South Dakota

1/16

see black hills

sioux

-=-=

After pledging to protect press freedoms throughout his nearly two years in office, Republican South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden found himself standing in front of reporters Friday with President Donald Trump as the president defended a decision to ban three news organizations from the White House.

Rhoden was in the Oval Office for an unrelated reason: to talk about Trump administration efforts to save money on prescription drugs in the federal-state Medicaid health insurance program for people with low incomes.

Earlier that day, Trump announced on social media that he was banning CNN, Politico and MS Now from the White House. Reporters asked Trump about that decision when Trump, Rhoden and several other officials — who were standing behind Trump as he sat at his desk — finished speaking about the prescription drug program.

Trump responded by alleging that the news organizations report “fake news,” and he expanded at length on those allegations. The three news organizations have since sued to regain their access.

South Dakota Searchlight asked Rhoden’s office Monday for the governor’s reaction to Trump’s actions and comments. Rhoden’s office sent a written statement that said “the president can make his own decisions.”

“I’ve built a strong relationship with all of you by being open and responsive, and you’ve lived up to my trust,” Rhoden said in the statement, referencing journalists in South Dakota. “You’ve shown me a tremendous deal of respect, and I am grateful for the role you play in helping us serve the people of South Dakota.”

Searchlight then asked if Rhoden was implying his office would not be open and responsive to journalists who haven’t “lived up” to the governor’s trust.

Rhoden’s spokesperson, Josie Harms, responded.

“That implication is inaccurate,” Harms wrote. “Openness and responsiveness will continue to remain pillars of the Rhoden administration — the governor is simply acknowledging his respect and gratefulness for your reciprocation of that commitment.”

The governor’s initial statement also said it was “ironic” that the president “was being criticized for being against free speech while Trump was actively taking questions from dozens of media.”

Searchlight asked if the governor recognized that three news organizations were losing their access to ask questions of Trump. Harms replied, “As the governor said, ‘The president can make his own decisions.’”

Rhoden’s past comments on open government

Since becoming governor in January 2025, Rhoden has repeatedly emphasized government transparency and has made improving relations with the press one of his stated goals.

In a 2025 column he sent to media outlets titled “Protecting Our Free Press,” Rhoden wrote that “tough, investigative reporting can lead to much-needed policy reforms.”

“I’m committed to making my administration the most transparent in our state’s history,” he wrote.

During the annual NewsMedia Day at the state Capitol earlier this year, Rhoden responded to questions from reporters about open government.

“We’ll always do our best to respond to your questions, and you might not always like the answers you get, but you’ll always get a response of some kind,” Rhoden said.

Rhoden’s opponent in the Nov. 3 election is Democratic nominee Dan Ahlers, a former legislator from Dell Rapids. Ahlers said Trump’s strategy since becoming president the first time has been to criticize and belittle reporters when he doesn’t like their reporting.

“I don’t hold a grudge against the press,” Ahlers said. “I don’t not communicate with the press when something doesn’t go my way.”

Trump suggests his face on Rushmore amid healthcare talk

Rhoden’s Friday appearance at the White House was for Trump’s announcement that all 50 states will join a program providing “Most Favored Nation” pricing to some drugs in Medicaid, with a goal of bringing the price of selected drugs down to prices paid in some other countries.

Rhoden’s office issued a press release Friday saying South Dakota has so far identified three drugs that would benefit from the program, saving the state approximately $750,000 a year. This year’s budget for Medicaid in South Dakota is about $2 billion, and the state’s share is about $715 million.

After Rhoden’s comments on the prescription drug program during the Oval Office event, Trump turned to him and made a comment about Mount Rushmore National Memorial that sparked laughter in the room.

“I’m being very nice to him,” Trump said of Rhoden, “because maybe he’ll get my face on that beautiful wall.”

Rhoden jokingly replied, “You want it on Crazy Horse?” He was referencing the other massive mountain carving in South Dakota’s Black Hills. The Crazy Horse Memorial, which has been in progress for decades, honors a late Lakota war leader.

-=-=

GMAIL 5 26

I’ve been thinking a lot about something the Oglala Lakota activist Nick Tilsen said to me in an interview for the story about him we’re publishing today on Drilled’s web site. We met in the office of the organization he founded, NDN Collective, in Rapid City, South Dakota last March. I was about to go pick up a flash drive from the Pennington County courthouse, containing body camera and surveillance video footage of the night a cop accused Tilsen of attempting to run him over.

He told me, “ I think that what people don't realize is when prosecutors and police bring politically motivated charges like this, it's often a narrative war.” I’ve been covering the criminalization of land and environmental defenders for a decade now, and that resonated.

You should go to Drilled’s web site, and read the story, but to summarize, in June 2022 Tilsen was attempting to observe as the officer questioned an Indigenous community member. Rapid City police have a reputation for discriminating against Indigenous residents, and Tilsen wanted to make sure the man wasn’t abused. He pulled into a parking spot where the cop was standing, and the officer accused Tilsen of trying to hit him. However, no charges were filed until a year later, four days before a protest that NDN Collective was planning, against racist policing. One day, the mayor gave a press conference calling the protest a public safety threat, and literally the next day Tilsen was accused of two felonies for the incident a year earlier. The case was finally dismissed this past March, after a trial ended with a hung jury.

an 1 25

Soon Gov. Kristi Noem could be installed as the next Secretary of Homeland Security. In one of her last official acts as governor, Noem managed to instill some uncertainty in South Dakota’s public education system.

During her budget speech, Noem claimed she wanted to continue to “prioritize education.” Notice that she didn’t say “prioritize public education.” In what was likely her final budget address to the Legislature, Noem proposed an ongoing $4 million expenditure to help families pay for private school tuition and other forms of alternative instruction.

Her largesse toward families seeking to pay for a private school education came during a budget address in which she:

Offered a paltry 1.25% funding increase for the “big three” of health care, public education and state employee salaries.Unveiled $71.9 million in budget reductions and discretionary changes.Included in the budget cuts a $2 million reduction for the Board of Regents and a $3.6 million cut for South Dakota Public Broadcasting.

Noem proposed that the state would pay about $3,000 per student annually for private school tuition or alternative instruction. Private schools, homeschoolers and other forms of alternative instruction operate under a different set of rules. It’s a veritable wild west of schools that can be unaccredited or accredited by someone other than the state. In other words, good luck figuring out how your tax dollars are being spent.

It’s probably possible to figure out how much money the state of South Dakota has invested in public education since statehood. Instead of doing the math, let’s just assume it totals in the billions of dollars. It seems at cross purposes for the state to make that kind of long-term investment in public education only to turn around and start funding its competitors.

Instead of tackling the bigger issues in public education, Noem has revved up the Legislature for a fight over an idea that’s trendy in conservative circles. It’s also an idea that the state can’t afford. Any state budget that proposes tens of millions in cuts isn’t likely to have a spare $4 million. If there is $4 million extra in the state budget, it should be funneled into teacher salaries.

Through neglect and short-sightedness lawmakers and the governor have let teachers’s salaries sink back near the bottom of the barrel nationally. Noem’s proposed 1.25% increase in education funding certainly isn’t going to do much to get South Dakota’s national teacher salary ranking out of the basement.

