Senator Rounds Is Right to Hold the Postal Service’s Feet to the Fire
by State Representative Jessica Bahmuller

As a municipal Finance Officer, I handle large volumes of mail including utility billing, invoices, and public service correspondence. I know how much planning goes into getting mail where it needs to go, and how quickly things can get complicated when delivery schedules become unreliable.

For municipalities, delays mean missed deadlines, added costs, and frustrated residents. For families, it can mean waiting longer for a prescription, a payment, or an important document. And in rural South Dakota, where the nearest alternative may be miles away, there’s often not much anyone can do but wait.

That’s why I’ve been paying close attention to Senator Mike Rounds’ efforts to address the Postal Service’s problems in South Dakota.

Rounds has been raising concerns about mail delays for years, and he’s done more than write a few letters asking for answers. He helped secure a commitment to keep the Huron processing facility open, along with $3 million in improvements. He’s pushed for upgrades to mail processing in Sioux Falls and requested an independent investigation into service problems across the state.

That investigation, released in September, confirmed what many South Dakotans already knew: mail service in our state has been falling short.

Rounds has also placed a hold on nominees to the Postal Service Board of Governors, making clear that the agency needs to show progress before the Senate hands more responsibility to its leadership.

I think he’s right to do it.

The Board of Governors doesn’t get much attention outside Washington, but its decisions affect just about everyone who sends or receives mail. The board selects the Postmaster General and oversees major decisions about how the Postal Service operates. Its members serve seven-year terms, so the people confirmed today will have a hand in shaping mail service for years.

That matters in South Dakota, where a change to a processing facility or delivery schedule can have consequences hundreds of miles away.

We’ve seen how difficult it can be for cities to plan around unreliable service. When mail takes longer than expected, residents don’t necessarily care whether the problem started at a local post office, a regional processing center, or somewhere in Washington. They just know their mail didn’t arrive when it was supposed to.

And while the Postal Service faces real financial and operational challenges, South Dakota shouldn’t have to accept worse service as the price of fixing them.

As Congress heads into its final weeks of the year, there’s a chance these nominations could get swept into a larger package of unfinished business. That’s often how Washington works. The calendar gets tight, negotiations pick up, and appointments that deserve a closer look end up moving together. But these nominees shouldn’t get a pass simply because Congress wants to finish its work before the holidays.

Senators ought to ask each nominee what they plan to do about rural mail service, whether they support keeping processing operations closer to the communities they serve, and how they’ll make sure the Postal Service follows through when it promises improvements.

Senator Rounds has spent considerable time getting the Postal Service to acknowledge the problems South Dakota is facing. His efforts have helped protect local processing operations, secure investments, and bring some much-needed scrutiny to an agency that hasn’t always been responsive to rural customers.

The Senate should give these nominees a careful look, consider them individually, and make sure South Dakota’s concerns are addressed before moving forward.

For those of us whose businesses depend on the mail, that’s not asking too much.

Jessica Bahmuller
Municipal Finance Officer and State Representative
Alexandria, South Dakota

From a release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 28, 2026

Campaign Finance Complaint Filed with South Dakota Secretary of State Over Contribution to Taffy Howard Campaign
Filing requests state review of reported $5,063 contribution and compliance with South Dakota campaign finance law

RAPID CITY, S.D. — Ranee Haglund, Chairwoman of the Pennington County Democratic Party, has filed a formal campaign finance complaint with the South Dakota Secretary of State’s Office, requesting an official review of a reported $5,063 contribution from South Eastern Strategy to the campaign committee Taffy Howard for SD.

The complaint raises questions about whether the reported contribution complies with South Dakota Codified Law § 12-27-8, which governs contributions from business entities to legislative candidates. Based on the contribution limit cited in the complaint, the filing asks the Secretary of State to determine whether the reported amount exceeds the applicable annual limit of $1,000 and, if so, whether corrective action is required.

The potential excess amount identified in the complaint is $4,063. The filing requests that the Secretary of State examine the relevant campaign finance disclosure records and determine whether the contribution was properly classified as a monetary or in-kind contribution, whether it complied with applicable law, and whether any required return, correction, or other action has occurred.

“This complaint is about transparency and accountability in South Dakota elections,” said Haglund. “Campaign finance laws exist to provide clear rules for candidates and contributors and to help voters understand how campaigns are funded. When a disclosure raises questions about compliance, the appropriate step is to ask the state’s campaign finance officials to review the facts and determine whether the law has been followed.”

The complaint does not presume that a violation has been established. It asks the Secretary of State’s Campaign Finance Division to review the available documentation, determine the applicable legal requirements, and take any action warranted by the findings.

Campaign finance disclosures are an important public resource, allowing South Dakotans to evaluate the sources and amounts of financial support provided to candidates for public office. A review by the state’s campaign finance officials can help clarify how the relevant contribution should be treated under South Dakota law.

Haglund submitted the formal complaint along with relevant campaign finance disclosure documentation for the Secretary of State’s review.

