#stan adelstein

[markluker]

New Post has been published on Putlocker

New Post has been published on http://ewebmovies.com/dinosaur-13-2014.html/

Dinosaur 13 2014

A documentary about the discovery of the largest Tyrannosaurus Rex fossil ever found.

[osfilmesqueviporai]

Dinosaur 13 (2014) ★★★★ [8/10] 083/2015

[seriesandmoviesgallery]

Dinosaur 13 (2014)

[politicalsmokeout]

Rounds headed to Israel

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mike Rounds will travel to Israel this month, his campaign confirmed today.

Stan Adelstein, a Jewish state senator and wealthy businessman who backed Rounds' gubernatorial campaigns, wrote on his blog that Rounds will have an "intense six-day briefing" in Israel.

"He will have an in-depth confidential discussion with three Israeli generals concerning the military situation. In addition, he will be meeting with business leaders, press individuals, and members of both parties of the Israeli Knesset," Adelstein wrote.

Rounds aide Jason Glodt didn't have additional details about the trip, which is on Rounds' initiative rather than part of a group journey. The former governor was traveling Wednesday and wasn't immediately available to discuss the trip.

With his political experience being in the South Dakota statehouse, Rounds has minimal foreign policy experience. This trip will provide an international perspective as he runs for the U.S. Senate where he'll be expected to weigh in on foreign affairs.

Support for Israel is also an increasingly important position among GOP primary voters.

[politicalsmokeout]

SD Medicaid expansion formally defeated for 2013

South Dakota won't expand Medicaid to 48,000 low-income adults, a legislative committee voted Friday.

The unsurprising vote by the Joint Appropriations Committee to reject expansion came after Gov. Dennis Daugaard and many Republican legislators expressed opposition to expanding this year.

Many proponents of expansion were in the room Friday but didn't testify.

"Clearly this Legislature didn't seem inclined to take up the issue," said David Hewett, president of the South Dakota Association of Health Care Organizations.

That didn't stop Sen. Stan Adelstein, R-Rapid City, from making his case.

"This hidden tax is being paid by the citizens of South Dakota, in the order of magnitude of $50 to $60 million every year," said Adelstein, referring to medical providers passing on the cost of charity care to paying customers.

Accepting federal money to expand Medicaid, Adelstein said, would provide those low-income people with health coverage, easing the burden on everyone.

Under the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the federal government will pay 100 percent of the cost to expand Medicaid eligibility to 138 percent of the federal poverty line for the next several years. After that, the federal government promises to pay 90 percent of the costs.

Several lawmakers questioned the required funding for administering the Medicaid expansion, and said expansion should be in the form of a bill, not an amendment to the state budget.

The committee voted 13-5 to table Medicaid expansion, with Adelstein and four Democrats voting no.

But the issue of Medicaid expansion isn't defeated. Daugaard aide Deb Bowman announced a committee to study Medicaid expansion over the summer. That workgroup will submit recommendations the governor and next year's Legislature can consider in 2014.

[politicalsmokeout]

Bill excluding weekends, holidays from abortion wait passes

The wait before South Dakota women can have abortions is about to get a little longer.

The South Dakota Senate on Thursday approved a bill excluding weekends and holidays from the state's existing 72-hour pre-abortion waiting period.

It now heads to Gov. Dennis Daugaard for a signature or action.

In 2011, the Legislature passed a law requiring that 72-hour wait and requiring mandatory counseling by anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers before a woman could have an abortion. It was pitched as a way to give women the time and information to properly consider the decision, and resist being coerced into an abortion, though opponents argued it was offensive and unnecessary. 

Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union are currently challenging the counseling requirement in court, having just asked to drop their challenge to the 72-hour period.

This year, anti-abortion advocates brought the bill to exclude weekends or holidays. They said it was to prevent Planned Parenthood, South Dakota's sole provider of elective abortions, from forcing crisis pregnancy centers to be open on weekends and holidays by starting the 72-hour period on a Friday.

"Weekends honestly shouldn't be an issue, unless Planned Parenthood would decide to make it an issue," said Sen. Phyllis Heineman, R-Sioux Falls.

Other supporters of the bill House Bill 1237, said it was a reasonable restriction for an important decision like abortion.

"We are talking about a fatal, irrevocable decision," said Sen. Bill Van Gerpen, R-Tyndall. "That's why I think it's important that we provide these ladies with as much opportunity as needed to assemble the information, get the input, the counsel and advice, and then have time to think."

Opponents said the bill was insulting by suggesting that women couldn't consider an abortion on weekends or holidays.

"To suggest that a woman is unable to make a decision in 72 consecutive hours is to (belittle) their ability to think and to suggest that somehow weekends and holidays have something to do with the difficulty of their decision," said Sen. Stan Adelstein, R-Rapid City.