With its low teacher salary ranking, South Dakota’s universities find themselves training the next generation of teachers for the surrounding states that make a greater attempt to pay teachers what they are worth. When qualified teachers become harder to attract because of South Dakota’s low salaries, school districts will be forced to cut their offerings, hamstringing the very education that Noem says she has gone to such great lengths to “prioritize.”

The last time South Dakota made any progress in this area was in 2016 when Gov. Dennis Daugaard led an effort to raise the state sales tax by half a percent with some of the funds dedicated to raising teachers’ salaries. Since then, lawmakers have cut the state sales tax and mandated a $45,000 minimum salary for public school teachers without offering any extra funding to help schools reach that goal.

Given the state of the budget Noem proposed, lawmakers would do well to put their efforts into protecting public education and finding a funding source that could ensure that the state’s teacher salaries are no longer a national embarrassment.

South Dakota Searchlight is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Seth Tupper for questions: info@southdakotasearchlight.com.

---

AN 12 23 NO LNX

Kristi Noem in hot water following Trump visit to South Dakota

Alexandria Jacobson

andRaw Story

December 29, 2023

In front of a sea of MAGA hats, bedazzled patriotic gear and “Never Surrender” mugshot t-shirts, former President Donald Trump spent nearly two hours at a South Dakota rally in September bemoaning the current state of America.

“We are a nation that in many ways has become a joke, and we are a nation that is hostile to liberty, freedom and faith. We are a nation whose economy is collapsing into a cesspool of ruin,” Trump said over a melancholy orchestral tune that played for the final 12 minutes of his speech Sept. 8 at the South Dakota Republican Party’s Monumental Leaders Rally in Rapid City, S.D.

Then came a 180-degree vibe shift: R&B duo Sam and Dave’s “Hold On, I'm Comin'” blasting over the speakers to signify the end of the event, prompting a little dance at the podium from Trump before he headed off stage.

ALSO READ: Florida judge’s son is a neo-Nazi patron: data leak

The rowdy, “U-S-A” chant-filled affair held at Rapid City’s The Monument event center would end up costing the city’s taxpayers about $20,000 in public safety-related government expenditures, according to information Raw Story obtained through a South Dakota Sunshine Law request.

Trump’s campaign — in keeping with its standard practice — refused to help offset the costs to taxpayers.

The situation represents an awkward dichotomy for South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, who Trump could consider as a vice presidential running mate upon winning the Republican Party’s 2024 presidential nomination.

On one hand, there’s Noem the MAGA champion who introduced Trump at the Sept. 8 event, giving him her “full and complete endorsement for President of the United States of America.

“To him, every American is worth fighting for. No one is better than anyone else. No one deserves to be treated differently than anyone else, and he will never forget about us, the little people in the little states that are the backbone of this country,” Noem said at the event.

On the other is Noem the anti-tax warrior, who boasts “keeping taxes low” on her official website.

"Public sentiment has shown that South Dakotans want a permanent tax cut," Noem said earlier this year when signing a bill lowering the state’s sales tax.

Noem did not respond to Raw Story’s request for comment about the Trump rally’s cost to taxpayers.

As with other rallies, Trump discussed his own legal troubles during the South Dakota event, which include 91 felony charges spread across four indictments and a separate New York civil trial that threatens to upend his business empire.

“I am being indicted for you. I’m not too thrilled about that, but that's part of the job description. I’m being indicted for you,” Trump said on Sept. 8.

...

---

'Shocking and filthy': Alleged harassment of South Dakota GOP senator’s aide sparks state party chaos - Alternet.org

---

https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post:(style="background-color:#ffffffff"):}::{/south-dakota-:(style="background-color:#ffff66ff"):}::{state-rep-joe-donnell-claims:(style="background-color:#ffffffff"):}:**-mount-rushmore-is-a-demonic-portal-spreading-communism**:{-across-the-nation/

---

{{ https://www.alternet.org/missouri-gop-dont-say-gay/

---

35yrs rip off covid $ 150K landscape biz?

an 3 23

no lnx

joe Harding, the now-former Florida Republican lawmaker who authored the extremist "Don't Say Gay" bill could face up to 35 years in prison after pleading guilty Tuesday afternoon to federal felony fraud charges in a scheme to obtain $150,000 in COVID-19 relief funds, according to Florida Politics‘ publisher Peter Scorsch.

Harding, 35, was a construction project manager who started his own lawn care company. He quickly became a right-wing darling after his anti-LGBTQ legislation, officially the Parental Rights in Education Act, was embraced by Florida GOP Governor Ron DeSantis, who signed it into law.

Harding was charged in a December federal indictment with six counts of wire fraud, money laundering, and making false statements in his plot to obtain $150,000 in COVID funds. He resigned from the legislature the following day. He originally pled not guilty.

READ MORE: 'Chilling': Law Enforcement 'Seriously' Investigating Threats Ahead of Possible Trump Indictment Says Top WaPo Reporter

After Harding was charged and resigned, Nadine Smith, the executive director of Equality Florida, responded via social media, saying: "So much harm to students, parents and teachers because of his raw political ambitions. He slandered entire communities and trafficked in lie after lie that has emboldened violent bigotry. He will have his day in court but his legacy is already a despicable one."

Harding is not the only family member accused of criminal acts.

"Harding's indictment follows a September guilty plea from his brother-in-law, Patrick Walsh," Florida Politics reported in December. "As reported by Fresh Take Florida, Walsh pleaded guilty to wire fraud and money laundering charges connected to his receipt of nearly $8 million in disaster relief loans."

Unrepentant to the harm many feel he has done to children and the LGBTQ community, in a statement Tuesday Harding said: "During the past legislative session I have felt the support of millions of Americans while fighting for our shared concerns and for the rights of parents. I will never forget the support I received from every corner of this great country."

READ MORE: 18 Attorneys General Blast Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' Law as Unconstitutional

Harding will be sentenced in July.

Florida's Voice also reported Harding's guilty plea Tuesday.

FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES

Missouri GOP goes 'a step further than Florida' and proposes 'most extreme Don't Say Gay bill': report ›

Author of Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' bill indicted for fraud ›

Hurricane Ian washes away home of Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' law co-sponsor: report ›

How the super-rich use tax loopholes

The Pandora Papers come five years after a similar leak of documents called the “Panama Papers.” Those documents showed how many of the world’s wealthiest people routinely avoided any type of tax by placing their assets in tax havens – nations or jurisdictions with low tax rates.

In response to the Panama Papers, many countries took measures that made some of the techniques exposed in the Panama Papers obsolete. For example, after decades of offering rich people the greatest bank secrecy in the Western world, the Swiss forced their banks to open their books. The latest release also comes amid scrutiny over how little tax some wealthy individuals pay. The intergovernmental Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development recently pushed for a corporate minimum tax of 15% as another way to attack the tax haven problem.

The Pandora Papers reveal the tactics wealthy people developed to replace the no longer secret means they used in the past. In particular, the Pandora Papers shine a light on the role of shell companies in making it harder to tax high-net-worth individuals. Included in the leak are documents revealing aspects of the finances of hundreds of politicians from 90 countries.

