Bluestem Prairie

Abortion poll: Is South Dakota the next Kansas?

While South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem insisted on national television that she'd force a raped 10-year-old bear the child of the man who assaulted her, a new poll suggest that South Dakotans think otherwise. 

Oddly enough, the Governor's Pure Prairie Pro-Life Positioning seems to end at the state's border, or at least when she's campaigning for candidates in other states, as Dakota Free Press and the South Dakota Standard have pointed out. Funny girl.

As John Tsitrian observed on the latter venue:

Noem’s outrage at the abortion of what she deems to be a precious life in South Dakota becomes a muted acceptance of the deed in Massachusetts.

It also exposes the ambiguity - some would say moral corruption -  that is the essence of situation ethics.  Noem is inflexible with regard to the preciousness of life in South Dakota, but appears to have some wiggle room on the subject when she’s in Massachusetts.  

That she’s on shaky philosophical ground is plenty obvious, but as a practical political matter Noem inconsistent rhetoric should be of some concern to her. There’s evidence that a majority of South Dakota voters don’t share her categorical abhorrence of abortion.   You’ll recall that we had two ballots on the subject, in 2006 and 2008.  In each election, the pro-choice vote prevailed by a 55-45 margin.  

That’s pretty convincing, red state that we are. ...

I believe that South Dakotans, who will likely be voting on the matter in 2024, will make it clear to her that the majority of us share the view of her Republican friends back east, wanting women to make their own choices about their pregnancies.

From South Dakota News Watch:

New poll: Majority of South Dakotans oppose total ban on abortion and want voters, not lawmakers, to make the rules
by Stu Whitney

Editor’s note: This is the first in a series of articles based on a July 2022 statewide poll conducted by South Dakota News Watch and the Chiesman Center for Democracy at the University of South Dakota, and is the latest segment in the ongoing “South Dakota Matters” series of polls and panel discussions hosted by News Watch.

A majority of South Dakotans believe the state’s abortion ban is too restrictive and feel that voters should determine the legality of abortion access rather than the state Legislature, according to a statewide poll sponsored by South Dakota News Watch.

The poll of 500 registered voters showed that a majority (57%) of respondents support allowing legal access to abortion medications in the state, including 42% who “strongly support” such access. Nearly two-thirds (65%) said they support having a statewide referendum to determine South Dakota’s laws regarding reproductive rights.

More than three-fourths (76%) of those polled support allowing legal abortion in cases of rape and incest, an exception not currently allowed under South Dakota’s laws, among the most restrictive in the nation following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe vs. Wade in June.

The random survey was conducted July 19-22, 2022, by Mason-Dixon Polling & Strategy and contacted voters in all South Dakota counties by landline and cell phone; it was co-sponsored by News Watch and the Chiesman Center for Democracy at the University of South Dakota. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.5%.

The recent landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs vs. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization removed the federal constitutional right to an abortion, leaving it up to states to determine legality and access. South Dakota had a “trigger law” from 2005 that took effect, making it a Class 6 felony for anyone “who administers to any pregnant female or prescribes or procures for any pregnant female” a means for an abortion, except to save the life of the mother. The crime is punishable by two years in prison, a $4,000 fine, or both.

“That’s the reality we’re living in right now,” said Rick Weiland, whose Dakotans for Health organization plans to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot in 2024 to legalize but regulate access to abortion in South Dakota. “I do think recent events have galvanized a segment of people who haven’t engaged in the past because now they see their rights being taken away.”

The poll also showed that nearly 8 in 10 respondents (79%) oppose criminal penalties for anyone who helps a South Dakota resident obtain an abortion where it is legal, such as in a neighboring state. An overwhelming majority (71%) also support permitting South Dakota residents to leave the state to obtain abortions.

Dale Bartscher, executive director of South Dakota Right to Life, declined an interview request from News Watch but was quoted by the Washington Post recently as saying he was “very interested” in preventing South Dakota residents from accessing abortion in other states.

“I’ve heard that bantered about across the state of South Dakota,” Bartscher told the Post.

Gov. Kristi Noem had no comment on the poll results when contacted through her office by News Watch.

Some voters balk at government involvement

The poll revealed no significant differences in responses based on age, gender or region of the state. Though there were partisan differences, a majority of Democrats, Republicans and Independents support holding a statewide abortion referendum; support legalized abortion in the cases of rape and incest; and support allowing residents to leave the state to legally seek abortions in other states. 

The majority of respondents in both parties also oppose criminal penalties for those who help individuals obtain an abortion in a state where it is legal.

Julia Hellwege, an associate professor of political science at the University of South Dakota, said that bipartisan agreement is likely attributable to shared distaste for too much government intervention rather than any sort of moral agreement on abortion.

“It’s important to note that (the poll) is differentiating the action of having an abortion versus criminalizing the action and role that the state should play,” said Hellwege, who serves as director of the Government Research Bureau at USD. “If the question was simply ‘do you support abortion?’ or ‘would you have one yourself?’’ there would likely be different results. These questions were about the state’s role, and a lot of South Dakotans, as it shows, don’t support the state intervening in the circumstances that were presented.”

Weiland, a former Democratic candidate for U.S. House and Senate, said he was encouraged but not surprised by the results. He said the responses show that abortion restrictions supported by Noem and the Republican-controlled Legislature are not representative of the general electorate.

“There’s been tremendous overreach,” said Weiland. “But the court threw it back to the states, and it’s reassuring that people in South Dakota want it decided by a ballot initiative and not by the governor or state Legislature. That’s exactly what we’re proposing to do.”

The constitutional amendment proposed by Dakotans for Health would prevent the state from regulating abortions during the first trimester. During the second trimester, the state could regulate “the abortion decision and its effectuation only in ways that are reasonably related to the physical health of the pregnant woman.” After the end of the second trimester, abortion could be regulated or prohibited except to preserve “the life or health” of the mother.

Weiland said the effort would return South Dakota’s abortion laws to where they stood before Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a landmark 1992 Supreme Court ruling that upheld the basic tenets of Roe while broadening the ability of states to regulate abortion with provisions such as waiting periods.

Dakotans for Health, which can legally start collecting petition signatures on Nov. 5, has a stated goal of collecting “60,000-plus” signatures using both volunteers and paid circulators to get the measure on the ballot for 2024. The threshold for signatures will be 10% of the total vote in the upcoming gubernatorial election (about 34,000 signatures using the 2018 election as a guide).

It wouldn’t be the first time South Dakotans have gone to the ballot box to determine state abortion laws. In 2006, the Legislature passed a law to ban all abortions except those done to save the life of a pregnant woman. The measure was signed by then-Gov. Mike Rounds, but opponents gathered enough signatures to refer it to the ballot, where it was defeated with more than 55% percent of the vote.

Two years later, voters rejected by a margin of 55% to 45% a ballot initiative that would have banned all abortions in the state except in cases of rape or incest or “to preserve the health or life of the woman.”

Weiland sees those votes – combined with recent polling – as evidence that South Dakota’s electorate is not as conservative on cultural issues as the state legislature, setting up a battleground between direct democracy through ballot initiatives and representative democracy through legislative action. Similar clashes will likely play out throughout the country, particularly in the 26 states that have initiative processes at the statewide level.

“South Dakota was the first state in the country to embed in its constitution this citizen initiative process,” said Weiland. “And here we have a very red state that has demonstrated on a number of ballot measures – from payday lenders to minimum wage to cannabis – that the voters are pretty independent when it comes to these proposed public policies.”

Battle lines drawn as midterm election nears

Hellwege noted that 49.5% of the state’s registered voters are listed as Republican, compared with 90 percent of state legislators. The fact that that nearly a quarter (24%) of voters are registered as Independent suggests that there are plenty of swing voters in play, many of whom likely lean Republican but could be wary of overreach on issues such as abortion.

