Noem Campaign Finance Notes: Congrats, President Mork!

The Federal Election Commission has updated itemized campaign finance reports up to September 30. Among the surprises on Kristi Noem's individual door report: Madison Dairy Queen owner DeLon Mork is listed as President of South Dakota State University.

That's what David Chicoine gets for donating to Stephanie Herseth Sandlin.

Expect President Mork to move quickly to eliminate a major source of Blizzard™ competition by closing the SDSU Dairy Bar and all that ice cream socialism.

Two Scoops of Socialism: SDSU Ice Cream Downtown!

Don't tell me the State can't do anything right!

South Dakota State University, my alma mater, makes some of the best ice cream in the state. The SDSU dairy program also makes some smart business moves. Ryan Woodard reports in the Brookings Register that SDSU has opened the Campanile Connection, a shop selling SDSU ice cream and cheese in downtown Brookings.

The new shop is getting up and running right next door to Sioux River Cyclery (a long bike ride always makes me hungry for ice cream!). SDSU instructor and dairy plant manager Howard Bonneman also looks eagerly to the gymnastics center next door and the spectacular new Children's Museum just a couple blocks away as sources of hungry little coneheads.

This new state-owned business (SDSU's second downtown venture this year, following a new branch of the campus bookstore to Main Street) isn't putting too much of a squeeze on other businesses. With Zesto's now moved out to the University Mall, there's no ice cream vendor within reasonable walking distance of downtown. There's no grocer downtown, either—hmm... maybe the Campanile Connection can snag some SDSU beef as well!

This kind of town-and-gown connection is good for everyone. The dairy products students make in their dairy-micro classes gets put to good use instead of getting thrown out. Students and residents get to make connections through commerce and chocolate revel. And everyone has one more reason to spend the day in the wonderful destination into which downtown Brookings is making itself.

Maybe DSU here in Madison can do something like this. Maybe our Tech Fellows could open a branch office downtown to provide cheap tech support for the community. Maybe our programming classes could open up a shop, Widgets While u Wait, whipping up quick Facebook event pages, blog polls, and other Web gizmos in under an hour.

SDSU ice cream: totally socialist, and totally good for downtown. Two scoops, please!

Private Donors Fund State University Athletic Facilities...

...why can't Madison HS do the same?

Speaking of new gyms, the South Dakota Board of Regents meets this week in Rapid City to discuss, among other things, the University of South Dakota's proposal to add on to the Dakota Dome. USD wants to build a new arena for basketball and volleyball along with some sports office and classroom space. USD hopes to consolidate their Health, Phys Ed, and Rec program into this one facility. The Dome itself may also get some repair and bleacher updates.

Agenda item III-K doesn't offer a dollar figure for the project yet (just developing the plan will cost $50K), but it does say up front that funding will come from private funding and possible federal grants to complement our Higher Education Facility Fund dollars.

South Dakota State University is also on the Regents' agenda with a proposal to raze Coughlin Alumni Stadium and build a new 20K-plus-seat football stadium. Agenda item III-F says SDSU anticipates funding the new facility through a combination of fees, sponsorships, and private donations. The $400K to $600K price tag for mere development of the plan will come entirely from private gifts to the SDSU Foundation.

SDSU also wants to build a new indoor all-sport training facility (agenda item III-H). Developing the facility plan will cost $250K to $350K. Proposed funding appears to come entirely from gifts and sponsorships.

Given that our state universities have established this model of significant private funding for their expanding sports facilities, it seems odd that our local school board hasn't gotten the message and opened the discussion of its $8.4 million new gym proposal with a call for private donors and sponsorships. The Schaefer Dome? Prostrollo Arena? (We could triple the sponsorship value of the latter by changing the team name from the Bulldogs to the White Buffaloes.) Perhaps the big donors to the South Dakota Basketball Hall of Fame could strike a deal to raise half the funds for the new building in return for winning permanent display space for its memorabilia.

Madison's new gym is a luxury with little direct educational value. If the Madison Central School Board approves this luxury project, it should seek private donations to cover at least half of the $8.4 million price tag.
-----------------------------
Update 22:35 CDT: In related news, Jeff Martin writes today's edition of that Sioux Falls paper about Mayor Mike Huether's plan to cover $15M to $24.5M of the $99.5M cost of his proposed events center with revenue from naming rights, premium seating, and other private donations. Let's assume the Sioux Falls market is a hundred times more valuable than the Madison market... we might still be able to swing $100K for naming rights?

I was also thinking about what we could do with $8.4 million dollars on other sites around town. We could renovate the Masonic Temple top to bottom and still have cash left to renovate every deteriorating storefront on Main Street. We could seal and stabilize every old building at Prairie Village and add a lakeside hotel and restaurant.

Or we could give $10,000 bonuses to 86 teachers every year for ten years.

Catangui Firing Threatens Academic Freedom, May Earn Censure for All SD Universities

The SDSU Collegian reports that the university's possibly improper firing of tenured professor and Extension Service entomologist Mike Catangui could have repercussions for the entire South Dakota public university system:

Political science professor Delmer Lonowski, SDSU's AAUP representative said the AAUP is waiting for the grievance process to conclude before deciding whether or not to investigate a possible censure.

