The prayer was offered by the Chaplain, Vicar Peter Hofacker, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Senate page Byron Crowe.

     Roll Call: All members present.

     The Committee on Legislative Procedure respectfully reports that the Secretary of the Senate has had under consideration the Senate Journal of the first day.

     All errors, typographical or otherwise, are duly marked in the temporary journal for correction.

     And we hereby move the adoption of the report.

    Legislative Intern -- Jennifer Miles

    Which was subscribed to and placed on file in the office of the Secretary of State.

January 6, 2006

The Honorable Dennis Daugaard
President of the Senate
500 East Capitol Avenue
Pierre, SD 57501

                                        Re: Appointment of Sara L. Burnette,
                                            to the Board of Pardons and Paroles

Dear Mr. President and Members of the Senate:

    Pursuant to the provisions of SDCL 24-13-1, and subject to your confirmation, the Court has appointed Sara L. Burnette, an attorney from Sioux Falls, South Dakota, to the Board of Pardons and Paroles. Accordingly, the Court requests that you submit said appointment to the Senate for consent during this Legislative Session.

    We will await your advice as to the Senate's action with regard to this appointment. Thank you for your continued cooperation.

    The President announced the referral of the appointment to the Committee on Judiciary.

November 1, 2005

The Honorable Dennis Daugaard
President, South Dakota Senate
Capitol Building
Pierre, South Dakota 57501

Dear Mr. President and Members of the Senate:

    Pursuant to SDCL 24-13-1 and 24-13-2, the Supreme Court has reappointed Mark F. Marshall, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, to a four-year term as a member of the Board of Pardons and Paroles, subject to the advice and consent of the Senate as required by SDCL 24-13-1. Accordingly, the Court requests that you submit said appointment to the Senate for consent during the 2006 Legislative Session.

    Thank you for your cooperation. We will await your advice as to the Senate's action with regard to this appointment.

    The President announced the referral of the appointment to the Committee on Judiciary.

December 14, 2005

The Honorable Dennis Daugaard
President of the Senate
500 East Capitol
Pierre, SD 57501

Re: Appointment of Dennis L. Kaemingk

Dear Mr. President and Members of the Senate:

    Pursuant to the provisions of SDCL 24-13-1, and subject to your confirmation, I have the honor to inform you that I have appointed Dennis L. Kaemingk to the Board of Pardons and Paroles. I have enclosed his Statement of Financial Interest and Executive Appointment.

    This appointment is effective immediately and until January 16, 2010.

    The President announced the referral of the appointment to the Committee on Judiciary.

December 29, 2005

The Honorable Dennis Daugaard
President of the Senate
500 East Capitol
Pierre, SD 57501

Re: Appointment of Jerome B. Lammers

    Pursuant to the provisions of SDCL 24-13-1, and subject to your confirmation, I have the honor to inform you that I have appointed Jerome B. Lammers to the Board of Pardons and Paroles. I have enclosed his Statement of Financial Interest and Executive Appointment.

    This appointment is effective immediately and until January 16, 2010.

MR. PRESIDENT:

        Your Joint-Select Committee appointed for the purpose of conferring with the Director of the Legislative Research Council in regard to making arrangements for the distribution of the official directory, House and Senate journals and bills, and other legislative printing for the two houses and the state offices with the full power to act respectfully reports that:

        The Legislature order 250 copies of the Senate and House bills and resolutions (each); and 210 copies of the Senate and House daily journals (each) for the Eighty-first Legislative Session.

        The free distribution of sets of bills, resolutions, and daily journals shall be as follows:

        Eight copies for the Governor's Office, thirteen copies for the Supreme Court, thirty-two copies for the Legislative Research Council, thirteen copies for the State Library Depository, three copies for the Attorney General, two copies for the Bureau of Finance and Management, four copies for the Secretary of State, two copies for the Department of Legislative Audit, one copy for the Code Commission, one copy for the State Treasurer, one copy for the State Auditor, one copy for the Commissioner of School and Public Lands, one copy for the Public Utilities Commission, and press copies as needed. Accomplishment of this distribution may be satisfied, in whole or in part, by obtaining electronic copies of these documents from the legislative Web site.

        State's Attorneys and County Auditors shall receive free copies of bills and journals if they pay mailing charges at a rate of $50 per set (bills or journals) for first-class mailing.

        Distribution of bills and journals to state officials, boards, commissions, and institutions will be made upon request in writing to the Legislative Documents Room at a charge of $55 per set of bills and $70 per set of journals plus mailing charges, if applicable.

        One free copy of the South Dakota Legislative Index shall be distributed to the Governor, the Attorney General and the Supreme Court; thirteen free copies to the State Library Depository; and one free copy to Senators and Representatives. Upon written request to the Legislative Documents Room before January 31, 2006, all other state and private entities may purchase the South Dakota Legislative Index at a cost of $25 per copy.

