Author: @SoDakCampaigns

While Easter Monday was a slow news day (except for the tremendous rate of snow melt) today will be more of a bombshell in South Dakota politics, as former State Senate candidate Joel Koskan will be arraigned on alternate charges on allegations of sexual abuse in Pierre after the rejection of a plea agreement.  The arraignment starts at 10 a.m. before Circuit Court Judge Margo Northrup in the courtroom of the Hughes County Courthouse.

No indication of what the alternate charges are, as the Attorney General’s office cannot legally file the alternate charges until the defendant waives his right to a preliminary hearing. That will happen today.

I suspect the content of the new charges may hinge on whether they were able to obtain testimony from the victim, and their willingness to participate in the prosecution of Koskan, a three-time legislative candidate who ran in the State Senate race in District 26 in 2018, 2020, and most recently in 2022.

The allegations of abuse were particularly graphic and shocked the conscience.  And South Dakota is a small state. There are a lot of people in political circles, myself included, who had met the victim. I believe she served as a legislative page, and she is well thought of. No one would wish that kind of violence or violation of her person on her.  The accusations are of such that if true, they are the ultimate betrayal of a person who said they would nurture and protect the alleged victim.

Aside from allegations of a terrible crime on a child, this case brings a sense of betrayal for many Republicans – including myself – as in past elections we’d supported Joel’s efforts to run for office.  Only to find in 2022 as charges against him were being investigated – and apparently negotiated – no one on the political end knew or suspected anything until it was too late. We found out when everyone else found out. When all of the plea agreements and investigation supposedly started, there would have been time for him to withdraw from the ballot and be replaced.  Instead, Koskan remained mute while people put time and money and resources into his race.

As the news broke, luckily for the Senate GOP Candidate PAC, their donation of $10,000 had not been cashed.. and they were able to stop the check the day they heard. Crazy people on the internet might claim they sent him money to fight the charges or for bail, but that couldn’t be farther from the truth. Unfortunately for others, such as the State GOP, postcards had already gone out in the race, and were far enough in the postal chain that they were impossible to claw back.  I have a postcard I could show you.. but unfortunately, I’d be compelled to blur significant portions, as this one went out with a picture of the alleged victim on it.

For those involved in the political process, there’s a lot of us feeling disgust at being used. It doesn’t compare to what the victim is said to have gone through over nearly a decade, so  the best you can hope is that today will provide healing for them.  The rest of us will always be left standing around wondering why any of it happened in the first place.

I don’t know if today will bring closure for anyone, as much as an end to a process.

More than two years ago, President Trump recognized that TikTok threatened U.S. national security and moved to ban it, but courts ruled the president lacked authority to do so. TikTok’s close ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and questionable handling of data are reason enough for concern, but various instances have also arisen that confirm our worst fears about its malicious potential. It’s no surprise that many Americans agree that TikTok should be banned. And it’s why I recently introduced bipartisan legislation that would codify President Trump’s forward-looking effort to confront foreign-adversary technologies like TikTok that threaten our national security.

It’s widely acknowledged that TikTok poses a threat to U.S. national security. Intelligence agencies, tech experts, and a majority of Americans recognize this. TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, which is headquartered in China, has access to its 150 million American users’ data and devices. Under Chinese law, the government just has to ask for it and ByteDance would be required to hand over this data to the CCP. After a Chinese spy balloon traversed the United States in February collecting intelligence, it’s obvious that the CCP seeks to spy on Americans. TikTok is just another iteration of this threat. Before TikTok, Huawei and ZTE deployed technology in the United States that included “backdoors” that gave China access to global communications networks.