The role of shell companies

A shell company is a legal entity that exists only on paper. It produces nothing and employs no one. Its value lies in a certificate that sits in a government office.

With this certificate, the shell company – whose sole purpose is to hold and hide assets – becomes one of a series of Russian dolls, each fit snugly into the next, creating a type of three-card monte in which the taxing authorities can never find assets nor owners. With a series of shell companies, a billionaire can house his or her assets far from the taxman’s prying eyes.

For the billionaire to avoid the tax, the shell company must reside, for tax purposes, in a tax haven. In the past, that has meant a bank account in the Cayman Islands or Monaco. But as the Pandora Papers show, increasingly it could mean using a tax haven in the United States.

South Dakota as a tax haven

South Dakota is mentioned throughout the Pandora Papers because many wealthy people use the state as a tax haven. Indeed, of the 206 U.S.-based trusts identified in the Pandora Papers – which combined hold assets worth more than US$1 billion – 81 are based on South Dakota.

South Dakota is a particularly good tax haven for a number of reasons. For one thing, it hasstrong secrecy protections thanks to its trust laws, which makes it easy to hide the true ownership of property. Trusts are said to offer some of the most powerful legal protections in the world.

According to the Pandora Papers, trust-friendly legislation in South Dakota has resulted in assets in trusts growing fourfold in the state over the past decade to $360 billion.

But South Dakota also benefits from the same things all U.S. states have: comparatively strong rule of law, a stable currency and good infrastructure – especially when compared with other known tax havens outside of Europe. A wealthy person can easily fly to the United States, purchase property in the U.S., put assets in American banks and feel secure knowing that his or her contracts will be respected and protected by a stable and transparent legal system.

---

Gov. Kristi Noem won't make kids wear masks in schools -- but she is trying to make them pray

David Badash

September 18, 2021

South Dakota's Republican Governor Kristi Noem refuses to mandate masks for schoolchildren and teachers but she's trying to make students pray in public. Gov. Noem, who is widely expected to run for...

---

3rd superspreader event , trump rally mt rushmore

sturgis 15x spike?!

south Dakota COVID cases explode after Sturgis motorcycle rally

Sarah K. Burris Raw Story

August 26, 2021

For the second year in a row, the Sturgis motorcycle rally has become a super-spreader event. In the 14 days since the rally, Meade County has had more than 1,500 percent increase in case

---

321 gop kia covid

https://www.alternet.org/2021/03/republican-governors/

---

===

oregon just decrim all possession?! 2/21

---

south Dakota voters ended marijuana prohibition — but Kristi Noem helped get it overturned by a judge

Bob Brigham Raw Story

February 09, 2021

The will of the voters in South Dakota was overturned by a judge on Monday.

"A Hughes County judge has ruled that a voter-approved amendment to the South Dakota Constitution ending marijuana prohibition in the sta

---

920 an

south Dakota’s GOP state attorney general reported hitting a deer with his car. He actually hit and killed a man

David Badash / The New Civil Rights Movement September 15, 2020

The Republican Attorney General of South Dakota was involved in a fatal auto accident late Friday night. Jason Ravnsborg reported to police he had killed a deer on the highway, but…

820 an

T. Denny Sanford, the richest man in South Dakota and a major donor to children’s charities, was being investigated for possible possession of child pornography, according to four people familiar with the probe.

Investigators with the South Dakota attorney general’s Division of Criminal Investigation obtained a search warrant as part of the probe, according to two of the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. They said the case was referred to the U.S. Department of Justice for further investigation.

Sanford has not been charged with any crime. It’s not clear what evidence, if any, investigators used to obtain the search warrant or what they collected from the search. It’s also not clear how the investigation may have progressed since federal authorities received the referral or if it is still ongoing....

---

https://www.thecollegefix.com/south-dakota-legislature-passes-intellectual-diversity-bill/

The College Fix

Original. Student reported. Your daily dose of Right-minded news and commentary from across the nation

FREE SPEECH POLITICS

South Dakota Legislature passes intellectual diversity bill

GRAHAM PIRO - STAFF REPORTER •MARCH 14, 2019

UPDATED

Sponsor says she’s ‘thrilled’ with passage

After multiple legislative failures, the South Dakota Legislature has passed a bill to promote intellectual diversity on campus. HB 1087 is on its way to the governor’s desk after the House passed the Senate-amended bill, 51-12, on Tuesday.

“We are thrilled that South Dakota has become the first state in the nation to adopt legislation requiring universities to promote intellectual diversity and not simply be dominated by the left,” Rep. Sue Peterson, a sponsor of the bill, told The College Fix in an email.

She called this leftist domination “a national epidemic which has undermined the education of thousands of students and fueled out-of-control political correctness at the expense of hard-working taxpayers.”

South Dakota is not the first state to adopt this type of legislation, however. Colorado and Tennessee both passed similar legislation in 2017.

Of the 12 representatives who voted against the bill, nine were Democrats, and three were Republicans. Seven representatives were excused from voting.

The South Dakota Board of Regents had adopted new policies last year intended to promote free expression and debate on campus. Peterson had previously expressed to The Fix that she wanted to lock in these reforms via legislation.

The bill forbids any public institution of higher education from discriminating “against any student or student organization based on the content or viewpoint of their expressive activity,” according to its language.[...?]

MORE: Push to support intellectual diversity underway in South Dakota

4/5/19: This article was updated to reflect that both Colorado and Tennessee passed legislation protecting speech on campus in 2017, prior to South Dakota’s bill....

https://www.alternet.org/2020/08/massive-super-spreader-19-event-now-underway-in-south-dakota/

[pix Sturgis, South Dakota motorcycle rally in 2015. This year’s rally, now underway, is expected to attract 250,000 people.]

:{:{}:

It would be too much to expect the millions of Americans who choose to celebrate their personal identity with intentionally loudand purposely obnoxious, high-polluting machines, operated at speeds in excess of 70 mph on our nation’s highways, with zero protection between themselves and the roadway, all to care equally about potentially infecting other people with an invisible virus.

Still, for at least a discrete subgroup of those folks who claim the “individual freedom” to face a fatality risk 26times the rate of other motorists, attendance at the annualSturgis motorcycle rally in Sturgis, South Dakota this year in the midst of the deadliest global pandemic in over a century, signifies a quantum leap of sorts in both irresponsibility and crass disregard not only for their own lives, but for the rest of the people in this country as well.

As reported by Michael Daly, special correspondent to the Daily Beast, starting on Friday, and for the next nine days, nearly a quarter million motorcycle aficionados, many driving thousands of miles from states all across the country, will congregate, backslapping, hugging, drinking, smoking, spitting, shouting, and expelling varied forms of bodily fluids from their orifices in a tiny South Dakota town, before returning home to spread whatever it is they might catch there to those who they interact with—stopping to sleep, eat, and urinate along the way for good measure.

Daly writes:

“Nobody is social distancing and none of them are wearing masks,” local psychologist Michael Fellner told The Daily Beast. “None.

The attendees for this event have come to Sturgis with the encouragement of South Dakota’s Republican governor, Kristi Noem,an acolyte of Donald Trump who has taken a highly visible, negative view towards any means of self-protection during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, Noem has encouraged parents to send their small children back into public schools without masks,which she claims will increase, rather than decrease, the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Following Trump’s lead, Noem has also advocated and commissioned her state to engage in trials ofthe anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19 infections, despite guidance from the FDA warning against its use.

