Author: @SoDakCampaigns

BARNETT OPPOSES ONLINE VOTING

WATERTOWN – South Dakota Secretary of State Steve Barnett today reiterated his opposition to allowing online voting in public elections.

“I unequivocally oppose online voting in any form,” said Barnett. “The sanctity of our elections is too precious to allow online security threats to undermine the will of the voters. As Secretary of State, I will continue to protect South Dakota laws requiring paper ballots and oppose all attempts to move voting online.”

Barnett was recently misquoted by the Volga Tribune in an article following a speech to high school students. Once the incorrect statement was discovered, Barnett requested a correction be printed by the newspaper.

South Dakota has some of the strongest election laws in the United States and is an example for other states on best practices. South Dakota Codified Law 12-16-2 requires ballots for South Dakota elections to be paper.

“South Dakota has secure and honest elections with dependable results. We can be confident in our election results because in South Dakota, we do the right thing to safeguard our democracy with election security,” said Barnett.

Barnett is seeking a second term as Secretary of State and is asking Republican Delegates for the party’s nomination at this week’s State GOP Convention. Prior to his 2018 election as Secretary of State, Barnett served as the State Auditor for eight years.

# # #

Rolled into Watertown a short time ago, and picked up my credentials.. and it sounds like I missed some of the fireworks, which took place in the convention’s adoption of the rule committee’s work.

First off was a debate to make convention free. Not kidding. The “freeloader motion” would have literally bankrupted the convention, and probably put the GOP on thin ice financially.

Thankfully, the freeloaders lost. Then there was the Saturday surprise motion.

How it was related to me was that Taffy Howard & crew was pushing to remove any deadline for candidates to declare their intentions. I heard the committee did resist a move from 3:30 for registration deadline and the committee balked at removing the deadline altogether.

Sounds like the former congressional candidate was hoping to remove the requirement to register an intent to run before the election… and I don’t know why, because it doesn’t make any sense.

It’s not like the Republican Party is the Democrat party, and we have to scour the taverns for candidates. If Taffy doesn’t know if she’s running, or doesn’t have a candidate to run until Saturday morning, they’ve got a lot bigger problems been worrying about the deadline for a protest candidate.

Attempting to bankrupt the party & turn candidate races into a circus? The Republican party in South Dakota has dominated state politics for decades because it is a well organized volunteer organization. It seems that a few want to turn it into the the kind of sideshow that Democrats have had for years.

It might be a long weekend.

I had to run up to the GOP Convention site tonight to drop off a load of materials, and snapped a couple shots of the preparations in the few hours before things kick off.

I believe that’s nearly 1000 swag bags that they’ve prepared for handing out this weekend for registrants.

I’ve had a couple of people send me facebook posts of those trying to make a mountain over an anthill and work themselves up into a kerfuffle because they don’t understand the fee structure for the State Republican Convention.  So, just by way of explanation, here’s some information to help alleviate the confusion.

The convention is taking place across three days, June 23 (Thursday), June 24th (Friday) and June 25th (Saturday).

For those wishing to participate in convention Thursday the 23rd and Friday the 24th, there is a $150 Delegate fee for convention, as well as a couple of the less formal meals. This covers delegate access to the convention on Thursday and Friday, as well as the Thursday night BBQ w/ Governor Noem & Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and the Saturday Grab and Go Boxed Lunch at Convention.

Originally, the fee was necessary for the Friday Night Hospitality Suites Access, but as I understand, the exec board decided to revisit that decision, and they won’t be kicking people out if they haven’t paid the $150 fee.

Why is there a $150 fee? This should not come as a shock, unless someone has amnesia or Alzheimers, as this is no different than was done in 2018. (They might have skipped the fee for the 2020 COVID virtual convention). This years’ convention expenses are in excess of $50,000, and literally all other states as well as the national GOP have a convention fee.  So, for those who are participating in Thursday and Friday meetings and activities, yes, the fee is part of that.

Is the fee necessary to attend on Saturday only when they nominate and elect candidates? No.  There is a $1 fee to register early for Saturday floor access, which is mainly to keep out the people who were trying to spam the registration system.  Are you going to get turned away if you are a delegate and you don’t pre-register and you just show up on Saturday?  No. Is there a good chance you’ll be standing in line while they look you up, and verify you as a delegate? Yes.

Do you have to be a delegate to attend? Actually no. You can register and attend as a guest of a delegate.  Say, you’re a legislator or a legislative candidate, and you just want to watch the show?  Just get ahold of someone who is a delegate, and ask to be a guest, and pay the fees.

If you haven’t done so yet, and you are eligible to attend as a delegate, You can register here.  If you’re going to take part, I would encourage you to support the party.  They’ve put a tremendous amount of effort into it, and the funds raised from it go into supporting Republican Candidates and GOP activities which benefit all Republicans.

Any questions, put them in the comment section, and I’ll try to answer them as I have an opportunity.

