Author: @SoDakCampaigns

Remember my post of June 1, where I noted that the Yankton County GOP had bylaws on deck to charge dues to Republicans to be in good standing?  I’m informed today that the Yankton County GOP group passed the bylaws last night on a vote of 18-7.

Why should it matter to the rest of the Republican Party? Let’s go back to paragraph 1 of their new bylaws:

Yankton County proposed GOP Bylaws by Pat Powers on Scribd

1. Purpose:  Yankton County Republican members desire clarity in the Republican Party Yankton County operations.  While seeking to generally conform with South Dakota Republican Party Bylaws, these bylaws govern Yankton County Republican operations and responsibilities to its members first, and then to state and/or national organizations subordinately.  Should any challenge arise on any matter due to alleged and/or real discrepancy/difference between the Yankton County Republicans Bylaws and the state and/or national Republican Party bylaws, these county bylaws shall take precedence.

The group has fired a shot across the bow of the SDGOP, and while they will generally conform to the SDGOP bylaws, they have declared that they are responsible to their own members first.  In other words, they’ve separated themselves from the SDGOP, and created their own group.

If they’re not following the bylaws of the parent organization anymore, then it appears they’ve managed to declare themselves null and void.  While the precinct people would generally have standing to attend the SDGOP convention, as they’ve filed the paperwork with the county auditor as provided in the State GOP bylaws, in one fell swoop the County group appears to have created a situation where there literally is no Yankton County Republican Party organization anymore.

I mean, if the local Elks Club declares they’re the Independent Yankton County Elks Club, and passes bylaws declaring they’ll generally be Elk-y, but not full on Elk, that does not necessarily confer standing for the group to be part of the national group, and demand the same rights as a member organization.

So for the Yankton County GOP, That leaves the state Republican Party with a Yankton County GOP group that does not exist anymore, and no official County Republican Party at the moment. They will have to go in and reorganize when they have a chance to get around to it.  So, no Yankton County Chair, Vice-chair, Committeeman, Committeewoman, etc. to represent the county. The SDGOP may even have rights to go in and seize the checkbook, but that’s for the lawyers in the group to figure out.

All of this might not have been the best decision on the part of the Yankton people coming the week of the Republican State Republican Party Convention.

It appears that the Yankton County GOP has voided themselves. In almost every sense of the word.

From Facebook:

Rounds, Cassidy, Foxx and Colleagues Urge Biden Administration to Withdraw Latest Student Loan Plan 

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), Senator Bill Cassidy (R-La.), ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and Representative Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), chairwoman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee, recently sent a letter urging the Department of Education to withdraw its latest student loan forgiveness plan. This proposed rule will cost hard-working Americans an additional $147 billion and bring the total student loan debt transferred to taxpayers to as much as $1 trillion.

“The latest Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) proposed by your Department of Education (Department) on April 17, 2024, represents the latest in a string of reckless attempts to transfer as much as $1 trillion of student loan debt from those who willingly borrowed to those who did not or have already repaid their loans,” wrote the lawmakers. “In addition to the fiscally irresponsible nature of this backdoor attempt to enact ‘free’ college, the administration continues to use borrowers as political pawns knowing full well these proposed actions are illegal. The Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that there is zero authority to write-off federal student loans en masse last June when the Department’s ‘Plan A’ was ruled unconstitutional.”

“Instead of exacerbating the problems of inflated college costs and low-value degrees, we urge you to withdraw this NPRM and work with Congress. It is past time that we fix our nation’s broken higher education financing system,” continued the lawmakers.  

Rounds, Cassidy and Foxx are joined by U.S. Senators John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Katie Britt (R-Ala.), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Ted Budd (R-N.C.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), John Kennedy (R-La.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Jerry Moran (R-Kansas), Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Mitt Romney (R-Utah), Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), John Thune (R-S.D.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.). They are also joined by 90 lawmakers from the U.S. House of Representatives.

Read the full letter HERE or below.

+++

Dear Secretary Cardona:

The latest Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) proposed by your Department of Education (Department) on April 17, 2024, represents the latest in a string of reckless attempts to transfer as much as $1 trillion of student loan debt from those who willingly borrowed to those who did not or have already repaid their loans. We strongly urge you to withdraw it.

