The rubber is finally going to hit the road and Barack Obama and John Mc Cain are soon going to announce the selection of their Vice Presidential running mate. The Vice Presidential candidate usually makes little if any difference in getting votes but their candidacies do have certain predictable values in campaigning and garnering media attention with their announcement, acceptance speech, and the single Vice Presidential debate.

The Vice President should be someone that the President is comfortable with and hopefully ready and able to assume the Presidency in the event of a Presidential vacancy (death, impeachment, or resignation). It is worth remembering that when Harry Truman became President few expected he could fill the shoes of Franklin D. Roosevelt but President Truman proved more than up to the task of leading an America at War. Truman clearly outperformed expectations.

Otherwise Vice Presidential duties are 75 percent ceremonial, attending foreign state funerals, doing party fundraising, taking political pokes at the opposition party and perhaps if called upon breaking a tie vote in the U S Senate.

The almost Legendary, Vice President (during FDR’s first two terms) John Nance “Cactus Jack” Garner described the Vice Presidency “as not worth a bucket of warm piss.”

Sidebar – Cactus Jack Garner who had served as Speaker of the U S House of Representatives is only one of two persons who served as both Speaker of the House and Vice President – thus being Presiding Officer of both Legislative Bodies. It is little remembered but in 1940 Garner challenged FDR for the Democrat Party Presidential nomination.   Garner from Uvalde Texas when a member of the Texas Legislature led the fight to name the Texas State Flower the prickly pear cactus (thus the nick name Cactus Jack) lost that fight to the Texas Bluebonnet.  Garner lived to be almost 99 years old. He was born on November 22, 1868. In 1963 President John Kennedy who was in Texas on that fateful day called Garner and wished him a happy 95^th birthday.

It is foolish to speculate who each of the Presidential nominees will select. The short lists are in the media daily and the campaigns and parties float names daily. What is happening is that both campaigns are positioning themselves in the political center.

John McCain is a conservative but ideologically unfettered. Suggestions from GOP activists are that he must shore up the Republican Party base. Barack Obama who is in overdrive flip flopping his way to the political center will try to find a centrist to make his candidacy more attractive. One other important factor that may come into play is that both campaigns are indicating that the important battleground States are Florida, Virginia, and Ohio. I would look for candidates that will play into both the Center and these States.

Interestingly, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been mentioned as a possibility in either major party ticket. He won’t be picked.

On the Democrat side, I have no idea. Recently mentioned Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia seems logical but I think Virginia Senator Jim Webb, a former Republican and Secretary of the Navy for Ronald Reagan would have made a better choice (Senator Webb now a Democrat recently took himself out of consideration.) For the same reason Nebraska Republican Senator Chuck Hagel would be an interesting pick.

For the GOP there are several that seem to make sense. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney who has moved from left to right, former Pennsylvania Congressman and Governor Tom Ridge (though he is pro choice could get through the GOP convention), and recently added House Chief Minority Whip, Eric Cantor of Richmond, Virginia all seem to be logical and in the running. Cantor who is little known outside Washington is conservative but respected by the moderate Republicans. Cantor also is Jewish and besides doing well in Virginia and would have appeal to many Florida voters.

Finally Senator Joe Liebermann would make sense but he could not get through the Republican Convention and in any event it is a fight the McCain camp would avoid.

It will be an interesting three or four weeks.

To comment on this post go to South Dakota Straight Talk.

Energy Independence is a goal that our elected officials agree on. How we achieve it is totally a different matter.

The benefits of being energy independent are stable energy prices, improvement in our balance of payments and thus a stronger dollar, an improved economy, and an improved foreign policy. Ridding America of its dependence on foreign energy would be a major defeat to the Terrorists that want to destroy us.

With so much at stake, our Government continues to fail us. Just a couple of weeks ago U S Senate Democrats were going to solve high gas prices by raising taxes on energy production (remember when you tax something it gets smaller) and today their answer to the our energy crisis is to stop excessive speculation on energy in the financial markets. Tinkering with the financial markets might be justified but it won’t solve the problem and won’t produce one btu on new production. Republicans want more exploration – a far more constructive approach that will actually produces something.

I agree with the GOP on more drilling but the problem requires an even Bigger Solution. In the last few weeks some of our biggest thinkers have likened the Energy problem to War. Recently when Newt Gingrich was in Sioux Falls he used the War analogy saying America needs a Manhattan like project to deal with the Energy Crisis. Oilman T. Boone Pickens also uses the war analogy when talking about how we must deal with the energy crisis saying it is America’s biggest problem since World War II.

Recently former Vice President Al Gore used a brilliant analogy in comparing our Challenge to that of putting man on the moon (though Gore’s plan deals only with electricity generation and solely using renewable sources of energy to stop global warming rather than focusing on energy independence).

Energy Independence requires a National Goal (as Gore suggests) and becoming Independent requires a War Like Attitude (as suggested by Gingrich and Pickens). Americans need both the focus and the willingness to sacrifice.