However, [SDSU labor union COHE president Bill] Adamson said an investigation is very likely.

"If you read between the lines, the AAUP will probably conduct an investigation," he said. "They won't censure just SDSU. They'll censure all the universities in the entire BOR system" [Emma DeJong, "Faculty Reviews Dismissal," SDSU Collegian, 2010.09.15].

According to DeJong, Catangui is asking the Board of Regents to review SDSU's decision to dismiss him. So if the Board of Regents gets it wrong, the AAUP could well drop the hammer on the whole system.

Upholding SDSU's decision looks more and more like the wrong decision. DeJong reports that the university is confirming that Catangui's research was part of the reason for his firing:

SDSU officials have declined to comment about personnel matters, but Rich Helsper, SDSU's attorney, made a general statement that SDSU "follows the COHE agreement to the letter," and "every faculty member is afforded all due process rights, not only under general law, but under the COHE agreement."

The BOR fired Catangui June 21 for reasons that have not been completely made public. Helsper confirmed that part of the reason for Catangui's termination is that he followed his own research, instead of a mandated requirement, in deciding when to spray for the removal of soybean aphids.

"Really it's becoming a public issue at this point because there is a serious threat that the university is going to get a censure from AAUP," said Bill Adamson, president of the SDSU chapter of COHE [DeJong, 2010.09.15].

Yikes. A professor gets fired for following the results of his research. That's a textbook definition of violation of academic freedom.

DeJong reports that Catangui had an opportunity to address the SDSU Acaademic Senate at its regular meeting yesterday. No word yet on the outcome of that meeting. The professors' governing body is waiting until its September 28 to make a decision as to what if anything it will do concerning Catangui's dismissal. The profs are waiting to act because they think there's more to this case than the university is letting on... and they're saying it publicly:

Senators Sandy Smart, animal and range sciences associate professor, and Patty Hacker, a health, physical education and recreations professor, said they think there is information that they likely won't be able to know.

"There's something darker under the surface," Smart said. "Somebody's out to get somebody." Hacker agreed.

"There is a distinct possibility that there is something under the surface we will never be privy to because it's a personnel issue," Patty Hacker said. "…I would hesitate to push something forward for immediacy knowing what the ramifications are going to be down the road" [DeJong, 2010.09.15].

Somebody's out to get somebody—that's a pretty serious statement to put on the record. But one can perhaps understand strong feelings from professors who look at a colleague's dismissal and see no reason given other than a pretty clear statement that speaking and acting on the basis of freely and fairly conducted research can get you fired.

What is the deep dark something under the surface? Is it manipulation or suppression of research unfavorable to Monsanto, whose executive board member David Chicoine also serves as SDSU president? Is it something else? Is there some other ethical, financial, oor political issue afoot?

Lest our state's entire university system suffer AAUP sanction, SDSU and the Board of Regents had better lay out the full story and either make clear they have done the right thing or quickly rectify any errors they have made.

SDSU Charging Catangui $908 for Hearing Transcript

The American Association of University Professors remains concerned over what they see as South Dakota State University's denial of full due process to fired entomology professor Mike Cantangui. In a September 10 letter to SDSU president David Chicoine, the AAUP notes that SDSU has asked Dr. Catangui to pay $908 to obtain a copy of the transcript of his hearing before the faculty members empaneled by the university to address Catangui's termination.

$908. For a transcript. Uff da!

Now I know documents like this can get hefty. I have a good ream-and-a-half worth of paper recording my own eight hours of fun and excitement with the Madison school board a few years back. But transcripts do come in electronic form nowadays. Providing Dr. Catangui with his hearing transcript probably requires 15 seconds of mouseclicks and keystrokes (new e-mail, address, attach, send). That's $60 a second.

The AAUP recommends standards and regulations for faculty dismissals, including a recommendation that transcripts of formal dismissal hearings be made available to dismissed faculty without cost. Charging a fired employee $908 for the single most important document that employee needs to pursue any further due process is unnecessary and unfair.
-----------------------
On the good side, the university does appear to have acquiesced in restoring Catangui's salary through August, to the point where he actually received something resembling due process. It's too bad SDSU seems inlcined to use the transcript charge to nickel-and-C-note Catangui to claw back some of that money.

Catangui Research Shows Monsanto Corn Helps Spread Pests

South Dakota State University's firing of entomologist Mike Catangui has struck me as odd from the beginning. The Extension Service advocates a regional standard for spraying soybeans for aphids. Dr. Catangui declines to advocate that standard, pointing to his research that suggests South Dakota farmers should follow a different standard. SDSU and the Board of Regents decline to continue Dr. Catangui's employment.

Monsanto executive board member and SDSU president David Chicoine has provided no explanation for Catangui's firing or for the university's apparent violation of due process that could get the university in hot water again with the American Association of University Professors.

A professor is fired for expressing views based on his peer-reviewed, published research. It just doesn't add up. That's why I've kept wondering if this case is revealing the fruits of Monsanto's corporate control over our land-grant university. Is there some way in which Catangui's research could be damaging to Monsanto?

