South Dakota Politics

Sutton Hearings

From Todd Epp:

Here's a Sentence You Don't Read Every Day in the Argus Leader

From this evening’s Argus Leader coverage of S.D.’s favorite soap opera, “As the Dan Turns”:

According to Olson’s testimony and his notes he made that day, Austin described the act as “hand on weiner.”

UPDATE:  Greg Belfrage has more coverage of the Sutton investigation, including these odd quotes.

UPDATE II:  Remember that you can listen to the trial online:

Sutton Hearing

UPDATE III:  You can access the archived hearings via this site provided by the legislature.  I listened to parts of the hearing tonight, but have yet to listen to yesterday's.  Also, be sure to check out Denise Ross's blog for more thoughts on the hearing.

This Is What It Has Come To

I have defended child pornography in class on the following grounds: if kids can get permission from their parents to engage in other activities for money, why not let parents attest to the emotion maturity of their children so the children can perform sex for money in front of a camera.  Surely some children have the maturity to make this decision freely (much as some are mature enough to commit adult crimes) and who is better to judge their maturity than their parents?  I hope you can see the problem with this logic, namely, there are somethings that are wrong in and of themselves, and thus cannot be justly consented to (slavery is another example).  But apparently depicting 12-year-olds getting raped is now "edgy" and "art."  And the 12-year-old swears her sexuality was not exploited. 

Janklow v. Argus

From the Argus Leader blog:

We said yesterday that former Gov. and Rep. Bill Janklow arrived in Pierre driving a new Escalade.

He corrected that today - in the lengthiest conversation he’s had with Argus Leader reporters in years.

He said he’s had the Escalade for several years and that it was a 1973. Did they make Escalades in 1973? He showed an unsigned vehicle registration form as proof.

“Look at it,” he said. “But I might have faked it.”

Janklow said it was important to correct the misinformation.

“The public hangs on every word the Argus Leader says, and when you get it wrong, you just screw them up,” he said.

He added that it was common for the Argus Leader to get it wrong.

It wasn’t a pleasant conversation, but it was a conversation - without profanity. That’s progress.

Prepare yourself for bad news

John Kerry is going to announce today that he is not running for President.  There, there, the pain will pass.  From the Boston Globe, ht to Michelle Malkin:

His decision to stay out of the presidential race reflects a realization that he would have had an uphill climb in capturing the Democratic nomination, given the other party heavyweights who are already in the race, according to the officials, who spoke to the Globe on condition of anonymity.

Well, I had noticed that polls tracking potential Democratic nominees don't usually even include Kerry.  But that hasn't stopped him from dancing the dance.

Kerry, the party's 2004 presidential nominee, has been acting like a 2008 candidate virtually since he lost to President Bush -- traveling the country, spreading money to other Democratic candidates, and keeping in place a campaign infrastructure that was ready for another presidential bid.

But according to Kerry associates, the senator's plans changed dramatically in the fallout of his election-eve ``botched joke" about the education levels of US troops. The harsh reaction to that incident -- from many Democrats as well as Republicans -- displayed to Kerry the extreme skepticism within his own party about whether he should mount another run.

That is an interesting, but not particularly plausible story.  Kerry must have known long before the "botched joke" that he had a snowball's chance in Florida of winning the Democratic nomination a second time.  Kerry is in the same predicament as Al Gore: Democrats will never forgive either of them for losing to Dubya.  The reason that both have been pretending to run is simply that one gets more attention that way.  At least Kerry has more time for leisure activities.

Obama Faces Prejudice. From Black Democrats!

Mickey Kaus has this story on his Slate blog, so I will just steal it from him.  He cites a Newsday Article. 

Clinton now holds a commanding 41-17 percent lead over the Illinois senator among Democrats and Democrat-leaning Independents, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll taken before her announcement, and after Obama's Jan. 16 campaign kickoff.

Strikingly, Clinton did even better among black Democratic voters, amassing a 26-point lead over Obama. "Hillary's Democratic primary support is climbing, while others are stalled or falling," crowed Penn.

That is indeed striking.  Kaus, again, refers us to this article by one of my favorite jazz writers, Stanley Crouch, in the New York Daily. 

When black Americans refer to Obama as "one of us," I do not know what they are talking about. In his new book, "The Audacity of Hope," Obama makes it clear that, while he has experienced some light versions of typical racial stereotypes, he cannot claim those problems as his own - nor has he lived the life of a black American.

CBS has this poll, also cited by Kaus. 

Sutton Hearing

The AP on the Sutton hearings yesterday.   

Wiese, the first witness at the hearing, said he agreed to stay in Sutton's motel room before he realized it had only one king-size bed. He said that after he went to sleep the first night, he was awakened by Sutton covering him up and touching him. He said he woke up numerous times and felt Sutton touching him on his side, back and hip.

Minimum Wage and Unemployment

My friend Chad at CCK poses this provocative question:

Does anyone know a person who was fired from their job because the minimum wage was raised?

Conservatives like this strawman, but I've yet to see a real-life example of it.

I am not exactly sure what would satisfy Chad.  Someone whose boss let him go and actually said: "Hey, I have to. It's that damn minimum wage increase."?  The real question is whether raising the minimum wage decreases employment across the board among the most vulnerable segments of jobseekers.  In fact, most economists believe that significant increases in the minimum wage have precisely that effect.  They believe this because standard economic theory predicts it, and because it is in fact what happens. 

Here are some figures from the National Center for Policy Analysis:

In a new study, economists Richard Burkhauser, Kenneth Couch and David Wittenburg review the evidence from the latest minimum wage increase and find that the 1996-97 minimum wage rise led to a decline in teenage employment in the range of one to three percent.

In a study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, Kenneth Couch translated these conclusions into raw numbers. 

• At the low end of the range, at least 90,000 teenage jobs        were lost in 1996 and another 63,000 jobs lost in 1997        (see figure).
• At the higher end, job losses may have equaled 268,000 in        1996 and 189,000 in 1997. 
• He estimates that a $1 rise in the minimum wage will        further reduce teenage employment by between 145,000 and        436,000 jobs. 

The CATO Institute has a more careful study of the effects of the 1990-1991 increase in the minimum wage, written by three economists from Texas A&M and the University of Chicago.  They observe that employment declined among all age groups after the wage hike.  It declined most steeply among younger workers, whose labor is less valuable.  Male workers between the ages of 20 and 24 saw a 4.4% decline.  Males in their teenage years saw a decline of almost 7%.  Women suffered only slightly less severe declines. 

Contrary to what Chad says, the idea that hikes in the national minimum wage hurt the most vulnerable workers is no "straw man."  It is based on overwhelming evidence, as well as common sense.  When you artificially increase the price  for some category of goods or services, you will decrease the demand.  When employing people becomes more expensive, employers choose the more valuable employees and hire fewer of the least valuable employees.  What is wrong with Chad's question is that it asks the wrong thing.  What matters is not who is fired, but who is not hired in the first place.

The President, Tim Johnson, and Thomas Jefferson

In the third paragraph of his State of the Union Address, as it is found online at the White House site, the President pays homage to our recovering Senator. 

Two members of the House and Senate are not with us tonight, and we pray for the recovery and speedy return of Senator Tim Johnson and Congressman Charlie Norwood.  (Applause.)

This South Dakotan gratefully acknowledges the President's words. 

The President's speech, as has become the custom, was so thoroughly vetted in advance that there are no surprises.  I will only note something formal, which is evident in this striking picture.

