A Few New Weekenders

FRACKING: REDUX

Last week: (Director of the N.D. Department of Mineral Resources) Lynn Helms said he doesn’t believe it’s necessary to know what’s in fracturing fluid. “We’d just bury ourselves in information doing the full disclosure thing. I don’t think people read ingredients on food they buy at the grocery store. This would just alarm people.”

This week: Helms said the threat of federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing has picked up again with letters from Congress to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson and new information about the EPA’s study plans being published. The EPA is undertaking a congressionally mandated study of hydraulic fracturing nationwide and any potential impacts of the process on drinking water and groundwater. Currently, the process is regulated by state and local governments (Source: Minot Daily News 2-19-2011).

Well, gee, Lynn, maybe if Congress and the EPA weren’t reading that states like North Dakota really AREN’T regulating fracking . . .

QUOTE OF THE WEEK

This week’s Quote of the Week is from Brett Narloch of the North Dakota Policy Council :

“They (North Dakotans) are starting to realize that having gigantic surpluses for six years means that the government simply has too much money.” Um, let’s see now. Surplus = Too Much. Wow. Now there’s a real light bulb moment.

WHAT’S HIS NAME IS IN TROUBLE

The United Nations Human Rights Council on today (Friday) condemned the actions of Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi (Kaddafi?) (Kadhafi?) (Gadhafi?) (Qadhafi?) (Asshole?) and established a U.N. commission of inquiry to probe possible war crimes by Libyan authorities. Wow. That ought to scare the shit out of him! This stuff just gets scarier and scarier.

WHAT’S HIS NAME IS IGNORED

Wouldn’t it be something if Grover Norquist came to town and nobody noticed? He did. This week. Aren’t you sorry you missed it? The news media did too. Actually, I think they knew about it and decided it wasn’t newsworthy. They were right.

YOU CHOOSE

Things you wouldn’t know if you didn’t look at You Tube once in a while: Scott Hennen’s interview with Governor Jack Dalrymple last week is on You Tube. When I clicked on it, it said I was the 11^th person to watch it. Just by way of comparison, I clicked on Justin Bieber’s video of “Somebody To Love.” I was number 134,173,501. Really. You choose which you want to watch. If you go to the Dalrymple interview, you can be number 12, increasing viewership by a full 9 per cent. He might appreciate a visit more than Justin.

Timing, Vol. II

North Dakota Democrats are scrambling to find candidates to run for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Kent Conrad, as well as Governor and the U.S. House seat. They’d do well to focus first on the Governor’s office, as I mentioned last week. As Democrats have learned in the last decade, you don’t build a party, which is critical to electing other state officials and legislators, without the Governor’s office.

But because it’s an open seat, and because there’s not another John Hoeven on the GOP bench, talk among Democrats turns first to the Senate seat. On the short list tossed out off the cuff by Conrad when he announced his retirement were former Attorney General Heidi Heitkamp, her brother Joel, Senate Minority Leader Ryan Taylor (who would probably more likely be a candidate for Governor) and a couple of the second generation of Schneiders from Fargo, Mac and Jasper. Some of them have been the beneficiaries of good timing. Heidi paid some dues running against Bob Peterson for North Dakota Auditor in 1984 (as did Conrad eight years earlier) before being appointed State Tax Commissioner in 1987 when Conrad ascended from that post into the U.S. Senate. Then she was elected Attorney General in 1992 when incumbent Nick Spaeth ran for Governor. Joel was elected to the State Senate from the old District 27 in 1994 when longtime Senator Jim Dotzenrod retired. He was reapportioned into a solid Democratic-NPL District in 2001, and when he retired in 2008, he convinced Dotzenrod to take his old seat back. Dotzenrod, incidentally, should be on somebody’s list for higher office in 2012. He’s never lost an election.

The Schneider cousins haven’t been favored so much with timing as they have with good political skills, although Mac lived in the right place at the right time, and benefited from the retirement of Grand Forks Senator Nick Hacker, winning an open seat in the State Senate in 2008. Jasper had to actually challenge an incumbent Democrat for a State House seat in Fargo’s traditionally Democratic-NPL District 21 at his district convention in 2006, and then beat her in the November election, when she switched parties. He stepped down to take a federal appointment as the state’s Rural Development Director in 2009. Unfortunately, the timing is not good for either of them this year, or for Joel Heitkamp either. Both Jasper and Joel would have to give up six figure jobs to run, and Mac is up for re-election to his Senate seat, so he’d have to give that up. The timing is good for both Taylor and Heidi to run. Heidi has been doing consulting and speaking engagements and serving on cooperative boards since she left office in 2001. Her husband is a successful family physician. Taylor won his State Senate Seat from District 7 in 2002 fair and square, in a good campaign against incumbent, Ken Solberg, and was re-elected twice, in 2006 and 2010. And he’s a holdover State Senator in 2012 so he’s not risking his Senate seat. More than a few Democrats are salivating over a Heidi for Senate and Ryan for Governor ticket.