        The Chief Mailing Clerk shall upon written request furnish any individual, firm, corporation, association, or other organization with a set of House and Senate bills for $55 per set and a set of journals for $70 per set for the Eighty-first Legislative Session, plus mailing charges, if applicable.

        Legislators may have two copies of all bills and resolutions and two copies of the daily journals distributed or mailed to constituents within the legislator's own district if constituents or legislators pay mailing charges of $50 per set for first-class mailing.

        Registered lobbyists shall be entitled to one copy of the official directory upon payment of the $35 registration fee to the Secretary of State; and upon payment of an additional $55 per set of bills and $70 per set of journals plus mailing charges, if applicable, to the Legislative Documents Room, shall be entitled to one copy of all bills and resolutions or journals pursuant to SDCL 2-12-3.

        Bill status reports will be printed and sold to state agencies at cost and to registered lobbyists for $200 payable to the Legislative Documents Room which receipted funds shall be used to pay the printing costs. If bill status is mailed, the cost is $125 for first-class postage.

        A free daily copy of the bill status report shall be distributed as follows:

        Governor; Speaker of the House; Speaker Pro tempore of the House; House Majority Leader; House Minority Leader; House Lobby; Chief Clerk of the House; Lieutenant Governor; President Pro tempore of the Senate; Senate Majority Leader; Senate Minority Leader; Senate Lobby; Secretary of the Senate; Page Advisor; Attorney General; Bureau of Finance and Management; Secretary of State; Treasurer's Office; Auditor's Office; Office of School and Public Lands; and Legislative Research Council.

        The Chief Mailing Clerk shall at the end of the session file a report with the Director of the Legislative Research Council of all money paid for the purchase of bills and journals and

Respectfully submitted,    Respectfully submitted,
Tim Rave    Lee Schoenbeck
Cooper Garnos    John Koskan
Burt Elliott    Garry Moore
House Committee    Senate Committee

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    Your Joint-Select Committee appointed for the purpose of fixing the compensation of the elective and appointive officers and employees of the House and Senate for the Eighty-first Legislative Session, pursuant to SDCL 2-5-8, respectfully reports that a salary schedule for the elective and appointive officers and employees has been developed and filed with the Director of the Legislative Research Council and the State Auditor.

    In regard to the system for payment of travel expenses to legislators we respectfully report that:

                        (1) A form listing each weekend during session will be delivered to legislators. Legislators will be asked to list their travel on that single sheet which would be signed and turned in at the close of session. Also, pursuant to statute, a voucher must also be signed by each      legislator requesting travel reimbursement.

                (2) Legislators driving their own car home for a weekend will receive mileage paid at state rates (32 cents per mile). Legislators not driving home will not be entitled to reimbursement unless they leased a vehicle or somehow incurred an expense, equivalent to 32 cents per      mile, in such travel.

        (3) Legislators flying commercially will receive the equivalent of flight expenses as long as it does not exceed 32 cents per mile.

        (4) Legislators flying charter or in their own plane will be reimbursed for actual expenses as long as it does not exceed 32 cents per mile.

        (5) A maximum of eight trips will be considered for the 2006 Legislative Session, including the trip for the final legislative day.

        (6) Pursuant to constitutional provisions, legislators will be paid for their initial trip to Pierre and their final trip home at the rate of 5 cents per mile.

Respectfully submitted,    Respectfully submitted,
Matthew Michels    Lee Schoenbeck
Larry Rhoden    Eric Bogue
Dale Hargens    Garry Moore
House Committee    Senate Committee

Your Joint-Select Committee appointed relative to securing chaplains for the Eighty-first Legislative Session respectfully reports:

We have conferred with the Pierre Ministerial Association and have arranged for ministers to participate on a part-time basis under the direction of Rev. Brian P. Christensen, St. John the Evangelist Catholic Church, as chief chaplain, to serve the Senate and House as chaplains throughout the Eighty-first session of the Legislature. The chaplains are as follows:

    Mike Bishop, Paul Bly, Theodora Boolin, Michele Bradley, Genie Butler, Larry Cass, Brian Christensen, Tom Cool, Roger Easland, John Fette, Richard Fox, Harvey Friez, Howard Grinager, Roger Heidt, Peter Hofacker, Diane Jackson, Ruth Ann Loughry, Dallas McKinley, Dodie Noordermeer, James Pearson, Shirley Sandberg, Elaine Scott, Alia Stowers, Brad Urbach, and David Zellmer.

Respectfully submitted,    Respectfully submitted,
Roger Hunt    Orville Smidt
Donald Van Etten    William Earley
Gerald Lange    Dan Sutton
House Committee    Senate Committee

    Your Joint-Select Committee appointed to make arrangements for legislative days respectfully reports that we recommend the days of the Eighty-first Legislative Session be January 10 through January 13, January 17 through January 20, January 23 through January 27, January 30 through February 3, February 6 through February 10, February 13 through February 17, February 21 through February 24, February 27 through February 28, and March 20.

