Attorney General Marty Jackley in Brookings talking about Economic Development and running for Governor.

Pat Powers

I had the opportunity today to listen to Attorney General Marty Jackley as he spoke to a group of about 40 people in Brookings today on a number of topics, and opened himself up for a wide range of questions from the audience. You don’t often get a lot of opportunities to ask our statewide elected officials open ended questions, so it was a rare opportunity from the mixed audience of local businessmen and women, as well as some of the Republican faithful.

Introduced by State Representative Scott Munsterman, Scott enthusiastically told the group that several months ago he told Marty he was all in on Marty’s candidacy to become the next Governor of South Dakota.

Marty spoke at length about IM22, and despite yesterday’s coverage from the Argus, as I’d suspected, his thoughts on an ethics panel weren’t far from my own. He indicated that in his travels, people weren’t worried about campaign finance. And they certainly aren’t worried about paying for campaigns. But they do want to see some form of ethics panel – and his thoughts along those lines mirrored mine yesterday; where it could take the form of a panel to hear many of these issues that are too small to prosecute, but should be looked into nonetheless.

He quickly shifted from initiated measures, and laid out his rudimentary campaign plan of five areas he would focus on as Governor;

  • Economic development, including such components as workforce development, housing, and engaging businessmen who understand development.
  • Improving Education and working further with tech schools our university system
  • In Health Care – He noted that there could be a delay in repealing Obamacare, and Medicaid expansion could still be on the table. He noted that Health care reform from the federal government could come in the form of block grants, and the next governor may need to know what to do with them.
  • Public safety was one of his five planks, and addressing concerns in law enforcement with regards to addressing meth use, other drugs, drug treatment, drug courts, and veteran courts was important.
  • Quality of life – Why does he want to be gov? He cited that we have a great state & opportunities, and he wants that for his children.

Marty was very pointed in comments criticizing Congress and talking about the work that the Attorney Generals had been doing in challenging Obamacare, the Waters of the US (WOTUS), etcetera, noting that while the Attorney Generals were doing the heavy lifting, all Congress did “was send a press release” – a theme he repeated a couple of times, as he noted that the Federal Government continuously fails in it’s oversight and it’s left to the AG’s to clean up the mess, specifically citing that “AG’s have stepped in and accomplished solutions” and “Congress passes resolutions and little else.”

The Jackley challenge and criticism against Congress as a whole seems to be a sharpening of rhetoric, as he develops his line of attack against his likely opponent, Congresswoman Kristi Noem. It’s expected that Noem would probably be challenging Pierre as an outsider candidate to State Government.

As he continued, Marty did shift back to some of the ethics and oversight legislation he’s planning on bringing this next session, and specifically addressed that he’d like to see a three pronged approach in new conflict of interest laws –

  1. You can’t have oversight your own contract.
  2. Whistleblower protections; you won’t lose your job if you report double dealing.
  3. And that financial crimes, such as EB5, are on the same footing as regular crimes, noting if you steal $1000 from your public employer, it should be the same crime if you steal $1000 from someone else. It should not be a misdemeanor.

That’s the lion’s share of the takeaway from today’s luncheon wth the Attorney General – A platform, lots of content, and maybe a couple of potential barbs that might be used in the upcoming Gubernatorial campaign.

70 thoughts on “Attorney General Marty Jackley in Brookings talking about Economic Development and running for Governor.”

    1. Again Marty’s campaigning on a work day. I hope Jeromy Pankratz was thereto help, he needs to earn that $81,000 the state tax payers spend on his salary.

      1. I really hope one of Noem’s people or the Governor’s staff takes a look at AG Jackley and Jeromy’s travel reimbursements takes a look at election night specifically and pass that along to the budget and audit committee.

    2. I happy my subscription to the JackleyJournal is free. If I had to pay to read Jeromy Pankratz’s press release I’m not sure o could afford an $81,000 subscription fee.

  2. So he is supporting an ethics commission but uses an Assistant AG that is one of his own state employees as the person to RSVP to for fundraiser is Marty Jackley perjure

    1. This will ruin Jeromy Pankratz career. If AG Jackley losses. And I don’ there is any doubt MM would win easily.

    2. I don’t understand his sudden interest in an ethics commission. These bills have had hearing every few years and Marty would fight or stay silent on them and now he supports it. I don’t trust this guy.

      1. I remember there being a bill up recently in the last few years and Marty had nothing to say about it. He put his finger up and see which way the political winds are blowing and that’s the way he goes not the politician I want. There’s a reason Trump won and it’s because of people like Marty.

      1. I don’t think Daugaard supports anyone for any race in 2018 until after the primaries. The only person I could see him supporting would be Matt Michels.

        I also don’t think he supports Dusty for Congress publicly unless he wins the primary.

      2. I’ve been hearing rumors that Marty is encouraging the conservative legislators to resist Daugaard’s agenda.

          1. Marty is in control of the far right and giving orders to fight the Governor all session.

    2. I m hearing Marty Capone and the Goveronor have some bills they are bringing just t o squabble. Expecially the bathroom bill.