These risks aren’t going away. Four out of the five most-downloaded apps in the United States last month are Chinese-owned. We need to be able to confront foreign-adversary technologies in a holistic and dynamic way. My bipartisan bill, the RESTRICT Act, would establish a comprehensive process for identifying, evaluating, and mitigating foreign technology threats. The RESTRICT Act would allow the secretary of commerce to address technologies that have been determined to threaten U.S. national security and to do so in a timely manner. This process would end the whac-a-mole approach that has left the United States playing catch-up as potentially malicious foreign technologies establish footholds in the U.S. market

The RESTRICT Act is the most effective option to address both TikTok and future technological threats. President Trump’s efforts to ban TikTok were struck down in federal court because they relied on a 1977 law that doesn’t suit the digital age we now live in. Other attempts to simply ban TikTok would likely face a similar fate, but the RESTRICT Act offers a rules-based process that is narrowly tailored to foreign-adversary companies, which is more likely to withstand judicial scrutiny. It builds upon President Trump’s executive order, modernizes the president’s power to fit the digital age, places guardrails on presidential authority, and gives Congress a clearly defined oversight role.

My bill takes a tailored approach to address foreign companies and technologies that threaten U.S. national security. Specifically, the RESTRICT Act targets technologies from six adversary countries: China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela. While the secretary of commerce could remove or add countries to this list, Congress has authority to overrule the secretary. Importantly, the RESTRICT Act does not target the content individual Americans post online, and it does not provide the administration with any authority to censor Americans’ speech online. Again, it is narrowly focused on targeting foreign-adversary threats from places like China and Russia. This tailored approach safeguards U.S. national security from technological threats from our adversaries and upholds civil liberties.

Recent history indicates that communications technology will continue to be an area in which our adversaries seek to threaten U.S. national security interests. We need to have a policy that can address the modern and evolving threats that we face, whether it’s a video app like TikTok, telecommunications hardware like Huawei’s, or something altogether new, like the rapidly expanding artificial intelligence capabilities we have recently seen proliferate. The RESTRICT Act enables the United States to attack the challenges of today and tomorrow and keep America secure at all times.

###

Well, my obsession for South Dakota Republican political ribbons got me into trouble again.

Not, any actual trouble mind you, but I had to pry my debit card out of my wallet, and probably pay more than I wanted to for a political ribbon I didn’t have in my collection.. because it’s one missing from my set.

This is a ribbon for the First Republican State Convention of South Dakota…. but it’s actually not the first convention, Keep reading.  First Republican State Convention of South Dakota, Held in Chamberlain March 23, 1892 for the election of delegates to the National Convention at Minneapolis, June 7, 1892. 

What it means was that this was the first presidential election South Dakota participated in as a state, and was able to send delegates to the national Republican convention, so this was the convention where they did so.

In fact, I had previously obtained a ribbon for that national convention a couple of years ago:

In the big scheme of things, this was actually the 4th Republican State Convention for South Dakota. (Still looking for #1, 5, 7, and 8).

I did get it as part of a set, sold together with what’s probably the earliest South Dakota Democrat ribbon I’ve run across. Apparently, Chamberlain was the hot place for a convention that year, since Democrats also held their convention in the same town.

Great items of memorabilia from South Dakota’s political past.

And if there are any collectors of South Dakota Democrat political memorabilia, drop me a note, and I’m open to a sale or trade for something I don’t have.

The New York Times is pointing out South Dakota Congressman Dusty Johnson’s influence in Washington as he argues that work is important for able-bodied Food Stamp recipients, and is leading a number of conservative legislators on the issue.

Representative Dusty Johnson of South Dakota, a favorite of Republican leadership, introduced legislation earlier this year that would make able-bodied adults without dependents subject to work requirements until they are 65 years old, raising the current age from 49. The bill would substantially narrow an exemption from work requirements for some people in households with children under 18, excusing only those whose households include children under the age of 7. And it would make it more difficult for states to give work requirement waivers, taking away their ability to request that the mandate be relaxed if there are not enough jobs to provide recipients employment.

and..

Mr. Johnson, who also grew up on food stamps and is now chairman of the Republican Main Street Caucus, is considered one of the most influential mainstream conservatives in the House. But most of the lawmakers who have co-sponsored the legislation so far are either members of the hard-right Freedom Caucus or lawmakers from safe seats. Of the 38 Republicans who have signed on, only three represent competitive districts.