To become Energy Independent our Government needs to set aside all the partisanship and using energy to posture for elections and political gain. We need a national discussion and put ALL possible solutions on the table for discussion including but not limited to: Nuclear, renewables (wind, solar, bio fuels, hydro, hydrogen, algae, geothermal) oil shale, massive investments for clean coal technology, more petroleum and natural gas exploration, more domestic refineries, 21^st and 22^nd Century conservation technologies including battery power, hybrids and technologies we haven’t discovered.

Energy Independence must be green and without question using the best environmental science. That being said government must have expedited permitting procedures that provides that projects and processes have in depth investigation but are not used by the tree hugger or NIMBY crowd just to delay or kill projects.

John Thune’s bill S3222 – The Transition Act of 2008 is a great first step calling for more exploration, more reliance on renewables, and finding better utilization of coal and oil shale but it does not go far enough. EVERYTHING needs to be on the table. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin who has been on Speaker Pelosi’s committee, Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, recently said we need a comprehensive approach.

Sidebar – Our Congresswoman has had several positions on ANWR, most recently I understand supporting some version of it.

The War of Energy Independence is a War we should have embarked on in 1973 but as former Governor Bill Janklow often said,” the best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago the second best time is Today.”

Check out –

Newt Gingrich - http://www.americansolutions.com/General/?Page=9d64a628-d028-48c1-840d-330aea987841

T Boone Pickens- http://www.pickensplan.com/

I have posted on our Government’s failure to deal with energy prices previouslyAll Talk No Answers and Gas Pains.

To comment on this post go to South Dakota Straight Talk.

The Campaign season is just beginning and surprise surprise our candidates and the media are not talking about the important issues and crisis of confidence our Nation faces but the same worn out Debate on Debates.

Senator Tim Johnson’s campaign is reprising their favorite tune of lowering expectations.

For many months following Senator Johnson’s brain hemorrhage during his recovery Senator Johnson was hidden from the public. Despite many repeated requests from the South Dakota media, other than a very select few friends and political allies no one was allowed to see or hear Senator Johnson. Although we learned later that ABC’s Bob Woodward did conduct several exclusive and what were at the time confidential interviews.

The effect of this self imposed seclusion beyond obviously aiding Senator Johnson’s recovery was to create wonder and wide speculation he was recovering slowly.  In late August, Senator Johnson had his Welcome Home celebration and South Dakotans were relieved to see that he was functioning far better than all the silence led us to believe.

What is transpiring in the Debate on Debates (specifically the Dakotafest forum in Mitchell next month) is just the reprise.

Senator Johnson’s campaign is doing two things. Lowering expectations so that when the debate that will happen happens, the story and political perception will be about just the fact that Tim Johnson showed up – not what anyone says. In fact the challenger Joel Dykstra will be lucky just to get into the story the fact that he was there.

Republican activists are taking Jarding’s hook and helping promote the lowered expectation with all their crying “Where is Tim Johnson and Why won’t he show up?”

Republicans would be far better off in stating that they are surprised considering he is a candidate for election to this important office that he might not show.

They might even add that they were looking forward to an explanation from Senator Johnson as to why Congress was on vacation for most of the month of August when there are so many important issues that need to be addressed.

There are timely and critical issues that deserve discussion as we look forward to a new Government next year – they deserve attention not how many debates, the format, the height of the podium, or other claptrap. South Dakota voters deserve better.

To comment on this post go to South Dakota Straight Talk.

Straight Talk Commentary – The very engaging and interesting article appeared this week in “The New York Times”. Essentially it says there is nothing funny about Barack Obama. I could not agree more.

My problem is that the Illinois Senator is inexperienced and an empty suit. We really do not know much about him. He has a shallow record both as Senator in Illinois and from Illinois. After losing to Hillary in New Hampshire he shifted his persona and positions from being everyman in Iowa to the States running up to Super Dooper Tuesday as the Liberal Candidate (reestablishing the Mc Govern coalition of anti war activists, liberal elitists, students, and African Americans.) Since becoming the presumptive Democrat nominee last month BHO now is reincarnating himself yet again.

What are Citizens to really know about the true ability and the political package we may be buying on November 4^th? I expect yet another reinvention as he makes his European and Middle East Tour. Europe may receive him like a Hero or a Rock Star.

Despite his lack of any governing political philosophy his talent as a speaker and the political personalization as “the agent of change” do capture the Public’s imagination if not their funny bone.  

The popular culture fascinated me and while I found nothing too humorous in “The New Yorker” magazine cover I can not understand that wile Barack Obama is truly not funny, he is also untouchable.

Want Obama in a Punch Line? First, Find a Joke

By Bill Carter

The New York Times

July 15, 2008

What’s so funny about Barack Obama? Apparently not very much, at least not yet.

On Monday, The New Yorker magazine tried dipping its toe into broad satire involving Senator Obama with a cover image depicting the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee and his wife, Michelle, as fist-bumping, flag-burning, bin Laden-loving terrorists in the Oval Office. The response from both Democrats and Republicans was explosive.