Conrad, of course, arguably North Dakota’s best politician ever (that’s saying something, with names like Langer, Burdick and Dorgan as part of our history), also was a huge beneficiary of good timing. You’ll remember that Byron Dorgan moved from State Tax Commissioner to the U.S. House in 1980, when incumbent Mark Andrews moved from the House to the Senate to fill the seat of retiring Senator Milt Young. Conrad was elected to replace Dorgan as Tax Commissioner. Andrews came up for re-election in 1986, and everyone expected Dorgan to make the run against him. Dorgan miscalculated the political climate, declined to run, Conrad ran as the expected sacrificial lamb, and in North Dakota’s biggest political upset ever, defeated Andrews. The day after that election, Dorgan felt a little like Kevin Cramer felt last month. Opportunity missed.

But Conrad, in what seemed as a bit of a desperate move at the time, announced during the campaign that if he was elected, he would not seek re-election unless the nation’s budget deficit came under control. It was a bit like Theodore Roosevelt announcing in 1904 that he would not seek re-election if he was elected that year. Both later regretted their statements. But both stood by their decisions. Conrad dropped his bomb on the opening day of the 1992 Democratic-NPL Convention. The deficit was not under control, and he would not seek re-election. Shocked Democrats did not panic, though. They had a big bench. They endorsed Dorgan for the Senate seat and Earl Pomeroy for Congress. Then, in an almost incredible piece of timing, four months after that convention Senator Quentin Burdick died in office, and the Democratic-NPL party drafted Conrad (with little resistance) to run for his seat in a special election in December. Conrad won, and serves there still, his service uninterrupted since 1986, for the next 22 months at least. Often to Dorgan’s chagrin, Conrad, once viewed as Dorgan’s protégé (his aide June used to mutter “protégé-schmotege” when she heard anyone use that term), was the senior Senator from North Dakota, and Dorgan the junior Senator, for the entire 18 years of Dorgan’s Senate career. Timing.

And what about Pomeroy? Most Democrats say he’s earned his big-time job in a Washington law firm, and is not likely to return to elective politics. Pomeroy himself admits that he’s 58 years old and “doesn’t have any money,” so the law firm/lobbying job will prepare him for retirement. Besides, he was pushing his luck in 2010 anyway. Pomeroy was elected twice to the North Dakota House (1980 and 1982), twice as North Dakota Insurance Commissioner (1984 and 1988) and nine times to the Congress, a total of 13 straight election wins with no losses, before his defeat in 2010. That’s quite a record, or was until last year. The only two living politicians I can think of who can even come close to matching that are a pair of state Legislators, Republican Bob Martinson and Democrat Lyle Hanson, but their wins were all for the Legislature. Pomeroy won 11 straight statewide elections, a pretty amazing record. I don’t think even Ben Meier can top that.

But even if Heitkamp and Taylor agree to run for different offices, there are still a bunch of other slots to fill, most importantly the U.S. House and Lieutenant Governor. Who’s left to do that? Well, there’s Tracy Potter, who paid some dues in 2010 against Hoeven and might feel he has first dibs on the Senate seat, although I don’t see an army of Democrats swarming around him right now. There are 12 State Senators who would like him back in his old Senate seat, which he yielded to Margaret Sitte last year, I can tell you that for sure. There’s Kristin Hedger, who ran for Secretary of State in 2006 and acquitted herself fairly well. She’s kept visible among party faithful while contributing to the management of the family business, Killdeer Mountain Manufacturing and who flirted with a Senate run last year herself.. There’s a little buzz about former Legislator and Dorgan aide Pam Gulleson, and former Legislator and Conrad aide Scott Stofferahn. A whole bunch of Fargo Democrats would like to drag Fargo banker George Sinner Jr., the second son of the former Governor, into the political arena. Another Fargo group has slipped the name of Fargo Mayor and flood hero Dennis Walaker into Democratic-NPL political discussions. He’d likely be a big-time vote-getter in the Valley. A really, really good candidate for any of the top three offices would be former Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson, who has never lost a statewide election either, but he’s happily ensconced in his National Farmers Union office right across the street from the U.S. Capitol. The Lieutenant Governor’s job is one that fills itself, usually picked in a scramble during the State Convention and usually a Democratic-NPL Legislator of the opposite sex of the Governor candidate.

Here’s the bottom line. Somebody, pretty soon, is going to do a poll showing Heidi with really strong numbers. Beating, or at least being really competitive against Dalrymple for Governor and Stenehjem, or maybe even Berg, for Senate. She’s said publicly that if she runs for anything, it will be Governor. But a good showing in a Senate poll will bring the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee to her door with its checkbook wide open. They desperately want to hold Conrad’s seat. In the years since she last ran for Governor, she’s converted a lengthy Rolodex of donors to her Blackberry. And Emily’s List will open its doors the moment she makes an announcement. No matter what she runs for, money won’t be a problem. Finally, Kent Conrad is her best friend. What he advises will be key to her decision. She’s going to be pressed to make a decision soon, probably as soon as the Legislature adjourns, so that Democrats can find candidates for the offices she doesn’t choose, and begin raising funds for that candidate. She’s been accused in the past of being indecisive, of waiting to long. This year, she knows that to win, she needs to move early to start the fundraising process. Timing is critical. But then, it always is.

Weekenders III

WHAT THE FRACK?