Read the entire story here.

This comes as no shocker, as Dusty has been cited as one of the most popular political figures in the state.

Johnson, Spanberger Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Protect 340B Program, Prevent Higher Drug Prices

Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representatives Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) and Abigail Spanberger (D-VA-07) introduced a bipartisan bill that would prohibit

health insurers and PBMs from discriminating against 340B Drug Pricing Program providers or their contract pharmacies on the basis of their status as providers or pharmacies that dispense 340B drugs.

The Preserving Rules Ordered for the Entities Covered Through (PROTECT) 340B Act addresses concerns from healthcare providers in South Dakota and across the country — particularly in rural areas — that have seen their access to the program threatened by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), insurers, and pharmaceutical companies. Specifically, the Spanberger-Johnson legislation would prevent companies from treating 340B providers differently with regards to reimbursement of fees, participation in standard or preferred networks, or inventory management systems — and it would block them from interfering in a patient’s choice to receive drugs from a 340B pharmacy.

“340B is an essential program for rural and low-income hospitals and patients,” said Johnson.  “South Dakotans rely on this program to access affordable drugs and medicines they need. ThePROTECT 340B Act will ensure the quality of care for communities that need it.”

“The 340B Program lowers prescription drug costs and saves money for seniors and families, especially those in rural and underserved communities. But in recent years, we’ve seen for-profit insurance companies and the shadowy middlemen of the pharmaceutical industry — known as pharmacy benefit managers — undermine these discounts, target 340B providers, and threaten the very survival of this program,” said Spanberger. “The PROTECT 340B Act would hold these actors accountable for trying to take away the savings of American consumers. I want to thank my colleague Congressman Johnson for his partnership on this issue, and we’ll keep working to level the playing field for 340B pharmacies and providers, maintain access to discounted medications, and protect the financial security of patients in Virginia and across the country.”

“The Community HealthCare Association of the Dakotas appreciates Representative Johnson’s strong support for the 340B program and his leadership in introducing the Protect 340B Act. The 340B program enables community health centers across the state to provide life-saving medications to our patients at lower costs. As prescription drug costs put pressure on the budgets of so many South Dakota families, Representative Johnson is responding with solutions that will make a difference,” said Shelly Ten Napel, CEO of Community HealthCare Association of the Dakotas.

“Avera Health commends Representative Johnson for his efforts to protect 340B hospitals and patients who rely on them for care. Avera is a nonprofit health system with 30 hospitals in the 340B program serving patients in need in South Dakota, Iowa, Minnesota and Nebraska. Without access to our critical, specialized services and support funded by 340B, many patients unable to travel to reach the next nearest healthcare facility offering such care would be negatively impacted. This bipartisan legislation is important because it would help ensure 340B resources are directed towards patients in need of this comprehensive care in their communities. On behalf of those patients, we thank these 340B champions for their leadership on this issue,” said Melissa Goff, Vice President of Pharmacy at Avera.

“340B hospitals applaud Representatives Johnson and Spanberger for their strong leadership to protect safety-net providers from discriminatory payment behavior by pharmacy benefit managers and insurance companies. 340B savings provide crucial resources to hospitals and other providers caring for patients with low incomes and those living in rural communities. PBMs and payers undermine that investment in patient care when they pay less to covered entities based solely on their participation in 340B. This bipartisan legislation would ensure that those 340B dollars go to care for patients of the health care safety net as Congress intended and not into more profits for PBMs and insurers,” said Maureen Testoni, 340B Health President and CEO.

“Essential hospitals thank Reps. Johnson and Spanberger for introducing the PROTECT 340B Act. The 340B program is vital to millions of low-income patients and our nation’s health care safety net. We call on Congress to defend the 340B program against drug industry attacks by passing this important legislation,” said Dr. Bruce Siegel, President & CEO, America’s Essential Hospitals

“With sixty percent of Sanford Health patients living in rural areas, 340B provides crucial support. Sanford Health relies on 340B to stretch scarce healthcare dollars, increasing our ability to support critical health services in our communities. Protection of the program allows us to maintain access and invest in care delivery in our communities. We are thankful for Representative Johnson’s support to this essential program,” said Corey Brown, System Vice President Government Relations, Sanford.