Filing details

• Filed: Wednesday, October 28, 2026
• Recipient: South Dakota Secretary of State, Campaign Finance Division
• Candidate: Taffy Howard
• Committee: Taffy Howard for SD
• Contributor identified in the complaint: Southeastern Strategies
• Reported contribution at issue: $5,063
• Statutory provision cited: SDCL § 12-27-8

The Pennington County Democratic Party encourages voters to remain engaged in the electoral process and supports transparent, consistent enforcement of campaign finance laws.

 

Rhoden for Governor Unveils “Honor” Ad

Pierre, SD – Today, the Rhoden for Governor campaign unveiled the “Honor” ad to close the 2026 general election for governor. The ad features Governor Larry Rhoden in his welding shop. You can watch the ad here.

“Almost two years ago, South Dakota gave me a tremendous honor. I’ve never taken it lightly,” said Governor Larry Rhoden. “South Dakota doesn’t need a talker — it needs someone who does the work. With your help, I’d like to keep doing the work.”

In the ad, Governor Rhoden highlights his results, including:

• Reducing crime;
• Protecting life;
• Strengthening the 2nd Amendment; and
• Delivering the largest property tax cut in South Dakota history.

The general election is November 3, 2026. Learn more about Governor Rhoden’s results to keep South Dakota strong, safe, and free at RhodenResults.com.

###

L No Campaign’s Dark Money Exposed
No on L Ads Warn of Outside Billionaires. Campaign Finance Reports Tell a Different Story

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — The No on Amendment L campaign has spent more than $1.5 million dollars claiming out-of-state billionaires trying to buy influence over South Dakota’s state Constitution. Their television ads claim that “out-of-state billionaires and their lobbyists” are the proponents behind Amendment L.

The L No campaign committees’ financial disclosure statement filed this week raises serious questions about the integrity and truthfulness of the Amendment L opposition group.

According to reports filed with the South Dakota Secretary of State, the L No committee has raised more than $2.2 million. Nearly all of it came from two Washington, D.C.-based organizations: The Fairness Project, which contributed $1.697 million, and the National Education Association, which contributed $500,000.

Proponents of Amendment L led by the Save our South Dakota Constitution committee, reported just $47,458.80, with no disclosed contribution from a California billionaire. Instead, South Dakotans have fully funded the effort.

“South Dakota voters deserve an open and honest debate about Amendment L, and so far our opponents have failed the test,” said Rhonda Milstead, treasurer of the Save Our South Dakota Constitution ballot question committee. “The finance reports show the truth about who’s funding each side of this issue–hardworking South Dakotans asking for a yes vote, and out-of-state pro-abortion radicals asking for a no vote.”

The Fairness Project’s involvement goes well beyond South Dakota. Looking back to the 2024 elections, the organization contributed more than $22 million to campaigns supporting pro-abortion-rights constitutional amendments in Florida, Missouri, Arizona, Montana, and Nebraska.

That included $16.4 million for Florida’s abortion amendment campaign. In Missouri, where voters approved abortion rights in 2024, The Fairness Project has since contributed nearly $12 million toward defeating a 2026 measure that would repeal those protections.

“It’s clear to me that Amendment L is the most important Yes vote for pro-life South Dakotans to consider in 2026,” said Rep. John Hughes. “The Fairness Project wants radical pro-abortion language in South Dakota’s Constitution. Right now, they’ve spent nearly $2 million to make it easy to pass their radical agenda. South Dakotans need to stand up and vote yes on Amendment L.”

The Fairness Project is a Washington-based nonprofit that isn’t required to publicly disclose all its donors, so we do not know who its billionaire donors are. Its political spending is documented. The original source of every dollar is not.

The Yes on L committee believes voters deserve to know who is financing the messages they see on television. The latest reports provide a clear comparison between the two campaigns’ disclosed fundraising. The No effort is almost solely funded by out-of-state organizations, while the Yes campaign is fully funded by fellow South Dakotans.

South Dakotans can draw their own conclusions. But the debate over outside money should begin with the financial records, not misleading television ads.

Just had this sent to me..

Yeah.. Kind of gives new meaning to AI slop. Not thinking Rickey Joel actually input any information..

Hot out of yesterday’s mail, I received a slate mailer for my local legislative district from Republicans.

And once again, the South Dakota Federation of Republican Women have stepped up to the plate when the South Dakota Republican Party lacked the funds to do statewide slate mailers for the candidates running for office. Good on them.

I mean, this year, the SDGOP is reporting that they have over 100k in their state account. It would have not been a big stretch for something like this to have come from the party. I used to help them do them year after year for around a decade.  Yet, this year, when they show $113,306.97 in their state account, the SDGOP’s spending on candidates has been ZERO. And at the same time, just yesterday, I saw the chairman in print attacking another one of our statewide officeholders, yet again.