The chief regulator of the North Dakota oil industry, Lynn Helms, was asked by a reporter last week if he was interested in knowing what goes into the water used in fracturing oil shale to release the oil, and if oil drilling companies should be required to disclose what goes into the water. Helms said he doesn’t believe it’s necessary to know what’s in fracturing fluid. “We’d just bury ourselves in information doing the full disclosure thing. I don’t think people read ingredients on food they buy at the grocery store. This would just alarm people.” Well, it is good to see that there are evidently still some “traditional families” left in North Dakota, maybe the Helms family included. The husband gets up in the morning and goes off to work to support his family. The wife goes to the market and buys groceries and has supper ready when her man comes home. He blithely eats his supper without having a clue what’s in it, but he doesn’t have to worry because there are regulatory agencies like the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture who make sure there is nothing unsafe in his food. Kind of like our regulatory agencies here in North Dakota making sure that there’s nothing unhealthy being pumped into oil wells under the ground on which our food is grown and our cows are grazed. Oh, wait, that’s right, our regulatory agencies don’t do that here in North Dakota.

FRACKING THE SNOW

I took advantage of the nice weather this week to drain and refill our hot tub, which sits just outside our back door. Easy job. I just hooked up a garden hose to the drain pipe, ran the hose out into a snow bank, and let it drain. I went out to check on it an hour later. The hot water coming out of the hose had melted the snow under the snow bank, and the snow bank had collapsed into itself. Just sayin' . . .

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

The merits of the new federal health care law touched off some lengthy arguments in the North Dakota House this week. Republicans, who control the House, approved a resolution asking Congress to repeal the federal health care bill. Republicans also endorsed a separate law that says North Dakotans can't be required to buy health insurance. Hmmmm. I found this on the North Dakota Insurance Commissioner’s website, in the Commissioner’s Auto Insurance Handbook:

Q. Do I have to buy auto insurance?

A. North Dakota state law requires that all motor vehicles registered and operated in the state carry certain minimum insurance coverages.

More specifically, North Dakota law says you cannot legally drive a car in North Dakota unless you have an insurance policy that includes $30,000 worth of personal injury protection (PIP), or no-fault insurance - $25,000 per person, $50,000 per accident for uninsured motorist coverage - $25,000 per person, $50,000 per accident for underinsured motorist coverage - $25,000 worth of bodily injury or death coverage for one person per accident - $50,000 worth of bodily injury or death for up to two people per accident - $25,000 for destruction of property of others per accident. When you sign up for insurance with a licensed insurance company in the state of North Dakota, you will be mailed an insurance card, which you must keep in your vehicle at all times to serve as proof of coverage. This proof of coverage must be surrendered any time a police officer or state trooper requests it. Note to Commissioner Hamm: Better run downstairs and tell the Legislators we’ve got a little conflict problem here.

Meanwhile, over on the Senate side, Sen. Margaret Sitte, who also says government can’t force you to buy health insurance, filed a bill to force you to undergo counseling before divorcing. Apparently the government forcing you to buy something is constitutional when you agree with it. The state of North Dakota recently sued the federal government, challenging the constitutionality of the health care affordability act. The argument was that forcing individuals to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional. Sitte has since introduced a bill that would essentially force divorcing couples to attend 10 one-hour counseling sessions as a condition for granting their divorce. Sitte says state government can, apparently, live by a different set of rules and force citizens of North Dakota who are divorcing to purchase counseling sessions at their own expense, four of which are required to focus on financial counseling.

$47 MILLION HERE, $47 MILLION THERE . . . PRETTY SOON WE’RE TALKING REAL MONEY

The associated Press this week reported that the North Dakota Office of Management and Budget has revised its predictions for tax collections this year and raised its projection by almost $47 million. Which prompted the following responses from two of the most conservative men in the North Dakota Legislature:

• Jeff Delzer, Chairman of House Appropriations: “”I would say it probably doesn’t change anything with what we’re trying to do at all. It’s a pretty small number for what we have.”

• Al Carlson, House Majority Leader: “ . . .$40 million doesn’t make that much difference. It just helps balance the books.”

Isn’t it amazing how a little jingle in your pocket changes your whole outlook on life and legislating?

SNIP, SNIP

Cutting the budget is a good thing to campaign on, and Senator John Hoeven did just that in 2010. But it’s amazing how your perspective on things can change. The Minot Daily News this week reported Hoeven paid a visit to the Minot Air Force Base and did a little scrambling in the face of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which is going to limit the number of ICBMs in the U.S. and Russia. I can see him almost tripping over his words as he toured construction sites for a new base dormitory, a new missile training facility and new facilities in the Pride Building for the 69th Bomb Squadron, the new and second squadron of B-52s.

· "The facilities, the people, the equipment that's coming in here is important. Minot is a very, very important part of our nuclear arsenal.

· “The treaty will determine how many ICBMs there will be at the three bases Minot, Malmstrom in Montana and F.E. Warren in Wyoming.

· "Right now there's 450 (ICBM’s), but remember, we can keep all the silos. None of that's been determined yet, but from my perspective I think that would be the right approach, obviously, to keep all the silos even if there is some reduction in the number of missiles.