Sen. Craig Tieszen, R-Rapid City, said if crisis pregnancy centers are worthy of their name, they should be open whenever women need them, even on weekends.

But the full Senate agreed with Heineman that HB 1237 was a "simple" fix and a reasonable requirement to ask. It passed 24-9 and needs only Daugaard's signature to become law. Both houses passed the bill with the two-thirds threshold needed to override any possible veto.

[politicalsmokeout]

Governor Adelstein? He's thinking about it

One of today's political must-reads comes from Kevin Woster in the Rapid City Journal, who interviews state Sen. Stan Adelstein about his life — and ambitions.

Adelstein, who strongly dislikes Gov. Dennis Daugaard's policies, is considering running for the state's top job in 2014. (Updated to reflect Adelstein's comment below.)

In fact, Adelstein loves the environment and the platform in the state Capitol so much, he has thoughts about taking things up a notch with a run for governor.

So far, it's only a consideration. And yet, with Adelstein one never knows.

"I guess I have given it serious thought," he said of a possible run for governor. "I don't want it. I'm going to be 83 by the time this Senate term ends. But I don't know how to get done what I want done. And people do ask, 'Why don't you run for governor?'"

The story notes that Adelstein, 81 and a multimillionaire, doesn't think he'll actually run:

Having served two terms in the House and one in the Senate prior to his defeat, Adelstein is now in his third consecutive Senate term. The state constitution limits legislators to four consecutive terms in one house. Adelstein said he'll "probably" run for that fourth Senate term in 2014, "depending on how he feels."

...

"I would rather find a younger man or young woman who wanted to be governor," he said. "But I'm really not pleased with what's going on these days. Running for governor would give me a statewide platform to discuss those issues."

But he's clearly thinking about it. Adelstein has raised his public profile lately, hiring a second legislative aide and starting a blog and Twitter account. On that same blog this morning, he posted a link to Woster's long story — and asked for readers' thoughts on "the future direction of SD."

Unmentioned is how Adelstein would run for governor, if that comes to pass. He's been a lifelong member of the Republican Party (albeit one who has on more than one occasion given to Democrats); would he challenge Daugaard in the GOP primary? Would he run as an independent? Or seek out the Democratic nod?

[politicalsmokeout]

Committee keeps law allowing people to sue others for breaking up their marriage

Even a lurid, high-profile trial didn't change Sen. Stan Adelstein's luck in his long-running battle against a South Dakota law.

Adelstein tried for the third time in the past 11 years Tuesday to repeal South Dakota's "alienation of affection" law, which allows individuals to sue a third party for breaking up their marriage.

Such a measure, Adelstein said, was archaic and offensive in how it placed a monetary figure on love and affection.

"I doubt very much that love is dependent on the wallet of the man who may be considered an interloper," Adelstein said.

But an array of socially conservative groups defended the law as a tool to help hold families together.

Dale Bartscher of the South Dakota Family Heritage Alliance described a case in which a threat by a husband to sue another man for alienation of affection caused the other man to abandon his affair with the husband's wife.

"This statute is not about the married couple, but about the person outside the marriage who maliciously attempts to disrupt the marriage," Bartscher said.

This was at least the fourth time since 2002 that the Legislature has considered repealing the alienation of affection law. Only six other states have such a statute, which has its roots in English common law.

But this year was the first legislative session after the conclusion of an alienation of affection suit involving the then-state's attorney of Pennington County, Glenn Brenner.

That lawsuit, in which Brenner was sued by his wife's ex-husband, went all the way to the Supreme Court and was extensively covered in the media. Testimony at the trial included specific and intimate details of the relationships involved.

A jury ultimately rejected the alienation of affection lawsuit against Brenner, who ultimately lost his bid for a fifth term as state's attorney and has since moved to Texas.

Sen. Craig Tieszen, R-Rapid City, said that case convinced him the alienation of affection law had to go.

"There was I think tremendous damage done to innocent people, and particularly to children," Tieszen said. "I believe that this statute causes more damage than the value that it has."

But a majority of the Senate Judiciary Committee disagreed.

"People take a vow to each other. Others shouldn't try to break that vow," said Sen. Mike Vehle, R-Mitchell.

Sen. Jeff Monroe, R-Pierre, said focusing on instances where someone was sued for alienation of affection miss the point. The value of the law, he said, is as a preventative — discouraging people from pursuing affairs because they know they could be sued.

Vehle and Monroe were joined by Sens. Jean Hunhoff and Tim Begalka in defeating Adelstein's bill, Senate Bill 108. Tieszen, Sen. Mark Kirkeby and Sen. Jim Bradford voted for the measure.

After the vote, Adelstein said he was surprised and disappointed. He believed he had four or even five votes in favor of his bill in the committee, rather than the three he got. Adelstein said he'd consider trying to revive SB 108 on the floor of the Senate.

Sen. Stan Adelstein, R-Rapid City. Photo by David Montgomery.