The governor’s plan to resolve the issue of potential CCP purchasing SD ag land is bureaucratic overreach. We already have Article XVII of our SD Constitution that bans corporate ownership of ag land (FOREIGN and domestic), we also have SDCL 47-9a-1 that limits individual foreigners to owning no more than 160 acres of our ag land. The only loophole we need closed would’ve been covered by HB 1069, a simple bill that prohibited foreign governments (like the CCP) from buying our ag land. Unfortunately, the prime sponsor pulled that bill, I’m sure at the request of the governor...so her plan would have a better shot at passing. Her plan though is typical government overreach and creates a huge opportunity for abuse of power. It would create a new layer of bureaucracy with her board that would “review” proposed purchases and would then make a recommendation to whoever the governor is to solely make the final decision. Hmmm...so ripe for abuse! Maybe certain purchases are approved or disapproved to coincide with corresponding campaign contributions or lack thereof? As a conservative, I much prefer the issue be resolved with as little government as possible...that is not the governor’s plan...it WOULD be with HB1069.
Wouldn’t we just seize Chinese owned land at the outset of hostilities like every country ever? So basically we’re talking about not allowing China to invest in US agriculture, so what’s the actual play here. I guess I’m wondering why the push against China owning farmland now and what group of all read probably too rich Americans profits from cutting land owners off from buyers? Are we just trying to depress land prices so Monsanto or some other conglomerate can buy it cheaper?
The governor’s plan to resolve the issue of potential CCP purchasing SD ag land is bureaucratic overreach. We already have Article XVII of our SD Constitution that bans corporate ownership of ag land (FOREIGN and domestic), we also have SDCL 47-9a-1 that limits individual foreigners to owning no more than 160 acres of our ag land. The only loophole we need closed would’ve been covered by HB 1069, a simple bill that prohibited foreign governments (like the CCP) from buying our ag land. Unfortunately, the prime sponsor pulled that bill, I’m sure at the request of the governor...so her plan would have a better shot at passing. Her plan though is typical government overreach and creates a huge opportunity for abuse of power. It would create a new layer of bureaucracy with her board that would “review” proposed purchases and would then make a recommendation to whoever the governor is to solely make the final decision. Hmmm...so ripe for abuse! Maybe certain purchases are approved or disapproved to coincide with corresponding campaign contributions or lack thereof? As a conservative, I much prefer the issue be resolved with as little government as possible...that is not the governor’s plan...it WOULD be with HB1069.
Wouldn’t we just seize Chinese owned land at the outset of hostilities like every country ever? So basically we’re talking about not allowing China to invest in US agriculture, so what’s the actual play here. I guess I’m wondering why the push against China owning farmland now and what group of all read probably too rich Americans profits from cutting land owners off from buyers? Are we just trying to depress land prices so Monsanto or some other conglomerate can buy it cheaper?