Behind the President are two persons, and it is important who they are and why they are there.  The State of the Union Address is a duty imposed on the President by the Constitution.  I reproduce here the first clause of Article II, Section 3, from ePublius!, a site constructed by Professor Schaff and myself. 

[The President] shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient;

Nancy Pelosi is behind the President because she is the constitutional leader of the House of Representatives.  Dick Chaney is there not because he is Vice President, but because he is the Constitutional Leader (de jure, not de facto), of the Senate.  Together they represent the presence of Congress, and that is a visible sign that the Constitution is in charge. 

Many of Bush's critics believe that his national security policy is a threat to constitutional liberties.  I believe this charge is hysterical, but it is not at all unusual.  I am currently teaching a course on judicial politics, and we are covering the famous case of Marbury v. Madison.  At that time both major parties, the Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson, and the Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, accused the other of aiming at tyranny.  Both were wrong.  The Constitution has proved stronger than the partisan forces that make it work.  But perhaps it is not a bad idea that we should always be hyper-sensitive to any threat against our fundamental principles. 

It is also a good idea to treat each other with common decency.  The President's kind mention of Tim Johnson did that. 

Ellsworth Receives Grant

From the Rapid City Journal:

A $500,000 federal grant will be used to hire a planning consultant to work with developers and communities around Ellsworth Air Force Base and fund efforts to develop technology-based economic development in the Black Hills.

Gov. Mike Rounds and the Moving Forward With Ellsworth Steering Committee on Monday announced receipt of the community economic diversification grant from the Office of Economic Adjustment, a division of the U.S. Department of Defense.

The grant is available to economies that are "defense dependent" and to communities experiencing growth of missions at their military installations. Ellsworth will become the new home of the Air Force Financial Services center, adding to challenges for community growth, according to a news release from the governor's office.

Are You Ready For Some Product Placement!

This is what I gather from this past weekend's CBS coverage of the AFC Championship game.  On Sunday, February 4, CBS will televise a concert by Prince (aka, The Artist Formerly Known As Popular).  Before and after the concert there will be many amusing commercials designed just for that special day.  In between the commercials they will show some meaningless athletic competition matching teams from Chicago and Indianapolis.  I think I speak for the rest of America when I say I can't wait to see one of those Mac commercials with that kid from Dodgeball.  Oh, and I hope Prince plays "When Doves Cry."  They better not waste too much time showing that stupid football game. 

Every day it gets harder and harder to enjoy professional sports.

Sutton Witnesses Announced

Argus Leader:

Officials with the South Dakota Senate moments ago released the names of more than a dozen people who have been subpoenaed by both sides to appear in the disciplinary hearing for Sen. Dan Sutton.

They are expected to testify during the hearing, which is scheduled to begin tomorrow afternoon and last through most of the week.

The witnesses include Austin Wiese, the former high school page from Flandreau who says Sutton groped him at a Fort Pierre motel room last year.

The Argus Leader generally does not name people who might be victims of sex crimes, and in previous coverage of this case, the newspaper had not identified Sutton's accuser for that reason.

However, since no charges have been filed in the case, and Austin Wiese is scheduled to testify in public at a legislative hearing this week, the newspaper decided to use his name.

The witness list also includes a staffer for U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth, D-South Dakota. That person, Steven Dahlmeier, was subpoenaed by the Senate. He declined to comment this afternoon when contacted at Herseth's Sioux Falls office.

Other witnesses expected to be called by the Senate include Chelsey Gassman and Brady Olson.

Gassman was a legislative page in the House of Representatives last year, according to the House Journal.

Also expected to testify are three members of Wiese's family, all of whom were subpoenaed by the Senate: Anna Wiese, Owen Wiese and Kyle Wiese.

Lawyers for Sutton subpoenaed their own witnesses. They include: Michael Mohr, Mitch Fargen, Rick Weber, Brett Doyle, Rod Clark, Janna Ellingson, Shawn Powers and Noah Johnson.

Both sides subpoenaed Brandon Carr to testify.

Jim McMahon, a Sioux Falls attorney who has been hired to represent the Senate, said last week that he may call one or two other people as witnesses, including an investigator with the state Division of Criminal Investigation.

Blue Dog Lobbyists

From today's edition of Roll Call:

When lobbyist Jeff Murray and his firm, the C2 Group, held a reception earlier this month to honor Members of the conservative Democratic Blue Dog Coalition on the occasion of their swearing-in for the new Congress, the event drew a crowd of 300.

That’s six times the number it was two years ago, Murray said.

The increase is a clear sign of the business community’s redoubled affection for the Blue Dogs, a group that lobbyists for corporate America view as a natural ally in the Democratic-controlled Congress. The Blue Dog Coalition is best known for its fiscal conservatism, though its members also have bucked the Democratic Party on business and social issues.

The network of former Blue Dogs and their one-time aides now working on K Street, such as Murray, is relatively small. But those lobbyists say that their clients are seeking closer ties to the Blue Dogs, hoping that the conservative Democrats will influence how their party oversees business policy, ranging from an upcoming farm bill to energy policy.

...

The business community sees in the Blue Dogs an opportunity to pick off majority votes, but lobbyists closest to the coalition say that today’s breed of Blue Dog is more loyal to their party and more likely to influence the debate from the inside.

“The business community sees the Blue Dogs as having an open-door policy -- open minds and open ears to their proposals,” said former Blue Dog and Rep. Max Sandlin (D-Texas), who’s now a lobbyist with Fleishman-Hillard Government Relations. “At the same time, the Blue Dogs are a part of the Democratic Caucus and certainly are going to work in the confines of the Democratic majority and try to work from within to try to influence legislation.”

...

Stenholm, a former co-chairman of the Blue Dog Coalition, now represents a number of clients in the agriculture sector. He said that since so many Blue Dogs are on the House Agriculture Committee, it bodes well for his lobbying business as Congress negotiates a farm bill reauthorization this year.

“The Blue Dog clout has been increased dramatically because many of the freshman Democrats are Blue Dogs,” Stenholm said. (There are now 43 Blue Dogs.) “Therefore the agenda for the 110th Congress is going to naturally go toward the center.”

Blue Dogs also serve on the House’s most powerful committees, including Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce. And one former Blue Dog staffer, Ed Lorenzen, now is an aide in the office of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.).

Creationism, Bushism, and Liars

My friend Chad at CCK kindly acknowledges that one of his earlier posts was based not on accurate information, but on a hoax.  Here is the gist of the original story:

Washington, DC — Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees.

In other words, the Bush administration is siding with the most extreme creationists, the Young-Earthers, who believe that the world is only a few thousand years old.  There are indeed such people, and they base their crypto-geology on the Old Testament.  From the original story, one would guess that the Bush Administration agrees, and has pressured the National Park Service to go along. 

The only trouble with this story is that it is a lie.  The quote above is from a PEER press release, PEER being the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.  The press release was at first reported uncritically by Skeptic magazine (which I happen to admire: Long Live the De-bunkers!),   but Skeptic failed to do the simple fact check and did not call the National Park Service at the Grand Canyon.  Skeptic now acknowledges that it has egg on its face. 

In our eagerness to find additional examples of the inappropriate intrusion of religion in American public life (as if we actually needed more), we accepted this claim by PEER without calling the National Park Service (NPS) or the Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP) to check it. As a testimony to the quality of our readers, however, dozens immediately phoned both NPS and GCNP, only to discover that the claim is absolutely false. Callers were told that the Grand Canyon is millions of years old, that no one is being pressured from Bush administration appointees — or by anyone else — to withhold scientific information. 