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    Your Joint-Select Committee appointed on joint rules respectfully reports that it has had under consideration the joint rules and recommends that the joint rules of the Eightieth Legislative Session be adopted as the joint rules of the Eighty-first Legislative Session with the following changes:

    To revert to an old order of business or to pass to a new order of business requires a majority vote of the members present. Any message or communication from the Governor or other state officer may be received at any time.

    5-11.1   Motions to reconsider. Having given notice of intent to reconsider, the member giving notice may move to reconsider the question not later than the next legislative day, except as provided in Joint Rule 5-13. Any motion to reconsider shall be made under order of business No. 8, except as provided in Joint Rule 5-13, and takes precedence over all other motions except to recess or to adjourn. No motion to reconsider the same question may be made twice in the same house without unanimous consent. Every motion to reconsider shall be decided by a majority vote of the members-elect on a roll call vote. No question may be reconsidered except the final disposition of bills and joint resolutions and the override of vetoes. No motion to lay on the table is subject to reconsideration.

    7-1.   Committee procedure--Relaxed debate. The rules of procedure in a committee are the same as the rules of the body insofar as the rules are applicable to committee procedure. However, as conditions permit, the rules limiting debate may be relaxed to allow free discussion and to facilitate the work of the committee. Discussion and debate may be permitted by the chair on an amendment that has not been moved.

    7-1.7.   Vote requirement. Final disposition on a bill or resolution requires a majority vote of the committee members-elect taken by roll call.

    7-1.8.   Final disposition. Final disposition is any action which moves a bill out of a committee to the floor of a house or to another committee or which removes it from further consideration by the committee. Examples of final disposition include "Do Pass," "Do Pass, Amended," "Refer to Another Committee," "Lay on the Table," and "Postpone Defer to a Day Certain Beyond the End of the Session."

    7-8.   Placement of "smoked-out" bill or resolution on calendar. If a bill or resolution is delivered to the House of origin Representatives or Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 7-7 on the last day for passage by the house of origin and it was not reported "Do Pass," the bill or resolution may, by motion approved by a majority of the members-elect of the House of Representatives or Senate, be placed on that day's calendar.

    7-9.   Calendar committee. The calendar committee in each house consists of the presiding officer, the majority leader, and the minority leader the Senate consists of the President Pro Tempore, the Senate Majority Leader, and the Senate Minority Leader. The calendar committee in the House consists of the Speaker of the House, the House Majority Leader, and the House Minority Leader. The committee shall determine the daily legislative calendar.

     7-13. Entertainment of motions. No motion may be debated until it is seconded.     Following the second of a debatable motion, the chair shall first recognize the member     making the motion. No member of the House of Representatives may make introductory     remarks prior to making a motion.

     7-14. Restatement and reading of motions. When a motion is made and seconded, it     shall be restated by the chair.

    7-15. Withdrawal of motions. After a motion is stated by the chair, it may not be     withdrawn without consent of the members who made and seconded the motion.

    7-16. Motions. When a question is under debate, no motion may be made except the     following motions:

        (1) Adjourn;
        (2) Recess;
        (3) Call the previous question;
        (4) Lay on the table;
        (5) Defer to a day certain beyond the end of the session;
        (6) Do pass;
        (7) Do pass, amended;
        (8) Do not pass;
        (9) Without Recommendation;
        (10) Defer to a day certain;
        (11) Refer to another committee;
        (12) Amend;
        (13) Appoint a subcommittee.

     7-17. Application and nondebatability of motions to lay on the table. A motion to     lay on the table which effects a disposition on the merits of any bill or resolution requires     the vote of a majority of the committee members-elect to carry and shall be decided     without debate. No other motion may be made until the members have voted on the     motion to lay on the table. Any other motion to lay on the table requires the vote of a     majority of the committee members present and shall be decided without debate. No     committee member may make introductory remarks prior to making a motion to lay on     the table.

    7-18. Scope of motions to lay on the table. A motion to lay on the table may be made     so as to apply either to the main question or to a proposed amendment or to the bill and     all pending amendments, and the motion shall clearly state to which it is intended to     apply.

     7-19. Motion to take from the table or to reconsider the bill. Whenever any bill or resolution is laid on the table or deferred to a day certain beyond sine die, it requires a majority vote of the committee members-elect to take it from the table or to reconsider the bill or resolution which was deferred. The motion to take from the table or to reconsider is debatable.

     7-20. Scope of motion to defer to day certain beyond sine die. The rules pertaining to motions to table and to defer to a day certain beyond sine die shall be the same except that a motion to defer to a day certain beyond sine die is debatable. A member of the Senate may make introductory remarks prior to making a motion to defer to a day certain beyond sine die.