South Dakota Republican Women are looking for donations during the Republican Convention to support Veterans at Christmastime through the Ft. Meade Shop for Veterans. Check out the flyer from the SDFRW, and bring your items to the SDFRW table at Convention!

Today marked the early end of South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg’s first and only term of office as the State Senate completed South Dakota’s sole impeachment of a state official, and barred the AG from future office in South Dakota.

But I have to wonder if the handwriting was on the wall, and delaying the inevitable only made the result more certain. And more painful.

As I opined in April, as it was said that Jason was moving forwards in seeking another term, it was not looking like he would be successful in getting past the Republican convention, especially in the face of a challenge from former Attorney General Marty Jackley, who only narrowly lost the race for Governor to Kristi Noem in 2018.  As he appeared headed towards a convention battle, in mid-May gears suddenly switched and instead of Ravnsborg running, suddenly DCI chief David Natvig was running… and Jason was maybe not moving in that direction.

At least, not that anyone would confirm. Until 11 days ago, when Jason finally let it be known publicly that he would not run for re-election.  And then less than a week ago, Dave Natvig found himself having to dispel rumors that he might keep Jason on as an employee if elected.

While it might not have changed anyone’s mind regarding the two articles of impeachment, which passed 24-9 and 31-2, the impression I have from speaking to many elected officials over the last year or so was that they were ready to be done with the whole affair months ago. And the more that Jason persisted in moving forward with another term of office, the more likely impeachment was going to be successful.

In the run up to the June primary, a poll conducted by South Dakota State University noted that 70% of voters wanted Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg impeached and removed.  But, from other sources, I had heard that the SDSU poll was off. Way off.   But not in a way that would benefit Jason. I’d heard that more accurate and recognized polling was out there which had the total number of South Dakotans who wanted to be done with it sitting closer to 80% of voters.

Candidates out in the field reported that the issue of the impeachment of the Attorney General was THE single most common issue that people were talking about.  But they were not expressing sympathy towards the AG. They wanted it to be over.  The issue of impeachment came up in candidate questionnaires with the media, and it was the subject of harsh attacks against at least one legislator.   The longer it has gone on, I would argue that inertia behind this never-ending controversy which drug on and on only drove an ever-increasing resolve for people to just want it to be done.

If Jason had signaled before session that he would pass on running for another term, would it have removed the appetite for impeachment?  I would guess so.  South Dakota was only within one vote in the House of not impeaching.  Knowing that he was done might have changed at least one mind.   And once we came to the tipping point in April when the House voted, had Jason resigned, it would have stopped the Senate from moving forward. 

It seems like a lot of digging in for the sake of a state job.  In 2021, Jason was paid $118,603.03 by the State of South Dakota. For an attorney who probably made more than that before running for office, I don’t know that trying to hold on for another year was worth the end result.  Now, they’ve voted to not just impeach, but to bar him from holding public office forever in the state.

I can’t imagine that all of this is going to do much good for his military career. It probably isn’t going help his legal career, either.

It was a lot to gamble with in an attempt to hold on for another few months.  After today, I don’t know if many would say it was worth it.

From Twitter:

After nearly 2 years the dark cloud over the Attorney General’s office has been lifted.

It is now time to move on and begin to restore confidence in the office.

— Governor Kristi Noem (@govkristinoem) June 21, 2022

Trying to keep up, but in addition to impeaching the Attorney General on both counts, the Senate also voted to disqualify Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg from holding any future office of profit or trust for the state on a vote of 33 yes, 2 excused for both the first and second articles of impeachment.

On Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment before the State Senate this afternoon:

Article II: Malfeasance in Office Following the Death of Joseph Boever

S.D. Const., Art. XVI, § 3 provides that the House of Representatives may impeach “state and judicial officers,” for “drunkenness, crimes, corrupt conduct, or malfeasance or misdemeanors in office.” Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg committed malfeasance in office following the death of Joseph Boever.

Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg committed the following wrongful deeds:

(1) Immediately following the collision, Attorney General Ravnsborg identified himself by his official title and made a direct misrepresentation to the dispatch officer, misleading first responders as to the crime he had just committed;

(2) During the investigation, Attorney General Ravnsborg made numerous misrepresentations and misstatements of fact to law enforcement and to the public regarding his conduct surrounding his criminal acts; and

(3) Attorney General Ravnsborg used assets of the Office of the Attorney General to benefit himself personally with respect to the investigation into his criminal activity.

Wherefore, the foregoing wrongful deeds amount to malfeasance in office as provided in S.D. Const., Art. XVI, § 3. Accordingly, this Article of Impeachment for malfeasance in office following the death of Joseph Boever is adopted, and Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg must face trial in the Senate of the State of South Dakota pursuant to S.D. Const., Art. XVI, § 2.

The Senate passed the Second Article on a vote of 31 yea, 2 nay, and 2 excused.