The rally is proceeding in large part to boost the South Dakota economy, as it normally generates several hundred millions of dollars in revenue. As reported by Daly, it is also proceeding despite the opposition of the majority of actual Sturgis residents. According to the The New York Times*, over 60% of the town’s 7,000 citizens supported postponing the event.But the same residents believed they could do little to stop it, since the rally itself occurs on state-licensed property and the state, through Noem, has already sanctioned it. A phalanx of businesses, advertisers and “people outside the city,” according to the The Times,* pressured the town to proceed, and the town’s City Council on June 15th voted 8-1 to go ahead with the rally, although city-sponsored events related to it were canceled.

As Daly reports, many of these attendee bikers have already expressed their disdain for preventive measures as well as the seriousness of the pandemic itself on social media.

“On my way I ain’t scared of the media flue or as we call it round here election fluesee ya soon sd,” J.F. Watson of Ohio said.

“Just call it a big protest !! And it be A-Ok!!” J. Toothman, also of Ohio, suggested.

The Sturgis rally is being reported as the largest public gathering since the COVID-19 pandemic began. But what particularly distinguishes it is the widespread disregard of the participants for preventative health measures to ward off potential infection, and the risk of broader spread of the virus once participants leave Sturgis. Reuters published an article on Friday describing the attendees as they arrive, through the eyes of Meade County Sheriff, Rob Merwin.

The sheriff’s office overlooks Sturgis’ Main Street and from Merwin’s vantage point, he saw few precautions taken as the town began to fill up Thursday evening.

“I’m sitting here and I’m watching people walk up and down the street, watching people ride up and down the street.A few have masks – most don’t,” he said. “There’s not much we can do. Everybody is coming here with their eyes wide open, they know what they’re getting into.”

In fact, it appears that many of them do know “what they’re getting into.” It’s just that they don’t particularly care. Most of these people have been fed six months of science denial and propaganda about the COVID-19 virus, by everyone from Donald Trump to Kristi Noem, down to their enablers on Fox News, all of it geared to stoke their delusions about how their “personal freedom” is being taken away by wearing masks, avoiding large gatherings and practicing social distancing. In Sturgis what we arewitnessing is the apotheosis of all that, a toxic blend of ignorance, insouciance, and arrogance in a small but significant subset population that prides itself on being “set apart” from the rest of society.

The problem is that in the context of an equal-opportunity pandemic, no one is set apart. Just as many of the attendees are likely to arrive already infected, and are likely to infect others while there, once they leave for home and parts unknown, millions of other Americans will be forced to deal with the health consequences of their “choices.”

So much for that “freedom.”

---

https://www.alternet.org/2020/02/obama-closed-an-agency-that-accredited-a-university-with-no-faculty-or-students-then-betsy-devos-saved-it/

no lnx

Obama closed an agency that accredited a ‘university’ with no faculty or students. Then Betsy DeVos saved it

Written by Daily Kos February 16, 2020

If you have never heard of Reagan National University, in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, you’re not alone. But like many small colleges you’ve never heard of, this one boasted (at least until this month) full accreditation as sanctioned by the federal government.

There’s just one small problem.

By all appearances, at present it has no students, no faculty and no classrooms.

As an investigation for USA Today by Chris Quintana and Shelly Conlon found, this institution of higher learning was accredited by the Department of Education under the auspices of Trump-appointed Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos. Or more precisely, it was accredited by an “approved” and sanctioned agency of DOE with a track record so dismal that, back in the good old days (known as the “Obama administration”) when the federal government was actually being run by competent people who worked for the interests of American ciitizens, it had been summarily shuttered and put out to pasture.

The agency in question, the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges & Schools, has a history of approving questionable colleges, with devastating consequences. It accredited ITT Tech, Corinthian Colleges and Brightwood College, massive for-profit universities whose sudden closures last decade left thousands of students without degrees and undermined the value of the education of those who did graduate. Those closures led President Barack Obama’s Education Department to strip ACICS’ powers in 2016.

After a Federal Judge ruled that the Obama Administration had failed to consider a substantial number of documents that ACICS had submitted to appeal its closure, DOE was ordered to reconsider its decision, which it did. DOE career employees again found that ACICS failed to meet appropriate standards in its accreditation process.

But by then Trump acolyte and billionaire-by-marriage Betsy DeVos, who, following standard Trump-appointee procedure, was proceeding to reverse every single action taken by the prior administration, no matter how sensible or helpful to the American people, had begun to remake the Department. DeVos reinstated the ACICS agency despite its horrid past record of promoting colleges that exist solely to rip off American students (usually poorer ones and disproportionately students of color).

Since its short-lived disbandment, the agency had lost many colleges as “members” and, as Quintana and Conlon note, lost their “membership fees” as well. It needed money, and fast. So, apparently it was time for some quick calls to those “institutes of higher learning” out there.

Accreditation is the key to obtaining federal grant and loan money for students who want to attend college. Of course, that money then goes straight to the “accredited” college. But as USA Today found out, “Reagan National University” is a very strange college. To begin with, when the reporters attempted to learn more about the college itself, its website links were all dead. They still are.

Adding further to the mystery, “[n]o students or graduates could be found on LinkedIn or Facebook.”

When USA Today tried to contact faculty from this so-called college, they could find none. People whose names were listed on the “college’s” website swore they’d never heard of or taught at Reagan National University. Other names had absolutely no internet history, something quite unusual for academics. Phone calls to the University ended in curtly disconnected lines. Attempts to physically visit the school were similarly unavailing, yielding locked offices. Peering through the window, a vacuum cleaner and some insulation were visible.

As the USA Today investigation found, ACICS specializes in accrediting “for profit” colleges, the same ones notorious for ripping off students with phony promises of inflated job prospects and providing worthless degrees. But since the Obama administration shut it down, its members have dwindled from 290 in 2016 to 63 at present. ACICS told USA Today that Reagan had somehow met its stringent accreditation standards, but it refused to provide any details on how that may have occurred.

Michelle Edwards, CEO and president of ACICS, defended the council’s accreditation process in emails this month to USA TODAY. ACICS first accredited Reagan in 2017, though Edwards said the university had to address some areas where it was initially out of compliance. She declined to say what those areas were.

But hey, ACICS pulled out all the stops to get Reagan National U. up to snuff! In January 2019, it sent an (apparently) sternly worded letter to its accredited so-called college, informing Reagan that its job placement rate was a whopping 0%. Of course, the agency’s standard procedure provided a window of time for an institution to “show cause” why its accreditation should not be pulled in such an instance. For Reagan, that “window” expired in May, 2019. According to the agency CEO, “Reagan” provided some sort of satisfactory information to ACICS (we’re not told what that was), and the “show cause” order was lifted.

But in December, 2019, ACICS really laid the hammer down.

This time accreditors raised concerns about the language in a course catalog and the university’s grading system. It also hinted at more existential issues, such as a lack of evidence of a qualified person to run the business programs. And the computer science program didn’t have the materials necessary to teach.