I was skeptical about this story from the start.  Bush is a Christian, to be sure, and so no doubt are many powerful members of his administration.  But I never saw any sign that the Bushies were Creationists, let alone Young Earthers.  This looked like a smear, which it was.  Chad has only a little to apologize for.  He relied on a journal with a reputation for getting the facts right.  Skeptic is properly embarrassed, but it has now come clean. 

I blog on this in part because it reminds me of a visit several years ago to Blanchard Springs Caverns (no relation).  These marvelous caves in the Ozark National Forest in North Central Arkansas are a pretty good testament to the age of the Earth.  When I was there with my family I asked the Park Service guide about a huge pile of Bat guano, about the size of a small submarine.  "How long did it take for that to be deposited?", I asked.  The guide was very cautious in answering.  At first I could not understand her hesitance, but after a little conversation I learned that she was frequently attacked by creationists.  Park Service personnel aren't paid enough to have to do battle with these gopher heads on a daily basis.  If there is any pressure on them to be quiet about the scientific age estimates, it doesn't come from George W.  It comes from the Young Earthers who probably plan their vacations precisely for this purpose. 

Chad and I have a lot of things to disagree about. The age of the Grand Canyon isn't one of them. 

Interesting: Country For Sale

Its official, Sealand is for sale.  Check out this rather interesting article from National Geographic News.

Blogs and Politics

New York Daily News:

Kissing babies? Old hat. Shaking hands? How very 20th century. The 2008 campaign is going to be all about blogging, podcasts and YouTube.

Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton announced they were running on the Internet, following the lead of ex-Sen. John Edwards and ex-Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack.

The road to the White House goes through Cyberspace now.

A recent Pew report found that nearly 20% of voters in the 2004 election relied primarily on the Internet to get their political news. That's going to soar.

Sutton Hearings Taking Place

From today's Argus Leader:

The state Capitol will be thick with lawyers this week, a sure sign that tumultuous events are unfolding inside.

Lawyer-lobbyists typically ply the halls during legislative sessions, but the disciplinary hearing to investigate Sen. Dan Sutton is sure to draw more barristers than usual.

Sutton, a Democrat from Flandreau, is represented by two of the top defense lawyers in South Dakota. The Senate, which is holding the hearing, is represented by former U.S. Attorney Jim McMahon. Attorney General Larry Long and others from his office also are expected to be on hand.

Then there's former governor and congressman Bill Janklow, who recently got his law license back. Janklow represents the high school page who accused Sutton last year of sexual misconduct.

...

Once you count 35 senators and the people associated with the hearing, there's room for only a couple dozen spectators. Throw in some curious House members, and there won't be much room for anybody else.

The hearing should be available to anyone with an Internet connection.

The state plans to broadcast the proceedings live on its Web site, Fry said.

Good Grief, Not The Laptops Again

Remember the story last year of Gov. Rounds proposing that every student have a laptop?  Now some schools are thinking about going to a four day week and using part of that extra day for teachers to figure out how to incorporate laptops into their lesson plans. 

Laptop learning: The laptop revolution supplies one reason for districts to at least think about it. Teachers would likely continue to work five days a week, using the fifth day for staff development, the leaders said.

Learning more about how to incorporate laptop computers into curricula would likely be one use of the fifth day for Groton Area teachers, Schuster said.

"A four-day week would definitely be an advantage to any school looking at participating in the laptop initiative," she said. "It is important to have staff development built into the calendar, and we would not have enough if we went with the laptop initiative. Staff development and a four-day week go hand in hand."

The state is promoting its program where schools buy laptops for secondary students, with the state sharing the cost. Warner and Groton are both looking at the possibility of participating in the laptop program beginning with the 2008-09 school year, their superintendents said.

I have posts on this matter from last year, here and here.  In the second link I summed up the findings on laptops in the classroom thusly: "The evidence is clear.  A pervasive use of laptops in education at best has no effect, and in fact there is some evidence that significant use of computers in the classroom actually leads to lower educational achievement." 

I urge those school districts looking to expand the use of laptops in schools to reconsider.  I beg the legislature to kill any state program funding such initiatives.  Let us devote more money to teacher pay rather than technological gimmicks, and more time on fundamentals. 

If we wish to produce "trousered apes" and "urban blockheads" (see this essay by C.S. Lewis) then by all means let us run to technology to solve our educational needs.  I will end on that note before I start pontificating on what a liberal education means to a citizen living in a free society. 

Undiscussable

Byron York has a piece in the print edition of National Review about how we have dealt with recent Senatorial health concerns.  For example:

Just hours after word got out that South Dakota Senator Time Johnson had fallen ill with a serious brain ailment, minority leader Mitch McConnell's office got in touch with Republicans around the Senate. The message: Do not--repeat, do not--talk about the political implications of Johnson's illness.  Besides being genuinely concerned about Johnson, Republicans worried about their image and didn't want even to hint that they were seeking any advantage from their Democratic colleague's misfortune. 

But, York points out, when the Senate came into session in 2001 split 50-50, with Republicans in nominal control because the President of the Senate was VPOTUS Dick Cheney, Senate Democrats started a "Strom Thurmond Death Watch," inserting unique language into the organizing rules about how committees should be restructured if partisan majority shifted during the session. There was open discussion about Thurmond's health and the chances of his death in the next two years.  Of course, this was all rendered moot by the party switch of Jim Jeffords. 

This year, Republicans pushed for no language about re-structuring the Senate should partisan control shift mid-session.  York does not doubt that should, for whatever reason, Democrats lose a Senator (say Johnson resigns or Joe Lieberman changes parties), that Republicans would take control, but unlike 2001 when the changing of the guards was seamless after Jeffords's party switch, York predicts a long and messy struggle over Senate re-organization.

Note: Make sure you see Jason's post about Senator Johnson's improving health.  We wish him the best. 

Rural Economies

Mason City (Iowa) Globe Gazette:  "Good yields, high grain prices and the ever-growing demand for ethanol are helping rural economies thrive, according to a January survey of nonurban bankers in a nine-state area that includes Iowa. . . .The nine states: Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming."

Johnson Improving

The New York Times:

Senator Tim Johnson is taking part in three hours of physical, occupational and speech therapy every day, and his tracheotomy tube has been removed, doctors at George Washington University Hospital said. Mr. Johnson, a South Dakota Democrat, suffered a brain hemorrhage more than a month ago. He is doing strengthening exercises to gain mobility on his right side, said Dr. Philip Marion, head of rehabilitation at the hospital.

You Got A Light?

I find this "Barak Obama Smokes" story fascinating.  Peter Lawler discusses it here.  For your amusement, take a look at the comments.  The speed at which the discussion descends into the fever swamps of anti-smoking extremism serves as an education into the puritanical zeal of some anti-smoking activists.  For example, take New Orleans (please!).  In New Orleans you can walk down Bourbon Street and pass the establishments advertising live sex shows (Men and Women!), using rather graphic pictures (but with the naughty parts blurred or covered) as evidence of what you will observe.  But at the same time, due to a new law (state or local, I don't know), you cannot smoke a cigarette in any establishment that earns over 30% of its income from food, i.e., restaurants.  Live sex shows: OK.  Smoking: So awful we must use the power of the state to stamp it out. 