In Kansas, a state that former President Donald Trump won with 56% of the vote in 2020, voters on Aug. 2 overwhelmingly rejected a constitutional amendment that would have allowed the Republican-controlled legislature to tighten restrictions or ban abortion outright, with 59% voting against the amendment. Turnout was unusually high for a primary election, with nearly half of registered voters casting a ballot.

That came on the heels of a national Pew Research Center poll after the Dobbs decision that showed 62% of respondents saying abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

“Tensions were really high not just in Kansas, but around the country,” said Hellwege. “This was sort of a first test of a post-Dobbs world where states decide the abortion question, and a lot of people were surprised at the result. On the other hand, the results really match what the (Pew poll) found in terms of what national political opinion looks like. I’m not saying necessarily that Kansas is in all ways reflective of the national environment, but on this issue the numbers line up.”

Noem, who faces a re-election challenge from Democratic nominee Jamie Smith in November, initially planned to call for a special session on abortion laws after the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade, but later reversed that decision, opting to wait until the 2023 legislative session. There is concern among some Republicans nationally that pushing for more restrictions could further energize Democratic and Independent voters for the November midterms.

“If these kinds of issues are sustained long enough, there’s certainly the potential for a big wave of turnout,” said Hellwege. “And the larger the turnout, the more likely that the vote will be close to what public opinion has shown.”

Noem has said that she intends to introduce new restrictions on medicated abortion – a combination of two pills prescribed in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy that makes up more than half of all abortions nationally. The governor signed a bill in March that prevented receiving the pills by mail from certified prescribers or pharmacies and using doctor consultations via video or phone as needed, a telehealth process approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2021.

In the News Watch poll, 57% of Republican respondents oppose allowing legal access to abortion medication, including 42% who strongly oppose. Of the Democratic voters polled, 86% support allowing access, including 76% who strongly support. Among Independents, 66% support allowing access, including 47% who strongly support.

Planned Parenthood sued and U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier granted a preliminary injunction to pause the legislative action, but that was prior to the Dobbs decision. The medication abortion question remains in legal limbo in terms of enforcement and constitutionality, as does the practice of traveling across state lines for reproductive services. President Joe Biden has said his administration plans to defend the rights of citizens to pursue those options as part of federal jurisdiction.

“Extremist state governors and legislators that are looking to block the mail, search a person’s medicine cabinet, or control a woman’s actions by tracking data on the apps she uses are wrong, extreme, and out of touch with a majority of Americans,” Biden said in a speech on the day of the Dobbs decision.

The November midterm elections, in which Noem seeks to retain her office and Republicans aim to take control of the U.S. House and Senate, could determine the degree of confidence and authority with which the GOP moves forward on the abortion issue.

Either way, it’s likely that the state’s ban will remain law in South Dakota until at least 2024, when voters could get a chance to weigh in.

This article was republished with the permission of South Dakota News Watch.

Graphics: From South Dakota News Watch. New poll: Majority of South Dakotans oppose total ban on abortion and want voters, not lawmakers, to make the rules.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

MN01: Rochester Post Bulletin fact checks staged Brad Finstad swearing-in photo

A couple of news items suggest that Brad Finstad's swearing in as Minnesota's First Congressional District Representative was an exercise in framing for November's general election, when he will face DFLer and retired Hormel CEO Jeff Ettinger and a couple of cannabis candidates.

Finstad took the oath of office on the floor of the House, administered by Speaker Nancy Pelosi. That official act was followed by a ceremonial swearing in by the Speaker. 

Then another photo op with the House Minority Leader "swearing in" the newly-elected New Ulm Republican.

Here's the ceremonial swearing in photo sent out by the Finstad campaign. Here it is in a tweet by KARE 11 Political Reporter John Croman:

New Ulm farmer Brad Finstad joined Congress today. The Republican defeated former Hormel CEO Jeff Ettinger 51% to 47% in special election Tuesday to finish the late Rep Jim Hagedorn’s term. He’ll face Democrat Ettinger again in November in race for a 2-year term in CD1 pic.twitter.com/T3lqHLUKfF

— John Croman (@JohnCroman) August 12, 2022

The photo was also used by the Rochester Post Bulletin, prompting a question to the paper's Answer Man. Here's the copy from Was the photo showing Finstad and McCarthy staged? And why?

Only the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives can swear in a new member.

Dear Answer Man: Can we get the real story behind the photo showing Congressman Brad Finstad being sworn in by Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy since it was probably staged?

T.J. Jefferson [ that name seems familiar--BSP editor]

Let’s just call it a sign of the times.

Yes, it was staged. There was nothing official about it. As to the "real story," it's not hard to imagine. If you are a conservative being sworn into Congress for the first time, you are not going to mark the occasion publicly with you in a photo with Nancy Pelosi, even if she did administer the oath. Finstad, after all, ran on "firing" the speaker.

Instead, the Finstad campaign suggested through its photo an alternative reality.

Last week, fresh off his special election victory over Democrat Jeff Ettinger in Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District race, Finstad was sworn in as the newest member of the U.S. House.

The Finstad campaign later released a photo of Finstad, GOP House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Finstad’s wife, Jackie. It showed Finstad’s right hand raised, left hand on the Bible as if taking the oath. McCarthy’s hand, too, is raised. Jackie, in the middle, is holding the Bible.

If you knew little to nothing how new members of Congress are sworn, you would have sworn that McCarthy was giving the oath. He wasn't.

The Rochester Post Bulletin used the photo Monday with an online political story about the upcoming race between Finstad and Ettinger, but to further avoid giving the impression that the photo represented an official swearing-in, took it down.

Oaths of office are officially and currently administered on the House floor by Speaker Pelosi, the two decade-long nemesis of the GOP.

When it’s the first day of a new Congress, the oath is given en mass. All members rise, raise their hands and recite the oath, said Ilona Nickels, a congressional and public policy expert.

For special elections, like in the Finstad case, the speaker gives the official oath on the House floor with the individual House member.

“It’s a longstanding tradition for all members to then go get their beauty shot for their vanity walls in the Speaker’s ceremonial office just off the floor,” Nickels said. “This isn’t anything particular to Finstad. Everyone does it and has done it for decades. It’s a photo op.”

But no new Member on the Republican side is going to send out that photo.

Thus a relatively newer tradition in which new members have ceremonial photos taken with their party leader (if they are not the party in power) has sprung up. Nickels said the practice has become common “since our political environment has gotten so divisive.”

“Given the toxicity surrounding partisan politics these days, it is totally understandable that Finstad would want a photo with his own party leader, rather than one touting the closeness to Pelosi,” she said.

An email seeking comment from the Finstad campaign was not returned.

Still, it’s one thing to have a picture taken with your party leader. It’s another to send out a photo that gives the impression of a swearing-in conducted by the minority leader.

McCarthy would like nothing better than to be speaker. And many are predicting he will be if Republicans take the House in the midterm elections this November. It’s a campaign photo.

Finstad, a former state representative from New Ulm, is running for a two-year term against Ettinger this fall. As part of his campaign, Finstad has made it his goal to fire Pelosi as part of a House Republican majority in 2023. . . .

He seems nice. Other media in the area were more straight forward about the ceremony. ABC affiliate KAAL reported Brad Finstad sworn into Congress by Speaker Pelosi.

In Finstad sworn in on another contentious day in Congress, MinnPost's Ada Radelat reports in Finstad sworn in on another contentious day in Congress:

With his wife, Jackie, in the U.S. House gallery and his seven children seated before him, Finstad took the pledge to serve the residents of the 1st Congressional District right after the House was gaveled in to begin another day of partisan bickering. . . .