     7-21. Motion to call the previous question. A motion for the previous question shall be decided immediately by a majority of the committee members present and without debate. The motion shall clearly indicate the question to which it applies. No committee member may make introductory remarks prior to making a motion to call the previous question. The effect of adopting a motion to call the previous question is to close debate, to prevent the moving of amendments or other subsidiary motions, and to bring to vote immediately the question to be voted upon. The effect of defeating a motion to call the previous question is to allow continuation of debate on the question before the committee.

     7-22. Priority of vote after call of the previous question. After a motion to call the previous question has prevailed, it is not in order to move to adjourn, prior to a decision of the question before the committee.

     7-23. Dilatory motions to defer or refer. If a motion to defer to a day certain, to defer indefinitely or to refer to another committee is decided in the negative, such motion is not again in order at the same stage of consideration of the bill or proposition.

     7-24. Motion to postpone as final action. A motion to defer indefinitely or to a date beyond the sine die adjournment of the Legislature requires the vote of a majority of the committee members-elect.

     7-25. Germaneness of amendments. No motion to amend a bill is in order unless it is germane to the subject as expressed in the title of the bill.

MR. PRESIDENT:

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has appointed Reps. Deadrick, Dykstra, and Gillespie as a committee of three on the part of the House to meet with a like committee on the part of the Senate to notify the Governor that the Legislature is duly organized and ready to meet in Joint Session to receive any communication he may desire to transmit.

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has appointed Reps. Kraus, Novstrup, Hunt, and Lange as a committee of four on the part of the House to meet with a committee of three on the part of the Senate for the purpose of arranging for a memorial recognition of deceased former members of the House and Senate.

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has appointed Reps. Hunt, Van Etten, and Lange as a committee of three on the part of the House to meet with a like committee on the part of the Senate relative to securing chaplains for the Eighty-first Legislative Session.

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has appointed Reps. Rave, Garnos, and Elliott as a committee of three on the part of the House to meet with a like committee on the part of the Senate for the purpose of conferring with the Director of the Legislative Research Council in regard to making arrangements for the distribution of the official directory, House and Senate Journals, and bills and other legislative printing for the two houses and the state offices with full power to act.

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has appointed Reps. Michels, Rhoden, and Hargens as a committee of three on the part of the House to meet with a like committee on the part of the Senate for the purpose of fixing the compensation of the elective and appointive officers and employees of the House and Senate for the Eighty-first Legislative Session, pursuant to SDCL 2-5-8, with the full power to act and that such compensation schedule be filed with the Director of the Legislative Research Council and the State Auditor.

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has appointed Reps. Kraus, O'Brien, and Miles as a committee of three on the part of the House to meet with a like committee on the part of the Senate to arrange for legislative days for members, officers, and employees of the House and Senate.

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has appointed Reps. Rhoden, Cutler, and Hargens as a committee of three on the part of the House to meet with a like committee on the part of the Senate to arrange for a Joint Session of the Senate and House of Representatives to receive a message from the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has appointed Reps. Deadrick, Dykstra, and Gillespie as a committee of three on the part of the House to meet with a like committee on the part of the Senate to arrange for a Joint Session to receive the message of the Governor.

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has adopted the report of the Joint-Select Committee for the purpose of notifying the Governor that the Legislature is duly organized and ready to meet in Joint Session to receive any communications he may desire to transmit.

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has adopted the report of the Joint-Select Committee for the purpose of arranging a Joint Session of the two houses to receive the message of the Governor.

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has adopted the report of the Joint-Select Committee relative to arranging for a joint session to receive the State of the Judiciary message from the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Also MR. PRESIDENT:

    I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the House has appointed Reps. Michels, Rhoden, and Hargens as a committee of three on the part of the House to meet with a like committee on the part of the Senate relative to the Joint Rules for the Eighty-first Legislative Session.

     SC 1   Introduced by:  Senators Kloucek, Bartling, Dempster, Duniphan, Hanson (Gary), Koetzle, Kooistra, Moore, Nesselhuf, Olson (Ed), Peterson (Jim), and Schoenbeck and Representatives Putnam, Cutler, Deadrick, Garnos, Gassman, Glover, Haley, Hennies, Hunhoff, Hunt, Jerke, Kroger, Lange, Michels, Miles, Murschel, Peters, Rhoden, Roberts, Schafer, Valandra, Van Norman, and Vehle

     Sen. Bogue moved that when we adjourn today, we adjourn to convene at 1:00 p.m. on Thursday, January 12, the 3^rd legislative day.

     Which motion prevailed.

     Sen. Ed Olson moved that the Senate do now adjourn, which motion prevailed and at 12:50 p.m. the Senate adjourned.