· “The nuclear weapons at Minot AFB are very, very cost effective at a time when this country has real budget issues."

And that’s not even the biggest news regarding the military in North Dakota. Over in the U.S. House, according to a blog report from Kristen Daum on the Forum website, Republican Rep. Rick Berg says he has successfully added language to the FAA Reauthorization bill that could mean a further boost for military operations in Grand Forks and Minot. Berg authored an amendment that calls for four new test sites for Unmanned Aircraft Systems, with the sites’ locations to be determined by established criteria. Previously, the FAA bill included no new test sites for unmanned planes. If the bill passes, the new sites would allow officials to study the effectiveness of allowing UAS to share airspace and runways with commercial aircraft. The FAA bill is expected on the House floor in March, Berg’s office said. Two weeks ago, North Dakota Sens. Kent Conrad and John Hoeven offered their support for the Senate counterpart to Berg’s amendment. The selection criteria established in this amendment would place both Minot and Grand Forks Air Force bases in prime positions to benefit from this testing and potentially be chosen as testing sites, Berg’s office said. “Expanding the use of unmanned aircraft systems holds enormous potential for both military and private sector innovation,” Berg said in a statement. “The use of unmanned aircraft offers numerous possibilities for core North Dakota industries and will provide new opportunities for agriculture, education, and border security.” Berg added, “North Dakota has long been a leader in the research and expansion of this technology, and I am confident that the creation of new testing sites will open the doors for this industry’s continued success in our state.”

ATTENTION: CONGRESSMAN RICK BERG AND SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN: TODAY MARKS THE OFFICIAL END OF THE “NO EARMARKS” RHETORIC IN NORTH DAKOTA. THAT’S IT. YOU ARE DOING GOOD FOR YOUR HOME STATE, JUST LIKE YOUR PREDECESSORS. YOU’VE LEARNED HOW WASHINGTON OPERATES. YOU ARE NOW PROUD MEMBERS OF THE WASHINGTON, D.C. ESTABLISHMENT. SO WHEN IT COMES TO EARMARKS, JUST STFU.

Timing, Vol. I

Of all the participant or spectator sports I know of, politics is the one, I think, in which timing is the most important. Politicians come and go. Elections are won and lost. There are many factors which figure into the eventual outcome of an election, but it almost always starts with timing. Some examples.

Kevin Cramer was appointed to the North Dakota Public Service Commission in the summer of 2003 to replace Leo Reinbold. When I called him shortly after his appointment to congratulate him on the appointment, he told me two things:

1. “This was the easiest appointment John Hoeven is ever going to have to make.” That was in reference to the dues Cramer had paid to the Republican Party over the years: a successful term as State Chairman and two runs against Earl Pomeroy for Congress, the first of which he sought, and the second for which he accepted a party draft. He was the logical choice. Likely no on else was even considered.

2. “I’m not going to make a career out of serving on the Public Service Commission.” That was in reference to his political ambitions, to one day represent North Dakota in Our Nation’s Capital.

Kevin bided his time there, though. He successfully sought re-election in 2004, and then when the anticipated Republican banner year of 2010 came along, he announced he would not seek re-election, instead seeking his party’s nomination for the U.S. House of Representatives, a nomination which, by all rights, probably should have been his, and probably would have resulted in his election to Congress. But he didn’t count on State Representative Rick Berg coming along and calling in all his chits from his 26 years in the Legislature, and outworking him in the district conventions. Berg won the nomination and was elected to Congress.

Kevin, meanwhile, changed his mind about not continuing his public service—$85,000 a year jobs aren’t that easy to come by in a recession, even in North Dakota—and successfully sought re-election to his PSC seat.

A couple years earlier, back in 2008, Kevin’s sometimes-nemesis, fellow Commissioner Susan Wefald, decided to retire, and voters elected a retired U.S. Marine officer, Brian Kalk, to fill her seat. Kalk, it turns out, also has political ambitions. It seems like these guys like to get elected to the PSC, but see that pretty boring job as a stepping stone to higher office. That’s not really new news; Republican Dick Elkin ran unsuccessfully against Art Link for Governor in 1976, and Democrat Bruce Hagen, who served about 150 years on the PSC, ran unsuccessfully against Mark Andrews for Congress in 1978, about 15 years into his service on the PSC. Shortly after the New Year in 2011, Kalk, smelling blood on the water after the 2010 election, announced he was planning to run against Kent Conrad for the U.S. Senate. And then Conrad dropped his bombshell: He was retiring at the end of his term.

There were only two Republicans in North Dakota who were extremely unhappy with Conrad’s decision. One was his former mother-in-law, an active Republican who adores her former son-in-law. The other was Kevin Cramer. Because Cramer, who was quietly retching in a corner of his office after hearing the announcement, had been trumped by fellow Commissioner Kalk, who quickly put his campaign website online, and claimed this year’s PSC stepping stone for himself. Kalk has been active in Republican politics for about three years; Cramer almost 30. But there’s no way Cramer can get in this race now. It just wouldn’t do for two of the three PSC members to be running for the same higher office at the same time. Kalk may not win his party’s endorsement. But it won’t be Cramer who beats him. Timing.

So what about the rest of the Republican ticket next year? Here’s what some of my Republican friends say.