Stop right there. I rail against other conspiracy theorists for seeing plots and cabals (and liberal media monsters) where there are none. But we all see what we want. I may be looking for a grand design where there is none. Cantangui's dismissal could well be just what the university said it was: "performance deficiencies" and insubordination. For all we know, Catangui may have mooned the boss.

So let me be clear: I have no documents to prove that Monsanto ordered Catangui's dismissal. I only have some casual Googling and reading well out of my field that establish that Catangui's research includes some findings relevant to a Monsanto product. I have pieces, but no finished puzzle... and not even evidence that there is a puzzle to finish.

But there are pieces. It's a lot of science, so I'll boil it down and then provide you with the bibliography.

Dr. Catangui has done research on the spread of western bean cutworm. This pest used to be no big deal. But since the introduction and widespread planting of Monsanto's genetically engineered Bt corn, western bean cutworm has been cropping up in higher numbers and in new places. Bt corn also appears to be an inviting home for corn leaf aphids. The western bean cutworms and corn leaf aphids appear to be benefiting from pest replacement: the toxins in Bt corn wipe out targeted competitor species, allowing previously minor pests to pig out and flourish. Monsanto and other corporations then trap farmers on a treadmill of new pesticides and seeds engineered to tackle the new pests... and all the while we dine on a revolving smorgasbord of tasty toxins.

Now Catangui isn't the only guy saying these things, so one could argue that Monsanto wouldn't benefit by targeting one professor in South Dakota. But Monsanto does have a history of going after small operators, and corporations do profit by maximizing every marginal percentage. When Monsanto wants 100% control and zero competition, even one less set of critical scientific eyes on their products may be worth the effort. And hey, you don't buy control of a major land-grant university for nothing.
-----------------------------------------
Read more:

• Catangui, M.A., and Berg, R.K. (2006). "Western Bean Cutworm, Striacosta albicosta (Smith (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), as a Potential Pest of Transgenic Cry1Ab Bacillus thuringiensis Corn Hybrids in South Dakota," Environmental Entomology, 35(5): 1439–1452.
• Collins, S. (2003 Aug 3). "Bt Doesn't Control Me," Corn & Soybean Digest.
• Faria, C.A., Wäckers, F.L., Pritchard, J., Barrett, D.A., Turlings, T.C. (2007) "High Susceptibility of Bt Maize to Aphids Enhances the Performance of Parasitoids of Lepidopteran Pests," PLoS ONE, 2(7): e600. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000600
• Schafer, S. (2010 Mar 27). "Insect Outlook," Farm Journal:AgWeb.
• SDSU (2008 Jul 21). "Corn Producers Now Should Scout for Leaf Aphids," Plant Management Network: Plant Health Progress.
• Then, C. (2010 Mar). "New Plant Pest Caused by Genetically Engineered Corn," TestBiotech report.
• Tonneson, L. (2009 Feb). "Corn Leaf Aphids Threaten Corn," DakotaFarmer.com.

VA Links Agent Orange to More Diseases; What's Monsanto University Think?

As the Iraq war "ends", our veterans get some more good news. KELO reports that the Department of Veterans Affairs is adding heart disease, Parkinson's, and hairy-cell leukemia to its list of conditions related to Agent Orange exposure. The VA will review 90,000 previously denied Agent Orange claims and expects 150,000 new claims over the next year and a half. Expected cost: $42 billion over ten years (any teabaggers care to criticize that government spending?)

I have to wonder: since Monsanto produced Agent Orange and continues to deny Agent Orange's health harms, will Monsanto executive board member David Chicoine allow the land-grant university he runs to do any research on the health effects of Agent Orange to support the VA's work to help veterans? Hmm... good thing our medical school is in Vermillion, not Brookings....

Chicoine Cold-Shoulders AAUP on Cantangui

The American Association of University Professors remains unsatisfied with Monsanto executive board member and SDSU President David Chicoine's response to their concerns about the firing of entomologist Mike Catangui.

Actually, AAUP is saying, what response? In an August 24 letter to President Chicoine, the AAUP says they are still waiting for a response from Chicoine to their July 8 letter protesting the apparent lack of due process in Catangui's dismissal. They acknowledge that the university subsequently granted Catangui a closed-door August 9 hearing before a faculty committee. However, according to AAUP's letter, the Board of Regents officially terminated Catangui's employment August 14, well before the anticipated release of the faculty committee's report on August 30.

AAUP isn't fighting now for Catangui to remain at SDSU; they're simply saying that if you're going to fire a professor, you've still got to accord him due process. Their position: Catangui should remain on staff and receive salary at least until the formal hearing process has concluded and the faculty committee has issued its report.

Whether Chicoine deigns to offer AAUP the courtesy of a response remains to be seen.
--------------------------
Archive update 2010.09.01: see also coverage in the Brookings Register. Getting fired twice in one summer—that just stinks!