This story points out that in post-Katrina New Orleans the sex trade is suffering.  Tourism in the French Quarter is down considerably.  A stripper used to make $1200 a night, but now she has to resort to prostitution to keep up that standard of living.  Perhaps the Democrats can use this as yet another reason to raise the minimum wage.  Talk about the working poor!

100 Hours Energy Legislation

On Thursday, Democrats in the House passed legislation that will repeal taxes and increase certain fees for oil drillers, while reserving the money earned for alternative energy sources.  It is estimated that this bill will repeal $14 dollars in tax breaks and subsidies for oil drillers.  This initiative has a few problems.

The first problem seems to be a basic economics issue.  Increasing fees on the producer usually leads to increased costs for the consumer.  As recently as this summer, gasoline prices at the pump were reaching record highs.  Prices have declined since then, certainly helping others who rely on gasoline such as farmers, ranchers, and truck drivers.  Increasing the costs of production of American oil is a terrible idea that will likely lead to an increase in prices for the long term.

Next, these fees are applied to domestic oil drillers.  This means that the price of American produced oil will be more expensice.  This will likely lead to further dependence on foreign oil.  Since many in Congress have talked about the need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, it seems to go against their own principles to support such legislation.  While there is some logic in focusing on alternative energy development, Congress should not increase the costs on consumers by taxing producers to develop new means of energy production.  Especially at this crucial time when our dependence on foreign oil is a significant threats to the American economy.

Note that Representative Herseth supports this legislation.  Here is the first paragraph of a press release from her website:

The House of Representatives today approved H.R. 6, the CLEAN Energy Act of 2007, which repeals $14 billion in giveaways and tax breaks for the oil industry in order to invest in homegrown, renewable biofuels like ethanol and biodiesel. U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth supported the bill as part of her strong commitment to renewable biofuels as a means to decreasing our dependence on foreign oil, enhancing our national security, protecting our environment and revitalizing rural American economies.

Link to the release.

I appreciate that Representative Herseth is focused on revitalizing rural American economies, and focusing on renewable biofeuls to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.  However, this legislation seems to point towards an increase in energy prices which will hurt rural, agricultural economies (farm equipment doesn't power itself).  Further, increasing the prices for American producers and drillers will potentially lead to a further dependence on foreign oil.  I fully support researching renewable feuls.  It will likely lead to better energy prices and dependence on our own energy sources.  But I do not support increasing taxes and costs on our primary sources energy in the mean time.  I hope the Senate gives this bill more careful consideration.

How Old Is The Grand Canyon

Did you fall for the fake story that the Bush Administration, in the service of Creationism nuts, won't allow the National Park Service to give the geologic age of the Grand Canyon?  These guys did, but are correcting themselves.  This guy did, but isn't (yet).  More here.

Update: Chad corrects the story.

USS Arizona

Divester: "If you've been thinking of visiting the memorial at Pearl Harbor, consider booking the trip sooner than later."

One Last Sutton Post (For Now)

Recently, I called for Dan Sutton to resign from the South Dakota Senate.  Instead, he has chosen a legalistic defense strategy (i.e., "you have no right to investigate me," rather than "I didn't do it).  PP has a list of rather bombastic statements from Mr. Sutton's attorney.  Then today we get this:

Lawmakers could vote to censure or expel Sutton, who has maintained his innocence. His lawyers this week said they are prepared to aggressively defend him, even if it means a drawn-out succession of embarrassing testimony for those involved.

Does engaging in a strategy of "drawn-out" and "embarrassing" hearings sound like the act of a statesman?  Let me revise my statement: Dan Sutton should either resign or fire his lawyers, who seem more intent on intimidating all involved than actually producing evidence of their client's innocence.  .

European Fascists Have Learned to Love the Jews

The old joke about mixed feelings, when your mother in law drives your new sports car off a cliff, describes pretty well how a political scientist feels most of the time.  What is most interesting to him, qua political scientist, is what is most appalling to him, qua human being.  The chaos in Iraq is really interesting, for example, when looked at through the lens of international relations and the study of political factions.  Of course it also means children blown apart in the market place.

I felt that way when I read Sarah Wildman's piece, "Guess who's coming to seder", in the New Republic. 

Filip Dewinter, the 44-year-old leader of Vlaams Belang. Dewinter's party, like its far-right counterparts across Europe, has a long history of racism and xenophobia. But sitting in his office, filled with sleek Italian-style furniture and overseen by a massive Rubens painting of Nicholas Rockox, a mayor of Antwerp in the mid-seventeenth century, Dewinter's anger takes a surprising turn. "We should stand with the Jewish community, and we should do everything possible to protect them," he says. "Jewish values are European values!" Then he launches into an earnest plea for Jews to come home to his extreme-right--"right-wing," he gently corrects--party.

Dewinter is at the forefront of Europe's new philosemitic far right. Along with his French homologue, Marine Le Pen, daughter of Holocaust minimizer and Front National leader Jean-Marie Le Pen, Dewinter has spent the last few years proclaiming his support for Jews and championing their rights. No matter that Vlaams Belang's founders were Nazi collaborators or, simply, that the idea of the Jew as "European" is itself a novelty for his base constituency. Since 2003, Dewinter has loudly and consistently spoken out against attacks on Jews--calling Judaism a "pillar of European society" to Time magazine and condemning anti-Semitism and, very specifically, anti-Zionism, to Haaretz and New York Jewish Week. This fall, when elections fell on Sukkot and religious Jews would have missed going to the polls, it was Dewinter's party that helped collect their proxy ballots.

What is happening is this: "extreme right-wing" parties in Belgium and France have decided to embrace the Jews and Israel.  In American language, these parties would be described as "right-wing populist."  They have virtually nothing in common with American conservatives.  Their only real principle is anti-immigrant sentiment, but the immigrants de jour are Muslims, and the Muslims hate the Jews about as much as the European right used to hate them.  Acting on the principle that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, the Eurofascists have decided that the Jews are a pillar of European civilization. 

Philosemitism is a very clever strategy on the part of Europe's neofascists.  There is only a small chance that they will attract enough Jewish voters to make a difference, though that may change if they keep with the program long enough.  But by "standing with the Jewish community" they are making a claim to respectability.  Hey, we don't hate Jews anymore, so voting for us doesn't make you a Nazi.  We just hate Blacks, and browns, and Muslims generally.

The rise of neofascist parties in Europe is a mere symptom of demographic decline.  The older nationalities of Europe are getting literally older, and they aren't making babies.  The Muslim immigrants are making lots of babies.  Right wing parties extending a hand to the Jews, this is just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.  All of this is appalling.  But it's damn sure interesting. 

Shocking News About Obama!

He smokes cigarettes.  I suppose that virtually disqualifies him, doesn't it?  Now cigars . . .   See the wierd article on this in Slate.

ps. Todd Epp has some pretty funny highschool shots of Obama. 

Montana Blog

From the mail bag:

You gentlemen have in part inspired this new Montana blog.  It is sincerely hoped that it will in some small way help call the Montana press to accountability, just as yours has done with the South Dakota press.  These are dark days for Republicans in Montana, but there is a palpable sense of determination to turn it around. 

 

http://montanaheadlines.blogspot.com/

 

--
Montana Headlines

We're flattered that we've inspired another to hold the media accountable.  Welcome to the blogosphere!

Lawyer: Sutton Will Not Resign

He fights based on technicalities, not on the merits of the accusations.  Now his lawyer says that he will not resign.  Why does his lawyer speak for him, rather than the man defending himself?  The Dan Sutton Saga continues. 

