Other Views: Change state contract system in South Dakota and Good news for WAPA is good news for consumers

Change state contract system in South Dakota

Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is today's poster boy for bad government. He's not the first elected representative to find himself in the public eye for less-than-desirable -- probably illegal and certainly unethical -- behavior while in office and he won't be the last.

That blatant abuse of his position to profit from "pay to play" politics provides another stark reminder that good opportunity -- in this instance filling a key Senate seat -- can go incredibly bad, and quickly.

The foul play we're unfortunate enough to witness in Illinois hasn't reared its ugly head in South Dakota; but could it?

Conceivably, yes, in a worst-case scenario. So it makes sense to take simple steps to lessen the risk of damaging political controversy down the line by severing any possible tie between campaign contributions and no-bid state contracts.

Several businesses detailed in recent Journal stories have no-bid contracts with the state and also were in the ranks of contributors to Gov. Rounds' campaign.

While the practice isn't illegal, it has critics raising an eyebrow questioning if "pay to play" politics hasn't taken root in South Dakota.

Knowing that, even the appearance of impropriety should be avoided with simple new guidelines.

For instance, if you receive a no-bid contract you shouldn't be allowed to make a donation to any political candidate or any politician involved in state government in that year.

If the government is giving you something -- such as a no-bid contract -- the donation simply creates the impression of impropriety and shouldn't be allowed.

If you've gone through the competitive bidding process, of course, the rule wouldn't apply.

This wouldn't necessarily stop corruption but it would prompt openness.

In the Journal story covering this topic, Gov. Rounds said accusations of connections between contracts and contributions are "bogus."

Saying it's bogus just doesn't make it so -- change the system to eliminate the potential is what makes sense for South Dakota.

Rapid City Journal

Good news for WAPA is good news for consumers

The Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) has completed a study on wind energy and the benefits it may offer. The study was mandated by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and is important because it can be used as a guide to help WAPA in its future generation and sale of electricity.

The electricity generated by any future wind towers would be used to complement the hydroelectric power WAPA gets from the dams on the Missouri River. Wind power, like hydroelectric power, is a renewable resource and an environmentally friendly power source.

In low water years in the Missouri River Basin, wind power makes more sense; the less water moving through the dams on the river, the less power WAPA produces for sale. And when power production is down, WAPA has to purchase power on the open market to fulfill its contractual obligations. That power is more expensive than hydro and the cost is ultimately passed on to consumers.

If WAPA were to erect a series of wind towers along the Missouri River to produce power, the time of day becomes a factor. WAPA's peak energy demand is during the daylight hours when the winds in central South Dakota aren't blowing at their strongest. Those levels come at night when WAPA's power demand is lower.

WAPA hasn't announced yet whether it plans to produce wind energy to supplement hydro power. But it seems to be an idea worth pursuing, especially since the Missouri River Basin has been in the grips of a drought for the past decade. Wind energy could be a valuable addition to WAPA's power plan and lessen the amount of power it has to purchase on the open market. That's good news for WAPA and consumers, too.

Watertown Public Opinion