It’s not clear who ACICS was talking to at “Reagan,” if they were actually talking to anyone at all. This entire shoddy episode reeks of either purposeful negligence or something worse. As Antoinette Flores, with the Center for American Progress who studies accreditation asks, how could this agency possibly have accredited a “school” with no faculty and no students?: “You accredited this institution. How did you miss this?”

In February of 2020, while USA Today was conducting its investigation, “Reagan National University” voluntarily withdrew its accreditation.

The USA Today investigation found something that provides a clue to exactly what “Reagan National University” is. It seems that in 2011, agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement visited another questionable institution, called the “University of Northern Virginia” on “suspicions” that it was operating to exploit the issuance of visas through legal loopholes for foreign visitors rather than acting as an actual educational institution. That university was shut down by the state of Virginia because of its lack of accreditation in 2013, but popped up again, listing an address in South Dakota—the same address used by “Reagan National” in its corporate filings. It even listed the name of its agent as “Xianhua Fan”, seemingly the same name as Reagan’s president (in its business filings spelled as “Xuanhua Fan,” although the official “website” listed president of the University was a fellow named “Harold Harris”).

South Dakota, as the authors of the USA Today article point out, is probably not the ideal place to go to college: “State officials merely ask colleges whether an accrediting group has approved them — they don’t independently hold universities accountable.”

If it seems that all of this should have been obvious to ACICS, the agency DeVos stepped in to save, it should. The article describes the many criticisms and problems that agency has, including denial of recognition by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, a university-member body that sets stringent standards for accreditation.

But ultimately, as the article notes, this is all traceable back to DeVos and the Trump administration philosophy of rolling back every regulation in favor of business interests, no matter who is harmed in the process.

The education secretary wants to cut back the rules governing accreditation. Fewer regulations could allow colleges to implement new training programs swiftly to fill holes in the workforce, she says — an approach cheered by for-profit colleges like the ones accredited by ACICS.

Critics argue these rollbacks will make it easier for shoddy or predatory institutions to take advantage of students. They have pointed to the high-profile closures of several for-profit colleges over the past decade as a need for more regulations to protect students, rather than fewer.

What this all boils down to has nothing to do with learning or “education,” and everything to do with political campaign contributions from the “for-profit” college mill industry and lining the pockets of the investors that fund such scam schools. As noted by Jeff Bryant of the Campaign for America’s future,”The favors Trump and DeVos are granting to the for-profit college industry reflect the generosity of campaign contributions the sector has generally showered on Republicans, especially since the advent of the regulatory constrains issued in the Obama years.”

And whether those colleges actually have any faculty or students, or whether they even can provide degrees, is apparently not a major concern.

ew 1119

Oct. 11 people around the world celebrated the release of four plains bison onto a snow-covered butte in Badlands National Park, South Dakota.

Their large, chocolate brown bodies were in beautiful contrast against the park's snow-covered sagebrush, hills, and canyons. This was the first time that the species had set hoof in this area since 1877. For wildlife fans and the U.S. national mammal it was a homecoming long overdue. For tribal community members who were there to witness this important moment, the significance was immense for much deeper reasons.

...

---

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24102019/south-dakota-anti-protest-law-riot-boosting-oil-pipeline-penalties-transcanada

7 states have

South Dakota officials have agreed to walk back parts of the state's new anti-protest laws that opponents say were meant to target Native American and environmental advocates who speak out against the proposed Keystone XL crude oil pipeline.

Gov. Kristi Noem and state Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg agreed in a settlement Thursday with Native American and environmental advocates that the state would never enforce portions of the recently passed laws that criminalize "riot boosting"—which it applied, not just to protesters, but to supporters who encourage but never take part in acts of "force or violence" themselves.

The settlement, which makes permanent a temporary ruling issued by a federal judge in September, has immediate implications for opponents of the Keystone pipeline in South Dakota and could challenge the validity of similar laws targeting pipeline and environmental protestors in other states....

guk no lnx

https://yyy.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/08/wave-of-new-laws-aim-to-stifle-anti-pipeline-protests-activists-say

nice 3 color map

'Protesters as terrorists': growing number of states turn anti-pipeline activism into a crime

Conservative lawmakers have put forward laws criminalizing protests in at least 18 states since 2017 that civil liberties advocates say are unconstitutional

Susie Cagle in San Francisco

Mon 8 Jul 2019 11.00 BST Last modified on Mon 8 Jul 2019 11.01 BST

Seven US states have passed laws that ratchet up the penalties for activists protesting.

From the Standing Rock camps in North Dakota to tree-sits in Texas, activists have attempted to stop pipeline construction with massive shows of civil disobedience. Now they could be forced to change those tactics, or face heavy penalties under a wave of new anti-protest laws that civil liberties advocates say violate the first amendment.

Conservative lawmakers have put forward laws criminalizing protests that disrupt the construction and operation of pipelines in at least 18 states since 2017.

Seven states have passed laws that ratchet up the penalties for activists protesting or even planning protests of oil and gas pipelines and other “critical infrastructure”

At least six more states are considering such laws

In each case, misdemeanors are elevated to felonies, and criminal and civil punishments are escalated drastically

The ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights have mounted challenges against such laws in Louisiana and South Dakota.

“This is a trend that shows no sign of slowing, let alone stopping,” said Elly Page, who has been tracking anti-protest legislation for more than two years as a legal adviser for the International Center for Non-Profit Law.

The laws purport to only criminalize violence and property damage in service of pipeline safety, but critics say their greater intent appears to be to deter nonviolent civil disobedience by framing it as potentially violent in itself.

The bills have mostly found fertile legislative ground in places where gas and oil companies already wield significant political and economic power and where anti-fossil fuel protests have been especially successful. But watchdogs say there’s every reason to believe more of these types of laws will be passed, and that they will chill activism otherwise protected by the first amendment.

“This is a miscasting of protesters as economic terrorists and saboteurs when in fact they’re going out and having their voices heard about why these pipelines are problematic for their communities and the environment,” said Vera Eidelman, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. “Even if folks haven’t been charged, the fact that these laws are on the books can seriously chill people and make them fearful of getting their voices out,” she added.

Native Americans and activists gathered outside Cannon Ball, North Dakota, to try to halt the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline in 2016.

A wave picking up speed

Oklahoma was the first to pass pipeline-protecting legislation in 2017, with a pair of bills that ostensibly protected critical infrastructure from trespass and damage. By the end of the year, the American Legislative Exchange Council, a non-profit coalition of conservative politicians and industry representatives, had developed model Critical Infrastructure Protection legislation based on Oklahoma’s laws. Energy industry groups immediately sent a letter to legislators urging them to adopt the bill in their states.

That effort has proven fruitful.

Louisiana passed a version into law in 2018, and the legislative wave picked up speed in 2019. Laws that would increase criminal and civil penalties for protesting against gas and oil pipelines specifically and “critical infrastructure” more broadly have passed this year in Tennessee, Indiana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Texas, and are currently pending in Idaho, Minnesota, Missouri, Illinois, Ohio and Kentucky. In each case, the laws provide for more extreme criminal charges and civil penalties for trespass and vandalism against pipelines.