Sutton

SDWC:

In newspapers across the state this AM, Bob Mercer is reporting that Senator Dan Sutton has left the building (the Capitol building, that is). Possibly never to return.

Senator Dan Sutton left the State Capitol  with his wife, Mary Beth, and headed home to Flandreau Thursday evening.

He didn't plan to return today. The mystery is whether he ever will.

"We're just going to go back and look at all of our options," Mary Beth Sutton said.

Asked whether resignation was a possibility, she replied, "He hasn't ruled anything out right now."

Read this breaking story it in the dead tree editions of the Pierre, Spearfish, Watertown, Mitchell or Aberdeen Newspaper.

This is major, and alludes to what I've been predicting all along. Excepting the bluster and bravado of his attorneys, it seems the handwriting is on the wall, and just remains to be signed or not.

If that's the case, it would be extremely unfortunate that he's put the legislature through this circus, protesting his innocence, but maneuvering left and right in every attempt to delay the matter. He resigned once, labeling is a political matter by opponents and sullying the names of the legislators who were doing no more than their duty.

But once that was off of the table, the charges didn't evaporate. They didn't go away, and the Senate has been pressing ahead to get to the bottom of this matter.

In fact, if you read the article, it sounds as if resignation may not absolve the Senate of getting to the heart of the matter. Senator Ed Olson talks as if the proceedings may happen with or without him in an attempt to bring finality to the investigation.

Maybe - just maybe - those who were doing their jobs in the first place may have been right to do so all along?

SDP Jazz Note: Alice Coltrane 1937-2007

Alice Coltrane, wife of the late John Coltrane, passed away on Friday, January 12th.  Ms. Coltrane was a jazz pianist and composer in her own right.  I confess that I do not know her work.  You can find out a lot more at Jeffery Siegel's marvelous website, StraightNoChaser.  I leave you with this shot, from Siegel's blog. 

Uncurious Yellow About Cancer Research Funding

My friend Chad at CCK and I have been ignoring each other for too long now. I find this piece of jaundiced reasoning on his site today:

You've probably heard the good news about deaths from cancer taking a dip for the second straight year.

It's really too bad President Bush is cutting the research that is giving us the treatments and medications that are providing us with this good news.

Of course, the standard GOP response would be something like this ...

If you want research to help cure your cancer, go do it yourself you lazy bum!

Leaving aside, for a moment, the dubious emotional maturity expressed in the last two sentences, we have this: first, cancer rates have declined under President Bush.  This is somewhat understating the case.  Lung cancer declined among women for the first time ever, and total cancer deaths decreased for the first time since 1930, when data was first compiled.   Second, Bush "is cutting" spending on cancer research.  I was curious enough to follow the link, which is to a site called Think Progress.  Chad poo poos any talk of a liberal media, but maybe it's not out of line to point out that leftists, at least, are leftists, and, like conservatives, they have an agenda.  What I found was this:

The total budget for the National Cancer Institute has increased $1.2 billion since 2001. But as ABC News’s Medical Editor pointed out last night, “most of that occurred in those early years under a Clinton initiative. The budget was actually cut last year and the projected budget for this year is to be cut even further.”

So the budget for the National Cancer Institute has in fact increase by one billion, two hundred million dollars, since the first year of Bush's Presidency.  That's a lot of dollars.  And it may be true that this was "under a Clinton initiative."  But it was a Republican Congress that continued to fund that initiative, wasn't it?  And it would have been Bush who signed that legislation, wouldn't it?

As for cutting the budget, Think Progress has this:

Bush’s 2007 budget proposed cutting funding for the National Cancer Institute by $40 million.

The link provided leads to a Senate Democratic website, which, I humbly suggest, also has an agenda.  None of the sources mentioned what the total budget of the NCI is, or whether this cut represents an actual cut in funding or merely a cut in projected funding, i.e., what the NCI thought it was going to get.  It looks like an actual cut.  Here is what the NCI says:

The fiscal year FY 2007 budget includes $4,753,609,000, a decrease of $39,747,000 below the FY 2006 enacted level of $4,793,356,000 comparable for transfers proposed in the President's request.

So: the NCI budget in 2006 was, using the Think Progress estimate, about a third larger, under President Bush, than under Bill Clinton.  That is a big increase.  The 2007 budget is 39.7 million less, a decline of less than one percent.  That is a very small decrease in a big increase.  I do not know whether such a decrease is warranted or not.  To know that, I would have to consider the budget as a whole, and ask where the 40 million was going to come from.  I would have to know also whether current research programs are being adequately funded.  To judge that, I would have to be able to compare private research investments with publicly funded research.  That would be a long night. 

What one can say after a half hour of searching is that the Bush Administration, and the Republican Congress, have been very generous when it comes to cancer research.  That is what you find out when you are genuinely curious.  To say something this: "Of course, the standard GOP response would be something like this ...If you want research to help cure your cancer, go do it yourself you lazy bum!", that demonstrates only a lack of curiosity and a jaundiced eye.    

Registering Bloggers?

Instapundit:

HARRY REID INTRODUCES BILL TO REGISTER BLOGGERS?  Hmm.

Put this together with a move toward the reintroduction of the inaptly named "fairness doctrine" and it's starting to look like a rather heavyhanded effort to silence critics.

UPDATE:  Much more here, including the revelation that -- surprise, surprise -- Trent Lott is on board.

UPDATE:  Professor Bainbridge doesn't buy it.

The Media Monopoly Issue

From the National Journal's Technology Daily:

Democratic Gains Alter Media Ownership Debate

By David Hatch

(Tuesday, January 16) For television, radio and newspaper outlets seeking regulatory relief from the FCC, the timing of the agency's comprehensive review of ownership limits could not be worse.

When FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, a deregulatory-minded Republican, initiated the review last year, the business-friendly GOP controlled both chambers of Congress. But now the Democrats are in charge, and some are flexing their muscle on the issue.

"I think the election [result] is going to add additional challenges" for stations seeking relief, National Association of Broadcasters spokesman Dennis Wharton conceded.

"If Martin had known the Democrats were going to take over Congress, certainly he would have moved things along faster," quipped Andrew Schwartzman, president and chief executive officer of the public-interest law firm Media Access Project, which opposes easing the rules. Schwartzman predicted that the agency, which will issue new reports on media ownership this spring, will not conclude its review until the third quarter of 2007.

Learning From The Past

In 2003, then-FCC Chairman Michael Powell, a Republican, pushed through revised restrictions on a 3-2 party-line vote. The changes would have allowed one entity to own up to three TV stations, eight radio stations, the daily newspaper and cable system in a single market. But Powell prompted a backlash from lawmakers in both parties, watchdogs and citizens worried that the new thresholds would trigger consolidation and lead to more homogenized content.

In 2004, responding to a challenge spearheaded by low-power radio operators, a federal appeals court sent most of the changes back to the agency for reconsideration. The court said the FCC had failed to provide sufficient analysis to justify altering the rules.

Martin is now overseeing a review of those items, but having learned from Powell's problems, he is taking a fresh approach that includes seeking input from all sides. The FCC plans six nationwide hearings, with two already having been held in Los Angeles and Nashville, Tenn.

"The goal of these hearings is to more fully and directly involve the American people in the process," Martin said in Tennessee. "I have said many times before, but it bears repeating: Public input is critical to our process."

As a commissioner, Martin supported Powell's initiative. But at his September re-nomination hearing -- under questioning from Sen. Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat and staunch critic of media consolidation -- he said he was no longer comfortable with his 2003 vote.