The Biden administration describes this regulation as “targeted relief,” yet the Department’s own estimates show the opposite. This is even broader than the Department’s first attempt: at an estimated price tag of $147 billion, taxpayers are being forced to take on the debt of nearly 28 million borrowers. Moreover, while the Department likely does not wish to highlight how much their proposal would help the wealthy, outside estimates show that borrowers eligible for “relief” under certain provisions in this proposal will have a typical income of over $300,000. Unfortunately, the Department did not include its own analysis of the distributional effect of these regulations.

In addition to the fiscally irresponsible nature of this backdoor attempt to enact “free” college, the administration continues to use borrowers as political pawns knowing full well these proposed actions are illegal. The Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that there is zero authority to write-off federal student loans en masse last June when the Department’s “Plan A” was ruled unconstitutional.

Further, this regulation is only part of the Department’s “Plan B.”  The Department notes that the long-anticipated regulation to “cancel” loans for borrowers facing “hardship”—a broad term defined under the NPRM to grant the Department full authority to cancel any loan it pleases—is still forthcoming. According to budget experts, those additional changes would bring the total cost of the Department’s “Plan B” to nearly $750 billion, at almost double the cost of “Plan A”.

“Plan B” hinges on creating these extensive regulations based on scant statutory text written in 1965. That text, which describes how the then Commissioner of Education at the Department of Health Education and Welfare could “enforce, pay, compromise, waive, or release any right, title, claim, lien, or demand, however acquired, including any equity or any right or redemption” under the Federal Loan Insurance Program.[8] It is certain that drafters in 1965 through the last reauthorization in 2008, did not contemplate that these words would be used to cancel massive portions of student loan balances. This statute has no history of broad use by any previous Secretary and was previously deemed by this administration as less likely to hold up in court than “Plan A.”

While the administration dedicated resources needed to draft this proposal to benefit those who already were able to attend college, it simultaneously failed to competently implement the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). The FAFSA is a simple 36-question form that helps the nation’s neediest current and prospective college attendees understand what federal financial aid is available to them. Failure to make the FAFSA available to these prospective students on time will have life-long consequences for many young Americans. We already know, as of March 29, FAFSA completion for seniors in high school is down by 40 percent. Those who do not file will likely not attend college next year and maybe never will.

Instead of exacerbating the problems of inflated college costs and low-value degrees, we urge you to withdraw this NPRM and work with Congress. It is past time that we fix our nation’s broken higher education financing system.

###

I want to thank Tim Reisch and the Minnehaha County Commission team of Karsky and Kippley for their support and advertising in the run up to the primary election, which will end after tonight.  I would also be remiss if I did not thank SDGOP Chairman John Wiik and the South Dakota Republican Party’s leadership team for their long-time advertising spot which has now come to an end, further opening up one of my prime advertising spots.

So, as we wind down the hours until the election, once again we find ourselves with advertising space on Dakotawarcollege available for groups and individuals to promote their messages to opinion leaders in South Dakota as we move into the the 2024 campaign season.

Interested in advertising? Have a ballot measure, cause, candidate or campaign related business? There are limited advertising opportunities left for reaching South Dakota’s opinion leaders. Advertising on the Dakotwarcollege.com website is based on a first-come, first-serve basis for available positions.  As of this writing, we have several spots open now, including the #2 and #3 spots on the right, along with the #1 spot on the left.  Monthly spots are available, and I do provide discounts for longer ad commitments.  Information on ad prices, ad positions, and ad commitments may be directed to the webmaster by clicking here.

Please take a moment to visit our current advertisers such as Summit Carbon Solutions supporting the ethanol and biofuel industries in South Dakota. South Dakota’s chief executive Governor Kristi Noem, our friend South Dakota Senator John Thune, our undisputed and undefeated Congressman Dusty Johnson, and the equally undefeated Republican United States Senator Mike Rounds. Our friends at South Dakota Ag Alliance are also here to fight for landowner rights and common sense ag development.

Of course, at Dakota Campaign Store, down on the right, you’ll find me already busy in 2024 with yard signs, postcards, and all the things a professional campaign needs to make an impression.

Thank you to our advertisers for your support, and please reach out if you’d like to join them!