I’m not sure what the State Republican Party views it’s role as anymore. But there’s a lot of self-gratification, and not a lot towards doing the job they are actually supposed to be doing.

So, kudos to the SDFRW. At least someone is getting it right.

Referring back to yesterday’s story on the spate of fundraising coming from the Minnehaha County GOP.. except it’s not coming from them, and they had to announce that it’s not them, but people pretending to be them.  One person in that orbit had an interesting note to me this morning about what these pretend fundraisers are actually for..

Hey Pat, re: Minnehaha GOP fundraiser. It’s a back-channel fundraiser for one of the house candidates in D9, Megan Tschetter. She claims to be a hair stylist and small business owner yet her license is expired and the salon didn’t renew theirs and is up for sale. She also told someone she’s going to win because she was “anointed by God.”

She also had about 14-15 judgements against her and her husband over the years.

Oh, my.

Well, if you go to the Cosmetology Commission website, that is correct in that you won’t find Megan Tschetter there. But, I can’t speak to the whole anointed by God thing. I didn’t hear it myself, so you’d have to ask him.

And yes, there are very real records according to UJS. There’s what you might say are a few “oops,” where as recently as 2024, Midwest Credit Management and others would not appear to have been happy and asked the court system to sort it out.  I mean, many went back several years, but the more recent ones would certainly give someone pause about a candidate’s fiscal responsibility.

But it gets more concerning when it’s potentially coupled with the whole “fake fundraiser” mess coming out of Sioux Falls where people are pretending to raise money for the County Republican Party, but as I’m told may be raising it directly for her instead?

I mean honestly, what is going on?

First off, it tells me that people should avoid those events like they are contaminated with plague rats. If someone wants to throw a fundraiser for someone, there’s NOTHING on god’s green earth that stops them from doing so, and organizing it under their own name. To do so otherwise smacks of deception.  And that’s a bad way to help a candidate begin their political career.

As for the rest, it’s too bad that this wasn’t disclosed in the Primary election. It might have given people the heads up that a different choice might have been a better one for Republicans to move forward to the general.

 

Well, this is a new one.

Apparently a few people are going around in Sioux Falls sending out fundraising invites, and raising money using the name of the Minnehaha County GOP… except they aren’t. And the actual Minnehaha County GOP has issued a statement disavowing all this stuff being done in their name:

And here’s how the “fake Minnehaha County Republican” events are being billed..

Yeah..  I think if I was the Minnehaha County GOP, I’d be calling for a cease and desist order and calling law enforcement as opposed to sending a notice through their e-mail system. The bigger problem is that what’s going on is that that since it involves people going renegade to raise money and hold events, it’s not just the typical back-biting within the Minnehaha County GOP. There are some laws being broken when it comes to campaign finance and disclaimers.

They might not be big things, but when you’re trying to gather checks $500 and $250 at a time, and not portraying yourself accurately, the people behind the renegade and potentially fraudulent political fundraising might be inviting some real world consequences for their actions.

(Just ask Tom Pischke what happens when you go to far with your infighting..)

SECRETARY OF STATE MONAE L. JOHNSON PROVIDES NOTICE OF FEDERAL ELECTION DAY MONITORING IN MINNEHAHA COUNTY

 (Pierre, S.D.) – The South Dakota Secretary of State’s Office has received notification from the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division of its intent to send federal election monitors to Minnehaha County during the November 3^rd, 2026, General Election.

According to the DOJ, the purpose of the monitoring is to observe election procedures and assess compliance with federal voting rights laws. These include the Voting Rights Act, the Help America Vote Act, and other federal laws intended to protect voting rights and ensure accessibility.

The DOJ has indicated that its monitors will observe and take notes without interfering in the voting process. Monitors will identify themselves to election officials, follow state and local election laws, and report any concerns through their designated DOJ leadership. The DOJ has also stated that its monitors will not speak to voters inside polling places or carry firearms.

Under South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) 12-18-9, members of the public are permitted to observe voting and counting activities at polling locations, provided they do not interfere with election operations. Federal DOJ personnel conducting election monitoring are subject to the same privileges and restrictions as other members of the public serving as poll observers.

All election observers are expected to respect voter privacy, comply with election laws, and refrain from interfering with election workers or the voting process. Any concerns regarding activities at a polling location should be directed to the precinct superintendent or appropriate election officials.

The Secretary of State’s Office remains committed to ensuring that South Dakota’s elections are conducted in a fair, secure, transparent, and orderly manner. The presence of federal election monitors does not change the responsibilities of local election officials or the procedures established under South Dakota law.

For additional information regarding election observation requirements, please visit the Secretary of State’s website at www.sdsos.gov.

The campaigns asked me to get the word out, as the top three campaigns in South Dakota are on the trail with a bus tour across South Dakota to bring their message to the voters of the state. Check it out at a stop near you!

Starting out this morning, the team will begin their stops today out west, as they slowly make their way back to Eastern South Dakota, ending in Brookings on Thursday night.