Finishing Strong by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson

Finishing Strong by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (March 11, 2022)

On March 10, 2022, at around 6:00 PM, my son Augie joined me on the House floor. Half an hour later, the House of Representatives passed the final bill of the Legislative Session, setting a budget and wrapping up the main run.

The budget includes ongoing expenses of state government. In that area, we maintained Governor Noem’s recommended 6% increases for schools, Medicaid providers, and state employees. A 30-year state employee told me it was the largest single-year increase she could remember. Some state employees in corrections, UJS, and LRC received additional pay increases as well.

My quest for tuition cuts was successful, although to a lesser degree than I had hoped. The budget included about $11 Million in funding to freeze tuition at the universities and technical colleges. While I had pushed for a larger tuition cut, I was thrilled that we cut the cost of college on our citizens. I’m convinced it will help to keep them in our state and avoid putting excessive debt on young people in South Dakota.

I was likewise happy to see one-time budget priorities pass: $19.9 Million to renovate and improve the Cultural Heritage Center, $3.5 Million to improve the flaming fountain and establish a master plan for Capitol Lake, $69 Million (federal funding) to build a new Public Health Laboratory in Pierre, and $16 Million to expand capacity at our technical colleges. Each of these projects is a true one-time expense. We’ll pay for the infrastructure now, and benefit from the project for decades to come.

Most importantly, South Dakota has a fully balanced budget – without using budget gimmicks. We cut several taxes in addition to cutting tuition. We added a few dollars to reserves and allocated other dollars to a large impending liability: major renovations at our 140-year-old state penitentiary in Sioux Falls.

That’s what conservative budgeting looks like. We didn’t get carried away in thinking the good times would last forever. We didn’t create a deficit. We took care of the core responsibilities of state government, put a little away for the future, and began planning for known liabilities.

The Legislative session may have looked messy, but I’m proud of the work we did. 105 legislators come to Pierre with 105 perspectives, histories, and personalities. The Governor charted the course, and we were off. In the 37 legislative days of the main run of session, we considered over 550 bills and set a budget for all agencies of state government. There were disagreements, celebrations, confusion, and compromise. In the end, we delivered another balanced budget for the state and managed to quash most of the worst ideas. I’d say that is a good result. I’d say we finished strong.

Marijuana update from the Capitol by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (March 3, 2022)

When I wrote my Legislative Preview, I predicted the Legislature would get a truckload of proposals related to marijuana and money. That prediction proved true. Over 45 bills pertaining to marijuana were filed. Almost 100 bills spend or authorize spending. I’ve written about the budget repeatedly this year. Now, I’d like to give you an update on the marijuana bills.

The dozens of marijuana bills generally fall into three categories: IM26 Consensus Cleanup, IM26 Revision or Restriction, and Recreational Marijuana Legalization. If you’ll recall, the Legislature did not change a section, word, or syllable of IM26 last year. It went into effect exactly as passed by the voters.

Virtually all IM26 Consensus Cleanup bills came from a Marijuana Summer Study on which about 25% of the Legislature served. These items have broad support from stakeholders and make technical fixes or improvements to IM26. I have supported all of them. Virtually all have passed or are going to pass.

The IM26 Revision-Restriction bills mostly came from folks who just don’t agree that marijuana should be allowed for medical purposes or any other. These bills were generally opposed by the sponsors of IM26 in the marijuana industry. The IM26 Revision-Restriction bills seek to repeal or change IM26 to restrict patient access or restore prosecution for certain folks with serious medical conditions. I have opposed these measures as they came. Like 70% of South Dakotans, I supported IM26 and do not believe we should be tearing it down less than a year after implementation. Most of these bills have been defeated, but some are still being debated.

Finally, the marijuana industry has been pushing several different measures to fully legalize recreational marijuana. Some of these allowed for sale in convenience stores. Some allowed for sale in more-regulated dispensaries. Some had to do with taxing marijuana and who received the revenue. Some took effect this year, some took effect next year. Many of these proposals were well considered and written in great detail. However, I opposed all of them.

I know that hundreds of thousands of people voted for Amendment A because they wanted recreational marijuana to be legal. The voters were not confused. However, I give credence to the Supreme Court’s finding that the bill contained three subjects: recreational marijuana, medical marijuana, and hemp. I have spoken with folks who voted for Amendment A because they supported medical marijuana. I don’t know whether that reason for voting applies to several hundred voters or several thousand voters. In November, we will find out. The sponsors of Amendment A are working to put the single subject of recreational marijuana on the ballot at the next general election. If that ballot measure passes, the law will go into effect July 1, 2023.