The odds of Congressman Rick Berg making the jump to the Senate are probably 50-50. Berg, likely the GOP’s best vote getter next year, would face big-time charges of being opportunistic, but the thought of running only every six years instead of every two is a big lure. But there’s some talk that Berg may not be a “lifer” in Washington, and that a couple of terms in Congress might be enough for him. He may not want to miss his son’s high school years sitting in an apartment in Washington. That could keep him in the House for another term, or even two, before returning to his successful business career in Fargo. Also facing the opportunism problem is the newly appointed Lieutenant Governor, Drew Wrigley. Wrigley’s ambitious, and will be squirming a little if he has to sit through four more years of being Jack Dalrymple’s Lieutenant Governor. When I congratulated him the other night, I told him I was glad he got the appointment because it made politics in North Dakota more interesting. He responded jokingly, “Yeah, now I suppose I have to run for the Senate.” At least I THINK he was joking.

Dalrymple’s choice, my friends say, is between running for re-election or going back to Casselton to live the life of a semi-retired gentleman farmer. He’s not a likely candidate for a Washington job. He is, though, my Democrat friends say, the candidate they’d most like to run against in 2012. He kept a fairly low profile as Lieutenant Governor for ten years, he’s virtually disappeared from the news since the Legislature came to town (although he has time to make up for that after April) and he hasn’t been on a statewide ballot by himself since he ran against Conrad for the Senate in the 1992 special election to fill Quentin Burdick’s seat. He’s one of North Dakota’s least-known Governors ever.

So, if Dalrymple, Wrigley and Berg stay put, who’s the odds-on Republican candidate for Conrad’s Senate seat? Kalk has announced. Fargo Senator Tony Grindberg has expressed interest. But most feel that the nomination probably goes to Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem if he wants it, and a lot of folks think he does. If Berg decides to make his move, though, Kalk may have the inside track. Stenehjem seems unlikely to want to campaign every two years for Congress. Nor would he be likely to run for Governor if Dalrymple decides to move to the Senate. People have said for years that Stenehjem is the likely choice to follow Hoeven in the Governor’s office, but my friends seem to think that’s not the case. It may be that’s why Dalrymple brought Wrigley out to the Lieutenant Governor’s office: to groom a successor for four years down the road, or next year if Dalrymple decides two years is enough.

In reality, although everyone talks about the Democrats having a weak bench (more about them next week), the Republicans don’t go much deeper than this. There don’t seem to be any more emerging Republican Legislators, so holdover Tax Commissioner Cory Fong seems to be about the only other possible contender. Insurance Commissioner Adam Hamm and Public Service Commissioner Tony Clark have to get themselves re-elected before they go anywhere else. Al Jaeger and Kelly Schmidt are unlikely federal candidates.

It all makes 2012 a bit of an interesting year, politically, if the Democrats get their shit together. There are two prizes for North Dakota Democrats: Governor and Senator. They know that if they are to rebuild their party, Governor is most important. John Hoeven, who will be absent from the ballot next year, has proven that. Hamm, Fong, Ag Commissioner Doug Goehring, Dalrymple and Wrigley all owe their jobs to Hoeven. Oh, yeah, and Cramer. It really is all about timing.

Weekenders

WORRYING A LITTLE LESS

President Reagan’s son Ron, speaking to an Associated Press writer recently, made me feel a little less nervous about 2012. The younger Reagan said “Sarah Palin is a soap opera, basically. She’s doing mostly what she does to make money and keep her name in the news. She is not a serious candidate for president and never has been.” I hope he is right, and that whoever the Republican candidate is, it is someone who is at least a little bit qualified to be president, just in case he or she wins. On the other hand, it could be pretty darn entertaining . . .

NO DANCING IN THE CAPITOL

Chuck Suchy’s Centennial paean to his home state, “Dancing Dakota” will not be our state’s official state waltz. The State Senate this week, on a pretty much party line vote, saw to that. The song had a hearing in front of the Senate Agriculture Committee for some stupid reason. Several sponsors and supporters spoke in favor of the bill, explaining why we should have an official state waltz, and why this one. No one spoke against it. The committee voted 3-3 to send it to the floor with no committee recommendation. There, a couple of Senators again explained why we should have a state waltz, and why this one. No one spoke against it. Looked like a done deal. Until they opened the key to vote. 30 Republicans and two Democrats voted against it. Ten Democrats and four Republicans (who apparently did not get the memo to vote against it) voted for it. It’s no big deal, I suppose. As Jefferson would say, “it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” Still, it would have been fun, and a few people put a lot of work into making it happen, including a pair of NDSU professors, Tom Isern and John Miller, so the partisan vote was disappointing. There is certainly no better waltz in the world than this one to be the Official North Dakota Waltz. Someone suggested the Republicans killed the bill because its prime sponsor was a Democrat, Sen. Connie Triplett. Maybe. That would be sad. The bill, the song and the songwriter all deserved better.

SERIOUSLY?