But Finstad’s swearing in by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had a bipartisan, celebratory feel. Rep. Betty McCollum, D-4th, the dean of Minnesota’s congressional delegation introduced Finstad and praised his “life of public service” and experience in agricultural issues – something the new freshman lawmaker likes to stress. . . .

At a ceremonial photo-op with Finstad after the official swearing in, Pelosi told the new lawmaker he is the 431st member of the House and repeatedly complimented him on his “beautiful children,” which include twin eight-year-old sons.

“This is just a photo-op, but this is a special day for us,” Pelosi said. . . .

But there was one other bit of mythology Finstad promoted last week. That he's farmer, plain and simple.

How serious in Brad Finstad as a farmer?

We had more questions about the framing of Finstad identity in his swearing in.

Something Finstad said on the floor of the House after being sworn in has put us in a pensive mood. Via Twitter:

What an odd thing to say. Farmers & guys who got their hands dirty when I grew up in Southern MN always cleaned their hands & trimmed their nails before bedtime. My dad learned this from his fieldtiler dad. 🤷‍♀️ https://t.co/k74x56tCJd

— Sally Jo Sorensen (@sallyjos) August 12, 2022

We weren't the only one to notice the remark. In the Daily Reformer newsletter, Minnesota Reformer Deputy Editor Max Nesterak observed:

Rep. Brad Finstad was sworn in this morning as Minnesota’s newest congressman. He’ll serve out the remaining months of the late Rep. Jim Hagedorn’s term and then must win re-election this November. His first vote will likely be against the Inflation Reduction Act, which the House is expected to pass today. Gonna need a fact check on the claim he wakes up with dirty fingernails. 

Whoever suggested the stereotype of the dirty hands and fingernails seems to have grown up somewhere else, or missed Chasing Dirt: The American Pursuit of Cleanliness, as one scholar of American public health history put the transformation of Americans into a clean hand culture.

But the remark also sent us in another direction. In saying such a culturally insensitive remark about farmer masculinity, Finstad got us wondering about his career as a farmer. 

At Brad Finstad profile at the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library's Minnesota Legislators Past and Present database, we learned that Finstad worked as an "Agricultural Consultant." 

Does that mean farmer?

At the bottom of the profile, we read in a January 24 2003 Session Weekly profile, "Youth and Understanding: Finstad Brings Range of Experience with Agricultural Issues, Seeks to be a Vocal Ally for State Farmers" :

. . . The son of a farmer, Finstad understood the message he heard repeatedly from farmers while campaigning: "Bring back our kids." Finstad was one of 76 in his high school graduating class. Today, only 10 classmates live within 25 miles of their hometown. The others left for better job opportunities, lamenting the loss of an excellent quality of life, said Finstad.

Finstad himself originally wanted to farm with his father, Howard, on the family's 300-acre operation. But his father laughed when he heard that, said Finstad.

"He always would tell me, 'There's a better life than farming for you,'" said Finstad, who graduated from the University of Minnesota with an agricultural education degree. "He wouldn't be saying that if we got better prices for crops." . . . 

Finstad said he was proud to have his parents at his swearing-in ceremony Jan. 7. It was an opportunity for him to demonstrate to his parents that their hard work in raising him had paid off. The best part about the ceremony, said Finstad, was seeing his dad "trying out" his son's desk in the House chamber . . .

Howard Finstad appears to farm to this day, according to the EWG Farm Subsidy Database.

The father-pleasing career path appears to have been followed, for a while at least.

 A November 29, 2017 press release, Trump Administration Appoints Brad Finstad to Serve as State Director for USDA Rural Development in Minnesota, summed up his career to date:

The Trump Administration recently appointed Brad Finstad as the new State Director for USDA Rural Development in Minnesota. Finstad began his new role on Monday, Nov. 27.

Finstad’s farming family upbringing and 4^th generation New Ulm, MN area resident has provided the roots that have led him through a widespread multi-faceted career in support of rural prosperity. After graduating from the University of Minnesota with a degree in Agriculture Education with emphasis in Rural Leadership Development, Finstad began his career in the Human Resources department for Christansen [sic] Family Farms, introducing him to “real people, the real world and agricultural production.” From there, Finstad’s career took him on a whirlwind of rural government, policy, and legislative service spanning more than 20 years. From a brief role as Area Director with the Minnesota Farm Bureau, to agriculture staff for Congressman Mark Kennedy, to a three-term elected Representative for District 21B in the Minnesota House of Representatives, and most recently serving as Executive Director of the Center for Rural Policy Research, Finstad has indisputably served the interests of rural communities from the start. A family man to the core, Finstad shares his passions with wife, Jaclyn, and their seven children. . . .

Farming was added to his resume not long after that, though we don't know how much this disappointed his father.

In an October 12, 2021 press release, Minnesota Turkey Welcomes Interim Executive Director, Brad Finstad, the Minnesota Turkey Growers stated:

As a fourth-generation farmer, Finstad has been involved in the agricultural industry since childhood.  He currently partners with extended relatives to run the family farm.

“Brad’s farming roots make him a natural fit for working with our growers.  His experience will add great support to our industry, that is so important to Minnesota’s economy,” said MTRPC President, Pete Klaphake.

Finstad previously served as the Chief Executive Officer with the Center for Rural Policy and Development from 2008-2017 and was also the State Director for the USDA Rural Development from 2017-2021.  Most recently, he served as the President for Frontier Labs MN.  Finstad brings strong leadership experience to this role and has been highly involved in the agricultural industry for many years.

Finstad is so new to his congressional seat that his disclosure report to the Clerk of the House of Representatives is still found in searching the candidates' database.

Here it is:

Brad Finstad's financial disclosure report to Clerk uploaded by Sally Jo Sorensen on Scribd

The financial disclosure report to the Clerk mentions Frontier Labs; it is an active business filng at the Minnesota Secretary of State, with Nicholas Finstad as the registered agent.

Another business mentioned in the disclosure statement, Grounded Resources, LLC, has been on file at the Secretary of State's office since 2008. Brad Finstad is the registered agent. The filing faced Administrative Termination in 2015, but received an Annual Reinstatement in 2021.

As for the farm mentioned in the disclosure report? Finstad Farms LLC is an inactive business filing on file in the Minnesota Secretary of State's database. The business was registered on April 4, 2018. The registered agent is Nicholas J Finstad, who must be part of that extended family. Nicholas John Finstad received $4,718 through 2019-2020. We're not sure which other extended family members farm in Brown County--and there are payments going to other people named Finstad in the EWG database, though none named Brad to date.

We do know of a way that Representaive Finstad can demonstrate that he has been and is indeed a farmer. He can release his Schedule F (Form 1040), Profit or Loss From Farming from his income taxes for the last 10 or 20 years. According to Navigating a Schedule F Farm Tax Return by Kristine Tidgren a Staff Attorney at the Center for Agriculture Law and Taxation,  Iowa State University: 

Farmers who operate their businesses as a sole proprietorship or through a trust or partnership must file a Schedule F to report their farming income and claim their expense deductions. Income from farming includes income earned from cultivating, operating, or managing a farm for gain or profit, either as an owner or a tenant. Farm income includes that derived from operating stock, dairy, poultry, fish, fruit, or truck farms. It also includes income earned from a plantation, ranch, range, orchard, grove, or nursery specializing in ornamental plants. Farmers who rent their crop ground to a tenant only report the rental income on Schedule F if they receive that income through the sale of crop shares and they materially participate in producing the crop. Cash rental income, on the other hand, is “rental income” reported on Schedule E.

It's not unusual for candidates for statewide and federal office to release tax returns. It's not rocket science; it's transparency.

When he was elected to the Minnesota House, Brad Finstad said he wasn't a farmer. Now he's bragging about being a pre-rural-electrification, pre-hot-water-heater era farmer who wakes with dirt on his fingernails. And he's not sworn in by the Speaker of the House.