Comedy has been no easier for the phalanx of late-night television hosts who depend on skewering political leaders for a healthy quotient of their nightly monologues. Jay Leno, David Letterman, Conan O’Brien and others have delivered a nightly stream of jokes about the Republican running for president — each one a variant on the same theme: John McCain is old.

But there has been little humor about Mr. Obama: about his age, his speaking ability, his intelligence, his family, his physique. And within a late-night landscape dominated by white hosts, white writers, and overwhelmingly white audiences, there has been almost none about his race.

“We’re doing jokes about people in his orbit, not really about him,” said Mike Sweeney, the head writer for Mr. O’Brien on “Late Night.” The jokes will come, representatives of the late-night shows said, when Mr. Obama does or says something that defines him — in comedy terms.

“We’re carrion birds,” said Jon Stewart, host of “The Daily Show” on the Comedy Central channel. “We’re sitting up there saying ‘Does he seem weak? Is he dehydrated yet? Let’s attack.’ ”

But so far, no true punch lines have landed.

Why? The reason cited by most of those involved in the shows is that a fundamental factor is so far missing in Mr. Obama: There is no comedic “take” on him, nothing easy to turn to for an easy laugh, like allegations of Bill Clinton’s womanizing, or President Bush’s goofy bumbling or Al Gore’s robotic persona.

“The thing is, he’s not buffoonish in any way,” said Mike Barry, who started writing political jokes for Johnny Carson’s monologues in the waning days of the Johnson administration and has lambasted every presidential candidate since, most recently for Mr. Letterman. “He’s not a comical figure,” Mr. Barry said.

Jokes have been made about what Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton really thought about Mr. Obama during the primaries, and about the vulgar comments the Rev. Jesse Jackson made about him last week. But anything approaching a joke about Mr. Obama himself has fallen flat.

When Mr. Stewart on “The Daily Show” recently tried to joke about Mr. Obama changing his position on campaign financing, for instance, he met with such obvious resistance from the audience, he said, “You know, you’re allowed to laugh at him.” Mr. Stewart said in a telephone interview on Monday, “People have a tendency to react as far as their ideology allows them.”

Despite audience resistance, Mr. Stewart contended, his show had been able to develop a distinctive angle on Mr. Obama.

Noting that the senator seems to emphasize the historic nature of his quest, Mr. Stewart said, “So far, our take is that he’s positioning himself to be on a coin.”

There is no doubt, several representatives of the late-night shows said, that so far their audiences (and at least some of the shows’ writers) seem to be favorably disposed toward Mr. Obama, to a degree that perhaps leaves them more resistant to jokes about him than those about most previous candidates.

“A lot of people are excited about his candidacy,” Mr. Sweeney said. “It’s almost like: ‘Hey, don’t go after this guy. He’s a fresh face; cut him some slack.’ ”

Justin Stangel, who is a head writer for “Late Show With David Letterman,” disputed that, saying, “We always have to make jokes about everybody. We’re not trying to lay off the new guy.”

But Mr. Barry said, “I think some of us were maybe too quick to caricature Al Gore and John Kerry and there’s maybe some reluctance to do the same thing to him.”

Of course, the question of race is also mentioned as one reason Mr. Obama has proved to be so elusive a target for satire.

“Anything that has even a whiff of being racist, no one is going to laugh,” said Rob Burnett, an executive producer for Mr. Letterman. “The audience is not going to allow anyone to do that.”

The New Yorker faced a different kind of hostility with its cover this week, which the Obama campaign criticized harshly. A campaign spokesman, Bill Burton, said in a statement that “most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive — and we agree.”

Asked about the cover at a news conference Monday, Mr. McCain said he thought it was “totally inappropriate, and frankly I understand if Senator Obama and his supporters would find it offensive.”

The cover was drawn by Barry Blitt, who also contributes illustrations to The New York Times’s Op-Ed page. David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker, said in an e-mail message, “The cover takes a lot of distortions, lies, and misconceptions about the Obamas and puts a mirror up to them to show them for what they are.

“It’s a lot like the spirit of what Stephen Colbert does — by exaggerating and mocking something, he shows its absurdity, and that is what satire is all about,” Mr. Remnick continued.

Mr. Colbert said in a telephone interview that a running joke on his show has been that Mr. Obama is a “secret Muslim”; the New Yorker cover, he said, was consistent with that. “It’s a completely valid satirical point to make — and it’s perfectly valid for Obama not to like it,” he said.

Mr. Colbert said he had been freer to poke fun at Mr. Obama than other late-night hosts because “my character on the show doesn’t like him. I’m expected to be hostile to him.”

Mr. Stewart, who is also an executive producer of “The Colbert Report,” said the Obama campaign’s reaction to the New Yorker cover seemed part of what is now almost a pro forma cycle in political campaigns. “Nothing can occur without the candidate responding,” he said.

Bill Maher, who is host of a politically oriented late-night show on HBO, said, “If you can’t do irony on the cover of The New Yorker, where can you do it?”