My State Senator, newly elected District 35 Senator Margaret Sitte, finally gets my vote for something: the goofiest bill introduced in the 2011 Legislature. It’s SB 2309, and it was introduced to “nullify” the federal health care laws in North Dakota. That’s right, it says that the federal laws enacted by Congress and signed by the President don’t apply here in North Dakota. In its exact words, it says the federal health care laws “are not authorized by the United States Constitution and violate its true meaning and intent as given by the founders and ratifiers and are declared to be invalid in this state, may not be recognized by this state, are specifically rejected by this state, and are considered to be null in this state.” Well! Violate its true meaning and intent? Hmmm. Has she been channeling Thomas Jefferson? Is that how she, and she alone, can determine the "true meaning and intent" of the U.S. Constitution? Goofier, the bill says that any federal employee who tries to enforce the law is guilty of a felony, but any state employee who tries to enforce the very same law is only guilty of a misdemeanor. Huh? Where’s that in the Constitution? I learned about this bill too late to attend the hearing. Darn. Must have been something. No committee action yet. Can’t wait to hear the sponsor defend this bill on the floor of the Senate. Margaret is a Senator because the incumbent, Tracy Potter, stepped aside last year to run for higher office. Tracy was an entertaining state senator, but nothing like this. Tracy, come back, Tracy . . . .

CODE OF THE WEST

Meanwhile out in Montana, the State Senate has given preliminary approval to adopt the “Code of the West” as Montana’s state code. Senate President Jim Peterson introduced the ten-point cowboy code from the book “Cowboy Ethics” by James P. Owen. The code includes items such as “Live each day with courage,” “Be tough, but fair,” “Know where to draw the line,” and “Ride for the brand.” Well, gee, the Code of the West, eh? Who could be against that? For starters, how about Democratic Sen. Shannon Augare, a Native American from Browning? He says the cowboy’s code was not always so favorable to the state’s original residents, and that the code endorses a checkered past, such as brutality against Native Americans for speaking their own language. Peterson’s bill isn’t a real original thought, by the way. Wyoming adopted the code last year. In Montana, it’s Senate Bill 216. We’ll try to keep track of it for you.

BULLY!

Bullying has been in the news a lot lately. Enough that some North Dakota Senators introduced a bill dealing with teaching our children about bullying in schools. When it came to the floor for a vote this week, newly-elected State Senator Oley Larson (Yes, he claims that’s his real name) from Minot went on a tirade against the bill that lasted so long that Lt. Gov. Drew Wrigley had to gavel him back into his seat. Larson’s choice line: "If we actually succeed in raising children who never experience any abuse or neglect, they will grow up to be emotional marshmallows." Oooookay. Senator Larson has a compadre: My Senator, Margaret Sitte, voted against the bill. She says it will take away from students’ learning time. Tracy, I’m serious. Get back here. And yes, in spite of Oley and Margaret, the bill passed the Senate and moved on to the House.

FORGIVE ME FATHER . . .

Only we Catholics can really appreciate this, but you Protestants can read on if you want. Or you could convert, to get in on the action. I’m taking calls. Here’s the news: The iPhone, which just went on sale here this week, has a $1.99 app called “Confession: A Roman Catholic.” It guides Catholics through the sacrament of confession and contains what the developer describes as a "personalized examination of conscience for each user." It is not designed to replace going to confession. We still must go to a priest for absolution. One news report listed the following features (notes in parentheses are mine):

• Custom examination of conscience based upon age, sex and vocation – single, married, priest, or religious
• Multiple user support with password protected accounts (yeah, right, like I’d share THAT phone with my wife)
• Ability to add sins not listed in standard examination of conscience (for the REAL sinners among us)
• Confession walkthrough including time of last confession in days, weeks, months and years (the ultimate guilt feature)
• Choose from 7 different acts of contrition (I swear, I’ve been a Catholic for 63 years, and I didn’t know there were seven. I can name the seven deadly sins though.)
• Custom interface for iPad (so you can see your sins in really big type)

Whooooeee. I’m going to stick with my Blackberry. This iPhone app adds a whole new level of worry when you misplace your phone. Forgive me, Father Chad, for writing this. That’ll teach me to make my priest my friend on Facebook. He's a pretty cool priest. We'll see how cool.

Weekenders

Once upon a time, when I worked for The Dickinson Press, we ran a local feature on the editorial page on Saturday morning called “Weekenders.” The whole staff contributed, but the editor, John Neckels had the final say on what was included, and how it was said, and took responsibility for any repercussions.

The Weekenders column was just a bunch of short blurbs on various subjects that we collected during the week and often offered comments on. It was, at various times, serious, silly and sarcastic. It was the best-read feature in the paper. I don’t know what happened to it after I left the paper in 1975, but I’ve thought about reviving it in some fashion from time to time using a variety of media outlets. A year ago, when I started this blog, I promised myself I’d get around to doing it again. So here’s a first try.

