Bad Leadership
By Thad Titze
Mirror Guest Writer
I've never been overly interested in party politics. What I am interested in are responsible policies that serve the people well. Governor Daugaard's budget proposal is no such thing.
Daugaard ran on the premise that "South Dakota is not broken." When asked to rate South Dakota's budget problem from 1-10 (one signifying no problem, 10 signifying a major meltdown), Dennis gave it a three while even the other Republican candidates gave it an 8, on average. In the same debate, Daugaard said that a cut to Medicaid would be "off the table."
Then, after outgoing Governor Mike Rounds unveiled his budget in December, Daugaard indicated his budget proposal would be similar. The Rounds budget included a five percent cut to education.
Daugaard doubled that. In summary, Dennis was not up front about the state's budget crisis and he disillusioned many voters.
Don Frankenfeld, a former Republican legislator from Rapid City, estimates that the Daugaard budget will cost the state 9,000 jobs.
Daugaard says his proposal is "a plan, not the plan." Yet when Pam Homan, superintendent of the largest school district in the state, approached Daugaard with alternatives, he essentially said that they would have to agree to disagree. He also dismissed a plan offered by the minority party.
South Dakotans have made it clear through the internet, letters to the editor, and public forums that they don't approve of Daugaard's budget.
A balanced approach to handling our budget crisis does not mean making sweeping cuts all in one year.
Perhaps we should use some of the state reserves that Dennis speaks so fondly of in one of his campaign ads. It may also mean passing one of the many proposed sales tax bills and looking for other sources of savings and revenue.
If we don't address the ongoing budget problem now, we will face similar and growing challenges every year.
Governor Daugaard's current proposal is not responsible policy and does not serve the people well.
The governor's current budget proposal would harm the state as a whole and unfairly punish students, working families and the elderly. That's bad leadership; that's Governor Daugaard.
Cuts must happen
By Carrie Hemeyer
Mirror Guest Writer
Many South Dakotans hear about the budget cuts being made in Pierre, but do not really understand why these cuts need to be made and how these cuts can effectively be done.
Governor Daugaard has proposed at least a 10 percent cut for all government funded agencies in South Dakota. The goal of this cut is to eliminate South Dakota's structural deficit of around $127 billion.
South Dakota has a structural deficit which means that ongoing expenses have been paid for by money given to South Dakota through the federal stimulus.
Due to the cuts at the federal level, states do not receive the federal stimulus that was previously given to them.
Governor Daugaard would like to eliminate the deficit in one year and is therefore asking for a 10 percent cut in every state agency. I agree with eliminating the deficit in one year.
If South Dakota takes several years to do this, cuts that can be made now will not be able to be made in the future.
I do not agree, however, with across the board cuts of 10 percent because many departments of our state need this money, for example education. Funding needs to stay in education.
The future of our great state relies on citizens being educated; without proper funding, our state's education system may not be as effective. Each agency needs to be looked at closely to make budget cuts where the least amount of citizens are affected.
South Dakota needs to get this deficit behind us so that we can focus completely on generating more revenue.
Like any state, South Dakota's revenue is down, but the ongoing expenses continue to grow. South Dakota must also create jobs to help stimulate the economy.
Budget cuts are unavoidable in South Dakota; in order for South Dakota to catch up financially, budget cuts must happen.
is a member of the 
Be the first to comment on this article!