One issue that clearly has some impact on writing jokes about Mr. Obama is a consistency among the big late-night shows. Not only are all the hosts white, the vast majority of their audiences are white. “I think white audiences get a little self-conscious if race comes up,” Mr. Sweeney of Mr. O’Brien’s show said.

Things might be somewhat different if even one late-night host was black. Black comics are not having any trouble joking about Mr. Obama, said David Alan Grier, a comedian who, starting in October, will have a satirical news magazine show on Comedy Central, “Chocolate News.”

“I tell jokes on stage about him,” Mr. Grier said, reciting a few that would not ever get onto a network late-night show (nor into this newspaper).

But he said of the late-night hosts, “Those guys really can’t go there. It’s just like the gay comic can do gay material. It comes with the territory.” Still, he said, he has no sympathy for the hosts. “No way. They’ve had 200 years of presidential jokes. It’s our time.”

Jimmy Kimmel, the host of the ABC late-night talk show “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” said of Mr. Obama, “There’s a weird reverse racism going on. You can’t joke about him because he’s half-white. It’s silly. I think it’s more a problem because he’s so polished, he doesn’t seem to have any flaws.”

Mr. Maher said that being sensitive to Mr. Obama was in no way interfering with his commentary, though on HBO he has more freedom about content than other comedians. “There’s been this question about whether he’s black enough,” Mr. Maher said. “I have this joke: What does he have to do? Dunk? He bowled a 37 — to me, that’s black enough.”

Mr. Kimmel said, “His ears should be the focus of the jokes.”

Mostly the late-night shows seem to be in a similar position.

Mr. Burnett of the Letterman show said, “We can’t manufacture a perception. If the perception isn’t true, no one will laugh at it.”

Mr. Sweeney said, “We’re hoping he picks an idiot as vice president.”

To comment on this post go to South Dakota Straight Talk.

Legendary Dallas County Sheriff, Bill Decker, when asked why Dallas had so many murders, said that Dallas can get hot in the Summer and when that happens, people can get pretty irritated.

Sidebar - Bill Decker during his career as either Dallas County Chief Deputy Sheriff or Sheriff (a period of 35 years) housed among his guests in the Dallas County Hoosegow, both Clyde Barrow and Jack Ruby.

While Pam may not be ready to shoot anybody, the Minnehaha County Treasurer is hot (at least under the collar) and clearly irritated.

Her interview on Friday with KELOland TV is titled County Treasurer Fed Up With New System and that is an understatement. (You can watch the video above.)

Pam goes overboard perhaps thinking she is back in the State Senate warring with then Senate Leader Mike Rounds (is there an element of payback at work here?) saying:

             “I am fed up.”

             “I have never seen anything in the history of South Dakota that equals this mess.”

             “I can’t imagine anything that could come out this bad.”

Pam Nelson is rightfully frustrated that the system is not working, that her patrons are made to stand in line, that her staff is stressed, and that she is not getting at least in her opinion adequate answers from Pierre.

That does not excuse her blowing up on camera. Part of me sees her genuine frustration but another part on me sees the Old Pol and Battler in Pam Nelson taking the political opportunity to exploit State Government’s apparent mishandling of the license plate issue.  Is this about fixing the problem or sticking it in the Gov's Ear?

The political fallout will happen without the mild TV tantrum but the high road would have been better to work at finding an administrative solution while the computer system is being fixed or at a minimum trying to minimize Citizen Frustrations rather than inflaming them.

Having this kind of interview was certainly not the way to persuade the Governor and State Government to fix the problem. Was she expecting help by saying in effect, this is the biggest mess I have ever seen.

Pam Nelson needs to cool off.

The Pam Nelson File

Pam Nelson was elected and served several terms on the Sioux Falls School Board. Then she was elected to the State Legislature where she served two years in the House of Representatives and eight years in the State Senate. In the Senate she served in Democrat Party Leadership, one term as Minority Whip, one term as Majority Whip, and one term as Assistant Minority Leader.

In 1996 she filed to again serve in the State Senate from her western Sioux Falls District but when Republicans recruited Assistant Sioux Falls Fire Chief, Dick Hainje (Hainje went on in 2001 to become Mike Rounds’ Assistant Senate Majority Leader and now is President Bush’s Regional Director of FEMA in Kansas City) as her opponent, Nelson decided that perhaps a better outcome would be to find another Office and she secured the Democrat nomination to the Public Utilities Commission. It was an open seat due to the retirement of Ken Stofferehan. Nelson defeated Republican Roy Letellier in a close election (48.2% to 46.8%).

In her 2002 PUC reelect as the incumbent Commissioner she found herself again facing another formidable opponent, just term limited Sioux Falls Mayor Gary Hanson. She had built up over her six year term a sizeable Campaign War Chest (if my memory serves of about $80,000). Rather than actively contest Hanson she employed her assets to assist Curt Johnson who was running against Bob Sahr for the four year term created by the death of Laska Schoenfelder. It was believed in political circles that if the Democrats could maintain a Commission Majority, Commissioner Jim Burg and Curt Johnson when elected would appoint Nelson (whom it was assumed would lose to Hanson)  as the PUC Executive Director.

