As a founding board member of the South Dakota Conservative Action Council, I thought I would comment on a Nov. 20 Daily Republic report on the organization. I appreciate the efforts to include Sen. Ed Olson's view as others have also compared the SDCAC to the South Dakota MAINstream Coalition of which Olson served as executive director.
Oddly, Olson claims his coalition was concerned about religious freedoms, but their secular approach was more about "freedom from religion" and against "freedom of religion." For example Olson said in December 2006 that people should not be "preached to from the pulpit" in regard to the issue of abortion and that if they are, the government should look at removing the church's tax exempt status.
As your Nov. 20 report stated, the SDCAC logo includes "Under God the People Rule." What your report did not point out is that it is also South Dakota's state motto and is on our official seal.
As the Declaration of Independence states that our unalienable Rights comes from our creator and the Constitution's preamble states its purpose of securing the "Blessings of Liberty," the South Dakota state motto is in line with the ideals of our founding fathers.
As a board member of the SDCAC, I hope to restore principles that fit "Under God the People Rule," including the four issues of advancing private property rights, education reform, tax and spending reform, and government transparency.
ADVERTISEMENT
"Under God the People Rule" tells us that freedom includes being self-governed. That makes government transparency a very important element. Knowing where our tax dollars are being spent is fundamental to the capability of being self-governed. Without it, tax and spending reforms are not possible.
On Nov. 2, your paper reported Olson saying the taxpayers may have to "pony up" to the Board of Regents. I say, "hold your horses," especially after looking into the details of the governor's FY2009 budget proposal.
This paper's Dec. 7 "Our View" talked about a 3.8 percent increase in state revenue. That is only in regard to the general fund, which totals $1.2 billion. The total state budget is over $3.5 billion after adding other funds and over $1.4 billion in federal funds. Let us not forget that there are people in South Dakota who pay federal taxes.
My numbers show an increase in South Dakota's general appropriations of about 6 percent from last year, with the Board of Regents looking at a 7 percent increase (not counting over $12 million in the Executive Management Department for high speed Internet). Since 2003, higher education has enjoyed a 62 percent increase while the entire general appropriations budget is up about 40 percent (from $2.5 billion to $3.5 billion). It is difficult to understand how we can call this a "limited growth budget."
We are being told that because of lack of funds, we need to force consolidation on our smaller schools. On Oct. 29, this paper ran a Bob Mercer column titled, "Small high schools hold key to future for state universities -- and South Dakota." I agree, but it appears to me the governor thinks South Dakota's future means bigger government driven by higher ed.
The SDCAC's education reform includes putting the decision of educating children into the hands of parents in the form of a voucher. I see that reform as the best way to save our small schools from the hands of those in government who think bigger is better. And I am including private, charter, and home schools in my definition of small schools.
And last, I would like to address the SDCAC's private property rights mission. I don't think I need to say much more than "TransCanada." Eminent domain needs to be looked at, as well as perpetual easements.
I invite others to join me in SDCAC's effort to restore South Dakota's "Under God the People Rule." Together we can make South Dakota better versus making its government bigger.