To sum it up: I have been a strong defender of IM26, including honoring the wishes of the measure’s sponsors. On recreational marijuana, I have been cautious. I give weight to pro-legalization arguments about reducing the black market. However, I think it is OK to walk before we run. It is OK to watch the effects of medical marijuana in our state before moving to full-blown recreational legalization. If the voters think otherwise, I’ll defend that ballot measure next year just like I’m defending IM26 this year. I realize my position is nuanced, but I’m a conservative guy, and change comes hard for me. In this case, I think we should take one step at a time.

Mort Report: Putting Taxpayer Dollars in Taxpayers’ Pockets by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (Feb. 24, 2022)

For 8.5 weeks, the Legislature fights over hundreds of bills. The bills would change thousands of statutes. When we get to the 9^th week, however, it becomes apparent that there is only one most important bill of the year: the state budget.

South Dakota should be proud of its budget. We balance it without gimmicks. We don’t tax more than we need and don’t spend more than we can afford. We have the 7^th lowest tax burden in the whole country. We don’t have an income tax – and as long as I’m in the Capitol, I’ll fight to make sure we never do. We are fiscally prudent and fiscally responsible.

This year, we have far more revenue than we had projected. I believe some of those dollars should go back to the taxpayers. At this point, there are three main plans for doing so: cutting the sales tax by 0.5%, cutting property taxes by adjusting the state-local split in paying for education, and cutting tuition at our technical schools and state universities.

When I weigh which of these is most prudent, I consider a few things: Whose costs will be cut? Can we afford the cut without creating a deficit? What will be the impact on our state from the cut? I believe cutting tuition makes the most sense.

First, tuition cuts target cost savings directly to South Dakotans going to school here. A large portion of our sales tax is paid by out-of-state visitors. Anyone paying attention to the Land Transfers section of the newspaper knows that much of our land is owned by out-of-state folks also. So, I like that tuition cuts accrue to South Dakotans.

Next, tuition cuts and property tax cuts are scalable – that is, we can cut by the amount we can afford to cut without creating a deficit. Cutting the sales tax (as the House passed on Wednesday) would likely create a large structural deficit for the state, putting our budget in the red by tens of millions of dollars. It is a $150M cut when we can probably afford a cut closer to $50M. So, I like that tuition cuts are affordable.

Finally, tuition cuts will have a real impact on whether and where our kids and grandkids will go to college. On the other hand, our state saw little change in retail activity when the sales tax went up by 0.5% five years ago. I think there will be little impact if we reduce it by the same amount now. Likewise, I don’t think we can make a large enough reduction in property taxes to have a marginal impact on first-time homebuying or running a business located on real property. Putting $30M toward property tax relief would reduce property taxes on average by 2%. My $2,500 property tax bill on my house would drop to $2,450. I don’t think that will move the needle for most folks.

So – I’m going to be spending a lot of my time and energy in the next two weeks trying to cut tuition at our technical colleges and universities. Tuition cuts will put taxpayer dollars back in the pockets of South Dakotans. Tuition cuts will help families afford college. Tuition cuts will help more of our kids and grandkids stay here in South Dakota and will help to meet our massive workforce need.

We have a once-in-a-generation revenue situation. We should use it to make a multi-generational difference for our state.

.

Mort Report: Painful Importance of No by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (Feb. 18, 2022)

As your Representative, I’ve got to admit that it’s a lot more fun to be “for” bills than “against” them. I like talking to my neighbors about changes I’m proposing to help agriculture and education. I like talking about regulations I proposed to cut or freedoms I hope to expand. Those are the reasons I ran for the Legislature and the issues that I’m passionate about.

Lately, though, I find myself opposing more efforts than I support. I vote No an awful lot.

While voting No is a necessary part of the job, it isn’t a fun one. Often, saying “No” is painful.

From outside the Capitol, it may be easy to scoff at a headline about a bill or to deride the legislator sponsoring it. However, as someone inside the building, I truly believe that each legislator is putting forth their earnest best efforts. I don’t think any legislator is working in bad faith or trying to harm our state – I hope that’s still obvious in South Dakota.

If a bill is introduced, it means that a legislator believes in the idea. That legislator is passionate about the idea – as passionate as I am about ag and education. That legislator wants to talk to his neighbors about the idea just as much as I want to talk to my neighbors about my ideas.

Even further, most bills are supported by South Dakotans who take time out of their day to travel to Pierre and share their story. This week, I heard compelling, important, emotional testimony on several bills. I heard from first responders, special needs children, and concerned parents. For these folks, you’d better believe the passion was earnest and real. For every single one of them, the intentions could not have been purer.