During her time in Pierre, Nelson became the Democrats strongest Political Activist in the Statehouse and during the 2002 election cycle was de facto running the State Democrat Party.

Sahr’s defeat of Johnson caused Nelson to return to Sioux Falls. In 2004 she ran for County Treasurer against Sara Menjares. This November she is running for her second term without opposition, the Minnehaha County Republicans failing to recruit a candidate to this well paying ministry position.

To comment on this post go to South Dakota Straight Talk.

The current so called license plate crisis is unfortunately another very visible public example that is fostering public opinion that our Government is Broken.

You wonder if the State cannot even license motor vehicles, how they can do anything. The purpose of this post is not to asses blame rather to focus on how we get the wheels back on the train and restore trust in what we call Government.

Public trust in government institutions has been lost through a series of high profile events. Headlined by the perception of the mismanagement of the War in Iraq (or perhaps our occupation of Iraq) was bungled (read hear Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld), the response to Hurricane Katrina, the unfortunate high profile disclosure of the conditions at Walter Reed Army Hospital the public has little confidence in Government.

Adding to people’s loss of Confidence are high gasoline and energy prices, eroding home values caused by the subprime mortgage meltdown and now the confirmed Bear Market on Wall Street.

As a consequence Congressional approval ratings are at an all time low about 9% and the President’s approval rating is hovering around 30%.

That is what makes State Government’s response to the license plate situation puzzling.

First changing to the new system did not just come as a surprise. From the time the new law was enacted the Bureaucrats knew what their task was and when the implementation date was. This was not a tornado, forest fire, or blizzard that just showed up and needed an emergency response. Other than the “State’s Computer System” is running slow, the cause of the problem is not known. Presumably it is programming and speculating -inadequate testing.  No doubt the Department of Revenue will fix the problem - Hopefully very soon.

Minnehaha County Commissioners perhaps over reacting a little are calling this a State of Emergency. One wonders what they would call a tornado or flood.

There is no excuse for this but it seems to me that standing in lines and frustrations could have been avoided. Certainly Citizens wanting to pay for their car and truck tags and paying for their vehicle sales tax have every right to be frustrated if not mad. Even the Treasurer’s office staff has a right to be upset with an inadequate system. Of course it does not help matters that the Minnehaha County Treasurer, Pam Nelson is blaming Pierre.

The problem was first reported on July 1, ten days later it has not been resolved and there are still long lines.

Pierre reports they are working on the problem while Citizens are frustrated.

To put a temporary fix on the problem until a stable and functioning system is put in place, Governor Rounds needs to announce an Amnesty or Get out of Jail Free Card.

Whatever time limits are on getting license plates, renewing plates, paying sales tax, there should be a simple method or procedure that people can go to their County Treasurers office and have their documents or applications stamped (in effect get an excuse from the teacher) to return when Public Service Announcements have been made that a working system is in place.

Doing something to make government work might begin to restore trust in OUR government.

To comment on this post go South Dakota Straight Talk.

A different sort of drifter came hat in hand to the Sioux Falls City Council at Monday’s “Informational”.

Monday, Minnehaha County Government came with their hand out seeking a financial partnership with the City of Sioux Falls to provide not only what they believe will help address the homeless problems in Sioux Falls but also provide permanent housing for perhaps up to thirty five homeless persons.

As reported in Monday’s “Argus Leader”, County Human Services Director, Hugh Grogan, was seeking municipal government support saying, "My perspective would be, we need to know from the city that they are committed to the idea of providing permanent housing as a possible solution to the homeless issue, and to the idea of jointly funding that solution,"

County Commissioners, Carol Twedt and Jeff Barth also spoke to the need to deal with the Homeless and more specifically a program technique referred to as “Housing First.” While the County Officials emphasized they were not locked into any specific proposal they seemed anxious to have the City pursue owning the current Army and Navy Reserve Center on Russell Avenue and using it for essentially an apartment building for the (my term) most chronically homeless. The permanent housing was described as a Hospice for the Homeless. It was suggested that such a permanent solution thus was usually a last stop for many. It was stated that have a permanent home then gave social workers an opportunity to make real progress on other problems the client had. It was noted that these chronic homeless were in generally in failing health and their life expectancy was poor.

The County Officials were adroit in using a common negotiating strategy of arguing about details while just assuming that the City would be their financial partner.

From the discussion of the six City Councilors (Beninga and Costello as well as the Mayor were not present) they all seemed open to discussion and listening to the Q and A, watching their body language, and reading today’s press reports probably are divided on their feelings and support on this issue.

Homelessness is an issue in our Community and is an important issue that should be dealt with. Answers are not easy as the problem has many facets, social, economic, mental health and substance abuse among others. Without question the City Council and the Citizens of Sioux Falls and Minnehaha County want to deal with this problem.

