.
Anonymous said…
Powers, you seem to have forgotten the Republican governor's motto: "Working together we can make South Dakota even better."
Anonymous said…
10:49, they use only a portion of the interest and add millions$$$ to the trust funds every year in unused interest. Over the last 3 years they have added on average $12 million a year to the education enhancement fund alone in unused interest.

If you would do your research before you comment you might get the facts right. Try it next time.
Anonymous said…
School funding must be more than adequate by the way SF is giving huge raises to their "poor" teachers. (Compare those 9 mo. salaries to the rest of our 12 mo. salaries). We should blame the idiots on the SF school board for much of the increase in State spending. They gave Homan way more than she deserved, so chicken-_hit Rounds gave Melmer a big raise, and the snowball started. "The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil!"
Haggs said…
Anon 12:50 PM -

How did I "discredit" myself? I'm not a legislator. I'm not anyone famous. I'm just a college kid who enjoys talking politics on the internet. I'm astonished to think I have any authority at all.

What I am is a South Dakota voter who deeply cares about our state. And when I see something I think is wrong, I'm going to speak up.

Okay, yes I knew about the 3% or inflation thing. Is inflation lower than 3% this year? I wasn't quite sure, but suspected that Rounds wouldn't have gone up to 3% unless inflation was higher.

Yes I know the extra money about the 3% is going to be over 5 years. But then it stops. So, in my mind, that still counts as one time money because schools won't be able to use it for ongoing expenses like salaries. Plus, what happens at the end of those 5 years? Are we to trust the the Republicans will extend that money? I don't think there is a lot of trust between the Republicans and the school... which is another reason the schools are suing the state. There are trust issues at work because they feel they can't trust the state for the funds they need. And I don't blame them for that because we keep playing this money game every freakin' year.

If Republicans want to do something that will actually help school, they should turn the one-time money (or the 5-year money, if you want) into ongoing money. That way the school won't be worried about what happens when that money ends so they'll be able to use it for teachers salaries and other ongoing expenses.
Haggs said…
And getting back to Heidepreim's point about working together: Just look at what's happening in Washington right now. A group of people from both sides decided to come together and work to make progress on immigration.

Is what they came up with perfect? No, it's a compromise. You have to compromise sometimes or else you'll never get anything done.

But it seems like they have their own Joel Dylstras there who say "It's my way or the highway" and refuse to compromise even a little bit. Those are the types of people that slow up the political process and they were out in full force in the SD House.

Popular posts from this blog

Why should we be surprised?

That didn't take long