Industry representatives insist these harsh penalties are necessary for pipeline security. “The intent of the critical infrastructure bill signed into law last year is to protect the safety of Louisiana’s people, environment and infrastructure,” the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association president and general counsel, Tyler Gray, said in a statement in May. “It is straightforward in its scope and application and does not infringe on an individual’s constitutional rights.”

When the Texas law goes into effect on 1 September, it will make “impairing or interrupting” pipeline construction a felony, punishable by up to two years in jail and a $10,000 fine. If an activist is alleged to have “intent to damage or destroy” a pipeline facility, they could face a third-degree felony on par with attempted murder, and up to 10 years in prison. And any organization found to be similarly culpable could face a $500,000 fine.

“It’ll be more difficult to give underrepresented communities a voice now because of this,” said Frankie Orona, executive director of Society of Native Nations, which vigorously opposed the bill.

Similar measures seem to have support at the federal level. The Trump administration, stacked with former fossil fuel industry lobbyists, attorneys and executives, has come out with its own proposals to protect fossil fuel infrastructure.

A June proposal of the Department of Transportation for “Protecting our Infrastructure of Pipelines and Enhancing Safety Act” included a provision to expressly strengthen criminal penalties for “impeding, disrupting, or inhibiting the operation of a pipeline facility”. The head of the Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration was formerly a vice-president of one of the country’s largest coal transporters.

The department’s proposal used “some of the same language and ideas in terms of covering peaceful protest activity”, said Elly Page.

Shutting down activist resources

Although the anti-protest laws are highly specific in explicitly or implicitly targeting oil and gas infrastructure, they’re highly vague when it comes to defining what behaviour is prohibited. The laws define “critical infrastructure” as a range of private and public energy facilities, including those that are under construction, but what constitutes imposition, disruption, inhibition or conspiracy is left up to a court’s interpretation, as is what constitutes “intent” to damage property.

Yet if preserving infrastructure safety and fossil fuel company profits are the goal, there are already a variety of legal tools available to law enforcement. Trespassing and damaging private property are already crimes in every state. “States already criminalize most if not all of the conduct that’s covered by these laws,” said Page. “It seems to be part of a larger effort to stifle certain political speech and environmental groups.”

The laws appear designed not just to deter individuals from protesting, but also to cut off material support from organizations by levying steep fines on organizations alleged to conspire with activists. South Dakota’s governor, Kristi Noem, admitted as much about the law in her state in March and said that the law was intended in part to “shut down” activist resources – she named George Soros as the top “national offender”.

By a particularly cruel twist in South Dakota’s law, which flew through the state legislature in just one week, those fines could actually be used toward the construction of the pipelines activists protest against.

‘An industry-created issue’

When off-duty police working as private pipeline security pulled Cindy Spoon off her canoe in southern Louisiana last August and handcuffed her, she didn’t yet know she would be one of the first activists in the country charged with a felony under this new spate of legislation.

Spoon was working with the L’eau Est La Vie camp protesting against the construction of the 163-mile Bayou Bridge pipeline, which carries crude oil through the vast wetlands of the Atchafalaya Basin. She was boating in navigable, public waters – the equivalent of being in the public road. But she was charged with felony trespassing, a little over a week after Louisiana’s protest law went into effect.

If the district attorney pursues her case, Spoon could face up to five years in prison. Sixteen activists are currently facing felony charges under the Louisiana law for peaceful protest either in public waterways or on private land where they had the owner’s permission to be.

Spoon remains determined to continue her work. “The risk involved to me personally is far outweighed by inaction,” she said.

Spoon’s pro bono attorney Bill Quigley and the Center for Constitutional Rights have filed a federal suit challenging the law in Louisiana.

“This is not a problem that any private citizen has ever filed a complaint about. This is a total industry-created issue,” said Quigley, a law attorney at Loyola University New Orleans. “They are essentially passing these laws to give themselves enhanced protection.” When he attended the state senate comment session for the Louisiana law in 2018, Quigley said, he was joined by nearly two dozen fossil fuel industry representatives. “There were no private citizens.”

In South Dakota, the ACLU has filed a suit challenging the law in South Dakota.

Dallas Goldtooth, who is Dakota and Diné, is a named plaintiff in that lawsuit. Goldtooth, a campaign organizer with the Indigenous Environmental Network, has been protesting pipelines since 2013, and using his substantial social media following to boost activist efforts – speech that could now be considered “riot-boosting” in South Dakota.

Goldtooth is ready to take that chance. But he worries that even if communities on the frontlines whose lands are being carved up by pipeline construction are willing to take on the increased risk of protest, others won’t. “The fear is that our allies are going to be intimidated and too afraid to come out and stand in solidarity,” said Goldtooth. And in sparsely populated rural America, numbers are everything.

While some communities may successfully push pipeline construction to the next, less-fortunate community over, these projects are rarely if ever shelved. There are few places in America that remain untouched by an oil or gas route. Pipelines touch every state in the US except Hawaii.

“They’re just picking the low-hanging fruit right now, the places where oil and gas have outsized influence. But oil and gas pipelines are everywhere. It’s not just Louisiana and Oklahoma and South Dakota,” said Quigley.

“I guarantee a law like this is coming to your state.”

---

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/28032019/pipeline-protest-crackdown-state-law-legislation-south-dakota-conspirators-riot-boosting

This story was updated with a lawsuit filed March 28 over the South Dakota law.

Bills to clamp down on pipeline protests have spread to at least nine new states this year, part of an industry-backed push that began two years ago to heighten penalties for activists who try to block fossil fuel infrastructure projects.

Several of the bills also allow prosecutors to go after people or organizations as "conspirators" or "riot boosters" for merely supporting or coordinating with others who violate the law.

Civil liberties advocates argue that these vague and far-reaching provisions risk violating free speech protections under the First Amendment, and they have already started launching legal challenges.

The latest government move came on Wednesday in South Dakota—one of the states the planned Keystone XL pipeline is slated to cross—when Republican Gov. Kristi Noem signed a law that enables state and local governments, as well as "third parties," to seek civil damages from people or organizations that engage in "riot boosting."

Lawmakers in North Dakota, a hub of oil and gas development, also passed a bill this week that stiffens penalties for anyone who interferes with the construction or operation of pipelines and other "critical infrastructure." Once the Senate approves some minor changes, it heads to Republican Gov. Doug Burgum, who has not said whether he will sign it.

The North Dakota bill was based on a law that was enacted in Oklahoma in 2017 and then circulated by the industry-backed American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Versions of that legislation have now been introduced in at least 15 states, three of which have enacted it: Oklahoma, Louisiana and Iowa. A version of the bill passed the Indiana legislature this week, too, though the Senate there must also approve some amendments before sending it to the governor.

While the details vary from state to state, the bills generally increase penalties for trespassing on or tampering with a range of facilities, including pipelines, oil storage tanks, railroads and utility infrastructure. Several of them, including North Dakota's, also include language assigning higher penalties—up to $1 million in some cases—for any group found to be a conspirator in violating the law.

The South Dakota law is different. Rather than imposing new penalties for interfering in pipeline construction, the bill enables state or local governments—or a third party working with government—to seek compensation from anyone who engages in "riot boosting," which includes encouraging or directing someone to engage in a riot, defined by the state as the use of force or violence by three or more people acting together.