While the media-ownership review has just begun, Martin already has altered it in response to Democratic-led demands. In December, Dorgan spearheaded a request from senators in both parties for the FCC to complete a pending inquiry into how TV broadcasters can best serve their local communities before tackling media ownership. Martin pledged to heed the request.

Late last month, the FCC posted internal studies on media ownership to its Web site. The move followed a September flap in which Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., accused the FCC of having spiked a 2004 report on the benefits of locally produced television news to communities. Martin, who claimed to be unaware of the report, immediately posted it to the site.

The new Democratic heads of the Senate and House commerce committees, which oversee the agency, and other lawmakers are expected to keep a watchful eye on the FCC's approach to media-ownership revisions. Adding to the pressure, Martin's Democratic colleagues, Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps, have been strengthened by their party's takeover of Congress, though the GOP still has a 3-2 majority at the agency.

The Stakes In The Debate

During an impromptu Jan. 10 interview, Copps told Technology Daily that as part of the review he will press for more public-interest obligations for broadcasters, which will be capable of offering multiple stations when they switch to digital signals in early 2009. During a speech the same day, Copps suggested that increased consolidation may be fueling more gratuitous violence and sex on television as media conglomerates appeal to the lowest common denominator.

Religious groups, meanwhile, raised concerns at a Jan. 8 press briefing in New York about the impact that loosening the rules could have on religious programs and stations, which increasingly worry about being squeezed off the TV dial.

Among the items up for review, the most controversial is the ban on one entity controlling a TV or radio outlet and newspaper in the same market. Combinations that pre-date 1975 have been grandfathered, and the FCC has issued permanent and temporary waivers to aid struggling papers and stations.

"I have various problems about how allowing more cross-ownership serves the public interest," Copps said. "When that happens, you're investing one player with just really excessive power in a specific media market, and you further encroach upon localism and diversity in that market."

"The irony is, what you're hampering is the only free media," countered Shaun Sheehan, a vice president at Tribune Company, which has been lobbying for years to end the cross-ownership ban so it can permanently absorb TV stations it inherited through its purchase of Times Mirror.

The FCC also is re-evaluating whether to extend its duopoly rules, which allow common ownership of two TV stations in large cities, to small- and medium-sized markets. NAB argues that when a successful TV station purchases a struggling one in the same market, program quality improves. Many stations face tremendous costs as they transition to digital, the group said. But critics accuse NAB of exaggerating the degree to which local stations are hurting financially.

In addition, the agency must re-examine its limits on co-owning TV and radio outlets in one market and review whether "triopolies," ownership of three stations in the largest markets, should be permissible.

Congress removed a key item from reconsideration. The FCC had voted in 2003 to increase the cap on the national audience reach of network-TV-owned stations from 35 percent of TV households to 45 percent. But lawmakers subsequently set it at 39 percent, meaning it is not under FCC review.

The Fight For Reform

Both sides are prepping for an all-out fight. Last month, nearly a dozen advocacy and academic groups released a book, "The Case Against Media Consolidation: Evidence On Concentration, Localism And Diversity," that details their opposition to further relaxation of the rules.

The watchdog Free Press also hosted a media reform conference in Memphis, Tenn., to sound the alarm about concentration. At the event, advocacy groups released six studies that seek to rebut industry claims that broadcast outlets are struggling to compete in today's Internet-driven world.

"The FCC must study the impact of consolidation on the diversity of media ownership and implement a plan to increase minority and female ownership of broadcast stations," Consumers Union, Free Press, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition Founder Jesse Jackson and other concerned parties demanded in a Jan. 12 letter to the FCC.

Proponents of easing the rules argue that with the growth of subscription television, the Web and emerging technologies, such as high-definition and satellite radio, the media universe is more diversified. "Many of these rules have been in place for 30 to 40 years," lamented NAB's Wharton, adding that "the program choice has exploded, but the rules have remained the same."

Democracies are best practiced when citizens have access to multiple and varying sources of information.  Debates in recent years have centered on the perils of media concentration and bias, and thus so has the issue of access to reliable political information.  This was the issue in 2004 in the Senate race between Tom Daschle and John Thune and the Argus Leader's political coverage and monopoly status.  Placing too much power into the hands of a single media outlet gives them immense power over editorial decisions and effectively limits the information available to citizens.

CRP

Rapid City Journal:

U.S. Sen. John Thune has joined other farm state senators in opposing a proposal by the Internal Revenue Service that would impose self-employment taxes on payments for acres enrolled in the federal Conservation Reserve Program.

The South Dakota Republican joined other senators in signing a letter of opposition to the proposal Thursday that will be sent to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Jr., and IRS Commissioner Mark Everson. The letter said IRS officials had for years "waged an aggressive campaign" to require farmers to pay the self-employment tax on CRP payments.

A ruling by the U.S. Tax Court disagreed with that position, but the IRS challenged it in federal court and won on appeal. Bolstered by the appeal ruling, IRS officials now assert that the self-employment tax could even be applied to CRP payments for those not materially participating in farming operations.

That would include retired farmers, the letter signed by Thune said.

McGovern Library

Rapid City Journal:

MITCHELL - Former President Bill Clinton and Sen. Hillary Clinton have donated $25,000 to the McGovern Library and Center for Leadership and Public Service here.

The former president was speaker at the October dedication of the library that honors former U.S. Sen. George McGovern and wife Eleanor.

"(We) commend your efforts to build strong and vital programs," according to a Clinton Family Foundation letter.

Sutton Update

Argus Leader:

With Sen. Dan Sutton's fate in the hands of the state Supreme Court, both sides agreed to postpone a Moody County court hearing to give the high court more time to rule.

But the Supreme Court ruling could come as early as today, some predict.

"They act with extreme dispatch on important cases," South Dakota Attorney General Larry Long said Wednesday.

After a telephone conference call Wednesday, it was decided that the circuit judge's hearing in Flandreau - which had been set for Friday - will be delayed until Jan. 26.

At issue in the court battle is whether the state Senate may hold disciplinary hearings for Sutton, a Flandreau Democrat. Sutton has denied an allegation of sexual misconduct with a teen Senate page last year.

Hunting Age

KSFY reports:

Representative Mike Buckingham is sponsoring legislation that would lower the age you can receive a big game hunting license from twelve to ten. He says this is an effort to get kids away from the TV and distractions of everyday life to spend quality time with family. Ken Dalnilson is a high school student in Webster and says he started hunting at an early age. "It's a pretty fun sport. It's a nice activity to get out and do. You get out in the fresh air and see the scenery and stuff like that and it's fun to get out hunting some animals too."

Opponents of the legislation argue that age ten is too young to put a firearm in the hands of a child. They cite safety and maturity as major concerns.

Representative Buckingham plans to introduce the bill to the legislature next week. If the bill passes, it would go into effect in July of next year.

Related thoughts from Greg Belfrage.  The Aberdeen American News says to keep the hunting age as it is.

SD State Basketball

New York Times:

The Women's Basketball Officiating Consortium ruled Wednesday that the game officials made a series of mistakes that led to them to count the game-winning basket in South Dakota State's victory over Minnesota on Sunday.

The consortium acknowledged that the officiating crew misapplied the ruling concerning when a game has ended and also mishandled the video replay.

Maria Boever made a layup with no time on the clock that gave South Dakota State a 59-58 win. After watching a video replay for a few minutes the officials changed their ruling to say the shot didn't count. South Dakota State coach Aaron Johnston protested and the officials watched the tape one more time and finally decided to count the basket.