Regents Seek Eminent Domain on Brookings Sorority House

The South Dakota Board of Regents appears ready to swing the eminent domain stick on SDSU's Alpha Xi Delta sorority. Vicki Schuster at the Brookings Register reports that SDSU wants to bulldoze the Alpha Xi Delta house on the south side of campus to build Phase II of the Electrical Engineering and Computer Science complex. The project has already replaced a lot of trees and old houses with brick and pavement. The Legislature this year authorized the Regents to offer the sorority $275K for the property. The sorority has thus far said no thanks... and if I were them, I would, too.

During my undergrad days, I had the pleasure of living three blocks west of Alpha Xi Delta, right at 8th and Medary, where the SDSU Foundation building now stands. I loved it. I lived within a two minute bike-sprint from class. I never had to drive to the Union or the library, even on the coldest night. If I owned the choice Alpha Xi Delta property in a tight housing market like Brookings, I would expect a much better deal from the Regents to give it up. Alpha Xi Delta won't find a location as good for its replacement, and I suspect they won't be able to build a house of comparable size for $275K.

The value isn't just the building and location. The Regents are also taking away a prime recruitment tool for the sorority. Banish the sorority to scattered on-campus housing for a year or more while ΑΞΔ builds a new house, and the organization loses a year of easy recruitment, weakening the group for more than a couple years.

I'm no fan of the Greek system, but they're entitled to protect their organization's interests and demand a fair market price for their property like everyone else. Eminent domain is acceptable for cases of absolute public necessity. I haven't heard the case yet for the absolute necessity of another new classroom/lab building on the south edge of campus.

I haven't gotten the minutes from this week's Regental meeting yet, so I don't know for sure that they passed their condemnation resolution. Let's hope they don't ned to use it and can instead make a deal that satisfies all parties.

Catangui Dismissal Raises Academic Freedom Questions

I continue to read up on the science and politics surrounding the contested dismissal of entomologist Dr. Mike Catangui from South Dakota State University.

Catangui's predecessor at the Cooperative Extension Service, Professor Emeritus Ben Kantack, says SDSU gave Catangui the boot for refusing to advocate soybean-aphid-spraying guidelines from other states for South Dakota. Catangui's research indicates that following different spraying guidelines in South Dakota will increase South Dakota farmers' yields and income.

Kantack says Catangui's dismissal violates academic freedom. Readers may wish to review the statement on academic freedom in the collective bargaining agreement our profs sign:

The parties to this agreement recognize and accept the importance of academic freedom to teaching and learning. Academic freedom includes the right to study, discuss, investigate, teach and publish. Academic freedom applies to both teaching and research. Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth. Academic freedom in its teaching aspect is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the teacher in teaching and of students to freedom in learning. It includes the freedom to perform one's professional duties and to present differing and sometimes controversial points of view, free from reprisal. The faculty unit member is entitled to freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the performing of other assigned academic duties [2008-2011 South Dakota University Faculty Collective Bargaining Agreement, 14.1.1].

This academic freedom statement makes it pretty clear that SDSU can't fire a professor for publishing and discussing the results of his or her research. But I wonder: does work in the field for the Extension Service fall under "other assigned academic duties"? Is there some clause that excludes those public outreach activities from the academic freedom clause?

Worth noting: SDSU Extension entomologist Kelley Tilmon quite firmly advocates the 250-threshold and regional aphid guidelines in this July 27 Extension Service article. Tilmon and Catangui have disagreed on aphid recommendations previously and publicly. Catangui has recommended treatment at one to five aphids per plant, a threshold challenged by other researchers. Some questions about Cantangui's research center on caging soybeans, which prevents beneficial insects from helping control aphids. But cage studies are used regularly in entomology, and subsequent field research seems to show better yields under the lower aphid thresholds.

Scientists have honest disagreements. They deal with complicated questions like when to spray soybeans for aphids—at least it seems complicated to me, what with a range of variables like soybean growth stage, yield potential, spraying cost, soybean market value to consider. They come up with different answers. That's why we have academic freedom: to protect professors' right to challenge the prevailing wisdom when their research (not to mention their conscience) says a challenge is warranted.

(Hmm... Dr. Blanchard, care to offer a turn on this topic on climate change?)

Meanwhile, outside the halls of academia, what are you farmers up to? Are you spraying for aphids? Do you follow the Extension guidelines? Are they working in South Dakota?

SDSU Cans Catangui for Defending SD-Specific Science?

Professor of Plant Science and Extension Entomologist Mike Catangui has been dismissed by South Dakota State University. South Dakota farmers and gardeners may recognize Dr. Catangui as a regular panelist on Garden Line on SDPB.

Professor Catangui's dismissal may have an interesting states-rights twist. Catangui has done research on aphids and soybeans and finds that the regional recommendations made for spraying soybeans with insecticides to get rid of aphids don't work in South Dakota's climate. Dr. Benjamin Kantack, SDSU professor emeritus of plant and bug science, apparently agrees. Kantack is telling the press that Catangui's firing is a result of his resistance to those regional recommendations.

"He was told he would accept the recommendations from these other states, which do not fit South Dakota weather conditions or growing conditions and so forth, which his own research showed do not fit," said Kantack, a professor emeritus and retired Extension entomologist at SDSU. "He was told if he didn't accept them he would not keep his job.