“The South Dakota Association of Healthcare Organizations appreciates Congressman Johnson and his efforts in supporting protections for hospitals and providers through the PROTECT 340B Act.  This proposed legislation, should it become law will assure access to healthcare Services in South Dakota, benefiting patients and our members statewide,” said Tim Rave, President and CEO, SDAHO.

Click here to read the full bill text.

 

Background:

The 340B Drug Pricing Program was enacted by Congress in 1992 with bipartisan support and is overseen by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The program requires that pharmaceutical companies give safety-net and rural healthcare providers discounts on their drugs, in exchange for having their drugs covered by Medicaid.

The program has a demonstrated record of protecting patients who are low-income, live in underserved communities, or suffer from serious chronic illnesses from the threat of skyrocketing prices for the drugs they depend on the most.

###

If you’re following the controversy over party-infighting between people getting involved with the party at the local level for the first time trying to toss out those who have been involved for years or decades, there are a few realities that come to mind.

It’s apparent that these groups haven’t really thought it out very hard about what happens when they get their way and they’re now “in charge,” and they can proceed on their mission of “replacing ‘establishment Republicans’ with grassroots conservatives,” as the coalition of confederates claim to be doing.

A couple of items bring to light the headaches that they’ve set themselves up for.

 

A climate of distrust.

If you recall a recent article in the Yankton Press and Dakotan, a situation came to light where the outgoing leadership of the Yankton County Republican Party determined that they felt they needed to create a Political Action Committee to ensure that funds raised from the donor base went to their intended goal, to support candidates, because they didn’t believe that the incoming group would spend them for those purposes.

The Yankton County Republicans are seeking a sheriff’s investigation into three former board members’ transfer of $12,000 last fall from party funds to a political action committee (PAC).

And..

“We did this (PAC) before the meeting (where they elected new officers). We weren’t reacting to anything,” he said. “We just thought it was prudent to put aside the funds, that it was a good move.”

The former board members are following state GOP by-laws, Meyer said. In addition, he said he conferred with the South Dakota Secretary of State’s office in setting up the PAC.

And..

The former board members didn’t transfer the full amount in the Yankton County GOP treasury, he said. The county party still has a mailing list while another copy of the list remains in private hands, he noted.

As for the Facebook page, the site belongs to a GOP member and not the party, he added.

Read the entire article here.

The new people involved in the Yankton County Party are just howling, but a political party forming a political action committee is not uncommon, nor is shifting funds between the two. Completely legal, and fairly common.

The only difference here is that the new group of county people are trying to rescind the action of the old, and are being told no.  And it sounds as if the group is in significant disarray.

There’s also rumors that the new group may be filing suit against the old. In effect, the new group spending what limited funds they have on an attorney to try to claw back money legally spent by the old group to support candidates.

What kind of message does that send to donors, large and small?  It’s not a good one.

As messy as the Yankton County GOP is, the Minnehaha County group is even more of a cautionary tale.

Back 30 years ago, the Minnehaha County Republican Party had a well-funded and long-established organization, which had an executive secretary, with sometimes more employees.  In the late 2000’s the internal organization of the office started to crumble, but fundraising and events were still going reasonably strong.   That is, until Lora. In 2012, Lora Hubbel was the first wave of the political outsiders to hit Minnehaha County – and it literally crashed the organization overnight. And it has not recovered to any significant degree since.

In their first meeting this year, the Minnehaha County GOP has announced they had either $1400 in the bank, or $4500, but they weren’t sure. So now they’re raffling portions of a donated hog, valued at $500.

The biggest county in the state has less than $5000 in the bank? That’s a bit of a head-scratcher, because for the state’s largest county, you would think the chair has the ability to raise ten times $500 in a brief period of phone calls. You would think.