Cornpone. Wash your hands, ladies and gents.

Photo: Brad Finstad and family shown in the ceremonial photo op following the administering of the oath of office from Speaker Nancy Pelosi on the U.S. House floor. MinnPost photo by Ana Radelat.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

MinnPost: if Klingbeil's petition on Westrom's residency prevails, still chance for GOP on ballot

We've been covering Torrey Westrom's housing issues in the new Minnesota Senate District 12 ever since we got the tip covered in Will 2020 redistricting plan boundary adjustment get snuck in to let Westrom live in lake house?.

That plan was abandoned, and Westrom filed for office using a new home his family and another guy had purchased just before the deadline for a candidate to establish residence in a new district. Questions about the move lingered and we reported Via personal Facebook page: independent candidate [Ashley Klingbeil]  vows to challenge Westrom residency.

We posted more details in Swift County Monitor, Black Robe Regiment look into MN12 Westrom non-residency claims.

At MinnPost, Walker Ornstein looks into what might follow if the Minnesota Supreme Court agrees with Klingbeil's petition in If a lawmaker violates residency rule, what happens with names on the ballot?:

Westrom challenge still pending

Westrom’s residency was challenged by a third-party candidate running to the lawmaker’s political right. The third-term senator — who previously was elected to eight terms in the House — lived in Elbow Lake. But he announced a move to Alexandria to run in an open district instead of potentially competing against Rep. Jordan Rasmusson, R-Fergus Falls, for the retiring Sen. Bill Ingebrigtsen’s seat.

Ashley Klingbeil, running under a party named “We the People,” and her campaign manager Christine Fischer, argued in court filings last week that they have video evidence that Westrom’s Elbow Lake home is in use while the Alexandria one is vacant and “appears abandoned.”

“No member of Torrey Westrom’s family was present at the property during numerous residency checks and no personal vehicles were observed on the property,” the petition says.

Westrom issued a written statement saying the allegations are “baseless” and are a “desperate attempt to distract from the real issues of the campaign.”

“I changed my residency to rural Alexandria before the deadline in full compliance with Minnesota Law,” Westrom said.

In Westrom’s case, Klingbeil hopes the residency challenge will lead to a two-person race between Klingbeil and the DFL candidate, Kari Dorry, Fischer told MinnPost.

Fischer said a special election “could” be ordered by a court, though she believes it would be unlikely since there’s time to correct ballots. “In my opinion the GOP had a chance to run a candidate and should not be allowed to replace Westrom with another candidate on the ballot,” Fischer said.

But that does not appear to be an option. State law says a major political party can nominate a new candidate if theirs is removed. And a special election would be called if Westrom is removed after the 79th day before the general election — which is this weekend. David Schultz, a political science and election law professor at Hamline University, said “barring anything really unusual” there isn’t wiggle room in the statute.

That means if Klingbeil succeeds, Republicans could either pick someone to run in the November general election or a February special election. In follow-up comments, Fischer acknowledged the GOP would have an opportunity to replace Westrom but said it would be hard for them to come up with an alternative in a week.

In 2016, the state Supreme Court ruled then-Rep. Bob Barrett didn’t live in his northeast metro district. He was removed from the ballot, but the Pioneer Press reported at the time that the court rejected an argument that the election should be held without a Republican. Anne Neu was named to replace Barrett and won a special election for the seat.

The option of the party to select a replacement for a candidate reminds Bluestem of the situation here in the South Dakota Senate District House races (in most state senate districts in the Rushmore State, house members are elected at large). When questions were raised about Logan Manhart's eligibility, he withdrew his candidacy and the district Republican Party leadership picked Joe Donnell to replace him. On the Democratic side, Jennifer Keintz withdrew her name (she was later selected as Democratis gubernatorial candidate Jamie Smith's running mate). The local party picked Retired Roberts County state's attorney Nikolas to fill Democratic spot on District 1 House race.

Meanwhile, the DFL candidate in the district is posting an ambitious door knocking schedule and material about issues on her campaign Facebook page:

We'll keep watching this story develop.

Related posts:

• Swift County Monitor, Black Robe Regiment look into MN12 Westrom non-residency claims
• MN12 Westrom residency challenge: Supreme Court sets August 15 deadline for evidence
• MN12: "We The People" candidate Klingbeil follows through on Westrom residency challenge
• Via personal Facebook page: independent candidate vows to challenge Westrom residency
• MN12: Ashley Klingbeil to challenge Torrey and Dorry from the right for state senate seat
• Will 2020 redistricting plan boundary adjustment get snuck in to let Westrom live in lake house? 

Photo: Torrey Westrom's new real estate purchase. We The People candidate Ashley Klingbeil believes she has evidence to prove Westrom does not, indeed, live there.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Press Release: MN BWSR awards over 1000 Lawns to Legumes Individual Support grants

There's more to pollinators than honeybees, a species in the headlines today at Minnesota Public Radio, Checking honeybee health by testing honey DNA.

That's one reason Bluestem has been such a fan of the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources' Lawns to Legumes program.

A new group of individual grants has been awarded the agency announced in a press release this morning:

The Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) has selected more than 1,000 Minnesota residents to receive Individual Support grants through the Lawns to Legumes program.

“Minnesotans are eager to help our at-risk pollinator species,” said BWSR Executive Director John Jaschke. “Lawns to Legumes provides the financial and technical support they need to play a hands-on role in benefiting pollinators.”

Funded by the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund, Lawns to Legumes offers a combination of workshops, coaching, planting guides and cost-share funding for installing pollinator-friendly native plantings in residential yards. BWSR partners with Metro Blooms and Blue Thumb — Planting for Clean Water to administer the program.

Individual Support grants reimburse Minnesota residents for up to $350 in costs associated with planting pollinator habitat in their yards. Recipients have access to workshops, coaching opportunities and gardening resources to help ensure project success. Recipients are required to contribute a 25% match in the form of purchasing materials, hiring contractors or as in-kind time spent planting and maintaining their projects.

Sign up for program updates to be notified of future grant opportunities. For more information on Lawns to Legumes, see BWSR’s website.

Congratulations to those who received a grant.

Related posts:

•  Lawns to Legumes program earned great media for MN; 5 GOP senators want to rob funding
•  Minnesotans, your yard can BEE the change: BWSR taking Lawns to Legumes requests 

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

MN Court of Appeals: DNR rule declared valid in part; MN Deer Farmers petition dismissed in part

A new decision issued Monday by the Minnesota Court of Appeals in general supports the rule-making authority of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources when it comes to protecting the state's wild deer herd from Chronic Wasting Disease found in captive deer herds.

The DNR and the Minnesota Board of Animal Health share Concurrent Authority Regulating Farmed White-tailed Deer.

Back in September 2021, we posted Bad news about chronic wasting disease at WI deer farm: straw meets camel's back?. 

As a consequence, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources annouced in a press release, DNR temporarily bans farmed deer movement into and within Minnesota to protect state’s wild white-tailed deer.

On December 6, the agency rescinded the temporary ban of deer movement, issuing a press release on December 2, DNR to rescind rule temporarily banning farmed deer movement into and within Minnesota.

In October, the new desision notes, Minnesota Deer Farmers Association, "a nonprofit corporation whose members own and operate deer farms in Minnesota, filed a declaratory-judgment petition with this court, challenging the validity of the rule."

That didn't go exactly as the MDFA wanted, but we suspect that MDFA allies, like Torrey Westrom, R-Elbow Lake/Alexandria, will attempt to both rescind the DNR's rule-making authority and the concurrent authority. Remember, Westrom put off hearing a bill drought relief for conventional farmers in February to instead consider the laments of deer farmers. And there's that family affair with deer farmers on the part of Senate Majority Leader Jeremy Miller.