    The following prayer was delivered by Pastor David Zellmer, Lutheran Memorial Church, Pierre, South Dakota:

O God of all Creation, we give thanks for the gift of the law and for those who work to bring justice and mercy to all the people of South Dakota. We remember those who go in harms way on our behalf, to keep us safe by night and day, for those who govern and for those who craft the laws and for those who apply them. We ask for wisdom, courage and the will to persevere for our Supreme Court Justices and Circuit Court Judges, our Governor and Legislators and all those who hold elected or appointed office. On this day we give thanks for the gift of healing that has come to Chief Justice David Gilbertson and we continue to lift up in prayer all those who continue to need your gentle healing touch. Bless this legislative session that the words from the prophet Amos might be fulfilled.

    Amos 5:21
        ...I take no delight in your solemn assemblies.
    23    Take away from me the noise of your songs;
        I will not listen to the melody of your harps
    24    But let justice roll down like waters,
        and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.

    In Your Holy Name we Pray. Amen.

    The Secretary of the Senate, Patricia Adam, called the roll of the Senate and the following members were present:

Abdallah; Adelstein; Apa; Bartling; Bogue; Broderick; Dempster; Duenwald; Duniphan; Earley; Gant; Gray; Greenfield; Hansen, Tom; Hanson, Gary; Hundstad; Kelly; Kloucek; Knudson; Koetzle; Kooistra; Koskan; Lintz; McCracken; McNenny; Moore; Napoli; Nesselhuf; Olson, Ed; Peterson, Jim; Schoenbeck; Smidt; Sutton, Dan; Sutton, Duane; Two Bulls.

    The Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives, Karen Gerdes, called the roll of the House and the following members were present:

Boomgarden; Brunner; Buckingham; Cutler; Davis; Deadrick; Dennert; Dykstra; Elliott; Faehn; Frost; Fryslie; Garnos; Gassman; Gillespie; Glenski; Glover; Hackl; Haley; Halverson; Hanks; Hargens; Haverly; Heineman; Hennies; Hills; Howie; Hunhoff; Hunt; Jensen; Jerke; Klaudt; Koistinen; Kraus; Krebs; Kroger; Lange; McCoy; McLaughlin; Miles; Murschel; Nelson; Novstrup; O'Brien; Olson, Ryan; Pederson, Gordon; Peters; Putnam; Rausch; Rave; Rhoden; Roberts; Rounds; Schafer; Sebert; Sigdestad; Street; Thompson; Tidemann; Tornow; Turbiville; Valandra; Van Etten; Van Norman; Vehle; Weems; Wick; Willadsen; Speaker Michels.

    Sen. Bogue moved that a committee of three on the part of the Senate and a committee of four on the part of the House be appointed to escort the Honorable David Gilbertson, Chief Justice of the state of South Dakota, to the rostrum.

    Which motion prevailed and the President appointed as such committee Reps. Rhoden, Dykstra, Hargens, and Gillespie on the part of the House and Sens. Schoenbeck, Bogue, and Moore on the part of the Senate.

    The Sergeant-at-Arms announced the arrival of Chief Justice David Gilbertson, who was escorted to the rostrum.

    Sen. Bogue moved that the Joint Session do now dissolve.

    Which motion prevailed.

    Pursuant to the Joint-Select Committee Report found on page 12 of the Senate Journal, the following is Chief Justice David Gilbertson's State of the Judiciary message:

DAVID GILBERTSON
CHIEF JUSTICE

    As I begin my second term as Chief Justice of the South Dakota Supreme Court, it is my pleasure to bring you, once again, both an oral and a written report on the state of the South Dakota Judiciary. I am pleased to report to you that the Unified Judicial System, which just completed its 30th year, is strong and working well to meet the challenges that face us.

    There are comments from time-to-time about federal court decisions interpreting the United States Constitution. In reality, the United States Constitution is a base or a beginning of individual rights. Each state is free to grant more rights or more protections to its citizens under its state constitution than are granted in the Federal Constitution. As an example, in 2005 the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion expanding the scope of eminent domain by a state to allow condemnation of private land that could ultimately wind up in the private hands of others rather than the original owner or the public. In that case, the United States Supreme Court also noted that the states were free to interpret their state constitutions in a more restrictive manner so as to offer greater rights and protections to its citizens than those afforded under the Federal Constitution. The South Dakota Supreme Court has done so repeatedly since the question of public use of private lands first came before us nearly 100 years ago. We have interpreted the South Dakota Constitution to require that no land may be taken by eminent domain unless it is for the actual use by the public. Thus, our state constitution provides more protection for private ownership of land against any threat of condemnation than does the federal constitution.

    Our state constitution also serves another valuable purpose. The federal government does not define our property rights. Each state, through its legislative and constitutional process, determines the property rights of its citizens.

    The South Dakota Supreme Court is called upon to interpret our State's constitution. We, as a Court, are not a continual constitutional convention in progress; we merely interpret the text that has been previously approved by this Legislature and ultimately our citizens. In the same vein, we are aware that the constitutional authority to pass legislation rests with the Legislature. The role of the Supreme Court is limited to interpreting the meaning or intent of that legislation.