Someone can qualify as a "riot booster" even if they reside out of state and act indirectly "through any employee, agent or subsidiary." Anyone found liable would be responsible for three times the ordinary penalty.

The bill was introduced at the end of the legislative session and approved over the course of four days, with only one hearing.

Environmental and civil liberties advocates, as well as many Native American tribes, say the bills are an attempt to stifle legitimate protest by creating harsh penalties for minor infractions and by trying to scare off advocacy groups. An organization that holds a nonviolence training, for example, might be targeted under the law if attendees are later part of a protest that ends in a clash with private security forces or police.

"'Riot boosting' is an unusual and new term. You might be asking yourself what that means, and I think protesters will too," said Vera Eidelman, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Unionwho has tracked the bills. "I think it poses a unique threat to speech and appears to be targeted at protests. It uses words like 'encouraging' and 'advising' that are very broad and refer to a category of protected speech."

On Thursday, the ACLU sued South Dakota officials in federal court on behalf of indigenous and environmental groups, arguing that the new law and two related statutes violate the Constitution by suppressing free speech and failing to describe what actions could qualify as violations. In a statement, the group said "such vague and broad language invites arbitrary enforcement, will chill protected speech, and will result in indiscriminate targeting of peaceful organizers."

Industry-Backed Group's 'Model Legislation'

The legislation is part of a wave of state bills introduced across the country since President Donald Trump's election in response to high-profile protests like those against the Dakota Access Pipeline on the Standing Rock Reservation in North Dakota in 2016 and 2017.

Oklahoma state Rep. Scott Biggs said he was responding to those protests when he introduced a bill in 2017 to impose harsh penalties on people or groups who interfere with "critical infrastructure." After ALEC adopted the bill as model legislation, versions quickly spread across several states with active pipeline projects.

The bills' supporters have said they make it easier for prosecutors to go after protesters or vandals who violate the law, and that they do not target free speech.

Advocates have pointed out that the actions in question—trespassing, vandalism—are already covered by existing laws. Instead, they say, the aim of the bills is to intimidate protesters who draw attention to their concerns through civil disobedience, including minor infractions like blocking the gates of construction sites. Advocates say these protests are part of a long tradition of American civil disobedience dating back to the Boston Tea Party.

"Even where these bills are simply introduced, even if they do not move, even if they do not become law, they have potential to chill free speech and curtail activism," said Maggie Ellinger-Locke, a staff attorney with Greenpeace. "We're hearing from people on the frontlines of activism in these states that these bills frighten them."

Pipeline Companies Register Their Support

Energy companies and associations have supported the bills and have continued to push the legislation this year, according to documents compiled by Greenpeace.

TransCanada, the Canadian company behind the Keystone XL pipeline, registered its support for the bill this year in Missouri along with the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers and other industry groups. In Illinois, TransCanada was joined by Enbridge and Energy Transfer, two other leading pipeline developers, as well as the American Petroleum Institute.

Sen. Janne Myrdal, who sponsored the North Dakota bill this year and is a member of ALEC's energy task force,did not respond to requests for comment. But she told the Associated Press that she introduced the bill in response to a protester who in 2016 broke into a control site for the existing Keystone pipeline that cuts through the state and manually closed one of the valves.

"There was frustration from law enforcement and residents that there wasn't enough teeth in current law to go after these people and the organizations that support them," she said.[pix]

The protester, Michael Foster, was convicted and sentenced to three years in prison, though two of those years were suspended. He ended up serving about half a year.

In South Dakota, Gov. Noem'soffice did not answer emailed questions about TransCanada's role in drafting the bill, but Noem said in February that she had met with representatives of the company to discuss her legislative package, which also includes a bill that requires pipeline developers to contribute to a fund that would help pay for government costs associated with construction.

"I fully support the freedoms of speech and assembly, but we must also have clear expectations and the rule of law," Noem said in a statement issued Wednesday. "My pipeline bills make clear that we will not let rioters control our economic development."

Terry Cunha, a spokesman for TransCanada, said in an email that "we appreciate the efforts of Governor Noem and her administration to help advance Keystone XL construction and other pipelines," adding that "any legislation that deters unlawful activities and encourages the advancement of critical infrastructure projects is a positive step."

Is It Stifling Dissent?

Some activists say the bills are part of a wider effort by the oil and gas industry and its allies in government—through lawsuits, public relations campaigns and legislation—to paint protesters as criminals and even terrorists.

"All of these things I think incorrectly mischaracterize protesters and respond to a powerful pushback against pipelines and other protests, not by trying to engage on the issues but by trying to stifle dissent," Eidelman said. "I think this is really part of a broader trend."

Last year, the ACLU sued the federal government, accusing several agencies of withholding documents detailing preparations for the potential construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. The group had submitted records requests seeking information about the preparations, and the documents that did emerge, mostly from state agencies, showed that law enforcement agencies were conducting trainings for potential protests. The ACLU said the activities risked treating activists as criminals even before protests broke out. State officials have said they are simply doing their jobs.

In January, The Intercept reported on similar concerns in Minnesota, where police had been preparing for a year and a half for protests against Enbridge's proposed Line 3 pipeline expansion project by identifying groups opposed to construction and monitoring some activists.

The ACLU and other civil liberties groups said they are continuing to evaluate the state bills and considering whether they may challenge them as unconstitutional. So far,Louisiana is the only state where protesters have been arrested under the new laws. Bill Quigley, a lawyer who is representing several of the activists, said prosecutors have two years to press charges and have yet to do so.

PUBLISHED UNDER:

ACTIVISM

OIL SPILLS/PIPELINES

REGULATION

==

How This Red State's Cruel Meth Laws Are Putting Women Behind Bars in Record Numbers

By Phillip Smith, Independent Media Institute

In South Dakota, testing positive for drugs is a felony. READ MORE»

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/13072018/keystone-xl-pipeline-native-american-resistance-oil-spill-cheyenne-river-sioux-dakota-access-transcanada

The company building the long-contested Keystone XL oil pipeline notified the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe in a letter this week that it will start stockpiling equipment along the pipeline's route this month in preparation for construction.

Tribal Chairman Harold Frazier sent back a sharp, one-line response: "We will be waiting."

The Cheyenne River tribe has opposed the Keystone pipeline since it was first proposed in 2008, and it has seen how pipeline protests can play out.

Just to the north of the tribe's land in central South Dakota, protests against the Dakota Access pipeline drew international attention as thousands of demonstrators established semi-permanent camps starting in the summer of 2016 near where the pipeline would cross under the Missouri river just upstream from the Standing Rock Indian Reservation.

The Cheyenne River tribe helped fight that pipeline, and it is in a similar geographic situation now—its reservation is just downstream from where the Keystone XL pipeline would cross the Cheyenne River.

Like Standing Rock, the tribe fears a tar sands oil spill from the pipeline could contaminate its waters.

While TransCanada still faces some challenges to its permits for Keystone XL, it wrote to Frazier that it expects to start construction in 2019.

"Chairman Frazier wanted to send a clear signal that they are not welcome," Remi Bald Eagle, intergovernmental affairs coordinator for the Cheyenne River tribe, said.

