During the Second Special Session of the week, there was an interesting vote from conservative corners of the State House against moving forward with the impeachment of Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg:
HR 7001 – Establishing a select committee to investigate whether articles of impeachment should issue against Jason Ravnsborg, Attorney General of the State of South Dakota, and draft any resulting articles.
The question being “Shall HR 7001 pass as amended?”
And the roll being called:
Yeas 58, Nays 10, Excused 2, Absent 0
Yeas:
Anderson, Aylward, Bartels, Barthel, Beal, Blare, Bordeaux, Chaffee, Chase, Cwach, Davis, Dennert, Derby, Deutsch, Drury, Duba, Finck, Fitzgerald, Goodwin, Lana Greenfield, Hansen, Healy, Hoffman, Jamison, Kevin Jensen, Chris Johnson, Keintz, Koth, Ladner, Lesmeister, May, Milstead, Miskimins, Mortenson, Mulally, Olson, Ernie Otten, Perry, Kent Peterson, Pischke, Randolph, Reed, Rehfeldt, Reimer, Schneider, Jamie Smith, St. John, Stevens, Thomason, Tidemann, Vasgaard, Weis, Weisgram, Wiese, Willadsen, Wink, York, and Speaker Gosch
Nays:
Gross, Haugaard, Howard, Phil Jensen, Karr, Marty, Mills, Odenbach, Overweg, and Soye
Excused:
Sue Peterson and Pourier
Read that here.
There were 10 “NAY” votes, mainly from strongly conservative quarters, with three of them Attorneys, and one outsider Congressional challenger in Taffy Howard.
What brought those Legislators to vote no on establishing a committee to review whether impeachment is warranted? A recent newspaper column from State Rep. Steve Haugaard in the Brandon Newspaper may shed some light on it:
What seems to be missing in all of this is any indication that there was any action on the part of the Attorney General that rises to the level of maliciousness, recklessness or even carelessness. That is why the ‘careless’ charge was dismissed in an effort to resolve the case. Anyone who has operated a motor vehicle knows that there are very brief moments when our eyes are not focused on the road ahead or something suddenly comes at us from the side, and that is apparently what happened that tragic night. If that happened to anyone else it would be found as tragic and the matter would be at an end.
Certainly, we should hold our elected leaders to a higher standard, but should one be forced to resign based upon an absolute accident? No one can seriously believe that the Attorney General sought to cause a death, or now, based upon the evidence, that the Attorney General was ‘reckless’ or even ‘careless?’ After an exhaustive review of the actual evidence, the State’s Attorney could not find ‘reckless’ behavior and willingly dismissed the ‘careless’ charge apparently due to the fact that the evidence would not ultimately be found sufficient.
When anyone reviews the work of AG Ravnsborg since his election, and especially since last September, it will be apparent that he has done an excellent job overseeing the Attorney General’s office and that he has continued to do his job, serve the state, accomplish victories for the State and developed relationships with the tribes that create a pathway for ongoing success.
Read the entire column here.
Rep. Haugaard seems to tip his hand in the article, and gives the impression that he will be one of the chief forces arguing against impeachment of the Attorney General.
With popular opinion for impeachment inflamed by media coverage versus the minimal traffic violations the AG pled ‘No Contest’ to, it is interesting to see the degree of pushback on impeachment as well as where it’s originating from.