''They didn't procedurely handle the review of the video properly,'' said Patty Broderick, the coordinator of officials for the WBOC. ''Obviously coaches aren't supposed to be around. It was one mistake after another. They got caught up in the emotion of it.''

Blogs and Openness in the Middle East

The Columbia Journalism Review:

In the American blogosphere, opinions and life tales blossom a millionfold every day. But against the background of a largely party-line mainstream local Arab media, and the absence of avenues for national conversation, these Arab bloggers, most of whom are anonymous for their own safety, commit small acts of bravery simply by speaking their minds. It should be said that most of the people maintaining blogs do come out of the highest strata of society, economically and educationally, so their opinions can seem at times to represent no wider a circle than the upper crust of any given country. But, as Ammar Abdulhamid, a Syrian blogger who was forced into exile in September 2005 for his democracy activism, which included blogging about his eight-month interrogation by Syrian security services, put it: “There is nothing wrong with admitting that we represent a certain elite. It’s not exclusively an economic elite, though economics surely plays a large factor. These are people who are comfortable, who have more time to blog. But in itself this is not the problem. The importance of this technology at this stage is to connect the elites better, to network the elites, to make them able to share more ideas and organize.” The power of the medium, Abdulhamid says, will come when those bloggers find a way to “cross the bridge between the elite and the grass roots” — a process that is already beginning, through a few organized demonstrations coordinated by bloggers, online campaigns, and the posting of information about police brutality or sexual harassment.

HT to Jay Reding.

Welcome Max Mayer!

A Note on Minimum Wage

Dustin Adams posted a couple weeks ago about the possible problems with raising the minimum wage.  We should seriously consider these issues which may cause future strains on the nation’s already overstretched budget. 

Consider basic Macroeconomic principles associated with raising the minimum wage.  Raising the wage limits the amount of labor firms can afford to employ.  As a result unemployment rises and Uncle Sam’s pocket is the one that pays in forms of social welfare programs. 

For this reason I have a hard time understanding the left wing complaints about the deficit, for raising the minimum wage will most likely raise the deficit further.  Maybe we should take a step back from social programs for the time being and focus on limiting government spending in areas that are not of great importance.

Sen. DeMint makes a great point about standard of living throughout different states.  One should also think about the variance of jobs throughout each state.  It seems to me that the minimum wage debate may be better off handled at a regional level.

Hello Everyone!

My name is Max Mayer and I am new to the site.  I have been given a great opportunity to share some of my humble opinions with you.  Hopefully I am able to stimulate a conversation or two!

Well here is a little about myself.  I grew up in Canistota South Dakota and graduated high school from there in 2004.  Currently, I am an undergraduate at the US Naval Academy in Annapolis Maryland.  I am a Quantitative Economics Major and hope to serve in the Marines when I graduate.  I wish I had some more interesting stories to share with you.  However, the life I live here at the academy is not exactly what they call the “average” college experience. 

That’s about it from my end.  If you would like to know anything else, feel free to contact me.  Thanks again, and have a great rest of the week! 

Baucus Fundraising for Johnson

From today's edition of Roll Call:

Baucus Fundraising for Johnson
January 17, 2007
By Erin P. Billings,
Roll Call Staff

Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who is up for re-election this cycle, has formed a special fundraising account to help Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.) raise money for a prospective 2008 bid while recovering from emergency brain surgery.

Baucus, the newly minted chairman of the powerful Finance Committee, on Tuesday finalized the creation of the Baucus-Johnson Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee that allows Baucus to simultaneously raise money for his re-election as well as Johnson's.

All funds collected through the committee would be divided equally between the Western state Senators, Baucus' office said.

"Max believes Tim Johnson is a national leader," said Baucus' chief of staff, Jim Messina. "Max wants to make sure that the last thing Tim is thinking about is raising money.

"Max will do anything he can to help Tim Johnson and believes this is one way he can be helpful."

Johnson remains at George Washington University Hospital, where he is recovering following a brain hemorrhage in December. The South Dakota Senator continues to improve, but his office said he has yet to make any decisions about seeking a third Senate term.

Drey Samuelson, Johnson's chief of staff, said Tuesday that the office is "very touched" by Baucus' move and remains confident that Johnson will make a full recovery and ultimately run in 2008. Samuelson added that while Baucus and Johnson are good friends, the Montana Democrat's overture "came out of the blue."

"We didn't ask for it," Samuelson said. "It's particularly generous. It says a lot about Sen. Baucus. It's going to help us put the campaign in the position we wanted to be in, so that's definitely a weight off of us."

Baucus and Johnson both represent states where Democrats have had to wage some difficult electoral battles in recent years. And both Senators' re-elections are critical to a Democratic majority in the 111th Congress.

Johnson's recovery has been atop Senators' minds since Dec. 13 when he suddenly fell ill during a phone interview with reporters at the Capitol. Johnson has remained at the hospital since then, but he has been transferred out of the intensive care unit and continues to improve in rehabilitation. His office said Tuesday he is awake, responsive and eating.

Following his collapse, speculation mounted over whether Johnson would be able to return to the Senate. If unable to serve, the balance of the chamber could have shifted from a 51-49 Democratic majority to a 50-50 split with Vice President Cheney breaking any tie.

The governor of South Dakota, Mike Rounds, is a Republican and likely would have tapped another Republican to fulfill the remainder of Johnson's term.

Prior to his illness, Johnson was on a path to run again in a state that almost certainly would have brought a competitive race.

Johnson successfully, but narrowly, staved off a challenge from now Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) in his re-election bid in 2002. A leading Democrat to succeed Johnson if he were to retire would be Rep. Stephanie Herseth, while the top GOP candidate likely would be Rounds.

Baucus also represents a swing state for Democrats and is on track to win a sixth term. The five-term Senator, known as a prolific fundraiser, had $1.4 million in cash on hand as of Sept. 30.

Samuelson said as Johnson focuses on getting better, his aides are hoping to "put him in a position to run for re-election should he choose to do so." As of Sept. 30, Johnson had $651,000 in the bank.

"Frankly, I think he will," Samuelson said. "I can't say that with certainty, but certainly that is what he wanted to do [before he got ill], that's what I believe he will want to do, and believe that's what he will do."

UPDATE:  Couple that story with the Argus Leader's story today that Johnson is adding to his campaign staff.  Of course, it's too early to know for sure what Johnson plans to do until we hear it straight from him.  Nevertheless, hiring Steve Jarding (campaign manger for James Webb in Virginia) was probably a wise choice.

Keep Diggin' Jimmy

Things just keep getting worse for Jimmy Carter.  And they gave this guy the Nobel Peace Prize.  Of course they also gave it to Carter's buddy, Yasser Arafat, so that isn't surprising.  For a classic take on Carter, see Jay Nordlinger's Carterpalooza. 

Iraq

Foreign Policy's Donald Stoker:  "Vietnam taught many Americans the wrong lesson: that determined guerrilla fighters are invincible. But history shows that insurgents rarely win, and Iraq should be no different. Now that it finally has a winning strategy, the Bush administration is in a race against time to beat the insurgency before the public’s patience finally wears out." Read the whole story.

