Plain Talk

Rob and Jay talk about the arctic weather and what it's doing to the power grid.

In the late 19th century hundreds of small, short-line railroads were being bought up and consolidated into larger companies. Our nation's burgeoning economy was (and still is, in many ways) dependent on those railroad lines which, increasingly, were under the control of a shrinking number of people. Those people began using their monopoly over the transportation of goods to price gouge and manipulate markets. "If we will not endure a king as a political power we should not endure a king over the production, transportation, and sale of any of the necessaries of life," Republican Senator John Sherman said at the time. Sherman would ultimately give his name to the Sherman Antitrust Act, which continues to the basis of American antitrust law to this day. The point is that corporate hegemonies should be allowed to suppress free trade. Some argue that's exactly what's happening in the enormous and growing market of app development. That market is dominated by two companies. Apple, the manufacturer of iPhones, and Google, which operates the Android operating system used on phones from pretty much every single non-Apple manufacturer. Companies that sell digital services through these apps - think a subscription to a fitness app, or an in-app purchase in a game like Candy Crush - have to use Apple and Google's payment services and they have to pay a 30 percent fee for the privilege. "This is exactly the same thing" as the railroad monopolies of the 19th century says Lacee Anderson, spokesperson for the Coalition for App Fairness, said on this episode of Plain Talk. It is in this context that North Dakota's lawmakers take up Senate Bill 2333, which was introduced by Republican Senator Kyle Davison of Fargo. Mark Buse, who is a vice president for dating service Match.com, says his company supports the legislation. "The issue is that all app developers should be treated the same." Anderson suggested that Apple and Google have used their control of the app markets to drive out competitors for their own services. She also noted the recent controversies over the tech industry censoring political content as an argument in favor of breaking up these company's controls over apps. No other state has this sort of law in place, though others are considering it. Why should North Dakota lead the charge? It could encourage app developers to locate here in order to avoid Apple and Google's fees. Could Apple and Google cut North Dakotans off from their stores if this legislation passes? After all, our state is but a fraction of the markets those tech giants serve. Anderson says that would be an extreme and unlikely outcome.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, business owners and policymakers have had to walk a balancing act between acknowledging the very real dangers of the coronavirus outbreak and the terrible economic realities attendant to shutting down or restricting businesses. Keeping businesses open during the pandemic - a necessity because people still needed many of those businesses, and those businesses needed to survive - was a health risk for business owners, the employees, and the customers. How much of that risk should business owners be liable for? "Businesses need to be protected from lawsuits," Allison Ritter, spokesperson for the National Federation of Independent Businesses, said on this episode of Plain Talk. Her group represents more than 2,000 businesses in North Dakota alone, and almost all of them see the need for legislation making it clear what pandemic-era risks business owners are liable for and which they aren't. Ritter's group and other business interests are pushing for legislation that would limit liability for businesses that have opened and will continue to open during the outbreak. Three bills in the state House in Bismarck are addressing this issue. House Bill 1271, introduced by Rep. Marvin Nelson (D-Rolla), was already killed in a floor vote. House Bill 1376, introduced by Rep. Jim Kasper (R-Fargo), just got a "do pass" recommendation in committee and is headed to a floor vote. But the most comprehensive bill, and the one Ritter and her group prefers, is House Bill 1175, introduced by Rep. Michael Howe (R-Fargo), has already been approved by the House on a 77-17 vote and sent to the Senate for consideration. "A person is immune from civil liability for an act or omission resulting in damage or injury sustained from exposure or potential exposure to COVID - 19 if the act or omission was in substantial compliance or was consistent with a federal or state statute, regulation, or order related to COVID - 19 which was applicable to the person or activity at issue at the time of the alleged exposure or potential exposure," that bill reads. Under that language, as long as a business owner took the precautions laid out by the local, state, and/or federal government, they're protected from liability. Bad actors can still be held accountable, but those who operated prudently have a shield. Ritter likened this to the responsibility business owners have for clearing snow from their premises. If they leave the snow and ice and someone gets hurt, their liable, but if they take appropriate steps to clear the snow and remove the ice and someone gets hurt anyway their liability is greatly diminished.

Rob and Jay talk Super Bowl, social media outrage, and an update on what's going on at the Legislature in Bismarck.

"She didn't violate a rule in Congress," Congressman Kelly Armstrong said, referring to Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. Greene has come under fire for numerous comments she's made on social media and elsewhere supporting conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks and school shootings. "There's no defending the things she's said," Armstrong said on this episode of Plain Talk, but argued that it's up to the voters in Georgia, not the majority party in the U.S. House, to hold her accountable. Armstrong says he's worried that the actions against Greene - she was stripped of her committee assignments over the objections of most of the Republican minority - are another example of "escalating issues" that have the majority party imposing its will on the minority. The congressman also discussed legislation he's introduced to move the Keystone XL pipeline forward. President Joe Biden has littered his first days in office with a flurry of executive orders, many of them aimed at the oil, gas, and coal industries. One of the most notorious has been the canceling of a permit for the Keystone line to cross the U.S./Canadian border. Armstrong said his bill would remove the necessity for that presidential permit, and he also said our nation needs to create more regulatory certainty around these projects. It's not fair, or good for the nation, he argued, for an already-issued permit to be suddenly rescinded when the political winds blow in a different direction.

