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.