Some letters never get sent
15/01/15 05:44
Here is a letter I’ll probably never send. It is cynical and probably shouldn’t even appear in my blog. I’m pretty sure a sitting governor who was reelected by a comfortable margin has no need of advice from someone like me.
Dear Governor Dugaard,
Now that your State of the State address has been delivered, I am sure that the legislature will get down to action on your proposals and priorities. After all the Republican super-majority legislature has seemed in the past quite content to follow your marching orders. There probably weren’t many surprises in your address for the legislators and the people of South Dakota - unless, of course, one considers what you didn’t say.
It was clear from your speech that roads and bridges are very high on your priority list. It is pretty rare for a contemporary Republican to call for tax increases, so when you call for roughly $50 million in tax increases, you got our attention. Maybe the only thing that seems more threatening than proposing new taxes is compiling with the requirements of federal funding. I haven’t read your proposed legislation and I’m no expert on laws and politics anyway, but I would like to propose a modest addition to your projects.
I hope that when all is said and done they select one of the new bridges and name it after you. The Dennis Dugaard bridge. A well-engineered bridge can last for a century and even more. If they were to select one of the best bridges to name after you, it would make a lasting legacy. Your name would be remembered for decades.
The second topic that garnered time in your speech was juvenile justice reform. After copying a Texas plan in the last legislative session that reduces the number of people in prison without reducing the number of people convicted of crimes it seems logical that you would try to apply the same kind of fix to the juvenile justice system. Instead of addressing the fact that more South Dakotans are convicted of crimes than is the case in any of our neighboring states by taking steps to reduce crimes, the legislature, under your leadership, decided to simply reduce the number of people in prison. It was a simple, short term fix.
Now you are proposing a similar approach to juvenile crime. Reduce the number of juveniles in detention and you can reduce the appearance of juvenile crime without investing in crime prevention or actually reducing the number of juveniles convicted of crimes. Again, a simple, short-term fix.
That is why I think that it would be a good idea to name a bridge after you. The bridge is going to last a lot longer than your so-called solutions to the reality that South Dakota convicts more of its citizens of crimes than any of our neighbors. Instead of looking into the criminal code or examining the reasons behind high rates of crime - most of which are nonviolent - tweaking the legislation can provide a change in the appearance. After all, with 416 people for every 100,000 in prison compared to the North Dakota rate of 226 per 100,000 or Canada with 117 per 100,000, it doesn’t make the state look too good. And prisons are expensive. It is hard to find money for other projects - including those roads and bridges you want to build - when you are spending all your money on prisons.
Now that you are in your second term as our governor, short term solutions are good enough for you. After all, it won’t be long before there is another election and it looks like your predecessor won’t be yielding his senate seat soon enough for you to consider that as your next job.
Then, of course, there are the things you didn’t mention in your speech. I guess those things just aren’t important to you. I guess you might claim to have addressed K-12 education because you made a brief reference to dual-credit courses, but to a non-politician, average citizen listening to your speech, it sure seemed like you were avoiding that topic all together.
I guess you can claim to be “pro-education” because you proposed a 3% increase in K-12 funding in your budget speech. You probably could have gotten by with 1.6% without violating the law.
Either way, it seems pretty obvious that the state with the lowest teacher pay int he nation doesn’t plan on changing that anytime during your tenure. After all it would take an additional amount of only about one tenth of the amount you are proposing in new taxes for roads and bridges to bring the state allocation for K-12 up to the per-student allocation’s previous high point of $4,805. That, of course, wouldn’t bring us close to the funding our neighbors provide for K-12 education, but it might be a small step in the right direction.
I know, I’ve heard your argument that quality isn’t dependent on funding and that money isn’t the only way to address educational problems. Fair enough. It only makes me more sad that you didn’t talk about those other ways. I live in Pennington County and our neighborhood was recently annexed into the City of Rapid City. I’ve been watching the systematic deconstruction of the Rapid City School District caused by a lack of adequate funding. I’m a veteran of a lot of conversations with really good teachers who have taken early retirement and moved on to other states in order to pursue their vocation in a place where their compensation is adequate for their living expenses. I know that there are excellent teachers who aren’t motivated by money. But they need groceries and rent as much as the rest of us do. I can’t blame them when they make the move to Wyoming or Minnesota for the pay raise. That exodus of talent will accelerate with this year’s budget woes in the district.
So that is I why I think a bridge named after you would be such a good idea. Perhaps, with a little luck, the bridge might last a century - almost as long as it will take to repair the damage caused by eight years of inattention to K-12 education by a governor who has other priorities.