Shelley Lenz and Cesar Alvarez are two Democratic-NPL candidates who have lost previously on the ballot but think they have ideas that can help Democratic candidates start to win in North Dakota. "Scrap the current platform," Lenz said on this episode of Plain Talk. "It's not resonating." Lenz and Alvarez want to be chair and vice-chair of the Democratic-NPL, and they want to organize the party around a platform of a half-dozen or so policy proposals. The party needs to "simplify our platform" to a more "legislative platform we can campaign on." They also argue that the state party needs to broaden its appeal in North Dakota. "We need to start winning some of these races in western North Dakota," Lenz said. "What do we have, one lawmaker elected west of I29?" she continued. It's actually a few more than that, but not many, and the point is well-made. So how do Lenz and Alvarez plan to help the Dem-NPL make inroads into western North Dakota at a time when, at the national level, the incoming administration of President Joe Biden is already issuing orders that harm the oil and gas industry? Neither offered a lot of specifics during the interview - the tired shibboleth about "all of the above" energy made an appearance - but Lenz did express a willingness push back against the national party's hostility to oil and gas and coal. "Energy and food will always come from rural areas," she said. "That's why we need to shape the national party on energy and food." Alvarez is a member of the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation, whose tribal lands make up the heart of western North Dakota's oil fields. "You'll get no anti-oil stuff from me," he said. "Our platform isn't anti-Republican," Lenz said. Alvarez echoed this saying he and Lenz are "not focusing on vilifying the other side." "You can't thrive in rural America without being conservative," Lenz continued.

Should North Dakotans be allowed to open and patronize cigar bars? Rob and Jay talk about it, also legislation aimed at seat belts.

"Even markets can be irrational," Senator Kevin Cramer said on this episode of Plain Talk. He was talking about activist investing which has ballooned stock prices for companies like video game retailer Game Stop and movie theater chain AMC, hitting bear investors who had placed bets on those prices declining right in the pocketbooks. What should be done about it? Nothing, says Cramer. At least not right now. He says he's waiting to see how things play out. Cramer also spoke about the impending impeachment trial for former President Donald Trump. The Senator has already cast a vote in favor of a motion declaring the trial unconstitutional but says he won't make up his mind on whether to vote guilty until after he sees the evidence. Still, given his vote on the motion, it seems unlikely he'd vote for Trump to be guilty. Cramer acknowledged that while he didn't approve of Trump's actions before, during, and after the riot at the U.S. Capitol, he didn't think it rose to the level warranting conviction. But even if Trump isn't convicted, is he someone Republicans should be following going forward? Trump is working on remaining a relevant force in the Republican party. "He's going to be," Cramer said. "He's going to have as much influence as he wants to have."

"This bill changes the legal guidelines." That's what former North Dakota Treasurer Kelly Schmidt had to say of a proposal, currently before the Legislature in Bismarck, which would invest 20 percent of the billions in the state's Legacy Fund in North Dakota businesses and infrastructure. Private entrepreneurs could access that capital to start up or expand their businesses. Also, local communities could access the money to finance infrastructure projects cheaper and quicker than they are at present. The Legacy Fund is already invested in these sort of things, just not in North Dakota. Currently, less than 2 percent of the Legacy Fund is invested in North Dakota. Schmidt spent 16 years at Treasurer before declining to run for another term last year, and that means she spent 16 years on the State Investment Board which oversees the Legacy Fund's fiscal management. Her objection to the legislation - it's House Bill 1425, introduced by Rep. Mike Nathe (R-Bismarck) and backed by Insurance Commissioner and SIB member John Godfread - is that it modifies what's called the prudent investor rule. "It's never good to make an exemption to the prudent investor rule," she told me, arguing that the rule is more than North Dakota law but a standard in the investment world. Nathe's legislation modifies it because the goal is to prioritize investment in North Dakota, even if there are better returns available through investments in other parts of the world. Schmidt says she's not against investing in North Dakota, and argues that the State Investment Board hasn't been against it either, but she worries about the Legislature mandating types of investment that might have a too-dramatic impact on the Legacy Fund's earnings. Some in political circles have suggested that Schmidt's opposition to this proposal may be born of a potential job waiting at one of the money management firms the state uses for Legacy Fund investments. Schmidt denied this, calling it a "lie," though she didn't entirely close the door on that sort of gig. She said her plan now is to spend time with her family but added, "if God has a plan for me moving forward I may be open to that, but there are no offers on the table."

President Joe Biden's brand new administration has already taken swift action, by way of an executive order, on all manner of policy fronts. One notable area is energy, where Biden has already withdrawn an already-issued permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. Now he's expected to sign a new order halting new oil and gas development on federal lands. What could this mean for tribal lands? "It's not good," North Dakota Indian Affairs Commissioner Scott Davis said on this episode of Plain Talk. Davis, who is a member of Governor Doug Burgum's administration with family roots in both the Standing Rock Sioux and Turtle Mountain Chippewa tribes, expressed no small amount of "frustration" with the Biden administration for taking this step. "You can't just turn the light switch on and off on a whim," he said. Oil and gas production is hugely important to the people of the MHA Nation whose lands are located in central and western North Dakota. According to Davis, among America's energy-producing tribes, the MHA Nation is "definitely the top." Development on their lands represents roughly a fifth of North Dakota's total oil output. Davis says the tribe has enjoyed a financial windfall from oil development, the revenues of which have been directed toward building schools, health care facilities, and needed infrastructure. If Biden's moratorium stops oil and gas leasing on the MHA Nation's lands "it would set them back 30 years," according to Davis. "They have a trust responsibility to tribal communities," Davis said of the federal government. I asked Davis if he knew if tribal leadership in North Dakota was consulted by the Biden administration on this order. "Not to my knowledge," he told me. Native Americans are the "most regulated people in America," Davis said, adding that he's afraid this abrupt decision by the Biden administration could set a precedent for other policy areas like education.