The Minnehaha County GOP took a few moments out of their day to swat at some of their elected officials who, like most Republican elected officials in the State and County, skipped the GOP event helmed by R. Shawn Tornow:

“..those of us working on the team at our GOP Office – along with what we trust the Minnehaha County Auditor and/or Minnehaha County Commissioners would have similarly encouraged if they would’ve been there on Saturday.. “

They can’t even get through a run-on sentence without attacking their own officeholders.

I was noticing as I was reviewing candidate lists today that the Secretary of State has several independent candidates who will be running for office this fall across the state. And there are a few interesting points of information with regards to the Indy’s.

Contest	Name	Party	District/County	Notes
State Senator	Michael J. Miller	IND	District 19	Actual Indy
State Senator	Shane C. Farlee	IND	District 28	Registered Dem
State Senator	Karen M. McNeal	IND	District 32	Registered R, Justin McNeal’s mom from Texas.
State Representative	David Reis	IND	District 26B	Registered Dem
State Representative	Shana McVickers	IND	District 31	Actual Indy
State Representative	Victoria Greenlee	IND	District 31	Unaffiliated
State Representative	William Craig Lafferty	IND	District 26A	Registered R

A couple are registered Democrats, and a couple are registered R’s.

On the Senate side, Michael Miller on the ballot means that Kyle Schoenfish has a run in the fall. D28 Senate is now a three way race between the victor of tomorrows primary and Dean Schrempp. In D32, Helene Duhamel now has a contest, against Justin McNeal’s mom, who at 68 moved to Rapid City from Texas.

In the House , 26A is now a three way contest for 1 seat, and now 26B will be a race for Rebecca Reimer against a Democrat.

District 31, which will end up being Fitzgerald and Odenbach, because Mowry is arguably incapable of winning the primary, is now a full blown contest with 4 candidates running for 2 seats in the fall.

But this might not be all. Because the Libertarian party has yet to weigh in. According to a post today from a South Dakota Libertarian party adjacent website, they may be coming with candidates as well:

As of now the only way to put challengers in any of these unopposed Legislative races would be for new candidates to run as either Libertarian Party or the newly created and recognized No Labels Party. These “alternative Parties” as the State calls them, have the ability to nominate State candidates at their State Conventions. The Libertarian Party of South Dakota will be having their State Convention on June 29th in Pierre. Details can be found on their website here. There has been no word on when, where or IF the No Labels Party will be having their State Convention or if they will put any candidates on the ballot. As of this writing they have not filed the required Statement of Organization with the Secretary of States office. Nationally the No Labels Party said they would not be running a Presidential candidate this year.

Read that story here.

Coming after the major party conventions this year may be something the Libertarians did that actually makes sense.  And it could mean that they come with more strater-egy.

Do I owe a correction? It’s entirely possible. Unfortunately, it begs the question of how badly Secretary of State Monae Johnson, the state’s record keeper continues to botch up the basics of her job.

Noting my post below “Three Liz May Political Action Committees, Kevin Jensen’s PAC, Manny Steele, others have not filed pre-primary reports, according to SOS Website,” I pointed out the fact that several committees and legislators are listed as not having filed pre-primary reports by the Secretary of State’s office, ending my post with “You can read the entire list of people who the SOS is telling us hasn’t filed reports at https://sdsos.gov.  (Assuming they got it right.)”  The bad part is from a conversation I had a short time ago, that my statement might have been an assumption, and there’s a possibility that it isn’t a foul on the PAC’s and candidates. It might actually be on the SOS not getting it right.

I was informed that a number of campaign finance reports that were submitted by mail, which is allowed, may actually be received and at the Secretary of State’s office.  My correspondent, revealed to me that when they had followed up on a missing campaign finance report a week after it had been submitted by mail that had actually been received by the SOS. But, they were informed that they were in a pile, and they would get to them when they could.  They’d get to them when they could?

I could see it as entirely possible that Manny Steele, Kathy Rice, and some of the others – even Robin Schiro – might have submitted a written campaign finance report, versus an electronic version. Definitely Manny Steele would. And to imagine that while we’re looking for open government, they’re sitting in a pile on someone’s desk in the SOS office?  Someone explain exactly why the SOS staff can’t stick them in a scanner and post them?  What is going on?