"He has defended the ag interests of South Dakota and saved them a lot of money over the years. He's being discharged, in my opinion, unjustly" [Wayne Ortman, "SDSU Dismissal of Longtime Extension Insect Specialist under Fire," AP via Rapid City Journal, 2010.07.27].

I'm not up on my aphid science, and I'll appreciate any enlightenment my farm neighbors can offer. But I am curious as to whether there is some Monsanto angle to this story, since SDSU is run by a highly paid member of Monsanto's executive board. Monsanto does cite in its aphid-management literature the 250 aphid-soybean threshold that Catangui and Kantack appear to challenge, but Monsanto take its info cue from extension services in neighboring states. If anything, Catangui's science seems to recommend more aggressive use of pesticides against South Dakota aphids, something Monsanto shouldn't mind. If Kantack is correct, Catangui's dismissal appears to be politics within the Extension Service trumping science that makes sense for South Dakota's unique growing conditions.

Everyone else from Catangui to the SDSU president is keeping mum, since this is a personnel matter and legal wheels are a-turning. As a teacher who's been there, I do appreciate Professor Kantack's willingness to speak out on behalf of a colleague he feels is being mistreated. I hope Catangui can come out with a fair resolution of the situation and continue his research on behalf of South Dakota's farmers.

SDSU Students Donate Meal Plan Money to Food Pantry

Life meets speech class: one of my students this week gave a speech about a problem I remember well from my SDSU days: student meal plan surpluses. You live on campus. Res. Life requires you to buy a big meal plan, based on the stated fear that undergraduates might fail to respond to millions of years of food-seeking instinct and forget to eat supper at college. You suffer no such instinct-deficiency, but you're also thrifty. You skip the expensive drinks at the Student Union, microwave Ramen noodles, show Mom you love her by coming home for her tater-nugget casserole on Saturday (and bringing laundry but doing it yourself). Spring finals approach, and you've got $150 left on your food account. You can't get the money back or carry it over, since Res. Life needs to guarantee margins for your friendly neighborhood for-profit food service contractor. So you end up buying extra food you don't really need, ordering extra pizzas for group study sessions, or just letting the money go to waste.

Sixteen years after I bought my last pancakes in Medary Commons, SDSU offers a solution to meal plan waste: students can donate up to 50 percent of their meal plan dollars to the Brookings Food Pantry. KELO notes the story Friday, but The Collegian's Kate Wegehaupt has the full story:

The first donation date is Friday, April 16, followed by April 23 and 30. Students can pick up a ballot from all main dining sites, selecting the food items or dollar amount they’d like to donate to Brookings Area Food Pantry. Ballots are then turned in to drop-boxes at each dining location. From a student’s perspective, that is all the work it takes to help someone out.

After being turned in, your pencil checks translate into healthy food items that the Brookings Area Food Pantry needs most. The Monday following a donation day, SDSU Dining Services will deliver donations to the Pantry [Kate Wegehaupt, "Food Pantry Useful for Extra Flex Dollars," SDSU Collegian, 2010.03.24].

Wegehaupt reports the Brookings Food Pantry can well use this help: in 2009, the Food Pantry served triple the number of residents who use the service in 2005.

My speech student informs me that DSU is doing something similar here in Madison. It would be nice if the food plan requirements didn't impose such surpluses on pennywise students in the first place... but at least we can turn the excess funds to some good. Students, put down the extra bags of jerky from the C-Store; put that money to good use for the community!

Chicoine Earns More from Monsanto than SDSU? No Problem, Says Legislature

So much for speaking truth to power: our Legislature seems to be perfectly willing to let Monsanto run South Dakota State University. Last week the Senate State Affairs Committee killed Senator Kloucek's SB 111, intended to address the sweetheart deal SDSU President David Chicoine currently gets for serving on the Monsanto corporate board.

Please allow me a little disappointment when I see Russell Olson and Scott Heidepriem both vote against a bill I like. Heidepriem at least tried to keep alive SB 113, a less aggressive measure that would have required the Board of Regents to work up a policy on such outside employment as Chicoine snagged. But the Board of Regents already has a conflict of interest policy, one that every employee signs but that the Regents apparently don't apply to university presidents with corporate connections.

There's still some small hope the Monsanto-Chicoine discussion might resume. HB1116, a bill that would cap moonlighting for university honchos at $10,000 a year, was tabled by House State Affairs last week. Not dead, but barely breathing....

Ho Ho Ho SDSU: Defense Bill Packs $8M in Pork

...or so the headline will read for my government- and education-hating Tea Party neighbors and GOP candidates... right?

Senator Thune had the guts to become my new favorite hippie last week, voting to block funding for the Pentagon. Now will his Republican friends have the guts to denounce $8 million of pork that defense appropriations bill will send to SDSU?

Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S .D.), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, on Thursday announced funding levels for a number of South Dakota projects as part of the final version of the Defense Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2010....