    This past year we marked the 30th Anniversary of the Unified Judicial System in this State. Those who are old enough to remember the previous judicial system in South Dakota are well aware of the chaotic existence of separate judicial systems that attempted to run for the most part independently of one another. It was as if each committee of this Legislature attempted to conduct its business independently and the Legislature as a body had no authority to put each committee proposal into an organized set of laws and a unified state budget.

    Thirty years ago an amendment to our state constitution combined the patchwork judicial system into a single system under the direction and supervision of the South Dakota Supreme Court. While the Supreme Court is probably most well-known for its appellate opinions, it takes with equal seriousness its constitutional obligation to run the people's judicial system in the best possible manner. To borrow a phrase from President Truman, "the buck stops here." I wish to thank Justices Sabers, Konenkamp, Zinter and Meierhenry for their dedicated efforts to that end.

    Since 1975 the Supreme Court has held a fall term of court outside of its courtroom in Pierre. This past year the Court held its October term of court at Northern State University in Aberdeen. Each day almost five hundred high school and college students and members of the public attended our oral arguments. Others who were not able to attend in person were able to listen to the arguments on our live Internet broadcasts. The proceedings were also widely covered by the media. We would like to thank President Schloss and the faculty and students of Northern for their gracious hospitality.

    This past year we experienced a slight decline in the caseload of the Supreme Court. However, the reduction in numbers was matched by the increasingly complex issues contained within these cases. In the circuit courts the case filings remained mostly constant compared with the previous year. State-wide there were no significant trends up or down from the current caseload. However, in those counties that are experiencing a rapid increase in population, there appears to be an ever-increasing caseload in both the criminal and civil dockets. People generate litigation. More people generate more litigation.

    The Supreme Court and the presiding circuit judges are well aware of the fiscal challenges that face our state. For the upcoming year, we will be requesting a budget increase of only 2.0% in general fund appropriations and an overall budgetary increase of 1.7%, excluding salary policy and health insurance. This budget will allow us to continue to provide the people of this state with an effective judiciary. Even with the requested increase, the UJS budget represents only a little over 1% of the state's total budget.

    On the other hand, I would call to your attention the fact that the judiciary is an instrument of the state that provides revenue to various units of government. In the past fiscal year we collected $22.3 million, as compared to our general fund budget of $28.5 million. We returned the entire $22.3 million with approximately $13.1 million going to the counties and school districts, $8.2 million to the state, and $1.0 million to the cities.

    Our foremost concern is the status of the children in these dysfunctional family units. As the writer of the book of Proverbs observed over three thousand years ago, "train up a child in the way he or she should go, and when they are old they will not depart from it." The UJS attempts to work with wayward youth as well as their families to provide the supervision necessary to redirect their lives. There is a limit, however, to what we can do. We have individual court service or probation officers some of whom are called upon to supervise up to 150 probationers. With such large caseloads, the amount of time available to spend on each probationer is, unfortunately, not sufficient. Such an important task requires the joint efforts of the courts, schools, churches, civic organizations and concerned citizens.

    Our intensive probation program, which carries a much more manageable caseload, continues to produce positive results. In many cases we are able to take successful corrective action while leaving the probationer in the home instead of the more expensive option of institutionalization or incarceration.

    An experimental program is also in place that promises further positive results. In Charles Mix County we have participated in a new program called Connecting Point that serves Native American children who have been found by the court to be in need of supervision. Rather than a placement with the Department of Corrections, the juvenile clients and their families are provided intensive community based mental health services, educational and family support. They are provided with group and individual counseling, training in life skills, a psycho-educational program, educational tutoring, job training and employment services. The good news is that as of June 30, 2005, none of the 13 clients being served by the program had committed a violation serious enough to require a placement with the DOC, and only two of the 13 had committed any type of violation at all. Avoiding placements with DOC saves the State funds and allows the juveniles to remain with their families and maintain community and cultural ties.

    The opportunity to rehabilitate children in need is a task at which we simply must succeed. We all like to proudly point to individuals from our town or state that have become prominent. However, we must ask ourselves a hard question: are we raising future Presidents or future Presidential assassins?

    The consequences of failure are too high. Since the dawn of civilization the vital conduit through which values and beliefs are passed from one generation to the next has been the family. Governments and empires rise and fall. Widely accepted scientific theories of the day, such as the world is flat and other ideas, are modified or debunked - yet the family endures. Although our civilization has advanced in many areas, we have developed no successful alternative to the family structure.

    If the failure of the family is generated by the parents and cannot be successfully corrected, termination of parental rights is the final option. The children are often placed in foster homes during the time corrective action is attempted. Since 1997 the Unified Judicial System has had procedures in place that expedite the time involved in the termination of parental rights should it become necessary to speed up the adoption process and get abused and neglected children into quality adoptive homes.