The decision concludes:

The DNR had the statutory authority under section 97A.045 and section 84.027,
subdivision 13, to adopt an expedited emergency rule temporarily prohibiting the
movement of farmed white-tailed deer in Minnesota to prevent the spread of disease in
wild deer. MDFA’s remaining arguments regarding the rule’s validity are moot.

Here's the decision:

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A21-138 uploaded by Sally Jo Sorensen on Scribd

We hope deer hunters and other voters educate themselves about candidates' positions on fighting Chronic Wasting Disease and captive deer farmers.

Related posts:

• MN Board of Animal Health: CWD confirmed in quarantined Winona County captive deer herd
• Update: More on Miller family deer farm interests
•  Senate DFL Leader Franzen raises conflict-of-interest concerns in Republican leader's role overturning bipartisan vote to protect wild deer 

Images: Todd Miller (top); Facebook page posts about depopulating his deer herd. We reported in Update: More on Miller family deer farm interests that Todd Miller, brother of the MN Senate Minority Leader, was the 2021-2022 president of the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association. His leadership in the Minnesota Deer Farmers Association isn't limited to 2021-2022. ProPublica's Nonprofit Explorer page of data for the Minnesota Deer Farmers Association included IRS filings from 2009 through 2019; for 2013 forward, Propublica list the names of officers on the filings.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Dennis Anderson weighs in on Walz absence at GameFair, "lacking" conservation leadership

At the end of July, we posted Unforced error with homefield advantage? Game Fair candidate debate in 2022 hinges on Walz, an article that included Outdoor News Minnesota editor Rob Drieslein's editorial, Game Fair candidate debate in 2022 hinges on Walz.

It's not just a poor country blogger or Drieslein fretting about this.

In Sunday's Star Tribune Outdoors section, columnist Dennis Anderson writes in Whether born or made, conservation leaders are sorely lacking in Minnesota:

All of which is preamble to the news of the day, that Gov. Tim Walz has declined to appear at Game Fair (due to scheduling conflicts, he says) to debate his primary gubernatorial opponent, Scott Jensen, about conservation and related issues.

Granted, if the past is prologue, the debate wouldn't make or break anyone's political career. In 2018, Walz faced off against his then-opponent for the state house, Jeff Johnson, in a Game Fair debate, and conservationists who attended were 1) unimpressed by Johnson, who seemed largely clueless about subjects discussed, and 2) hopeful that Walz's better performance would bear fruit if he were elected.

Walz was elected. But his first term has born little, if any, conservation bounty.

It's true that the land- and water-stewardship record of his predecessor, Gov. Mark Dayton, has been a tough act to follow. But even by the low conservation bar set by some previous Minnesota governors — see Ventura, Jesse — Walz has been a letdown. Not least because, most recently, he failed to line-item-veto the handful of projects that Republicans schemed into the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund appropriation, absent consent or even review by the fund's overseer, the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources.

It should be obvious to Minnesota politicians, as it is to most everyone else, that the state's lands, waters and wildlife continue to be assaulted by us — everyone — as manifested most often by the grinding machinery of agriculture, development and an ever-increasing human population.

Now, we're ones for naming names, and wish Anderson had helped voters out and told readers which Republicans schemed projects into the ENTRF appropriation--and the DFLers who objected to that.

Related posts:

•  Unforced error with homefield advantage? Game Fair candidate debate in 2022 hinges on Walz
•  Session Daily: Environment committee approves changes to distribution of lottery sales funds, LCCMR composition
•  Minnesota House passes ENRTF appropriations 
•  Session Daily: ENRTF appropriations OK’d despite no LCCMR recommendation 

Photo: The then-candidates for governor Tim Walz (DFL) and Jeff Johnson (GOP) drew a healthy crowd to Game Fair during election season 2018, and state conservation leaders would like to hold a similar discussion with candidates for the office again in 2022.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

MN Iron Range Sen. David Tomassoni dies at 69

We'll be back tomorrow with original coverage after a day consumed by errands and news tips. Bluestem would be remiss in not noting the passing of Minnesota State Senator David Tomassoni, I-Chisholm Like the late Granite Falls Senator Gary Kubly before him, Tomassoni died of ALS.

From the Minnesota Reformer:

Minnesota Iron Range Sen. David Tomassoni dies at 69
by Michelle Griffith

Minnesota Sen. David Tomassoni, 69, died on Thursday evening after announcing last year he was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS.

Tomassoni was first elected to the Minnesota House of Representatives in 1992 and the Senate in 2000 as a member of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, but after the 2020 election caucused as an independent with Republicans and served as president pro tem of the upper chamber. 

He had been in hospice care at a facility in Duluth. ALS, often called Lou Gehrig’s disease, is a fatal neurological disease that progressively degenerates the spinal cord and brain. There is currently no cure for ALS.

In March, Tomassoni helped spearhead a bill that allocated $20 million towards ALS research and another $5 million for ALS caregiving.

“The legacy he leaves is enormous, and his passion for public service benefited countless lives,” said Sen. Tom Bakk, a fellow Iron Range senator, in a statement. “His selflessness in advocating for ALS research could not save his life but may save the lives of millions who follow in his footsteps.”

Tomassoni was chair of the Higher Education Finance and Policy Committee and a member of the Environment and Natural Resources Finance Committee and Mining and Forestry Policy Committee. 

Tomassoni, who played professional hockey in Italy as a young man, was known as a stalwart defender of the Iron Range and its major industries of mining, logging and tourism.  

He is survived by his wife Charlotte, three children and six grandchildren.

Photo: The late Senate President David Tomassoni, I-Chisholm. Photo by Minnesota Senate Media.

This article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

MN1: Finstad to be sworn into House on Friday

Now that we got our snark out about Minnesota's First Congressional District's election in Wednesday's post, Branding and its discontents: Southern Minnesota voters dismiss Jeremy Munson again, we'll share some real journalism about the seat from the Minnesota Reformer.

Brad Finstad to be sworn into U.S. House on Friday
by Michelle Griffith

Republican Brad Finstad will be sworn into the U.S. House on Friday after winning a special election in Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District.

Finstad will finish out the term of the late Rep. Jim Hagedorn, who died earlier this year. A former state House representative, Finstad was also an official in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, appointed by then-President Donald Trump.

Finstad defeated Jeff Ettinger, retired CEO of Hormel Foods. Finstad also won the Republican primary in the race for the seat’s full two-year term and will again face Ettinger in November’s general election.

The 1st Congressional District spans the entirety of southern Minnesota’s border and includes Rochester, Mankato and Winona.

Political analysts said the closer-than-expected margin — Ettinger consistently beat President Joe Biden’s 2020 performance across the 1st — indicates an improving environment for Democrats going into the fall campaign. 

“There’s still time for things to snap back before November, but we’re no longer living in a political environment as pro-GOP as November 2021,” tweeted Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report. 

On Wednesday, Finstad appeared on Minnesota Public Radio and said if he was sworn into the U.S. House before the Inflation Reduction Act comes to a vote — which seems likely — he would cast a “nay.”

Finstad told MPR he hadn’t read all of the legislation, which includes provisions to lower prescription drug prices and historic federal investments to counter climate change.

“I would like to look into it more and read into it more, but from what I’m seeing so far right now, I don’t see how I would be voting for that,” Finstad said.

When asked if he would support certain parts of the legislation if it were broken up into separate policies, Finstad said he’s not sure since he hasn’t done enough research.

“I’m committed to a farmer mentality of rolling up my sleeves and making sure I’m a student of what’s in front of me, and that’s what I would commit to here,” Finstad said.

Photo: Brad Finstad won a special election for Minnesota's 1st Congressional District on Tuesday. Photo courtesy of Finstad.