But, I have the feeling the number of willing donors in those circles are not exactly opening up their checkbook.

With the rhetoric coming from a number of these groups calling for the excommunication of ‘establishment republicans,’ there is a strong climate of distrust. And as Yankton and Minnehaha are finding out, it’s bad for their bottom line.  People won’t give money to groups they don’t trust.

 

Blowing up the Pyramid of Giving

If you’ve spent any significant time involved in fundraising, you’ve heard of the pyramid of giving.. and if you’ve heard of it, it’s clear that the people involved in these groups demanding the ouster of long-time volunteers, and the repudiation of ‘establishment politicians’ don’t have a clue on how to raise funds for a stable and functional organization.

The pyramid of giving is really, fundraising 101 for organizations and non-profits. And grasping the concepts are how an organization can make the shift from short term efforts to long-term goals.

This might be the best example of it I can find that’s applicable to the area of political organizations..

 

As you can see, it involves donor acquisition, getting them used to donating on a regular basis as you move them up the pyramid, and possibly getting them all in for larger and larger donations.  I don’t know that I agree completely with this example, as letters are lower level in this field, as if you want larger political donations, there’s more of a personal element to the ask. But you get the hint.

Now, some say a more modern version of the pyramid is a funnel..

 

 

Which I stole from here.. (Please visit their website)… but it’s the same principle. You engage with people, and over time you build their engagement to the point where they are foundational.

Healthy organizations are going to be constantly working at all levels to bring people into the pyramid (or funnel) of giving.. and this is something that takes YEARS, if not decades, to gain their personal investment into the group or cause to the point where they’re willing to make major or transformational gifts to a county Republican organization.

People are not going to build their involvement in a group to the point where they make generational gifts to a county Republican organization when there are people who come in and express their goals are to completely nuke the Republican organization and throw people out.  It literally is the most counterproductive thing to organizational efforts that they could do!

If you blow an organization up about the time people become a repeat donor, you are not going to achieve organizational stability and long-term growth. You’re going to have to start over every time.

A fact, as Minnehaha has found, and I’m sure Yankton will find out if they haven’t already.

 

Who cares if we throw those guys out?

Of course, there are those who have blinders on, and will cluck around the chicken coop saying “who cares if we throw those guys out?”   For party organizations, they should. They really, really should. Because it directly affects their longevity as a group, and their ability to conduct activities.

With campaigns, I was taught that a successful campaign is a mixture of experienced campaign veterans and new people with enthusiasm and energy. They both benefit each other.  The same goes with party organizations.  Organizations without new blood – even if they are good – will become stagnant and outdated. Organizations without experience will make some really dumb mistakes, and have to re-learn everything, sometimes in a painful manner.

Contrary to what some may think, political party organizations are extremely challenged to raise funds, because they are the least sexy aspect when it comes to receiving donations.

If I have limited resources, and my options are a candidate I like, who believes the same things I do, versus the county party organization, who is saying they want to throw out all the establishment republicans, or have craziness like people claiming vaccines cause autism or they can heal illness with essential oils… guess who I’m going to support? The candidate.  People will donate to candidates first and foremost almost every time and will skip the party unless their relationship with the party is foundational to their goals.   

Speaking as someone who has been involved in campaigns for several decades now (or as my daughter claims, it’s my I’m old line), county political organizations are a tool for candidates if they can provide useful resources.

If candidates can rely on them for assistance with volunteers, support them in some manner at election time, help with mailings, sign locations, etcetera, that’s a great thing.  If not? Well, then they become an obstacle to go around. And candidates do not spend a lot of time debating whether they should do so or not. It’s a snap judgement, and then the candidates move on with their own volunteers and their own fundraising.

Which leaves the organization a bit in an awkward situation when they claim they’re helping the candidates, and the candidates will directly express to anyone that asks that they can’t rely on them.  Over time, it will wear on that group.

 

Elections are still actually about the future

It used to be that Republicans would have their primary election fights, and then at times bruised and battered, at least begrudgingly move forward towards running the election in the fall against Democrats.