  4. He’s already softening. Bad decision to go negative. These two will hate each other as long as it’s a two person race.

    Can anyone say governor Michels?

    1. I doubt very much if Marty is trying to make the case that Congress is ineffective therefore so is Noem. Being one member out of 435 should shine a light on a bigger challenge for Noem. She has no executive experience whatsoever.

      There’s a big difference between being a worker bee and being the boss. There’s always cover for legislators in caucus, but not so much when a leader takes a stand that he alone must justify and defend.

      Appointed leadership opportunities are always easier than elected slots. If she wanted a real shot at being the boss, she should’ve accepted Trump’s offer.

      1. and the same can be said for Marty…remember he was appointed into the position himself….so he had a leg up to then get elected and reelected….he has never had a hard race and it is showing…

  5. Michels might have to run just to make sure it doesn’t get too ugly.

    Marty’s attacks on congress are legit. However his advisors are short sighted and mistaken if they think they will work long term.

      1. There were no attacks on Noem, just a couple barbed comments at Congress. Candidates will draw a difference between their opponents, just as I’m sure Kristi will at some point.

        1. So Marty is taking shoots at congress while running for Governor. What about the Senate? At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if he criticized Thune and his Godfather Rounds. Marty Soprano knows who to protect.

    2. I don’t think pointing a finger at Congress is a legitimate argument. Look how many bills came out of the House that had zero chance of getting signed by the president. What more were they supposed to do?

      He’s just looking at the low approval rate numbers that Congress has, and is trying to associate Kristi with the numbers… Doubt that’s a good strategy in South Dakota.

    3. I personally don’t think the attack are coming from Noem staffers. I don’t think she’s currently that popular, and Im hearing seh has no organization. Plus her staffers couldn’t come up with this stuff.

      1. Not that popular???didn’t she just win a 4th term to Congress with over 60% of the vote….

  6. An ethics commission picked by South Dakota Judges made up of regular SD citizens of differing occupations and political affiliations would work superbly. The Legislature can pick the terms of service similar to a Game Fish & Parks commission.
    This needs doing right the first time.

  7. Am I the only one who does not want to hear about people running for governor at this time. We just finished an election cycle, are dealing with the fallout from the irresponsible ballot measures that passed in SD, and the legislature hasn’t even met yet this year. Give us a little break. Do the work we elected each of you to do, and start campaigning LATER!

  8. I still want to see what this ethics commission’s mandate will do that isn’t already a duty given to the Legislature, Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State, State Auditor, and Judicial Branch.

    And I want some connection to how it will expose and diminish whatever some one thinks is unethical in State Government.

    It’s is easy to say you are for something which promises to do something. It is hard to actually give some detail that will produce the intended consequences and not be a cure worse than the disease.

    Thus, if someone is for it, I expect details or will consider it just pandering.

    1. I think you nailed it, Troy. The AG and Secretary of State already have plenty of authority to do all this, they just choose not to investigate or penalize anyone (probably for political reasons).

      3. It’s sad when our politicians are so corrupt that they don’t do their jobs Based on being reelected

  9. the Federal Government continuously fails in it’s oversight and it’s left to the AG’s to clean up the mess, specifically citing that “AG’s have stepped in and accomplished solutions” and “Congress passes resolutions and little else.”

    Hold on – I thought we didn’t want the Feds meddling? This is what happens when you want smaller government. Marty: Closet Dem?

  10. Matt Michels needs to seriously consider running. Marty has mad a mess of EB5, Gear Up, Marsy’s Law scandal, and now having one of his state employees listed on campaign events that take place during work hours.

  11. After the presidential race we just went through, I’m kind of surprised that there is so much sniping at a list of quality candidates. I think we should be happy that our bench is so deep, a blessing to count this Holiday Season.

    1. The voters resoundly said no to the same old corrupt politicians. Marty has EB5, Gear up, Marsy’s Law scandlous timing of what happened when, and now we find out he is paying a predominat lobbyist son $81,000 on the state’s payroll to run his campaign. This is unexcepable!

      1. I agree, this is the stuff that you hear about in other states but not in South Dakota. Marty Jackley has disappointed me.

  12. Lee,

    1). I agree we have a strong bench.
    2). We also know from the Presidential race a strong bench makes for a tough primary which can expose weaknesses which the candidates have to show they can withstand. Better this than a coronation like the Dems did.

    That said, I agree some (not all) of the sniping seems petty and personal which makes me think some (not all) of it anonymously agenda driven.

  13. Watcher,

    My comments came from reflection on what I think was a rhetorical question on another thread: “I don’t know how someone can’t be for an ethics commission” as if to ask who is against ethics. But, judging ethics is often nebulous and in the eyes of the beholder (subjective). However, breaking the law is more black and white and more appropriately judged as it is objective.

    I’m all for ethics in personal and professional life. I’m all for ethics with regard to one acting in the public trust. But, I still don’t know what this commission will actually do and how this un-elected board can be more accountable than someone elected directly by the people.