The reports have a specific deadline, and there is a presumption and every expectation that they will be available for public view promptly for public disclosure of candidate finances prior to the election.  We have it in law when they’re due, and there’s a guide that you can find on the Secretary of State’s website.

The whole reason behind the concept of a pre-primary report is to publicly provide an accounting to voters of where candidates are receiving their funding from. It’s not there “just because,” otherwise, we’d just have a year-end report.   The possibility that the Secretary of State may have a number of reports in “a pile” that will in all likelihood sit until after the primary just beggars the imagination. What’s the point?  Open government completely breaks down when the custodian of the records can’t do their job.

But it doesn’t end there.

The group behind the recreational marijuana measure turned in petitions to place that measure on the ballot. Yet a month past, we’re no closer to knowing if we will be actually voting on it in the fall or not.   On April 30, Justin McNeal filed petitions to run an an independent. Have we seen those yet? Nope.   We just had the Board of Elections and the people who backed Monae to run for Secretary of State both actively roll her under the bus at the last Board of Elections meeting.

The office has been a revolving door for employees hired, fired, and coming in, and getting out as quickly as possible.  Don’t even get me started about their not acting on campaign finance filings that clearly violate state law, requiring an outside party to go to the step of filing an affidavit. Do they have no function or accountability as to referring things such as this?

(*Update* – Missed the one where Monae referred to the Life Defense fund as a “scam”)

At what point does someone (such as GOAC) ask “what is going on?” Because it has ceased to be a source of eye-rolling and amusement. It’s just bad.  Yes, various people in that office perform those tasks. But Secretary of State Monae Johnson was hired by voters to do the job of managing the office, and granted the latitude to bring on managers to act in her stead in carrying the job out.  The buck stops with her. When are we as the public going to get – at a minimum – a basic level of competence?

If the day-to-day task of managing the office, and hiring people who can get the job done, and the challenges are too great..  I hate to ask, but are we at the point to request Monae Johnson step down from being the Secretary of State? Because going into her first test as the person in charge of elections, she isn’t doing so great.   I’m not sure who remains who supports and cheers on the job she’s doing.   Maybe it’s a sign of the chaotic times, but if there was a resolution at the Republican convention this week to give her an “atta girl” for the job she’s doing, she may not want to know the results.

Are we at the point to request Monae to step down?  I don’t know the answer to that question.

But if she intends on staying, she needs to turn things around pretty darned quickly.

From Facebook, District 9 House candidate Kristi Golden has posted a video in support of her race from her old boss, Senator Larry Pressler:

This morning a supplemental campaign finance report was filed for one of State Representative Liz May’s political action committees, showing that Rep. Scott Odenback moved another $12,000 over to her Conservative Principles PAC from his Liberty Tree PAC, making a total of $17,000 that he’s shifted over to her committee from his.

What is State Representative and Hillary Clinton donor Liz May doing with all of Scott’s PAC money?  Well, we don’t have any idea.

Why? Because of her three Political Action Committees, as of this writing the Secretary of State’s website indicates that she has yet to file a pre-primary campaign finance report for any of them:

Liz May’s Conservative Principles, apparently don’t include campaign finance disclosure, as her Conservative Principles PAC, her Conservative Republican Caucus PAC, and her SHE PAC all have a “not submitted” status for their pre-primary campaign finance reports. D16 Senate Candidate Kevin Jensen also seems to be missing a report for his “Keep South Dakota Red” Political Action Committee.

Who else is missing reports? District 12 House Candidate Manny Steele must not have moved past chalk on slate yet, as his report is missing, despite his primary election tomorrow. D17 House candidate Robin Schiro must have had her cell-mate abscond with her report during her recent stint in county jail. Kathy Rice for District 29 is also similarly challenged by filing a timely report.

South Dakota Libertarians must not be participating in any elections this year, since their entire party has failed to file.   And what’s with the Trial Lawyers PAC?  You’d think someone might have read the law in that entire group.

You can read the entire list of people who the SOS is telling us hasn’t filed reports at https://sdsos.gov.  (Assuming they got it right.)