A Few Observations

Generally the State has designated the County responsible for welfare and social services. This is not a City Government responsibility. 

City Government has its own obligations and challenges that they are responsible for. What would County Government be expected to do if they were approached by the City and asked to pay for street maintenance or water and sewer?

County Government is financially challenged perhaps more so than the City because Counties have growing responsibilities with recently rapidly escalating costs (Law Enforcement, Courts and Welfare) without the smorgasbord of revenue options that City Government has (property tax, sales tax, fees, and revenue funds).

The City of Sioux Falls however has plenty of its own demands at the moment. Obviously Lewis & Clark Water System is #1, the need to fund the Levee upgrades, Street repairs and maintenance, and even the so called quality of life issues (libraries, parks, and sports fields) for a growing City,  For example, making the choice of using funds for a Library for West Sioux Falls or apartments for homeless, the money spent on a library (a City responsibility) will positively effect many and by waiting even two or three years actually impacts many more people.In the case of young people not having ready access to a library can be a missed opportunity to nurture learning that is of lifetime benefit.

As I often postulate, when you subsidize something it gets bigger – in this case putting the chronic in permanent housing (that does perhaps solve the immediate problem) will in my judgment by its existence create the need for even more permanent housing.

Finally if the County or the City and County do decide to proceed with the Reserve Center or another property – they should consider partnering with non profits such as Habitat for Humanity, Salvation Army, other non profits and Churches. I would also employ Convicts to help with construction tasks as was done when our Schools were wired and the State Fairgrounds renovated.

We ask a lot from our Government, sometimes too much, but at the end of the day Citizens must insist that Government stay prioritized and on task.

To comment on this post go to South Dakota Straight Talk.

Straight Talk Commentary – The Washington Post article below dramatically suggests that Americans have once again fallen into what President Jimmy Carter suggested was a Malaise.

Sidebar – For a recent look at history perhaps repeating itself take look at Carter’s 1979 Malaise speech. The facts Carter recites demonstrate in particular Governments dramatic failure in dealing in dealing with issues, particularly energy independence.

As the WaPo article says, with all the issues and problems that seem to be overwhelming America, Americans feel little sense of hope that there is little chance of anything getting better.

If this article is on the mark and I believe it is - Restoring Hope is the marquis issue for the 2008 Presidential Campaign.

Hope will overshadow Change that eclipses the Economy and the War Against Terrorism. Like the elections of 1932 (Franklin D. Roosevelt) or 1980 (Ronald Reagan), Americans want a Leader who restores our Confidence.  

Everything Seemingly Is Spinning Out of Control

By: Alan Fram and Eileen Putman

WashingtonPost.com

June 22, 2008

WASHINGTON - Is everything spinning out of control?

Midwestern levees are bursting. Polar bears are adrift. Gas prices are skyrocketing. Home values are abysmal. Air fares, college tuition and health care border on unaffordable. Wars without end rage in Iraq, Afghanistan and against terrorism.

Horatio Alger, twist in your grave.

The can-do, bootstrap approach embedded in the American psyche is under assault. Eroding it is a dour powerlessness that is chipping away at the country's sturdy conviction that destiny can be commanded with sheer courage and perseverance.

The sense of helplessness is even reflected in this year's presidential election. Each contender offers a sense of order — and hope. Republican John McCain promises an experienced hand in a frightening time. Democrat Barack Obama promises bright and shiny change, and his large crowds believe his exhortation, "Yes, we can."

Even so, a battered public seems discouraged by the onslaught of dispiriting things. An Associated Press-Ipsos poll says a barrel-scraping 17 percent of people surveyed believe the country is moving in the right direction. That is the lowest reading since the survey began in 2003.

An ABC News-Washington Post survey put that figure at 14 percent, tying the low in more than three decades of taking soundings on the national mood.

"It is pretty scary," said Charles Truxal, 64, a retired corporate manager in Rochester, Minn. "People are thinking things are going to get better, and they haven't been. And then you go hide in your basement because tornadoes are coming through. If you think about things, you have very little power to make it change."

Recent natural disasters around the world dwarf anything afflicting the U.S. Consider that more than 69,000 people died in the China earthquake, and that 78,000 were killed and 56,000 missing from the Myanmar cyclone.

Americans need do no more than check the weather, look in their wallets or turn on the news for their daily reality check on a world gone haywire.

Floods engulf Midwestern river towns. Is it global warming, the gradual degradation of a planet's weather that man seems powerless to stop or just a freakish late-spring deluge?

It hardly matters to those in the path. Just ask the people of New Orleans who survived Hurricane Katrina. They are living in a city where, 1,000 days after the storm, entire neighborhoods remain abandoned, a national embarrassment that evokes disbelief from visitors.

Food is becoming scarcer and more expensive on a worldwide scale, due to increased consumption in growing countries such as China and India and rising fuel costs. That can-do solution to energy needs — turning corn into fuel — is sapping fields of plenty once devoted to crops that people need to eat. Shortages have sparked riots. In the U.S., rice prices tripled and some stores rationed the staple.