    I once heard a speaker put it in terms of the eyes of a child who just finished the first grade. For a minute think back to when you were that age. Upon release from first grade in May you did not worry about school starting in September because in your eyes as a first grader, the summer was the same as forever. If a child of that age is undergoing abuse or is stuck in limbo because of an unresponsive system, that length of time is forever in that unfortunate child's eyes. Getting these children quickly into permanent homes is imperative. Every year nationally 20,000 foster care kids "age out" of the foster care system by reaching their 18th birthday. In two years, 60% of these former foster care kids are homeless, imprisoned or dead.

    Another area of deep concern continues to be that of domestic violence. I am still haunted by an incident of domestic violence which occurred early in my legal career. Late one Saturday night I was called to the jail by the sheriff to draft a criminal complaint for aggravated assault. When I got there the sheriff was in the process of removing scissors from the back of a man who had refused to go to the hospital. The victim looked at me and quietly said, "I hate to get her in trouble, but this is the third time."

    On a national basis, if law enforcement is called in to address the situation, there is a positive effect. In such situations only one out of four perpetrators will be involved in further incidents. Further success is gained by moving these cases into the courts. However, we still have a long way to go. Nationally in such instances, if a judge issues a protection order, 60% are violated within a year. This year South Dakota saw an 8.6% increase in the issuance of domestic protection orders.

    We must also stress personal accountability. Obviously, we do not have enough jails or institutions to lock up all perpetrators. Judges are called upon daily to make determinations as to who needs to be incarcerated and who can be successfully rehabilitated in non-institutional programs. As a circuit court judge, I told those I put on felony probation that they were not merely being allowed to freely walk out of the courthouse door; rather, they were being given the key to the penitentiary that they would be carrying with them at all times. It was their conduct, not someone else's decision, which would determine whether that key would be used in the future. When they left my courtroom, they knew the responsibility for whether or not that key was used rested solely with them.

    Except in cases where the sentence is death or life imprisonment, the person will sooner or later be released to become part of our society. Obviously we must assist them to ensure as many as possible of those theoretical keys to the penitentiary door are never used and that as many offenders as possible are successfully rehabilitated.

    A few years ago I told you that during the time I was a circuit judge nearly all felonies I encountered could be traced to alcohol abuse. The crime was either committed while the person was intoxicated or to get funds to get intoxicated. Times have changed. Although it is anecdotal, Presiding Judge Glen Severson of Sioux Falls has told me that he believes that 75% of the adult felony cases he handles can be traced to addiction to methamphetamines. These cases are not limited exclusively to drug cases. They carry over into felony assault, bad checks, burglaries, theft of autos and robberies. In visiting with veteran judges from Rapid City, they readily agree with this observation declaring methamphetamine use to be "skyrocketing."

    Methamphetamine use is a particular problem in South Dakota because it can be manufactured in the state with ingredients that are all too readily available. Compared with other illegal drugs, methamphetamine is relatively inexpensive to purchase, making it more readily available to a wider range of victims.

    In 1998 rural areas nationwide reported 949 meth labs. In 2003 that number increased astronomically to 9,385. This is one area where free enterprise has no place and should not be tolerated.

    From 1995 to 2002 the number of South Dakotans using methamphetamines increased by over 33%. South Dakota's rate of persons using this drug was double that of Denver and Los Angeles. This State's rate of use was six times greater than the rates of Dallas, Atlanta, Detroit, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Miami.

    If what brings people into the criminal system to begin with is an addiction to alcohol or drugs then those addictions must be successfully addressed or repetition of crimes is a virtual certainty. The victims and financial losses from these crimes will continue to mount. In visiting with judges and those who are experts in the area of drug abuse, it is clear that traditional forms of punishment and rehabilitation may not be effective.

    As a court system we are charged with looking out for the best interests of the children who come into our system. It is unfortunately too late for many of these meth babies after they are born. Not only do they suffer the effects of the methamphetamines from their mother, but the mother often avoids necessary pre-natal care for fear of her addiction being discovered. Keeping mothers off methamphetamines during pregnancy is imperative.

    The negative effects of a drug addicted parent continue after the child's birth. Nationally, approximately 10% of all children live with at least one parent who abuses alcohol or other drugs. Also nationally, between one-third and two-thirds of child maltreatment cases involve substance abuse. In 2005 there were 110 children in foster care in South Dakota due to parental involvement with meth. In cases before the South Dakota Supreme Court concerning the termination of parental rights, I believe that drug and alcohol abuse is at the core of over 90% of these cases.