If I were voting on emotion, I’d have passed every one of the bills. Instead, I think, read, listen, and ask questions on each bill. No matter my emotional reaction, I run each bill through the same critical, analytical, and careful process.

In these cases, I remind myself that every bill changes South Dakota. I love South Dakota. It’s my home and the place I care most about. Legislation that seeks to change our state needs to pass a high hurdle. If four parts of a bill are good for South Dakota, but one part is bad, I’m bound to vote against the bill.

So, I’ll probably continue to vote “No” more than most. This may have been a painful week for me, but it was an important one. In government, “No” isn’t fun, but it is necessary.

Don’t ever hesitate to drop me a line at Will.Mortenson@sdlegislature.gov.

.

Mort Report: Prudent Budgeting in a Crazy Year by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (Feb. 14, 2022)

State government revenues have grown like never before in South Dakota history. Two massive federal stimulus bills put billions of dollars in the pockets of South Dakotans and in the coffers of our state, cities, counties, and schools. Unsurprisingly, inflation has followed, since the same thing happened in every other state.

So – how do we maintain fiscal prudence in a crazy budget year?

First, we need to practice restraint. While it may be enticing to believe that massive gains in ongoing revenue will continue forever, we should not use our last couple years as benchmarks when projecting future revenue.

Next week, Appropriators will meet to adopt revenue estimates for the FY2023. I am urging them to be conservative. While an argument could be made for unbridled growth to continue, it is my firm belief that the combination of global unrest, drought, supply chain problems, and rising interest rates have the potential to slow our economy in the years to come.

Second, we need to take care of our core priorities. The core priorities of state government are education, Medicaid provider reimbursement, and administering government. That third part includes paying state employees and maintaining or improving state facilities. I’ve been an outspoken advocate for maintaining the Governor’s proposed 6% increase for schools, providers, and state employees. That remains my top budget priority.

Finally, to the extent we have additional ongoing revenue after taking care of core priorities, we should find a way to put money back in the pockets of the taxpayers. Some have proposed cutting the sales tax from 4.5% to 4.25%. For citizens, that would mean a $25 savings on $10,000 worth of purchases. It would take $75 million in ongoing revenue to ensure we did not have to cut anything. I don’t believe that is prudent, even with the growth we’ve seen. It would put us in an unnecessarily tight state budget spot, with only a token cut for taxpayers.

Instead, the time is right to consider cutting tuition at our technical colleges and universities. The cost of college on our students and families has been going up steadily over the last twenty years. Now, our technical colleges have the highest tuition of any of our neighboring states. The universities have higher tuition than many of our neighbors as well.

If we have extra funds after taking care of our core priorities, we should cut tuition. For far less than $75 million, we could cut tech school tuition by half and put a big dent in university tuition. Doing so would put money back in the pockets of students and would provide a strong enticement for them to stay in our state rather than heading out after high school. If we keep or attract several hundred additional students to our colleges and universities each year, our state will see real, sustainable growth. We’ll be a much stronger state.

This may be a crazy budget year, but we need to remember fiscal prudence. That means conservative revenue estimating, taking care of core priorities, and putting whatever else we can back in the pockets of South Dakotans. That’s what I’ll be fighting for in the next month.

.

Mort Report: Cutting Regulation; Keeping Reason by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (Jan. 28, 2022)

In Pierre, we know government is not the enemy. Our state, city, and county employees are solid folks. They keep us safe, keep our streets smooth, and administer our government efficiently and professionally.

Still, I am constantly looking for ways to reduce the burden of government on our citizens. I want regulations only when necessary. In other words, I’m looking to cut regulations while keeping reason. I’ll give you an example that does just that. I’ll also use the example to tell you about my process for bringing legislation.

This week, the House of Representatives passed HB1085, which will remove the requirement to open a probate for thousands of South Dakotans. The bill allows heirs to transfer the assets of someone who passes away with less than $100,000 through an affidavit rather than a multi-month probate. HB1085 is a common sense and meaningful reduction in regulation. It will save thousands of dollars and dozens of headaches for everyday South Dakotans.

So – how did we come to consider this bill? Where did it come from? Who reviewed it?

I’m awfully proud to sponsor HB1085, but it is not my idea. I’m not ashamed to admit that my mother suggested it to me. She’s been a first-rate estate and probate attorney in Fort Pierre for decades. She literally taught me everything I know about practicing law. This summer, she told me that the regulation could be reduced, cutting the cost for citizens and reducing the workload for our courts.

