Both Isaac Latterell and Herman Otten voted for this unconstitutional amendment the first time, to reconsider the failed action, and then the final time to pass it. I am not sure their angle in the whole process? Was this out of concern to get money for the Lewis and Clark project (a million is barely enough to keep it operational and would not expand it) or did the Tea airport need some improvements? Maybe they were promised something in their closed meetings that we will never know. Whatever the reasons, good or otherwise, they should have followed the correct path. They should have had a full hearing and been brought out into the light.
Isaac should explain how his actions follow the principals he "claims" to follow:
Corruption and Disloyalty to the Constitution and to the People Must Never Be ToleratedWe need to stop voting for politicians who will enrich themselves or their friends at the expense of other people. Government is not a career to pursue when you want to control other people or can’t make money fairly. We have to be so serious about requiring loyalty to the constitution that disingenuous, self-serving politicians will be afraid to run. Because we have been asleep at the wheel, politics has attracted the wrong kind of people. If We the People wake up and start asking the right questions, taking our duty as king seriously, good politicians won’t need millions of dollars and slick advertisements to get elected.I can agree with you on this Mr. Latterell, we don't need someone in Pierre that can't follow the State Constitution. We don't need someone that won't be open and honest in the process. We don't need the wrong kind of person that says do what I say and not what I do. We don't need your kind of actions in Pierre.