The SDSU projects marked for funding include:

• Alternative Power Technology (APT) for Missile Defense $3,200,000. SDSU works with Radiance Technologies to develop and demonstrate alternative power technology for missile defense.
• Accelerated Materials Development for Army Cannon Systems $2,400,000. SDSU is working with the U.S. Army to help develop a fatigue testing system to test and predict the life and the reliability of cannon system parts.
• Renewable Jet Fuel from Lignocellulosic Feedstocks $2,400,000. This project will develop affordable, alternative sources and production technologies that can achieve high conversion efficiency biofuel for military aviation applications [staff, "$8M for SDSU in Defense Bill," Brookings Register, 2009.12.22].

I can count on Sibby to denounce this money: it's his favorite mix of big government and big money for us evil secular America-haters in higher education.

But I want to hear it from people who might actually win votes in 2010. I eagerly await the press release from R. Blake Curd, Scott Munsterman, or any other Republican true believer in fiscal responsibility who will grinch out on SDSU and demand we send this filthy money back to Washington. Go ahead, Republicans. I double dog dare you.

Stop Global Warming: Quit Pitching Virgins into Volcanoes

Remember the ruckus in October when SuperFreakonomics authors Stephen J. Dubner and Steven Levitt argued that launching a whole lot of sulfur into the stratosphere might be the quickest way to fight global warming?

A South Dakota State University scientist finds more evidence that they may be right. An eager reader points out a Science Daily article featuring SDSU chemistry professor Jihong Cole-Dai's work (with SDSU post-doc David Ferris, SDSU grad student Alison Lanciki, and some other smart folks) determining the cause of the big global cold snap back in the 1810's. Their findings: an undocumented volcanic eruption in 1809 set the stage for the coldest decade of the last half-millennium. Dr. Cole-Dai and his colleagues found high amounts of volcanic sulfuric acid in ice samples in 1809 and 1810 snow layers in Antarctica and Greenland. Their argument is that those volcanic emissions reflected sunligh and chilled the earth through mid-decade, just in time for the big Tambora eruption of 1815, which produced the "year without summer" and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.

So, we could counteract global warming by pumping a hundred million more tons of sulfur into the atmosphere every year. But remember, sulfur makes acid rain. In the 1970s, when we got worried about acid rain, U.S. annual emissions of sulfur dioxide were 25–30 million tons a year. In 2005, we emitted 15 million tons of SO₂. Current global sulfur emissions are 55–68 million tons a year. And it's not just a matter of firing up more smokestacks and smoking up the neighborhood: the science says that sulfur emissions will only affect the global climate if you give them a volcano-sized blast into the stratosphere. So we might need to anger the volcano gods—whoever's throwing virgins into the volcanoes, knock it off!

Or we could just use less oil and coal. Hmm... could be a tough vote for the damsels in distress....

Dakota War College: All "War", No "College"...

...and not much defense of "Dakota"...

Some days Pat Powers is just so full of bull, I don't know where to start. Fortunately, others do. Here are today's big three proofs that Dakota War College will say anything, regardless of the truth, just to cheer the right-wing rah-rah section and avoid discussing actual issues:

1. Where Pat Powers manufactures mewling over Democrats having the integrity to question business dealing involving another Democrat and then resorts to the usual mindless ad hominem, David Newquist tears into the real reasons for the controversy surrounding SDSU President David Chicoine's appointment to the Monsanto corporate board:

The professors who work under President Chicoine must abide by a policy in regard to their outside work and consultation. It is:

Professional employees should avoid entering into outside employments, occupations or endeavors for profit of any kind that may reasonably be thought to influence the decisions that they make in their capacity as Board employees, the degree of thought and effort that they devote to their responsibilities as Board employees or, in any other manner, the loyalty and diligence with which they pursue the best interests of the Board and of the students and citizens who rely upon the Board and its employees. [South Dakota Board of Regents Policy 4:35.B]

State Representative Bernie Hunhof and State Senator Frank Kloucek have raised the issue stated in this policy in regard to President Chicoine. The policy is based upon the fact that academic work and corporate interests are often in conflict. The conflict is that academic research and teaching when conducted with full academic freedom and integrity does not always produce results that will serve corporate interests [David Newquist, "Monsanto State University and the Sacrosanct State of Sanford," Northern Valley Beacon, 2009.10.26].

Dr. Newquist asks honest questions here, as do legislators Hunhoff and Kloucek, about the consistent application of Regental policy and the academic integrity of South Dakota's biggest university. Mr. Powers spreads political gossip.

2. Mr. Powers doesn't mind corporations eroding SDSU's academic autonomy, but boy, let a SDSU president and some Democrats meander onto the campus green to call for a little social justice, and he's ready to call out the shock troops (all three who showed up, with signs). Mr. Powers manufactured all manner of sturm und drang over the mostly Democrat-organized health care rally on SDSU's Sylvan Green last week. Badlands Blue dissects Dakota War College's selective memory and backpedaling sophistry... not to mention narcissism, as the moral of the story in DWC's world is that he's a special little blogger for obviously getting under the Dems' skin. Never mind that he wins this glorious victory by getting the story wrong.

