First meeting of SOS Study on Election Integrity to be conducted behind closed doors

This year, South Dakota Secretary of State Monae Johnson has convened a group to meet on election integrity to probe how open and transparent our elections are.  And according to reports, apparently the first meeting will be conducted behind closed doors, and not many people are happy about it:

“It is a closed session so that our members can talk freely,” said Johnson, who rode federal election frustrations among GOP voters to the South Dakota Republican Party’s nomination for secretary of state last summer.

and..

“We understood, as supporters, that she already knew the issues around transparency,” she said. “You never know what you’re walking into, but many of the things she ran on seemed to disappear.”

Nelson, the lone lawmaker from the state’s minority party serving on the committee, supported the creation of a summer study pertaining to post-election audits, created through legislation he supported this winter. But the closed-door meeting doesn’t sit well with him, either.

Read the entire story at The Dakota Scout (Subscription required).

Why? Just why? Who is providing this advice? Because this is an unforced error.

I’m not sure why Monae Johnson is setting herself up for a media pummeling here. Because that’s all that closing a meeting on election integrity is going to get her.

Does anyone assume that everything is going to remain behind closed doors with the election denier crowd, and the opposing party at the meeting table?

Stay tuned.

22 thoughts on “First meeting of SOS Study on Election Integrity to be conducted behind closed doors”

  1. The third paragraph in the article doesn’t have a named reference. Who is being quoted? Apparently it’s not Monae Johnson, and because it states ‘she said’, nor is it Nelson, with the mention that ‘it doesn’t sit well with him’.

    1. I’ve heard (could be just a rumor) that Barnett is taking his $100k and transferring it to a PAC to get rid of Drew Dennert in Brown County.

      1. If this is true, this could be exhibit A of the you F around, you are gonna find out.

  2. The meeting is about “election integrity”? That was the false issue brought forward by Mrs. Johnson at the State Convention that she used to steamroll Mr. Barnett. Since our election integrity is fully intact, by every measure that could be used, I suppose the meeting has to be closed to prevent embarrassing questions and comments from committee members from being reported. Will Pat be allowed in the room or is this strictly a “star chamber” proceeding.

    1. “Will Pat be allowed in the room..”

      LOL, allowed or not, absent a pretty good reason, I have no interest in taking a day off work and spending gas money to haul my cookies to Pierre for a government meeting.

  3. Good thing Goss disclosed that he was prank calling Dan Lederman with the Governors number.

    Since he is a member of the media you know.

  4. She would do herself a ton of good to be as open as possible. Advice from Deadrick?

    The second problem is the study is not something I would give great credibility. Outside of Reimer it doesn’t have any legislative horsepower.

    “Those invited to attend include four county auditors from different regions of the state, including Minnehaha County Auditor Leah Anderson, as well as Reps. Rebecca Reimer, Tina Mulally, Sue Peterson and Kameron Nelson.”

  5. Good thing the legislature already passed comprehensive, forward thinking reform this session.

  6. Yes there is a problem. Monae used certain people to get the nomination and win the election, and then threw them away. She was elected by pandering to election-deniers, and now has no use for them. She played them well..

    1. That’s true, but it came at the cost of her credibility. Nobody on any side of this deal has any respect for her opinions.

  7. Here’s a thought…no more ballot boxes and have the voter put their ballot in a secure machine that tallies the votes right away. See Lyon County, Iowa for an example. Safe, secure, and transparent. Equipment is tested in public weeks before the election and everyone can go view the testing.

    Simple fix.

  8. OF COURSE IT’S BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
    Have you seen the animals that’d come walking in with their Westboro Baptist picket signs and white sharpie’d anti-pornography t-shirts if it was open to the public?

    How about we discuss amongst the adults before tossing it over to the SD Canvassing Group, or the Freedumb Caucus, or the Wingnuts, or the MyPillow Goober, or CFL, or Hitler etc.etc.

    Good on Monae for staying focused on the task at hand rather than bending over backwards to appease a bunch of bandwagoners who know nothing about our fair elections. You should all be so wise to understand EXACTLY why the FIRST meeting isn’t open to the public. The public knows nothing, just read the comments above my own for proof.

  9. Sorry Pat, I was out of bounds in suggesting that you should attend this meeting. It is probably more appropriate if you stand back and report on the media reporters, the interviews with those that attended and the reaction of political folks to what was proposed by Mrs. Johnson. Definitely your call.

Comments are closed.