This story is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.  Consider making a donation to the Minnesota Reformer here.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Swift County Monitor, Black Robe Regiment look into MN12 Westrom non-residency claims

It's not the first time I've been happy to have a subscription to the Swift County Monitor, which allows me to read all of Klingbeil claims Westrom doesn’t live in new Senate District 12.

Reed Anfinson begins: 

Ashley Klingbeil, an independent candidate running for the new District 12 Senate seat, claims that Republican candidate Sen. Torrey Westrom hasn’t established residency in the district and should be removed from the November ballot.

Klingbeil, a conservative running under the party label “We the People,” told the Swift County Monitor-News Monday that she had filed her case challenging Westrom’s residency this past Friday with the Minnesota Supreme Court. . . .

In our subscription, we read down column in the article which carries on to the fifth page:

Minnesota state statutes say that to challenge a candidate’s residency, a petition shall be filed with any judge of the Supreme Court when it involves a state Senate candidate. It also requires the petitioner to serve a copy of the petition to the candidate accused of not establishing residency in a district.

The Grant County Sheriff’s Office is responsible for serving Westrom with the petition of her challenge of his residency, Klingbeil said. They have the notice, she said. “But I don’t think they are going to find him,” Klingbeil added. “I think he went on a family vacation. I think he left, so I can’t find him to serve him.” 

In a YouTube interview, Klingbeil said Westrom was served on Saturday morning, with a jump drive that included the video evidence her campaign collected.  The article continues:

...Westrom’s staff also told the Monitor-News that it was no surprise that he would be spending time in Elbow Lake since Grant County is still in the district he currently represents.

We're surprised Westrom couldn't spend time at his Elbow Lake law office instead of his former home if he wanted to meet with constituents, but what do we know. More from the Monitor:

“The [ new home] property said, ‘No trespassing.’ We didn’t care. We did it anyway. What good journalist follows the rules? There is no way you can hide out behind a six-foot fence that says private property and say that you live there,” Klingbeil told the Monitor-News. The property is overgrown, and the house is empty with no furniture in it, she said. “You can’t say that nobody has the right to come and expose that.

“He didn’t even try…” to conceal his not moving to Douglas County,” Klingbeil claims. “That is the part that boggles my mind the most. Move some furniture over and pretend that you live there, right? He didn’t even try to protect his claim. Is that arrogance?”

For many nights, Klingbeil said, she sat in Elbow Lake until 11:30 at night watching Westrom’s house. “They were there every time, lights on, occupying the home. And, of course, we documented the empty house where he said he lived.”

Klingbeil and her supporters have taken photos they say support their allegations. She brought the claim to the Grant County attorney, who told her that it was “out of his realm and that she needed to bring the claim to the Minnesota Supreme Court.”

There are six or seven documents that Klingbeil says she is ready to submit to the Supreme Court included her notarized petition and exhibit list. There are documents from observers of both the Alexandria property and the Elbow Lake properties that were under simultaneous observation, she said.

There are six or seven documents that Klingbeil says she is ready to submit to the Supreme Court included her notarized petition and exhibit list. There are documents from observers of both the Alexandria property and the Elbow Lake properties at were under simultaneous observation, she said.

Klingbeil’s claim that Westrom is not living at his new residence isn’t the only one this reporter has heard. Others in Elbow Lake have made the same claim to the Grant County Herald staff.

She went to Grant County Sheriff Mark Haberer with her claims that Westrom was living in Elbow Lake, not on Lake Mary as he claimed. Klingbeil said he was helpful and told her, “Oh, no, Torrey lives here right in town, and I can’t believe he is doing this. The whole town knows that he is just right there.”

When contacted Sunday about Klingbeil’s comments, Haberer said, “I do not recall giving Ashley any information regarding when or where Torrey has been living this past summer. I did tell her that throughout the summer, I have seen what appears to be a cleaning up and a moving process taking place at the Elbow Lake address.” He also told her that he had not seen much activity around the Westrom house in Elbow Lake.

“I personally have no information regarding if Torrey was living there or not, and I certainly have had no conversations with people around Elbow Lake about Torrey’s residency prior to learning of Ashley’s investigation of which those conversations have only been with the staff at the sheriff’s office and the county attorney’s office.

Tuesday, Aug. 2, Haberer received a packet from Grant County Attorney Justin Anderson that contained documents Klingbeil had provided in her assertion that Westrom hadn’t established residency in Douglas County.

Uncertain about his role in her claim, Haberer contacted the Minnesota Secretary of State Office and was told that removing a candidate from a ballot was a civil matter. A couple of days later he informed Klingbeil of the process necessary to serve a petition to Westrom through the sheriff’s office.

Haberer also said that he had told Klingbeil that some of the tactics she had used in collecting information on Westrom’s residency “were concerning.” . . .

There's more, but readers should subscribe to access the paper, as we did around the time we posted  Associated Press: In Benson, Minnesota, two warring visions of America on one block.

Klingbeil has shared more information on her personal Facebook page about press coverage of  her petition, including Westrom attempting to "weaponize" the local sheriff's office.  She alleges:

As a poor country blogger, I try not to trespass when chasing a story (telephoto lenses are helpful) but perhaps there's a realtor journalist exemption somewhere in Minnesota law.

She also posts a link to a YouTube on Todd Carlton Pearson's "Minnesota Black Robe Regiment" channel. Pearson lives in Spring Valley, in Southeastern Minnesota, known for going to neighboring towns, like Rochester and Owatonna, to test the limits of civility at public meetings. There's a good piece on the national "Black Robe Regiment" trope here at the Washington Post.

Here's the YouTube , in which Peason remotely interviews Klingbeil and Fischer:

She's also posted a playlist of her video evidence on YouTube as MN Court of Appeals Case #A22-1112 Video Evidence Files. Those video files do not appear to involve a fixed trail cam, as was used by those challenged Representative Bob Barrett's residency years ago. 

Make of it what you will. Research about the third owner of the home we posted here is mentioned in the interview, but not the name of the "leftist" blog that published it.

Earned media and the MN12 money chase

Klingbeil received $1,316.17 in individual contributions before the July Pre-Primary Report deadline, and ended the reporting period with $391.71 cash on hand. She also reported that campaign chair Christine Fischer loaned the campaign $1,239.63 and paid Fischer $294.97 back, so the campaign still owes Fischer $944.66. Fischer is one of the petitioners on the filing challenging Westrom's residency.

What Klingbeil can't buy in ads or campaign literature, she's certainly getting in "earned media," though a loss in court may demonstrate not all media is good media.

The other candidates in the race? As a veteran candidate, Republican Senator Westrom started the year with $33,853.67 cash on hand; he raised $38,250.02 and spent $5,647.98, closing the period with $66,455.71 cash on hand. Kari Dorry, the DFL endorsed candidate, started the year with $7,217.22 in the bank, raised $35,602.29 and spent $18,296.18, closing with $24,523.33.

Meanwhile, she's getting ready for a chance to talk with voters at the Stevens County Fair:

Related posts:

• MN12 Westrom residency challenge: Supreme Court sets August 15 deadline for evidence
• MN12: "We The People" candidate Klingbeil follows through on Westrom residency challenge
• Via personal Facebook page: independent candidate vows to challenge Westrom residency
• MN12: Ashley Klingbeil to challenge Torrey and Dorry from the right for state senate seat
• Will 2020 redistricting plan boundary adjustment get snuck in to let Westrom live in lake house? 

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

PACT Act passed by Congress, but challenges await South Dakota veterans needing care

Back in March, we posted the South Dakota News Watch story South Dakota Iraq War veteran denied benefits after exposure to toxic burn pits.

Since then, the PACT Act, legislation to aid veterans afflicted by exposure to burn pits in Iraq and Afghanistan, passed in both chambers, and is now law. 