3. I'll tackle today's pièce de resistance: Mr. Powers joins purported journalist Bob Mercer in misrepresenting the legal efforts of Dakota Rural Action to challenge TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline before the PUC next week. Mr. Mercer continues to portray Dakota Rural Action as failing to meet deadlines and, today, refusing to answer official questions. Mr. Powers happily piles on, spinning a fantastic yarn (more like a meager thread) about Dakota Rural Action running away from answering questions under oath. (Let's not forget, it's TransCanada that has questions to answer, as it's TransCanada that wants to dig another giant trench across our state, wreck more farmland and roads, and create another giant environmental hazard that they will make us pay to clean up someday.)

Messrs. Mercer and Powers both ignore the unconstitutional nature of the fishing-expedition questions with which the PUC attempted to sandbag DRA. Funny that neither professional journalist Mercer nor defender of liberty Powers have taken the time to address those questions. Must not fit with the narrative they want to peddle.

Mercer and Powers also ignore the dilatory tactics adopted by TransCanada to make discovery an enormous challenge for Dakota Rural Action's lawyers. Instead, Mr. Powers invests his sizable journalistic talent in throwing out a couple cheap, unsubstantiated ha-ha lines about DRA somehow rejecting science. Funny: on the Keystone XL docket, the only folks who appear to be rejecting science are TransCanada, who say the state's own experts on pipelines, wildlife, soil, and water quality are wrong.

I know, the above two links come from Plains Justice, where DRA's lawyer Paul Blackburn works, but that is an important side of the story. And heaven knows you won't hear it from Mr. Powers.

Mr. Powers ends with this claim about a reality of his own making, saying Dakota Rural Action is "more than happy to show up to complain, but they won’t go under oath. Amazing."

Mr. Powers characterizes Dakota Rural Action as cowardly complainers. Dakota Rural Action has stood up to defend South Dakotans' property rights and ag productivity from the predations of a foreign corporation. Even Steve Sibson could drop his partisanship and find common cause with Frank Kloucek and the South Dakota Democrats in standing for South Dakota property rights and environmental concerns over corporate profits. Mr. Powers and his Republican party have lifted one finger to those landowners... and it wasn't a helpful finger.

Mr. Powers seems to be sinking ever further into the "help me! my right-wing worldview has fallen and it can't get up!" crowd. His language appears calculated to further fuel the fires of faux patriots wallowing in the delusion that they fighting to "Take this country back!" from those darned Commies and greenies and fellas in old suits and whoever else they're characterizing as the enemy today.

And while Mr. Powers gossips and gripes, fellow citizens like Bernie and Frank, Peggy and Amanda, and Paul and Kelly ignore the insults and focus on the issues, trying to make South Dakota and America a little better.

Enjoy a Hobo Day Bicycle Ride with Dr. Chicoine... and 1000 Other Pedal Pushers!

South Dakota State University President Dr. David Chicoine may have sold his soul and my land-grant alma mater to the ag-industrial complex... but if I were the Green Pope, I might sell him an indulgence for this:

Save the day? Heck, save the planet! Robb Rasmussen of Sioux River Bicycles and Fitness is hoping to get one thousand cyclists together to ride in the Hobo Day Parade on Saturday, October 24. One thousand cyclists! In one place! In South Dakota!

I know some naysayer out there will grouse that Robb is just trying to make money off the environmental movement. Fine. I hope promoting green energy and green lifestyles will make Robb a millionaire. Twice over. With customers who live longer because they are riding bikes instead of sitting in their SUVs.

Hobo Day, Saturday, October 24—1000 bicycles! Make it happen!

Now, if we can just get Dr. Chicoine to bring goodies for everyone in that big basket. Maybe some organic sweet corn? ;-)

---------------------
p.s.: More Brookings bike love: SDSU Students' Association is working on a campus bike-sharing plan. Pedals for the people!

H1N1 at SDSU: ThePostSD.com Breaks Story

I'm not big on H1N1 hysteria and media fear-mongering. But given the general concern about the Disease Formerly Known as Swine Flu until pork industry lobbysists got riled up, I note with respect the fact that in just its second week of business, ThePostSD.com appears to have broken the story last night of the first reported cases of H1N1 on a South Dakota campus this season. Amy Dunkle from up Brookings way gets the news up first—nice work, Amy!

The story is worth noting, since college campuses have been especially diligent in planning for flu outbreaks this year, since college students' lifestyle—less frequent doctor visits, less likely to go get shots, not to mention all that carousing in close quarters—poses some increased risk for spreading disease. Keep sneezing into your elbow (but wait: what about those elbow bumps?), and stock up on that chicken soup! (By the way, if it can be solved with chicken soup, it's not a crisis.)

-------------------------
Update 18:45 CDT: KELO has picked up the story for tonight's six o'clock report. But notice: The Post gets comment directly from an official at SDSU, where the story is happening. The Post's Dunkle follows up with information from officials at DSU and Mines. The first quotes in KELO's story come from two freshmen at Augustana, 50 miles away from the story. We also hear from an Augie official. KELO follows with a second story that adds no information about the SDSU story, instead getting quotes from students at, inexplicably, the University of Iowa.

Score one for real local news by The Post.