But especially over the past two elections, there’s a climate where there are those who are less interested in uniting as a group for mutual goals are more focused on being the group “in charge,” claiming to be the true Republicans and ignoring the fact that those they call the ‘establishment’ were a decade ago the ‘grassroot conservatives’ they themselves try to lay title to at this point.

I would offer to them that it might be a rude awakening in 2033 when they find themselves called the ‘establishment moderates’ when a new generation of republicans try to flex their muscle because they want to be the ones in charge, pushing out those they consider old guard in the future.

In perspective, it’s very generational, and it’s all happened before.

Probably the best advice to offer groups who aren’t interested in history, and wish to declare their version of republicanism is supreme, is to go ahead, and lead by example. Put the work in, and show us how you have raised tremendous amounts of money, built a group that will stand the test of time and be there after you’re gone, and put us all to shame.  And most importantly, get candidates elected.

Because we will know if you don’t, and electing candidates is what county organizations are supposed to be about.

Elections are about the future. And that is what we should all be working towards.

The Minnehaha County GOP announced this afternoon that they’re selling tickets to a Hog Raffle to benefit the Minnehaha County GOP and it’s candidates.

Unfortunately, it looks like they might have got the cart before the hog. While they actually did file the raffle with the city of Sioux Falls..

… they apparently skipped the part where it says “raffle tickets cannot be sold… by an authorized organization until 30 days after filing this form with the Sioux Falls City Clerk.”  And they even put it on the form the date they can start selling them – April 11.  Which is next week.   

You know, they should get someone who knows about this stuff to be chair of the county organization, like an attorney.

I do see that while the ad says the funds are for the party and the candidates, according to the form, the proceeds are to be used for “Party Development.”

So, we’ll see how much they actually end up dedicating for candidates the latter part of next year.

I just stumbled across this, and couldn’t help but chuckle.  From the November 1978 election as published in the Rapid City Journal.

With a new regime in charge of the Minnehaha County GOP, you’d think their earliest priority would be to start raising money and reaching out to their elected officials so they can deliver a win in 2024.

Or.. they could help a group of election deniers bring more election deniers to town, because it checks the box for a very small group of fanatics.

According to a new facebook post by the Minnehaha County GOP..

Or, as the long-time Republican who sent this to me said, the **** is this? (They did use asterisks)

Apparently on behalf of the SD Canvassing Group, the Minnehaha GOP is advertising an event for an election denier from New Mexico, David Clements, who had previously appeared at the pillow guy’s election lunacy event in Sioux Falls, and Robert Borer from Nebraska, who came in second in a primary for Secretary of State, and was a really unsuccessful write-in candidate for Governor.

So, is the Minnehaha GOP going to support every off the wall group claiming to be Republican?

I probably know better than to ask that after the 2021 rally before Jan 6 with the proud boys, as you can see in this picture ‘protecting’ former Minnehaha County GOP Vice Chair Cole Heisey on the stage.

As I said back then, and it continues to hold true,

In the realm of politics, I believe there are 20% who are always with you, 20% who will never support you, making it your job to convince the 60% in the middle that you provide better leadership than the other person or group. So, when there’s a rally with that kind of imagery, it might make it more challenging to convince that 60% that you share their beliefs and gain their trust to lead South Dakota.  You actually have to convince the soccer moms and state workers to vote for you along with the local gun club members.

Before Republican groups lend their cachet to other organizations, promoting them and advertising them, they should strongly consider how much of their credibility they squander when they hold up groups like the proud boys or the crew of out-of-state election deniers?

The election denier event isn’t going to cause the 60% of swing-vote Sioux Falls urban dwelling Republicans who are firmly in the middle to flock to the party.

If anything, it’s going to nibble away at our majority.

A majority of Americans believe that this prosecution of President Trump is political. So do I.

Murders and other major crimes have skyrocketed in NYC since Alvin Bragg took office. He should focus on his job: keeping people safe. He needs to get his priorities straight.

— Kristi Noem (@KristiNoem) April 4, 2023