BishopAccountability.org
	Did the Legislature Err in a Sexual-abuse Matter? By Bob Mercer Pure Pierre Politics October 27, 2011 http://my605.com/pierrereview/?p=4892 Over at the always interesting DakotaWomen.com blog there is a must-read post about South Dakota’s laws that limit recovery of damages by victims of childhood sexual abuse. The section of law added by the Legislature in 2010 says no one who has reached the age of 40 may recover damages from any one or any entity other than the person who perpetrated the actual act of sexual abuse. The DakotaWomen post addresses what critics see as the shortcomings of that additional limit. What is most interesting is the actual legislative history of the law. No one testified against the proposal, brought by then-Rep. Thomas Deadrick, R-Platte, on behalf of lawyer Steve Smith of Chamberlain and the late Jeremiah Murphy, a lawyer from Sioux Falls who had been deeply involved defending against sexual-abuse allegations involving the Catholic Church in South Dakota and where appropriate helping the victims. That’s right: No one came forward at the House hearing; no one came forward at the Senate hearing. Despite the silence from opponents, legislators did gradually amend the legislation, HB 1104. As introduced, it would have set the special limit for any victim of at least 25 years old. The House committee changed the age threshold to 35. That motion came from then-Rep. Rich Engels, D-Hartford, who is a lawyer, and Rep. Kevin Killer, D-Pine Ridge. Engels went on to support the bill in the committee and on the House floor, while Killer opposed it. The House committee endorsed the bill as amended on a 10-3 vote. The full House of Representatives was less decisive, passing the measure on a vote of 42-23. The House opponents tended to be many of the House Democrats and, among Republicans, mostly women. In the Senate Judiciary Committee, the bill was endorsed 7-0 without change and placed on the consent calendar, meaning it would automatically pass as a routine matter and wouldn’t even be debated by the full Senate unless a senator asked to do so. The three lawyers on the Senate committee, all Democrats — Maggie Gillespie of Hurley, Nancy Turbak Berry of Watertown and Scott Heidepriem of Sioux Falls — and all long shown to be smart people generally, supported the bill and supported the consent calendar treatment. Behind the scenes something began afoot, because the full Senate decided to take further action on the bill, adopting an amendment from Sen. Cooper Garnos, R-Presho, to change the age threshold to 40. The Senate vote for the Garnos-amended bill was 26-7. This time, Turbak Berry opposed it, while the other Republican and Democratic lawyers in the Senate supported it. Because of the Garnos amendment, the bill needed to return to the House for a decision whether to agree with the Senate version. House members voted 52-14 to concur; this time the only opposition came from House Democrats. What is most intriguing is that a bill which dealt with legal damages and sexual abuse drew no testimony from anyone other than the two lawyers who wanted it — and that a bill which had no opponents in public was amended twice in significant ways — and that nearly every lawyer in the Legislature but two, Turbak Berry and Rep. Marc Feinstein, D-Sioux Falls, voted for the bill on final passage in each chamber. This seems to add credence to the old saying that life sometimes works in mysterious ways.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.