Once I had the idea, I ran it by folks who know most about this topic – attorneys in the State Bar Association. After their review and input, I thought about who else might care. I knew that creditors keep a keen eye on the probate system, so I talked to the bankers. I also know that the Noem Administration watches all policy, so I sent a draft of the bill to folks in their office. It’s easier to go alone, but it’s more effective to build a team by inviting input and criticism early.

In this case, the early work paid off. HB1085 drew questions in committee, but no opposition. It was unanimously adopted by the Judiciary Committee and passed overwhelmingly on the House floor. The soup is not done cooking, but I expect the Senate to endorse the bill and am hopeful it becomes law.

I am hopeful this example gives you some faith your Legislature. It is important to know that the Legislature doesn’t just work on the “clickbait” bills – those which garner a ton of headlines. HB1085 is an example of the inverse. It is quiet, meaningful reduction of government that will save time and money for thousands of South Dakotans. It is the product of a good idea by one of my favorite constituents. It is the product of consensus among the folks impacted. I believe HB1085 is an example of common sense, conservative legislating.

Constituents can contact Mortenson via email at Will.Mortenson@sdlegislature.gov.

.

Mort Report: Hot Topics in Education by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (Jan. 20, 2022).

I’m awfully proud to be on the Education committee. Education is government’s best tool for upward mobility – helping people improve their station in life. If we ensure sound education for our kids, we’ve opened up the world to them. For me, “sound education” is primarily focused on achievement in math, reading, and science. It’s providing our kids the tools to compete.

This year, dozens of policy proposals focus on “clickbait” issues (those that the media fixate on in order to garner clicks online). Before providing my thoughts on two such bills (Critical Race Theory and Moment of Silence), I’ll say that while they aren’t my focus, I give each bill thorough consideration. Being hot-button doesn’t mean the bills are inherently wrong, only that they get outsized media coverage relative to their impact on our students and our communities.

The Governor’s Critical Race Theory bill, HB1012, doesn’t contain the words “critical race theory” anywhere. In South Dakota, we don’t ban books and we don’t ban ideas. Instead, the bill prohibits forcing a student to affirm that any race is superior to another race and that past deeds of one race should be held against people of that race. I want everyone to be clear on what this bill does – and more importantly, what it does not do.

The notion of “Critical Race Theory” has been bandied about by partisans on the right and left, each adopting a different definition of what this theory means. Folks on the Right claim it means teaching discrimination and division (in other words – what is banned by HB1012). Folks on the Left claim it means teaching about Jim Crow laws and racism in hour history (in other words – what is not banned by HB1012).

I’m inclined to support HB1012 as drafted. It doesn’t contain onerous mandates, ban books, or trigger a bunch of lawsuits, like other bills in this area. It prevents the most pernicious forms of racial education – those which would divide students. While I don’t think this is a problem in South Dakota right now, I don’t want it to be. I’ve read enough examples from around the country to know that race-first, individual-second education theories are gaining steam. In South Dakota, we always want to treat students as equals. I think HB1012 as drafted helps to ensure that without causing headaches for our schools.

Another proposal, the “Moment of Silence” bill (HB1015), mandates a moment of silence every day for every student and every employee in every school in the state. It would make it illegal for any student to disrupt any other student’s moment of silence.

I’m all for school prayer. I know there were prayers said before each and every math test when I was in school and I’m sure that school prayer will persist as long as math tests persist. I also feel that prayer is personal and not performative. Thus, I don’t think this bill would have a real impact on the ability of teachers or students to pray during the school day.

When I spoke to the school boards about this topic, I asked if a teacher could hold a moment of silence in class currently. The answer – yes. Further, they told me, a principal could make this a policy for his school or the superintendent for her school district. Finally, school boards are fully authorized to pass this as a resolution, if they thought it would help our kids. If this is a good idea, teachers, principals, superintendents, or school boards can do it today.

Finally, I haven’t seen a trend that would indicate a current or forthcoming problem that HB1005 solves. Instead, teachers have told me that the bill is impractical. I also worry that it could take away time and focus from instruction or cause unforeseen headaches for the teachers and students.

So, common sense dictates opposition to HB1005. It’s an idea that sounds good, but once I looked into it, I’m not sure it will do good.

Constituents can contact Mortenson via email at Will.Mortenson@sdlegislature.gov.

.

Mort Report: Fixing Our Famous Fountain by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (Jan. 14, 2022).

This week, Mary Duvall, Mike Weisgram and I heard from Vietnam Era veterans about the importance of the fountain and memorials at Capitol Lake. I heard about their efforts to clean up and maintain the Lake and Fountain area. I heard about spreading ashes of a fellow service member. The stories I heard, and the conviction behind them, cemented in my mind that we need to fix our famous fountain and we need to fix it now.