Residents of the nation's capital and its suburbs repeatedly lose power for extended periods as mere thunderstorms rumble through. In California, leaders warn people to use less water in the unrelenting drought.

Want to get away from it all? The weak U.S. dollar makes travel abroad forbiddingly expensive. To add insult to injury, some airlines now charge to check luggage.

Want to escape on the couch? A writers' strike halted favorite TV shows for half a season. The newspaper on the table may soon be a relic of the Internet age. Just as video stores are falling by the wayside as people get their movies online or in the mail.

But there's always sports, right?

The moorings seem to be coming loose here, too.

Baseball stars Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens stand accused of enhancing their heroics with drugs. Basketball referees are suspected of cheating.

Stay tuned for less than pristine tales from the drug-addled Tour de France and who knows what from the Summer Olympics.

It's not the first time Americans have felt a loss of control.

Alger, the dime-novel author whose heroes overcame adversity to gain riches and fame, played to similar anxieties when the U.S. was becoming an industrial society in the late 1800s.

American University historian Allan J. Lichtman notes that the U.S. has endured comparable periods and worse, including the economic stagflation (stagnant growth combined with inflation) and Iran hostage crisis of 1980; the dawn of the Cold War, the Korean War and the hysterical hunts for domestic Communists in the late 1940s and early 1950s; and the Depression of the 1930s.

"All those periods were followed by much more optimistic periods in which the American people had their confidence restored," he said. "Of course, that doesn't mean it will happen again."

Each period also was followed by a change in the party controlling the White House.

This period has seen intense interest in the presidential primaries, especially the Democrats' five-month duel between Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton. Records were shattered by voters showing up at polling places, yearning for a voice in who will next guide the country as it confronts the uncontrollable.

Never mind that their views of their current leaders are near rock bottom, reflecting a frustration with Washington's inability to solve anything. President Bush barely gets the approval of three in 10 people, and it's even worse for the Democratic-led Congress.

Why the vulnerability? After all, this is the 21st century, not a more primitive past when little in life was assured. Surely people know how to fix problems now.

Maybe. And maybe this is what the 21st century will be about — a great unraveling of some things long taken for granted.

(Straight Talk continues)

Endbar – For a look at the long term issues our Presidential Candidates are not talking about look at “Big Issues for the Next President” at Issuesandanswers.info

To comment on this post go to South Dakota Straight Talk.

                          Picture Credit to Kevin Woster 

I asked the following questions to Rob Skjonsberg, Vice President of Government Affairs at Poet.

Rob served as Chief of Staff to Governor Mike Rounds for five years and prior to that was Vice President and Community Development Representative for Wells Fargo in Pierre.

Q. What is Governor Mike Rounds single most important accomplishment? 

A. As governor, without question, the transfer of the Homestake gold mine  from Barrick Gold Corporation to the State of South Dakota and the National Science Foundation’s designation as the nation’s site for the Deep Underground Science & Engineering Laboratory. 

Elected leaders before him certainly deserve great credit.  And, our delegation’s support will be critical as the site moves forward. But, Mike Rounds was the guy that got it over the hump and frankly, kept it alive.  I was in the room when that project could have been declared dead on several different occasions.  The governor just wouldn’t give up on it.  We always found a way to move forward. 

A big part of that success was top-shelf people.  Guys like Dave Snyder, Dave Bozied, Casey Petersen, Jason Dilges and others – they all played critical roles.  We forget about the workers sometimes – but without them turning the wrenches, it never would have happened. 

Those days will always be embroidered in my mind, as the most exciting, challenging, game-changing moments during my tenure in government.  It’s very similar – I suspect - to the types of discussions that took place when Citibank came to South Dakota.  Those opportunities don’t come along very often – maybe once or twice in a lifetime.  So it’s important to have people in place that can close the deal.

Today, we can’t even fathom the magnitude of this project. It has the potential to improve the quality of life in every corner of our state and region.  I look forward to the day I can take my sons to Lead and tell them the story of how it all came together. 

Q. Part of your responsibilities at Poet is to lobby Government. When you were with the Governor’s Office you were on the receiving end of lobbyists’ efforts, are there any similarities in these jobs?

A. Public policy is public policy.  Whether you’re an elected official, government employee, private citizen or industry representative – good government should be the goal.  The process can get a bit messy and conversations can be fierce – but at the end of the day positive things will happen if those involved start and end with that basic principle.  I think most of us involved in the process have that as a common viewpoint.

Q. The tax credits and subsidies for ethanol and ethanol plants were established when crude petroleum was $20 per barrel or less. Today oil prices are north of $130, setting aside the energy independence argument, with petroleum at these historic high prices how do you justify Government support of ethanol?