    One of the ways the UJS is addressing the meth problem in South Dakota is by implementing a pilot drug court program in the near future in the Northern Black Hills of the Fourth Judicial Circuit. We are hopeful that by focusing additional resources and attention to this area, we can assist our citizens in decreasing meth use and its devastating effects on our State. This is the first attempt by the UJS at dealing directly with the meth problem within the judicial system. Only time will tell if it will be successful. However the greatest folly would be to simply do nothing as the problem continues to expand.

    This year two of our veteran circuit judges, Judge Boyd McMurchie and Judge Tim Johns, retired. Both had 30 years of judicial service to the people of South Dakota. They were with the UJS in its infancy and have been major contributing factors to its success. I thank them for their many years of service and wish them well in their future plans.

    Continuity is important. A key factor in judicial decision making is the experience judges acquire on the bench over their years of service. Difficult legal questions arise that may call for painstaking hours of legal research in the law books. However an even more difficult issue is the same one that faced King Solomon in determining who should get custody of a child. In such an instance a judge does not get the luxury of simply going to a law book or check list for an easy or automatic answer. The judge is all too often presented with the difficult decision of deciding custody between two parents, either both saints or both sinners. The exception is the easy call where there is one saint and one sinner. In a close case concerning the issue of custody, the best interests of the child may often times be guided by the years of judicial experience a judge has gained on the bench.

    The same rationale applies to an appropriate criminal sentence. Think back to your youth. Who among us who violated a rule of our household, while obviously not thrilled with our short-term prospects, would have wanted our parents to consult a "punishment table" to determine our fate? There would be no chance to plead our case or to bring up hopefully mitigating circumstances. If we are to sentence by a sentencing table rather than judicial experience, the sentence is by definition either too hard or to soft. The punishment does not fit the crime or the criminal.

    Since 2001 the Unified Judicial System has provided data and other assistance to a research project conducted by the Political Science Department of the University of South Dakota. The study was an effort to determine whether there were disparities in sentencing and incarceration of Native Americans in this State, and if so, the reason for them. Based upon a review of actual court files, the study concluded that any disparities are based upon poverty and socio-economic factors, not racism. While this offers comfort in that we, as a judicial system, are putting forth a good faith effort at judicial equality, there clearly is a cause for concern that socio-economic factors determine to some degree the likelihood a person will be incarcerated and how much time will be served. Although admittedly anecdotal, it is my personal experience that poverty, alcohol abuse and drug addiction are the three main culprits in our ever-increasing penitentiary population. To put it another way, sober people with good jobs and a supportive family commit few serious crimes.

    As a consequence of our concern that all people be treated equally in our criminal justice system, the Supreme Court created an Equal Justice Commission. The Equal Justice Commission held hearings at various locations throughout South Dakota, including seven Indian Reservations and several cities to listen to the various concerns of those who had grievances or complaints about their treatment in the system. It also visited the penitentiaries and obtained input from a number of inmates. It received numerous letters and written testimonials from South Dakota citizens dealing with the subject of fair treatment for minorities. It also heard from South Dakota Attorney General Larry Long and Secretary of Public Safety Tom Dravland. A representative of the Board of Pardons and Paroles also provided information to the Commission. All told, the Commission heard from hundreds of South Dakota citizens.

    The Commission was composed of judges, lawyers and lay persons, all with varying backgrounds, cultural heritages, and walks of life. I would like to thank those dedicated individuals who served on this Commission and rendered such an outstanding report.

    This year, however, we were presented with the possibility that the forces of nature, or man, would release damage so horrific that the legal system would be unable to operate for an extended period of time. One need only look at the devastating effects Hurricane Katrina had upon the legal system of Louisiana to realize this type of risk, while probably not great, is nevertheless a risk that could render our legal system inoperable for a significant period of time. Louisiana's legal system is basically being forced to start over. Obviously we are not the potential victim of a hurricane, but that should not allow us to become complacent to forces that could potentially overwhelm us.

    We wish those states who have sustained significant damage to their legal systems all the best in restoring them so that they might once again function to serve the public.

    On a more serious note, a few months later, I faced a diagnosis of prostate cancer. The surgery was successful and I am now cancer free. I would like to thank my wife, Deborah, and family, my colleagues on the Court, staff, members of the Executive and Legislative branches of government, as well as the citizens of South Dakota for their kind support, prayers and assistance during my diagnosis, treatment and recovery. I would also urge all men of this state who are over 40 to have the PSA blood test that led to the discovery of my cancer. This simple quick test can save your life.

            At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never. All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth . . . could not by force take a drink from [our rivers] or [set foot on our hills] . . . If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of free [people] we must live through all time, or die by suicide.

That was not a present-day leader attempting to assess our current situation, but rather Abraham Lincoln speaking in the early 1860s. If we continue to adhere to our constitutional principles, including equal justice under the law, we cannot be overcome.

    The UJS has done its best during the past 30 years to provide the citizens of this State with a judiciary that is timely and responsive at carrying out its constitutional and statutory tasks. Hopefully we can say, "the best is yet to come."