As we wrote about in November, our Flaming Fountain needs fixing. In 2019, a study was conducted by engineers from the South Dakota School of Mines & Technology. That study determined the methane gas in the water feeding the flaming fountain is no longer capable of sustaining a consistent, permanent flame. Most crucially, the study raised the concern of corrosion and a sinkhole, wherein the Fountain could collapse on itself. The report finished with this line: “it is critical that securing the Flaming Fountain be done as soon as possible.”

We couldn’t agree more. We don’t want to find out whether the corrosion problem will rear its head in 20 months or 20 years. Fortunately, we have a strong ally in Governor Noem. The Governor’s budget proposed $3.5 million dollars to stabilize and replace the fountain feeding Capitol Lake.

HB1013 appropriates the funds, including $3M in federal funds, to cap the current well and bring about a plan to stabilize and improve the fountain for years to come. Importantly, the fountain project is an example of a true one-time expenditure, custom made for using one-time dollars. We can invest one-time dollars on infrastructure to provide a lasting benefit.

As the specific plans for replacing the fountain are developed, I believe it is critical that veterans, law enforcement officers, firefighters, and first responders have a seat at the table. The memorials are meaningful for all South Dakotans, but especially for those who are honored.

Veterans groups, legislators, and the Noem Administration have explored the possibility of adding a Lakota Code Talker Memorial and a War on Terror Memorial near the fountain in the coming years. Both are worthy and important additions. I can’t wait to see them developed. But before those memorials can move forward, the fountain situation needs to be addressed.

Now is the time to fix our famous fountain and HB1013 is the key legislation to do it. If you have thoughts or want to join the effort, please reach out. Important projects are better done together. My email address is Will.Mortenson@sdlegislature.gov.

Mary, Mike, and I are planning to work with veterans and the Noem Administration to fix the fountain for decades to come. We hope you’ll join us.

.

Mort Report: Preview of 2022 Legislative Session by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (Jan. 4, 2022).

Next week (Jan. 11, 2022), all sorts of South Dakotans will descend on Pierre to kick off the 97^th Legislative Session. There will be school advocates, gun lobbyists, business-backers, pro-vaxxers, anti-vaxxers and everything in between. Collectively, we’ll work through the issues important to South Dakotans and try to make our state just a little bit better. Below are three big things I can see coming (and how I feel about them):

1. Marijuana. Last year, the Legislature left Initiated Measure 26 (medical marijuana) alone. We didn’t change a word, syllable, period, or comma. Medical marijuana has now been legal for over six months. This summer, legislators met to consider changes to the IM26 framework. The most important proposals center on patient access and “home grow.” On access, I believe patients should have roughly similar access to marijuana as prescription medications. On home grow (in-home growing of marijuana for those with medical cards) I need to do my homework. A “home grow” provision was in both IM26 and Amendment A. I’ll have to hear a convincing case of why home grow is a problem in South Dakota in order to repeal it – but I have a feeling law enforcement and others will help make that case.

Amendment A (hemp-medical-recreational marijuana) was struck down by the Supreme Court because the Sponsors wrote a three-subject measure when our Constitution only allows changing one subject at a time. So, in November 2022, South Dakotans will get to vote on a one-subject version of recreational marijuana. If passed by the voters, I’m committed to implementing faithfully. If voters reject the measure, we will only have medical marijuana.

2. Big Budget. The state has hundreds of millions in excess revenue due to federal stimulus and a roaring economy. As much as we’d like to “send the federal money back” and apply it to our spiraling national debt, we cannot. Those federal dollars would go to California, Minnesota, or Illinois and be spent by their governments for their people. Given that reality, my focus will be putting each dollar to work for the benefit of the taxpayers. Those dollars belong to the people, not the government. Throughout the process, I’ll never lose sight of the fact that every dollar we consider – state or federal – is a dollar contributed by the taxpayers.

3. “Clickbait” Issues. As with most years, hot-button, “clickbait” issues (designed to cause you to click into the story on the internet) will garner outsized attention. These represent 5% of the bills and 50% of the headlines. Do not be misguided – the clickbait issues do not represent the focus of the Legislature, only the focus of a few legislators and most of the press corps. While I will give each bill thorough consideration, I promise my focus will be where its always been: making South Dakota an attractive place for hardworking young families. That means quality education, strong agriculture, and a good measure of freedom.

Thank you for the opportunity to serve. I’d appreciate your feedback and advice throughout session. Don’t ever hesitate to drop me a line at Will.Mortenson@sdlegislature.gov.