South Dakota News Watch Stu Whitney takes a close look at the issue in Burn pit legislation passed by Congress, but challenges await veterans needing care:

Combat veterans in South Dakota are encouraged by new legislation in Congress to expand treatment and benefits for soldiers exposed to toxic burn pits during deployment overseas, but questions remain about the federal government’s ability to effectively provide the needed health care.

Those questions partly explain why Republican senators John Thune and Mike Rounds of South Dakota opposed the PACT Act initially, voting against it twice before public pressure and an agreement to consider GOP amendments swayed their votes to the yes column on Aug. 2. The measure passed the Senate by a vote of 86-11; it was signed into law by President Joe Biden on Aug. 10.

“We want to make promises that we can actually keep,” Rounds told News Watch, referring to backlogs in Department of Veterans Affairs processing that have delayed healthcare claims and referrals, sparking recent controversy and a change of VA leadership in Sioux Falls. “The VA has made it very clear that it can’t handle the influx of additional veterans that are going to be coming forward.”

The Honoring our Promises to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act expands healthcare eligibility to about 3.5 million veterans exposed to toxic smoke from burn pits used to dispose of chemicals, munitions and other hazardous materials, mostly in Iraq and Afghanistan, while also extending coverage for illnesses linked to the Agent Orange herbicide in Vietnam.

With an estimated cost of $280 billion over 10 years, the measure also directs more funding toward VA healthcare centers and claims processing, though Rounds and Thune say such efforts will fall short of meeting the increased demand in South Dakota, which has nearly 56,000 veterans, comprising 8.5% of the state’s total population, higher than the national average of 7.1%, according to the 2020 U.S. Census.

U.S. Rep. Dusty Johnson cited the similar logistical concerns while voting against the PACT Act in the House of Representatives, where it passed by a margin of 342-88 in July.

Tom Hafner, state commander of Veterans of Foreign Wars in South Dakota, admitted that procedural issues exist but said those concerns should not have caused South Dakota’s congressional delegation to oppose the groundbreaking veterans aid package.

“I was disappointed,” said Hafner, 73, who served as command sergeant major of his Army National Guard unit during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2004-05. “They talk about taking care of veterans, and this was one area where that could happen. Whether the VA can adapt or handle more cases shouldn’t have been their concern at the congressional level. Their concern should have been what was good for the veterans of South Dakota.”

Hafner recalled burn pits being a “common, everyday occurrence” during his time in Iraq with the 153rd Engineer Battalion out of Huron. He is one of nearly 24,000 veterans in South Dakota who served in either the Persian Gulf War or post-9/11 operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“I would venture to say that nearly every veteran who was deployed to Iraq was exposed to some sort of toxic fumes,” said Hafner, who lives in Parkston. “You’d go by burning oil pits that were smoldering constantly, and there was no way to get away from it. But I don’t think anybody thought anything of it, except in hindsight.”

Hafner suffers from rhinitis, a respiratory condition that causes congestion and makes it difficult to breathe at night. The VA last year added rhinitis and chronic asthma to its list of presumptive conditions, meaning Gulf War era and post-9/11 veterans diagnosed with the ailment are presumed to have gotten it from military service and are covered for treatment through the VA.

The PACT Act adds 23 illnesses to the list of presumptive conditions, including brain cancer, pancreatic cancer and lymphoma. Before this legislation, many veterans have faced situations where they had to prove that their ailments were linked to military service, using VA clinic visits and an appeal process.

This comes at a time of greater recognition of mental illness in the military, with suicide rates of military service members and veterans spiking in recent years, according to U.S. Department of Defense data.

“When you’re that young, it’s all about the mission,” said Connie Johnson, who served in the Army as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003-04. “You do what you’re told and serve your country and you’re not thinking about your health. Then 10 or 15 years later your body is like, ‘Now you’re going to pay for it,’ whether that’s physically or mentally. And we’re paying for it now. That’s OK, because we did volunteer our time. We just want people to recognize that we served our country and put ourselves in harm’s way, and now some of us are sick and want to be taken care of. That’s not a selfish thing. It’s OK to want to be taken care of.”

Greater awareness about burn pits and broader access to care is important, Connie Johnson added. But expanding the number of veterans who are eligible for care without addressing flaws in the system has her worried about more procedural bottlenecks and more pain and frustration.

“The VA can’t handle us already,” said Johnson, a 38-year-old Elkton native who serves as president of the South Dakota Veterans Council. “I’m worried that it’s just going to cause more heartache.”

Bureaucratic bottlenecks for veterans
Johnson received the Army Commendation Medal and a Purple Heart for injuries suffered when her 101st Military Police Company convoy was struck by a roadside bomb in northern Iraq. She was able to return to duty but dealt with nerve damage and post-traumatic stress disorder after returning to South Dakota, with scars on her neck as a remnant of war.

Because of her documented injuries and medals, Johnson’s experience with continuing care through the VA was mostly positive. But as she became more active in advocating for veterans throughout the state, she realized that her situation was not necessarily the norm.

“I had access that many veterans didn’t have,” said Johnson, a South Dakota State University alum who serves as the school’s coordinator of veteran affairs. “There are people, some of whom went through more than I experienced, who have had to scratch and claw their way into the system. That’s a serious flaw in the process.”

Many of these issues stem from implementation of the VA Mission Act of 2018, which established a Community Care program with the aim of integrating VA medical facilities with private doctors and clinics. This partial privatization was meant to allow more veterans, especially those in rural or remote areas, to receive care without having to physically travel to a VA facility.

But Rounds, one of just five senators to vote against the Mission Act in the Senate, points out that the process creates bureaucratic hurdles. Appointments and claims still must be processed and approved through Veterans Affairs, which in many cases lacks the staff and infrastructure to meet the demand, Rounds said.

“They put gatekeepers in place to keep veterans away from local doctors,” said Rounds, who attended a forum in Sioux Falls in February 2022 to hear veterans air grievances about Community Care in the Sioux Falls VA Health Care System, which serves about 30,000 enrollees. “We wanted to open it up so vets could go to the doctor of their choice and the VA would pick up the bill. The reason the VA is fighting it is that it takes business away from their own facilities, and they also can’t save money by slowing down the services being provided. That’s what the PACT Act will do in its current form. It will delay services for veterans because they don’t have enough resources right now to provide those services.”

In September 2020, the U.S. Government Accountability Office released a review of the Community Care program nationally, noting that the VA had not established a “timeliness goal” for veteran care and that the program was understaffed in many locations. It also pointed out that few community providers were using the VA’s software system to exchange information electronically, leading to backlogs and extended wait times for claims or appointments.

Earlier this year, Lisa Simoneau was reassigned as director of the Sioux Falls VA Health Care System amid concerns about the program, including reports that some vets were placed on hold for nearly an hour as they tried to make appointments. The acting director is Dr. Timothy Pendergrass, who was not made available for an interview with News Watch.

Pendergrass said in a statement that the longest wait time for the week of July 25-29 was four minutes and the average time a scheduler was on the phone was 3:39, according to Sioux Falls VA data.

“We continue to make improvements to provide the best care for our veterans,” Pendergrass wrote in the statement. “Reducing call times was one of our main priorities since this issue was identified and over the last six months, we have made significant changes and improved processes to make scheduling care in the community easier for veterans.”

Greg Whitlock, Secretary of the South Dakota Department of Veterans Affairs, said that while claims decisions and treatment occur through the federal VA system, his department works to help veterans prepare their paperwork and navigate the process with county and tribal service officers throughout the state.

“As veterans grow older, they might not have a smartphone or computer at home to file that claim,” said Whitlock, who has served in the South Dakota Army National Guard since 1975. “Will we see an influx [with the passage of the PACT Act]? Probably. But I think we have the staff to take care of everything in a timely manner, and then it’s up to the VA to process that.”