PROPERTY RIGHTS

They held half a hearing today (Friday) in the North Dakota Legislature on a bill attempting to help bring North Dakota out of the dark ages. It was Senator Connie Triplett’s SB2362, to legalize permanent conservation easements in North Dakota. As I said in yesterday’s post, North Dakota is the only state that does not allow landowners to sign easements to permanently protect their land from development. Half the people who wanted to speak on the bill in the Senate Natural Resources Committee got to do that before the committee ran out of time. The rest will have to come back next Thursday at 9 a.m. Three people, all farmers, I believe, spoke against the bill, saying they should not be allowed to protect their land in perpetuity—that the state should continue to take that responsibility away from them. Of the several people who got to speak in favor of the bill, Bismarck CPA Rod Backman made the most succinct statement: People are making permanent decisions about land all the time—when they pave it over for parking lots or shopping malls, or develop it into housing subdivisions. They change that land forever. The only permanent decision they cannot make, in North Dakota, is to protect it. Go figure.

THERE’S NO PLACE LIKE HOME

The North Dakota Legislature is about to declare a new state law that says sex offenders cannot live in state parks. Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem is asking the Legislature to make it so. Stenehjem says high risk offenders do have a difficult time finding places to live. "But the solution to the problem is to not permit them to live in our state parks because those situations can be more dangerous than someone in a house next door. You have a tent that can be pitched right next to where kids are playing and recreating and spending a weekend," Stenehjem says. Somebody needs to tell Wayne and the Legislature that we already have that law. No one can stay in a state park for more than two weeks. It’s a rule enforced by State Park managers all the time. But I guess it makes those politicians feel good to take after sex offenders once in a while.

THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ADULTHOOD

Five South Dakota lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require any adult 21 or older to buy a firearm “sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense.” The bill, which would take effect Jan. 1, 2012, would give people six months to acquire a firearm after turning 21. The provision does not apply to people who are barred from owning a firearm. Nor does the measure specify what type of firearm. Instead, residents would pick one “suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and preference." The measure is known as an act “to provide for an individual mandate to adult citizens to provide for the self defense of themselves and others.” No kidding. They’re really debating that law in Arizona--er, I mean South Dakota.

THE ARROGANCE OF POWER

Every 10 years following the U.S. Census, the North Dakota Legislature holds a special “Reapportionment Session” to adjust Legislative District boundaries because of changes in population distribution around the state. In one of the most arrogant—and unnecessary—power grabs I’ve ever seen, the Republican leaders in the North Dakota House and Senate propose HB 1267, which says they, and they alone, will appoint a committee to draw the new lines. That’s right. The Majority Leaders of the House and Senate—and only the Majority Leaders--will choose the committee to draw new district lines. The bill says there will be an equal number of—no not Democrats and Republicans—equal numbers of House and Senate members. The power to draw legislative district lines is one of the most important powers that exist in North Dakota. Under this bill, all power for redistricting would be given to the Majority Party—in this case, the Republican Party—in the Legislature. Gotta give Al Carlson and Bob Stenehjem credit for balls—they obviously believe their party will always control the Legislature. They’ve incurred the wrath of one Lois Ivers Altenburg of Fargo, among others. Lois, you might remember, was the Republican opponent of Byron Dorgan in the 1984 election for North Dakota’s seat in the U. S. House of Representatives. This year, she’s the chair of the North Dakota League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan group that is circulating petitions to remove the reapportionment power from the Legislature and give it to a nonpartisan committee. “There is nothing in the language of the bill that would require input from anyone outside of the majority party leaders. This is a disturbingly partisan attempt to exclude ordinary voters from the process,” Altenburg wrote in a recent letter to newspaper editors. “As the president of the North Dakota League of Women Voters, I am calling on all residents of North Dakota to contact their legislators in opposition to this attempt to place the pursuit of continued legislative power over North Dakota common sense. We are also calling on legislators from both parties to amend HB1267 to allow for a fair process for all citizens, both partisan and independent, to have a say in this critically important decision. The proposed legislation, as it currently stands, represents the worst of our current political climate and is an affront to the history and traditions of North Dakota politics.” Good for you Lois. Let’s all do as she says and contact our Legislators. And for more information on the initiated measure, go to the League’s website.

MORE TECHNOLOGY THAN I WANT TO KNOW ABOUT

North Dakota may soon join other states in banning hunting through the Internet. Yes, you read that right. Senate Bill 2352 would ban hunting wildlife in real time using Internet services to remotely control firearms and discharge live ammunition, thus allowing someone not physically present to kill wildlife. Thus reports Forum reporter Teri Finneman on her blog. Yes, it appears the technology exists to really do that. Don’t ask me how. Senator Dave Oehlke introduced the bill and testified in front of the Senate Natural Resources Committee. Oehlke said people pay big money to do Internet hunting, which is similar to playing a Wii game. “But it’s no game. And this type of activity, frankly Mr. Chairman, in my perspective, is enough to make a billy goat puke.” Well, me too. Apparently this really works. You can fire a gun at an animal while you are sitting at your computer keyboard a thousand miles away. Really. You can learn more about it by going to this website. Finneman reports that no one testified in opposition to the bill.

Saving A Little Bit Of The Bad Lands

In the mid-1990s, Harold Schafer, who had already put most of his fortune into the restoration of Medora, spent much of what he had left to buy a ranch near Medora. This was no ordinary ranch. It consisted of about 2,500 acres of grassland, and along with the ranch came the right to lease an additional 2,500 acres of National Grasslands from the U.S. Forest Service. Harold had no intention of becoming an active rancher. He was more than 80 years old at the time.