TransCanada did not respond to a request for comment.

Frustration Over Pipeline in Indian Country

Similar sentiments are being expressed across stretches of Indian Country this summer as TransCanada and Enbridge prepare to build two separate pipelines that would ship tar sands crude oil from Canada into the United States. Tribes and environmental organizations oppose both projects, citing concerns that oil spills would contaminate surrounding waters.

When the Minnesota Public Utility Commission voted in June to approve a new Enbridge Line 3—a proposed 1,000-mile pipeline running from Hardisty, Alberta, to Superior, Wisconsin—Tania Aubid, a member of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, shouted at the commissioners: "You have just declared war on the Ojibwe!"

The growing frustration raises the prospect of large-scale demonstrations again, perhaps similar to those that drew thousands to protest construction of the Dakota Access pipeline in North Dakota starting in 2016. By late fall of that year, pipeline opponents had clashed with increasingly militarized law enforcement. The protests ended in the forced removal of the camps after the pipeline was given final federal approval in early 2017.

...

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/321018-state-legislators-take-steps-to-criminalize-protests

Republican state legislators across the country are advancing bills that would criminalize or penalize some public protests just a month after millions of Americans took to the streets in opposition to President Trump.

In North Dakota, where protesters occupied land around an unfinished section of the Dakota Access oil pipeline, Gov. Doug Burgum (R) on Thursday signed four laws that would stiffen penalties against protests. The measures increase sanctions for offenses related to riots and broaden the definition of trespassing, allowing law enforcement officers to issue citations and fines.

The new laws, passed under emergency provisions that allow them to take effect immediately, came just hours after a protest camp near the pipeline was evacuated.

Senators in neighboring South Dakota on Thursday passed a bill that would allow the governor to create a "safety zone" in emergency situations. Anyone who entered the zone would be fined.

Legislators who backed the measure specifically cited the Dakota Access project and possible protests against the Keystone XL oil pipeline, which will run through South Dakota. Gov. Dennis Daugaard (R), who sponsored the legislation, said it was needed to deter “professional agitators.”

“Certainly, the Keystone XL pipeline would be a likely prompt to these types of demonstrations,” Daugaard told reporters at a press conference last week.

Native American tribes objected to the legislation, which they say improperly targets them.

Minnesota lawmakers say cracking down on protesters who block access to highways is among their top priorities this legislative session. On Wednesday, two legislative committees voted to increase penalties for protests that block access and to make protesters liable for costs incurred by police responding to their demonstrations.

The Minnesota legislation follows protests against the shooting deaths of several black men by police. Those protests blocked roads leading to the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport. Legislators in Indiana and Iowa have also considered bills to criminalize blocking streets during protests.

Arizona Republicans have introduced a measure to expand racketeering laws, which target organized crime groups, to include rioting. The bill would allow police officers to arrest and the seize the assets of those who organize protest events.

Civil libertarians say the measures are unconstitutional overreactions to a historic era of protests.

“Robust protest activity is a sign of the health of our republic. Our democracy is literally designed for citizens to get out in the streets and make their voices heard to their legislators,” said Lee Rowland, a senior attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project.

“To see legislators in these states make it a priority not to listen to the voices of their constituents, but to silence them, is deeply troubling and fundamentally un-American.”

One measure in Tennessee goes so far as to give civil immunity to a driver who hits a protester blocking traffic.

The legislation, sponsored by state Rep. Matthew Hill (R), comes after a car hit volunteers helping protesters cross a street in Nashville as they demonstrated against the Trump administration’s orders blocking immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries.

Hill’s measure passed its first test in a state Senate committee earlier his month. Hill did not respond to a request for comment on Friday.

A similar bill failed in the North Dakota legislature earlier this month.

Republican-led legislatures in Michigan and Virginia have already rejected their own measures increasing penalties on protests.

Rowland, who has been following state legislatures for about a dozen years, said the measures represent a “fairly unprecedented level” of action against protestors. The wave of bills come after high-profile protests including the Occupy movement, Black Lives Matter, and the Women's March on Washington, which took place the day after Trump’s inauguration.

The women’s march drew more than 3 million participants in cities across the nation. It attracted more people to Washington’s subway system than Trump’s inauguration, the city's transit authority reported.

Breaking: TransCanada’s Hopes For “Zombie” Keystone XL Pipeline Revived As South Dakota Validates Expired Permit

The South Dakota Public Utility Commission (PUC) voted unanimously to keep TransCanada’s hopes for the Keystone XL pipeline alive by validating its permit certification that expired in 2014..

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/navajo-water-supply-horrific-flint-cares-native-american/

hmm

he news out of Flint, Michigan brought the issue of contaminated drinking water into sharp focus, as it was revealed that officials at every level—local, state and federal—knew about lead-poisoned water for months but did nothing to address the problem.

Under state-run systems like utilities and roads, poorer communities are the last to receive attention from government plagued by inefficiencies and corrupt politicians. Perhaps no group knows this better than Native Americans, who have been victimized by government for centuries.

In the western U.S., water contamination has been a way of life for many tribes. The advocacy group Clean Up The Mines! describes the situation in Navajo country, which is far worse than in Flint, Michigan.

Since the 1950s, their water has been poisoned by uranium mining to fuel the nuclear industry and the making of atomic bombs for the U.S. military. Coal mining and coal-fired power plants have added to the mix. The latest assault on Navajo water was carried out by the massive toxic spills into the Animas and San Juan rivers when the EPA recklessly attempted to address the abandoned Gold King mine.

South Dakota

In 2010, the South Dakota Legislative Assembly passed House Concurrent Resolution 1009, a non-binding resolution introduced by 33 members of the House of Representatives and 6 members of the Senate, 39 in total, and 12 of whom are current members of ALEC. The bill calls for "balanced teaching of global warming in the public schools of South Dakota."

The 12 members of ALEC who sponsored HCR 1009 received $1,900 from the oil and gas industry in the 2008 and 2010 election cycles combined, according to FollowTheMoney.org.

The bill mirrors the provision of the ALEC bill that call for the providing of "a range of perspectives presented in a balanced manner."

---

lessig

Oct. 7 (UPI) -- Harvard professor and political activist Larry Lessig is throwing the power -- and coffers -- of his crowd-sourced Mayday PAC into the otherwise uneventful South Dakota senate race.

The anti-corruption super PAC will run ads on behalf of Democrat Rick Weiland, emphasizing minimum wage, closing corporate loopholes and investing in education.

Weiland's campaign against former Republican Governor Mike Rounds was initially considered uncompetitive until recent polling showed the mainstream frontrunners in the four-way senate race only seven percentage points apart, with 35 percent of voters favoring Rounds versus 28 percent who prefer Weiland.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2014/10/07/Larry-Lessig-super-PAC-jumps-into-South-Dakota-senate-race-to-boost-Democrat/8861412697377/

---

South Dakota is already a leader when it comes to harnessing wind energy. Nearly 500 large turbines spin over the state's windswept landscapes, with a collective capacity of 784 megawatts of power. The*Watertown Public Opinion* reports on an attempt to more than double that capacity:

THIS STORY CONTINUES

===