Meanwhile, Bryan Preston writes: "Michelle [Malkin] and I spent four days patrolling the environs around Forward Operating Base Justice in north and west Baghdad last week. . . . This post is mostly about mistakes. The troops didn’t sit down with us and tick off all the mistakes that they think we have made in Iraq to date, so what follows isn’t their gripe list being published under my name. They did answer our questions forthrightly and we learned much from interviewing them and just talking with them over chow and listening to their crosstalk in the Humvees. So this post is made up of my observations after seeing the war up close and following it from afar, including mistakes, fumbles and ways forward to win–and what victory actually looks like." He concludes: "Having said all of this, Iraq is still very winnable."  Michael Yon is saying the same thing.

Wadhams

Denver Post columnist Diane Carman writing about the "pit bull" Dick Wadhams and his position for the Colorado GOP:

Wadhams is revered by Republicans and Democrats alike as the most brilliant, ruthless, effective political strategist since Karl Rove.

Allard took the opportunity Monday to endorse Wadhams for state Republican Party chairman, a position that's his for the asking, even though it seems wimpy for a guy known for ripping reporters' faces off before he's even finished his first cup of coffee - and liking it.

Anybody who watches politics even casually can recite the highlights of Wadhams' career by heart. He managed Hank Brown's campaign for the Senate in 1990, Bill Owens' campaign for governor in 1998 and Allard's two campaigns for the Senate. He took over the ailing campaign to get Montana Sen. Conrad Burns re-elected in 2000, ran the campaign of South Dakota Sen. John Thune that buried former minority leader Tom Daschle's Senate career in 2004, and was widely believed to be the glorious heir apparent to the savage legacy of the late Lee Atwater and his successor, Rove.

Read the rest.

Obama and Team Daschle

Chris Cillizza's Washington Post blog notes the "key players" in Barack Obama's possible presidential campaign, many of which are former Daschle people:

Here's the early look at Obama's inner circle:

David Plouffe: A partner in AKP Media (the consulting firm that handled Obama's media in the 2004 Senate race), Plouffe is widely expected to serve as national campaign manager for the presidential race. In the last presidential election, Plouffe served as a senior adviser to Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.). Prior to that he served as executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee during the 2000 cycle and as deputy chief of staff to Gephardt.

David Axelrod: Axelrod, who is based in Chicago, is a well-known name in Democratic consulting circles and along with Plouffe handled the television advertising for Obama in 2004 and is expected to do the same in the presidential race. Axelrod previously worked with former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack -- two rivals for the 2008 nomination.

Robert Gibbs: Gibbs, a longtime communications operative with a special focus on the Senate, has been with Obama since shortly after his 2004 primary victory. Prior to that Gibbs served as a spokesman for Sen. John Kerry's (D-Mass.) presidential bid. Gibbs, like Plouffe, has experience in the nitty-gritty of Democratic politics, having served as the communications director at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and as campaign spokesman for Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.) in 1998. He will be the campaign's communications director.

Paul Harstad: Obama's pollster in 2004, Harstad is back on board for 2008. Based in Colorado, Harstad has had a remarkable run of success in the past few elections -- handling survey research for Obama, along with Sens. Ken Salazar (Colo.) and Clair McCaskill (Mo.).

Cornell Belcher: Belcher is one of the rising stars in the Democratic polling community, serving as the de facto in-house pollster for Howard Dean at the Democratic National Committee over the last few years. He will share polling duties with Harstad.

Julianna Smoot: Smoot is one of a series of top Obama aides who has strong ties to former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.). Smoot was finance director for Daschle during his time in the Senate, and she held the same role for John Edwards in his 1998 Senate race. Last cycle she was finance director for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and will hold the same position for Obama.

Steve Hildebrand: No one has stronger Daschle ties in Obama's new political world than Hildebrand. A South Dakota native, Hildebrand managed Sen. Tim Johnson's (D-S.D.) successful 2002 reelection race and two years later led Daschle's unsuccessful bid for a fourth term. Hildebrand also has considerable expertise in presidential politics; he ran Al Gore's 2000 Iowa caucus campaign. He will be an early state adviser to Obama.

Cassandra Butts: Butts will be charged with overseeing policy development for Obama. She, too, is an alumni of Gephardt's office and currently works at the Center for American Progress -- a progressive think tank. Butts was also a law school classmate of Obama's at Harvard.

Paul Tewes: Tewes was Hildebrand's deputy in Iowa in 2000, directing Gore's field operation in the caucuses. He went on to serve as political director at the DSCC during the 2004 cycle and then formed a consulting company with Hildebrand in 2005. Tewes will be Obama's Iowa state director.

Bill Burton: Burton will be the national press secretary for Obama's bid. He served as communications director at the DCCC for the 2006 cycle. Burton worked as a spokesman for Gephardt and then Kerry during the 2004 presidential race.

Dan Pfeiffer: Another holdover from Team Daschle, Pfeiffer will be the traveling press secretary for Obama. Pfeiffer was communications director for Tim Johnson in 2002 and then deputy campaign manager for Daschle in 2004. Following that race, Pfeiffer signed on as communications director for Sen. Evan Bayh's (D-Ind.) presidential campaign-in-waiting. When Bayh dropped from the race late last year, Pfeiffer became a free agent.

Devorah Adler: Adler was the research director at the Democratic National Committee in the 2006 cycle where she gathered information about Republicans eyeing the presidency in 2008. She'll now turn her attention to the records of Obama's Democratic rivals as the research director for the Illinois senator's national campaign.

Alyssa Mastromonaco: Mastromonaco, the political director at Obama's Hopefund PAC, will oversee scheduling and advance work for the presidential campaign.

Read the whole story.  All the Daschle people who wanted to run a presidential race will now get to.

Hands Off the Gay Sheep?

File under "News You Can Ewes."

Science told: hands off gay sheep

That's the London Times headline, I kid you not.  How exactly was "science" handling the gay sheep, you ask?  Well:

SCIENTISTS are conducting experiments to change the sexuality of “gay” sheep in a programme that critics fear could pave the way for breeding out homosexuality in humans.

The technique being developed by American researchers adjusts the hormonal balance in the brains of homosexual rams so that they are more inclined to mate with ewes.

Actually I can think of certain rural counties in Arkansas, my home state, where this stuff should be sprayed like agent orange.  Or at least that what the sign comming in from Memphis once implied: Welcome to Arkansas, it read, where men are men and sheep are nervous. 

But apparently one expert spokeswoman thinks the Oregon project is a really baaaad idea. 

The research, at Oregon State University in the city of Corvallis and at the Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, has caused an outcry. Martina Navratilova, the lesbian tennis player who won Wimbledon nine times, and scientists and gay rights campaigners in Britain have called for the project to be abandoned.

Navratilova defended the “right” of sheep to be gay. She said: “How can it be that in the year 2006 a major university would host such homophobic and cruel experiments?” She said gay men and lesbians would be “deeply offended” by the social implications of the tests.

It turns out that, to the herders dismay,  a lot of his rams have been listening to Abba. 

Approximately one ram in 10 prefers to mount other rams rather than mate with ewes, reducing its value to a farmer. Initially, the publicly funded project aimed to improve the productivity of herds.

I'm sorry, but this isn't a story; it's a farm joke.  It seems a bit odd to me to be worrying about the sexual freedom of a species that is frequently bred for slaughter.  We probably ought to consider the ethical implications of such a therapy for human beings well before Larry King starts pushing it on radio adds, but whatever they are, they surely don't apply to lamb chops. 

Holding On For Dear Life

Dan Sutton's lawyers argue that only conviction for an "infamous" crime allows the legislature to expel a member.  I have previously argued against such a notion.  If the Supreme Court knows what is good for it (and follows the law) it will leave a political question to the politicians in the legislature.