 

Are you familiar with the whole sovereign citizen movement?  Where people who have declared themselves to be sovereign citizens kind of pick and choose what laws they will and will not follow, and use a variety of conspiracy theories and falsehoods to justify their beliefs and their activities.

Well, the South Dakota Republican Party is facing their own sovereign citizen moment with the Yankton County GOP, where they’ve just up and decided that they’re going to pass some bylaws and by gosh, they’re just going to do what they want.  How do we know this? Because I’ve got a copy of the bylaws that they’re going to try to vote on this coming Monday night.  And of course, I’m an admitted over-sharer. So, here you go!

Yankton County proposed GOP Bylaws by Pat Powers on Scribd

Take a good read. Because we’re just starting up first hill for the carnival ride roller-coaster.

The first paragraph is where you start off with the crazy. Because you’ve got to see it in print to believe it:

1. Purpose:  Yankton County Republican members desire clarity in the Republican Party Yankton County operations.  While seeking to generally conform with South Dakota Republican Party Bylaws, these bylaws govern Yankton County Republican operations and responsibilities to its members first, and then to state and/or national organizations subordinately.  Should any challenge arise on any matter due to alleged and/or real discrepancy/difference between the Yankton County Republicans Bylaws and the state and/or national Republican Party bylaws, these county bylaws shall take precedence.

It’s the organizational bylaw equivalent of saying “Imma just goin’ to do what I want.” like a spoiled child.

And that’s just the beginning.   Because if you want to be a Republican in this county, they want to pass bylaws so you have to show up with a check in hand:

3. COUNTY GOP MEMBERSHIP– All DUES paying residents of Yankton County, who are registered Republicans are county GOP members.  

Dues…? This is new.  The new bylaws also demand that no one can be a party officer and hold public office above the city or school level:

5. YCREC: The elected officers of YCREC are the county chair and county vice chair, who shall be of the opposite sex, a county secretary, a county treasurer, a state committeeman and a state committeewoman, who shall hold their offices for a term of two years or until their successors have been elected. This group of officers is referred to as the YCREC. Each officer must be a registered Republican residing and voting in Yankton County and an active member in good standing in the Yankton County Republican Party. No officer may hold an elected public office at the county, state, or federal level.

No officeholders allowed!

Regarding the whole “Dues” thing and the “active member in good standing” part:

SECTION III —MEMBERSHIP

a) ACTIVE membership:  Persons who wish to actively participate in the Yankton County Republicans must be in good standing and their dues current.  He or she can provide input on regular business items and serve on committees. Active members will be notified of meetings and events.

b) INACTIVE membership:  Members are assigned INACTIVE status if dues are not received by January 31st.  Inactive members may not hold office, be on a committee, make motions, or vote on any items until dues are paid.

They are trying to place it into the bylaws that you have to pay dues to be considered as actively belonging to the Yankton County Republican Party?  An even more importantly, inactive members may not hold office?

So, how does that work?  And when I ask about the not hold office part, are they including the precinct people who make up the county central committee in that grouping?  I ask, because we get into some questions that the Yankton County people proposing this might not have a good answer for.

As a current (and hopefully soon to be re-elected) precinct person, my position is filed with the County Auditor. I’m one of those people who invariably ends up facing a primary election every year. After the primary election, the County Auditor certifies my election for the position and sends me a certificate of election. Meaning, I won the office, and it’s certified and recorded.   By noting that if  someone doesn’t pay dues, are these proposed Yankton County GOP bylaws claiming that they can remove me from the office? Because if I was elected, and certified by the county as having won that election, and the Yankton County GOP is trying to put further limitations on, that might be something I’d ask a judge to decide who is in the right.  The County GOP who is demanding dues, or the voters who elected me?

One of the many pitfalls that this runaway “sovereign Republican” County Committee is facing as they try to create their own breakaway party.

The Yankton County GOP also picked an interesting time to vote on their attempt to shakedown Republicans for money and telling people they’re not active Republicans unless they write a check.

I’m told their meeting is set to be held on Monday, June 3rd. The day before the primary election.

As opposed to helping candidates get elected on Monday, or getting out the vote, instead, they’re voting on a cash shakedown.

It might be a long convention next week.