Faithfully,
Ted Huffman
Dear Governor Dugaard,
Now that your State of the State address has been delivered, I am sure that the legislature will get down to action on your proposals and priorities. After all the Republican super-majority legislature has seemed in the past quite content to follow your marching orders. There probably weren’t many surprises in your address for the legislators and the people of South Dakota - unless, of course, one considers what you didn’t say.
It was clear from your speech that roads and bridges are very high on your priority list. It is pretty rare for a contemporary Republican to call for tax increases, so when you call for roughly $50 million in tax increases, you got our attention. Maybe the only thing that seems more threatening than proposing new taxes is compiling with the requirements of federal funding. I haven’t read your proposed legislation and I’m no expert on laws and politics anyway, but I would like to propose a modest addition to your projects.
I hope that when all is said and done they select one of the new bridges and name it after you. The Dennis Dugaard bridge. A well-engineered bridge can last for a century and even more. If they were to select one of the best bridges to name after you, it would make a lasting legacy. Your name would be remembered for decades.
The second topic that garnered time in your speech was juvenile justice reform. After copying a Texas plan in the last legislative session that reduces the number of people in prison without reducing the number of people convicted of crimes it seems logical that you would try to apply the same kind of fix to the juvenile justice system. Instead of addressing the fact that more South Dakotans are convicted of crimes than is the case in any of our neighboring states by taking steps to reduce crimes, the legislature, under your leadership, decided to simply reduce the number of people in prison. It was a simple, short term fix.
Now you are proposing a similar approach to juvenile crime. Reduce the number of juveniles in detention and you can reduce the appearance of juvenile crime without investing in crime prevention or actually reducing the number of juveniles convicted of crimes. Again, a simple, short-term fix.
That is why I think that it would be a good idea to name a bridge after you. The bridge is going to last a lot longer than your so-called solutions to the reality that South Dakota convicts more of its citizens of crimes than any of our neighbors. Instead of looking into the criminal code or examining the reasons behind high rates of crime - most of which are nonviolent - tweaking the legislation can provide a change in the appearance. After all, with 416 people for every 100,000 in prison compared to the North Dakota rate of 226 per 100,000 or Canada with 117 per 100,000, it doesn’t make the state look too good. And prisons are expensive. It is hard to find money for other projects - including those roads and bridges you want to build - when you are spending all your money on prisons.
Now that you are in your second term as our governor, short term solutions are good enough for you. After all, it won’t be long before there is another election and it looks like your predecessor won’t be yielding his senate seat soon enough for you to consider that as your next job.
Then, of course, there are the things you didn’t mention in your speech. I guess those things just aren’t important to you. I guess you might claim to have addressed K-12 education because you made a brief reference to dual-credit courses, but to a non-politician, average citizen listening to your speech, it sure seemed like you were avoiding that topic all together.
I guess you can claim to be “pro-education” because you proposed a 3% increase in K-12 funding in your budget speech. You probably could have gotten by with 1.6% without violating the law.
Either way, it seems pretty obvious that the state with the lowest teacher pay int he nation doesn’t plan on changing that anytime during your tenure. After all it would take an additional amount of only about one tenth of the amount you are proposing in new taxes for roads and bridges to bring the state allocation for K-12 up to the per-student allocation’s previous high point of $4,805. That, of course, wouldn’t bring us close to the funding our neighbors provide for K-12 education, but it might be a small step in the right direction.
I know, I’ve heard your argument that quality isn’t dependent on funding and that money isn’t the only way to address educational problems. Fair enough. It only makes me more sad that you didn’t talk about those other ways. I live in Pennington County and our neighborhood was recently annexed into the City of Rapid City. I’ve been watching the systematic deconstruction of the Rapid City School District caused by a lack of adequate funding. I’m a veteran of a lot of conversations with really good teachers who have taken early retirement and moved on to other states in order to pursue their vocation in a place where their compensation is adequate for their living expenses. I know that there are excellent teachers who aren’t motivated by money. But they need groceries and rent as much as the rest of us do. I can’t blame them when they make the move to Wyoming or Minnesota for the pay raise. That exodus of talent will accelerate with this year’s budget woes in the district.
So that is I why I think a bridge named after you would be such a good idea. Perhaps, with a little luck, the bridge might last a century - almost as long as it will take to repair the damage caused by eight years of inattention to K-12 education by a governor who has other priorities.
Faithfully,
Ted Huffman