Connie Johnson has heard much of this talk before. She prefers to take matters into her own hands, advocating for fellow veterans through the Wounded Warrior Project and her work with the Veterans Council and SDSU. She’s married to a former Marine and has three children in addition to running a flower business on her property north of Brandt, 35 miles northwest of Brookings, making her sensitive to the plight of those who have not been as fortunate since returning home.

“There might be more legislation on the way, but as a human being and a veteran, at the cost of what?” Johnson said. “How many hopeless nights do veterans have to go through as they wait for the VA to get its [act] together based on budget numbers and legislative concerns? Because none of that stuff moves fast, and that makes me really sad.”

Political pressure plays a role
Thune and Rounds raised eyebrows among veterans’ groups by standing against the PACT Act in the initial vote June 16, when it passed the Senate 84-14. The burn pits legislation had bipartisan support after being pushed by Biden in his State of the Union speech in March, and both South Dakota senators have forged a political reputation as supporters of veterans’ causes, though neither served in the armed forces.

Controversy flared more than a month later, when the bill had to be voted on again due to a technical issue that originated in the House of Representatives. This time, the bill failed 55-42 in a procedural vote in the Senate, with 25 Republican senators withdrawing their support and Thune and Rounds remaining against it.

Democrats accused their GOP counterparts of lashing out in retaliation for legislative maneuvers that same day that made it possible to pass the Inflation Reduction Act, a victory for the Biden administration. Republicans responded by accusing Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of preventing their amendments on the PACT Act from reaching the floor.

With the burn pits legislation in limbo during this standoff, comedian Jon Stewart, a longtime advocate for veterans and 9/11 first responders, railed against Republican holdouts as their withdrawal of support for the bill in the Senate became national news.

“It is despicable to continue to use Americans, men and women who are fighting for this country, as a political cause for anger you have about separate issues,” Stewart told reporters outside the Capitol. “I’m used to the hypocrisy. I’m used to all of it, but I am not used to the cruelty.”

Rounds, who serves on the Senate Committee on Armed Services, declined to directly respond to Stewart but pointed to a lack of general understanding about the complexities of the VA process and implementation of the Mission Act.

“We’ll take all the help we can get in fighting for veterans,” Rounds told News Watch. “But people really should have accurate information, or it comes back to bite them later on. It’s one thing to make a promise that you’re going to provide all these benefits, but if you don’t have a system that can actually provide them, you haven’t helped the veterans anyway.”

The fact that Rounds and Thune ultimately voted for the PACT Act sheds light on the liability of being on the wrong side of an emotional issue that gains political momentum and which relates to veterans care. No lawmaker, especially from a conservative state with a rich history of military service, wants to be seen as not supporting veterans, regardless of the complexities involved.

Rounds earlier co-sponsored a Senate bill with a much more modest price tag that would have extended the eligibility deadline for combat veterans from five years after their discharge to 10 years while also providing a one-year application window for those who already missed the deadline.

The $1 billion measure, which Rounds called the first phase of a three-phase process, would also have mandated education and training for VA personnel on toxic exposures and expanded federal research in the field.
But the more sweeping PACT Act is the one that came back to the House, though Rep. Johnson voted against it and cast doubt on whether the White House-favored measure could pass the Senate due to the substantial budget numbers involved.

Part of the GOP opposition stemmed from Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey’s claim that the bill “allowed $400 billion of current spending to be moved from the discretionary to the mandatory spending category,” which he said would free up space under spending caps elsewhere that could be used on items not related to veteran care.

“Most of us think [the Democrats] did that on purpose so they can spend that in other areas,” said Rounds. “Now that we’ve drawn attention to it, it will be more difficult for them to get away with it.”

Toomey’s amendment to address that issue failed in the Senate on Aug. 2, as did an amendment from Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., to allow veterans to see a doctor in their community for a primary care appointment that would be reimbursed but not processed by the VA.

When the amendments failed and voting on the PACT Act started, Thune and Rounds joined 84 other senators in voting yes, though Thune expressed reservations in a statement to News Watch.

“Though I continue to have some concerns that this new expansion could overwhelm the VA’s limited staffing capacity and claims-processing apparatus, I ultimately supported the legislation following the consideration of multiple amendments offered by my Republican colleagues after weeks of unnecessary delays by [Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer],” Thune said. “But at the end of the day veterans deserve our support and we will do what we need to do to make sure veterans get the care they deserve.”

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, drew some backlash for claiming that the bill expands presumptive conditions too broadly, noting that the CDC estimates that 116 million Americans have hypertension, which is one of the conditions presumed to be linked to military service under the PACT Act.

Rep. Johnson made a similar comment during an interview with News Watch earlier this year, saying that determining whether illnesses are linked to burn pits or other elements of military service “needs to be an evidence-based process.” Rounds, however, said the expansion of presumptive conditions wasn’t a factor in his opposition to the legislation.

“I don’t have a problem with that,” he said. “I think that’s the cost of having a war in the first place. If somebody does come up with a cancer or condition that’s unusual and they’ve been in these areas, I don’t have a problem with starting out with the assumption that it’s combat- or job-related. These individuals are going to need to get that care one way or another anyway.”

Finding hope for the future
For Jerry Somsen, the passing of burn pits legislation in Congress is not a time of celebration but cause for further reflection. The 54-year-old Webster native, who helped command an Army National Guard battalion during Operation Desert Storm from 2003-05, started experiencing tremors in his hands after returning home from Iraq, where he and other soldiers regularly encountered smoke on the compound from burning waste and munitions.

When the shaking spread to both sides of his body and down his legs, Somsen was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, a progressive nervous system disorder, though he has no family history with the disease.

“I didn’t have this when I went over there, and I came out knowing something was wrong,” the insurance executive said in an interview with News Watch earlier this year. “I guess you could say we signed up for it, but we didn’t sign up to not be protected once we got back.”

Somsen receives medication for his condition through the VA but has been denied disability benefits because the VA does not recognize Parkinson’s as being connected to burn pit exposure, citing research from the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. The illness is not listed among the presumptive conditions added by the passage of the PACT Act, so Somsen’s disability status has not changed.

“Parkinson’s is basically falling through the cracks,” he said the day after the bill passed the Senate.

But Somsen, who retired in 2009 after 23 years of National Guard service, sees a lot of positives from recent attention paid to the burn pits issue. He said he heard from veterans across the county after his story was featured by News Watch, and many of those service members will be getting help now that the legislation has passed.

“Anything we can do to help veterans out is what I’m after,” he said. “It’s amazing how many people have reached out to me to talk about what they’re going through, whether it’s neck cancer or respiratory illness or melanoma. I’m glad that people are going to get help, but it’s unnerving to hear about all the stuff that’s out there and wonder if something couldn’t have been done earlier.”

Somsen said there are good days and bad days with his condition. The tremors come and go without warning, but medication sometimes helps. He worries about his ability to continue to support his family and be active in the community, not to mention spending quality time with his wife, Kari, and their four daughters.

But he holds out hope, especially since the term “burn pits” has become part of the American vernacular – much like Agent Orange became associated with Vietnam – and public pressure has been brought to bear on leaders entrusted with overseeing the welfare of those who serve their country, even long after that service is done.

“It’s good to see more awareness, but it’s sad that these service members were exposed in the first place and there weren’t protections put in place at the time,” said Kari Somsen. “But hindsight is 20/20, and at least now there appears to be a recognition from the government that, ‘Yes, this is something harmful that service members were exposed to, and they should be compensated for it. I would say that’s a good thing.”

This article is published with the permission of South Dakota News Watch.

Photo: The U.S. military has often burned wastes and excess military equipment at foreign bases during wartime, including at this U.S. base in Afghanistan in 2006. Some veterans exposed to toxic fumes from burn pits are worried about their health. Photo: Shutterstock image via South Dakota News Watch.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6