A. I’ve always been intrigued by this argument.  Let me put it this way; if ethanol ceased to exist oil would be north of $150 and gas would be 60 cents more per gallon.  Not only should those original lawmakers be commended for their vision when oil was $20 per barrel – current policy makers should be doing everything they can to strengthen the renewable fuels movement.  Ethanol is the only immediate alternative to high oil prices.  The country’s return on investment has been and will remain phenomenal as long as good policies are in place.

But, I think it’s important to understand the overall tax structure and how it really applies from an economic standpoint. 

For example, South Dakota’s fuel tax code has numerous tax rates for different fuels.  Jet fuel, off-road diesel, off-road gas, aviation gasoline, compressed natural gas, liquid petroleum gas, and E10 & E85 all have a different tax rate than unleaded gasoline.  I don’t consider off-road diesel to get a “subsidy” because it’s not taxed the same as unleaded gasoline.  Simply put, I don’t consider it a “subsidy” if the tax is different than a comparable, in this case unleaded fuel. 

Actually, South Dakota has a myriad of tax rates, tax refunds, and tax exemptions for almost everything.  Take residential, commercial and agricultural land for instance.  If we tax residential property less than what we tax commercial property – should we abolish the “subsidy” for residential home owners and hike up everyone’s taxes across the board in order to achieve tax parity?  Of course not, because it doesn’t make sense.  That’s not good policy.

I’d rather just have the real discussion.  If someone wants to make a case that unleaded fuel and ethanol blended fuel should be taxed the same – they should just say that and call it a tax increase on consumers at the pump.  That’s a more reasonable approach and helps facilitate an honest dialog about the intent.  I’ll gladly have that debate.    

Secondly, as it relates to tax credits, at the federal level the blender currently receives a 51 cent per gallon tax credit.  The ethanol and corn producer don’t receive that credit.  And actually, the recent farm bill reduces that blender’s credit to 45 cents. 

Lastly, as it relates to taxation I have a very simple philosophy.  We don’t tax chewing gum and chewing tobacco the same, we shouldn’t tax foreign oil and homegrown, clean, renewable ethanol the same either.  One costs Americans nearly $2 billion a day and one is reducing the price of gas by 60 cents per gallon.  Again, good tax policy takes all things into account.    

Q. The Chief Operations Officer of Smithfield Foods (owner’s of John Morrell and Company) recently blamed Smithfield’s extreme drop in profitability (profits plunged 94%) on the consumption of corn for ethanol saying ethanol “is having a substantially adverse effect on our business… and it’s going to cause food prices in this country to go up.” How do you respond to the growing claims that corn should be used for feedstuffs and not energy?

A. I empathize with ranchers who are paying the same prices that we are for corn and we’re constantly looking at partnership opportunities from that standpoint.  I have less empathy for folks like the Grocery Manufacturer’s Association that have yet to actually defend their stance.  When Senator Grassley attempted to meet with them to discuss their position only one CEO agreed to meet.  To me, that speaks volumes about their weak position.

Let’s talk about the facts. The President’s Council of Economic Advisors has stated that ethanol accounts for between 2 and 3 percent of the overall increase in food prices.  That means 97% of the inflationary factor is being caused by something else.  If this gives you additional insight, in 1947 a bushel of corn and a barrel of oil were priced the same at $2.16.  It’s not that hard to figure out what’s driving price increases.    

A farmer receives less than 20 percent of the total food costs paid by consumers.  More than 4 out of every 5 cents of the cost of food, including transportation, processing, packaging, marketing, distribution and retailing are added to the commodity after it leaves the farm.

That’s why, in an 18 ounce box of cereal priced at $4.95 the farmer gets about 16 cents.  In a one pound sirloin priced at $7.99 the farmer gets about 85 cents.  Somebody is making money at those prices and it surely isn’t the farmer. 

Ethanol has been blamed for everything from the increased price of gummi bears to male pattern baldness.  And, I’m only half joking. Saying that ethanol is primarily responsible for increasing food prices, is ludicrous.

Q. Several years ago you were mentioned as a possible candidate for public office, is that something that could still be in your future?

A. I was humbled by the suggestion.  But, it just wasn’t practical at the time – I’m pretty sure I’d have lost the popular vote in my own home.

Right now, my hands are full with two young boys, a new career and a new community.  Once I’ve mastered those priorities, I’ll worry about the next chapter.

I’ll always be involved to some extent – I imagine.

Q. What would we be surprised to know about you?

A. My mother is a Sisseton-Wahpeton tribal member.  With a name like mine – most people are surprised to know that.  As unoriginal as it sounds, my family literally has deep ties to this state and I just can’t imagine being anywhere else.   

To comment on this post go to South Dakota Straight Talk.

“Forbes Magazine” reported earlier this month that Oprah Winfrey and Tiger Woods are number 1 and 2 on their list of the 100 most powerful and high paid celebrities.

Beyond fame and fortune both Oprah and Tiger are among the most widely admired Americans.

Sidebar – like Rudy, Hillary, and now Barack, Oprah and Tiger are on a first name basis with the World. In the World of Public Opinion that’s powerful, although it did not seem to help Hillary and Rudy.