Regents Sue to Protect SDSU-Patented* Wheat Seeds

AgWeek notes that the South Dakota Board of Regents and South Dakota State University are already acting more like Monsanto (on whose board sits SDSU president Dr. David Chicoine). Evidently the Regents (i.e., us, South Dakota tax- and tuition-payers) are suing five producers for illegally selling or offering for sale the spring wheat varieties Traverse and Briggs. Said wheat varieties were developed by SDSU researchers and remain intellectual property of the university.

The Regents are suing under the Plant Variety Protection Act, the same law Monsanto uses to intimidate farmers to keep them from saving seeds and to protect its profits. SDSU says the suit's primary goal is to "support farmers who rely on the continued development of better wheat varieties for their farming success"—in other words, make sure dealers pay the proper fees that trickle back to SDSU to support more research.

So remember, farmers: those seeds in your field don't really belong to you... well, at least not for 20 years. You're just licensing them, like software from Microsoft.

*patented? Well, not exactly: PVP is an alternative to the official patent system, but it's a similar intellectual property protection mechanism.

Kloucek Promises Legislative Discussion of Chicoine-Monsanto Deal

Sibby and the Mitchell Republic bring us this story first; that Sioux Falls paper and DWC come toodling after: State Senator Frank Kloucek (D-19/Scotland) is proposing legislation to put some serious limitations and oversight on the ability of our university presidents to serve as highly paid corporate board members. Senator Kloucek is responding specifically to SDSU president David Chicoine's appointment to the Monsanto corporate board and the mondo bucks he'll get for that gig ($400K in cash and stock options, $80K more than he makes as SDSU president).

Kloucek's concerns sound very much like criticism we've heard from the SDSU Collegian and from this very blog: Big Ag buying influence, threat to public perception of the quality and independence of SDSU research, etc.:

“It’s just totally inappropriate to give that money to an individual rather than to the university for research,” Kloucek said. “It appears pretty clear-cut that they’re trying to buy influence at the university by buying influence with the president.”

...“There will be at least one bill,” Kloucek said. “I just think it’s better … to make it clear the we’re not in that kind of game at South Dakota.”

The appointment of Chicoine to the Monsanto board negatively affects the credibility of the university, Kloucek said, since crop research reports from SDSU could easily be assumed as skewed.

“This research must not be tainted in any way, shape or form and this certainly taints that research,” Kloucek said. “It … jeopardizes the integrity because it makes it look like we’re in the hip pocket of Monsanto” [Austin Kaus, "Senator to Regents: Fix SDSU Conflict," Mitchell Daily Republic, 2009.06.19].

It doesn't take a Ph.D. in economics to reason that if a guy has two bosses, and Boss M pays more than Boss S, then when push comes to shove, Boss M will probably have more pull. (Remember the Golden Rule: he who has the gold makes the rules.) Of course, Dr. Chicoine, who has a Ph.D. in economics, doesn't see it that way:

"My value to them comes as an economist," [Chicoine] said. "It comes from independence.

"If you don't perform to the criteria that is required for your appointment as an independent member, your appointment is not maintained. If you're not fulfilling your independent director's business, you'd be lacking of integrity, and you're of no value either to the company or to your own profession."

..."I'm in compliance with regents policy," he said. "It is standard for the industry. There is a disclosure process and transparency process in place in this state and every other state for presidents serving in this regard. So I'm comfortable with it" [Steve Young, "College–Corporate Links Targeted," that Sioux Falls paper, 2009.06.21].

Kloucek's fellow Democratic Catholic farmer (and my neighbor!) Senator Gerald Lange (D-8/Madison) isn't comfortable with it:

"I see a conflict," Lange said. "So, yes, I think Frank's onto something. I would support any bill he brought on the issue" [Young, 2009.06.21].

Strangely, the main blog voice from the seat of Monsanto's purchased power in South Dakota finds it more important to hurl personal insults at Kloucek (and surely, shortly, at Lange) than to address the actual issue:

Frnak [sic] Kloucek is proposing legislation.

Good for Frank. He can propose. Too bad it’s likely misspelled, and written in crayon... [Pat Powers, "Monsanto Job... Legislation to Be Utterly Ignored, Considering the Source," Dakota War College, 2009.06.20].

(I wonder if the Munsterman campaign Powers manages will be relying on such playground rhetoric. Powers could take a lesson in class from Kloucek, who criticizes the Chicoine–Monsanto deal without any such demeaning and irrelevant personal attacks.)

Should a university president, as Kloucek tells Young, "be living, breathing and eating SDSU 24 hours a day, seven days a week"? I'll grant a guy a sabbath... but I'll also note that DSU expects me to put DSU first, and I'm just a lowly graduate assistant. My contract explicitly forbids me from taking other full-time employment. That doesn't restrict me from serving on a corporate board (and I'll certainly consider offers to attend a few meetings for $400K a year... or even $40K a year!), but it does set a threshold at which DSU would consider me not to be putting sufficient emphasis on my research and teaching.

Public discussion of a similar threshold for our state university presidents is a fine idea. Senator Kloucek is to be commended for his willingness to raise this issue in Pierre.