The reason the ranch was so special is that it was the gateway to Medora from the east, where most of the Medora visitors came from. The ranch consisted of a six mile long corridor of land, adjacent to the south side of Interstate 94, varying in width from half a mile to a mile and a half. If you’ve been to Medora, you will know it as all the land on the south side of I-94 between the Painted Canyon Rest Area and the city of Medora. Harold leased the land, which became known as the Schafer Ranch, to a local rancher, who ran cattle on it. In 1999, he gifted it to the Theodore Roosevelt Medora Foundation. The Foundation continued to lease it to the local rancher. The Foundation, which operates the Medora attractions, is a non-profit 501 ( C ) ( 3 ) corporation. In North Dakota, corporations are not allowed to own farmland. If corporations are given farmland as a gift, they must dispose of it in 10 years. In 2009, as the 10-year limit approached, the Foundation was able to find a conservation buyer for the land, a wealthy individual who bought it and continued to lease it to the same rancher.

The point of all this is that Harold bought the ranch to keep it from being developed as a commercial or industrial enterprise. More than a quarter million visitors to the Bad Lands exit I-94 at the Painted Canyon off ramp each year. That volume of traffic would make the land Harold bought a prime spot for a gas station or restaurant or motel or some other commercial development, and the land beside the Interstate, all the way to Medora, would have been prime real estate for being subdivided into ranchettes, with houses overlooking Painted Canyon. Harold, and later the Foundation and the Foundation’s conservation buyer, wanted to avoid that. They wanted to keep that six-mile stretch of Badlands between Painted Canyon and Medora free of development, so that visitors could appreciate the beauty of the Bad Lands as they approached Medora.

So far, they’ve done that. Today, nothing mars the spectacular landscape along both sides of the interstate, because the conservation buyer owns the Schafer Ranch on the south side of the highway, and the National Park Service owns all the land on the north side. The north side is protected forever by the NPS. The conservation buyer would like to put a perpetual conservation easement on the south side, to protect it, as she says, from the possibility that an “evil grandchild” would be tempted to sell it or subdivide it. The problem is, in North Dakota (and only in North Dakota), perpetual easements are against the law. Conservation easements are limited to 99 years. The conservation buyer reasons that yet-unborn grandchildren might be nearing retirement age in 99 years, and she wants to remove the temptation.

Senator Connie Triplett has introduced a bill, SB 2362, that will change the law to help people who own grassland protect it in perpetuity. This is not the first time an effort has been made to make permanent conservations easements legal in North Dakota, which is the only state in the United States with such an archaic law. Each time, opposition from farm organizations has killed the bill. The difference this year is that Senator Triplett’s bill takes cropland out of the area that would be eligible for conservation easements. Stated another way, only grasslands and land that has been planted to grass for at least 15 years (e.g., CRP land) could use this tool. This change was made as a means of blunting the opposition of the farm groups who were unanimously opposed in the past. In an e-mail to supporters of conservation easements, Senator Triplett said “You may or may not agree with this advance compromise, but it is my strongly-held opinion that we will not be successful without making some compromises to assure the farm groups that agricultural land is not the target. We are trying to prevent inappropriate development on fragile landscapes by giving landowners a tool to stay on the land without having to sell. We are not trying to destroy production agriculture in North Dakota.”

I believe this is a good compromise, and if it helps pass the bill, it will help save some very precious areas of the Bad Lands. There are already a number of conservation buyers who have purchased ranches in the Bad Lands to stop them from being subdivided, and some of them will use this law to save those ranches in perpetuity. An example: a conservation buyer has purchased the two ranches immediately adjacent to the former Eberts Ranch. If Sen. Triplett’s bill becomes law, and this buyer chooses to put a permanent conservation easement on those ranches, which is likely, the viewshed from Theodore Roosevelt’s Elkhorn Ranch, now owned by the National Park Service, will be protected forever. More importantly, of course, the six mile corridor from Painted Canyon to Medora along I-94 will be protected forever. Forever. That’s a very long time.

Senate Bill 2362 (you can look at it by going here) will be heard before the Legislature's Senate Natural Resources Committee this Friday, February 4^th, at 9:45 AM. Location is the Ft. Lincoln Room at the far west end of the ground floor of the Capitol. If you can go to the hearing, please do so. You don’t have to testify, but you can sign the register as being in favor of the bill. And you can visit before or after the hearing with any members of the committee you know.

Here are the Committee members and their e-mail addresses. If you can’t attend the hearing, please e-mail any of these Senators you know, or who represent your district, and urge them to support the bill.

Sen. Stan Lyson, Chairman slyson@nd.gov

Sen. David Hogue, Vice Chairman dhogue@nd.gov

Sen. Randy Burckhard raburckhard@nd.gov

Sen. Layton Freborg lfreborg@nd.gov

Sen. Mac Schneider maschneider@nd.gov

Sen. Connie Triplett ctriplett@nd.gov

Sen. Gerald Uglem guglem@nd.gov

Harold Schafer took the lead in buying land in the Bad Lands for conservation purposes. A number of conservation buyers have followed his example. These are people with the means, and the will, to help save some pieces of our oft-threatened Bad Lands from development. Helping to pass this bill will be our way to say “Thank you.”