    Let’s take the issue in Platte. What was done here was subjectively criminal. And, the legal process is proceeding appropriately for those still able to be pursued. Would this ethics commission been better able to detect this than an audit? I don’t think so. Would it have been harder to do if we had instead stronger monitoring of existing conflict of interest restrictions? I don’t think so.

    So what would an ethics commission done here? Absolutely nothing. Same with EB-5. But, they are cited as the reasons we need this.

    Might we need stronger laws than we had in the past? Probably. Might the changes made in the last session be sufficient? Maybe. And, might there be need more aggressive monitoring and enforcement of existing laws? Maybe.

    But, instead we promote an “ethics commission” which (at least until we see details) is more likely to only give the IMPRESSION things will be different.

    I oppose alot of positions/proposals by conservatives not because I disagree with the goal but nobody has convinced me it will do what it is purported to do. For that, I’m called a moderate or something else. I’m just not convinced it will do anything and I abhor things which only give the impression something has been accomplished.

    So, to answer the rhetorical question: I’m opposed to an ethics commission because I don’t think it will accomplish what it promises. I think instead we are more likely to get what we desire by:

    1) If we need greater authority in the Department of Legislative Audit to identify earlier what was happening in Platte, let’s do it.
    2) If we need to give the Department of Education stronger finance personnel who could have sifted through the financial statements more competently, let’s do it. (BTW, I think this is why this went on too long. As talented as the people in DOE might be, they are filled with people whose expertise and skills are directly related to education. Everytime it is suggested to have a business person on an Education board the common cry is “Education isn’t a business.” Well, we know how well things go when nobody from business is at the table).
    3) If we need to give more powers to the Secretary of State/Board of Elections, let’s do it.
    4) If we need to give more powers to the Attorney General, let’s do it.

    But, to put all our trust and expectations in a group of people unelected and unaccountable to people who are elected? Makes absolutely no sense to me. In fact, it seems to be a cure worse than the disease.
    4) If we need to

    1. What needs to be done is get an Special Independent Prosecutor that has no political interests.

    1. Charlie, Certainly you’ve heard of the Governmental Operations and Audit Committee. That committee has the authority to handle this sort of problem if the legislative leadership let them. If it doesn’t have enough authority to deal with it, the legislature could fix that. No need to reinvent the wheel or violate the constitution.

      1. Because she’s a climber with no other accomplishments. No way she beats Dusty he has real world experience, chief of Staff and has a brain. Big advantage.

        1. Don’t forget the person that issues Corporations and LLCs is the exact same person that left A lot of Finance years old in the bag when she committed bankruptcy.

    3. Charlie as a former legislator you should know that all she has to do Is contact the local State’s Attorney to make a complaint about what is taking place Thank God you didn’t get reelected. Give Chris Nelson a call sometime he’ll set you straight its too bsf that he works for the PUC he seems to be the only person in South Dakota that knows the election law

  15. Annon obviously the framework of fighting corruption in South Dakota’s constitutional authority has failed us and the People are demanding something more be done.
    Surely you don’t think politicians are smarter than the General Public.

    2. Especially not you. Hahhaha. Thank the good Lord you didn’t or should I say couldn’t get elected.

  16. Nice Spin Room Pat. Jackley’s conversion to an Ethics Committee is a tacit admission that GOAC is a joke. You constantly rail against adding another layer to government but now it sounds about right for “petty” stuff — well sir EB-5 and Gear Up certainly weren’t petty; not by any stretch of the imagination, nor are other scandals like HSC issues in Yankton. Free markets depend on real checks and balances. We don’t have that in SD right now. I personally don’t care what Jackley’s motivations were, I’m just glad he and Krebs are on board. For what it’s worth, I do think he is a lot more qualified to be Gov than Rep. Kristi Noem.

  17. I disagree with Jackley. Yes the small stuff is a problem but so was EB 5 and Gear Up. An ethics commission shouldn’t be limited. Obviously a court and AG should have more authority than an Ethics Commission but I don’t feel like EB5 or Gear Up have ever been resolved.

      1. I agree These problems took place undern the governor’s Authority And ethics commission would not have caught them Prior to the problem taking placeWhich really doesn’t put us in a better place than we are now

  18. I agree they let the little guy hang while Department Heads are still in place. Corruption at its finest. Marty will loose the general election to Sioux Falls Mike.

  20. I noticed that SD wasn’t among the states that sued generic drug manufacturers for price fixing and collusion. I guess if it isn’t something that makes great political press and fires up the base our AG isn’t interested in it. This litigation has the potential to save South Dakotans thousands of dollars if not significantly more but I’m sure which bathroom a preteen uses is more important.

  22. Not Marty Capone he’s clean – His new campaign slogan. To protect and serve his friends! Paying one of his state employees $81,000 to be his campaign manager when Goldts too busy with Marsy’s Law. EB5 no convictions, GearUp no convictions, Marsy’s Law and Marty’s collusion.

Comments are closed.