From South DaCola this afternoon comes a rumor that Ann Tornberg’s name has come up as potentially being the Dem’s answer to otherwise giving John Thune a historic 2nd Bye:
Over lunch, the rumor mill gets a going. The latest is that Ann Tornberg (or a close relative) are going to put their hat in the ring to run against Thune.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA…. (continue laughing for a few minutes)…
Seriously?
What that tells us is that, despite promises, Ann Tornberg can not find anyone to run for the office. So, in order to fulfill her own boast that there will be an opponent, she may get stuck with it herself. Of course, that raises the question of how much of party resources she’s going to divert from real candidates to accomplish it?
What was I saying about controversial measures in the prior post? Here’s an interesting item that just found it’s way to my mailbox in the face of Medicaid Expansion’s opposition in the state from groups such as Americans for Prosperity and many Republicans:
From: Jennifer Stalley Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 1:59 PM To: Jennifer Stalley Subject: Medicaid Expansion – Make Your Voices Heard
Thank you for your support of the Governor’s proposal to expand Medicaid to 50,000 South Dakotans who need assistance with their healthcare. The proposal accomplishes this in a way that is budget neutral for our State and makes sense for South Dakota. We need your help to convince legislators to support us.
We continue to gain supporters – more than 50 diverse organizations representing health care, education, business, tribal and local government interests have signed on in support of the proposal. Thank you for being one of those organizations and for standing up in support of this common sense proposal to providing health care access for some our poorest working families and improving the health care of our tribal citizens.
Now we need you and your organization to lend your voice and contact legislators to tell them you support of the proposal. Please ask your board members and grassroots supporters to contact their legislators via e-mail or phone next week. Let them know:
– The plan to expand Medicaid will not increase South Dakota’s general fund budget;
– Expansion of Medicaid means providing mental health services and substance abuse services to all Medicaid patients who need it;
– 60% of the expansion population is working – these are the working poor who need help with their health care coverage;
– The expansion plan will save local governments millions of dollars in indigent care;
– We have a unique opportunity to solve a long-standing reimbursement issue with Indian Health Services and help 50,000 South Dakotans with their health care coverage
A simple phone call or email from your members will help legislators see the depth and diversity of support for the Governor’s proposal and counter the out of state interests working to persuade them to oppose the plan.
Please ask your membership to send an e-mail their legislator to show support for the expansion proposal. They can send an e-mail to a legislator by clicking HERE. Or, have them call their legislators, if they prefer. They can call Senators at 605-773-3821 and Representatives at 605-773-3851.
If you have folks who can attend this weekend’s cracker barrels/legislative coffees this weekend, please encourage them to do so. The meetings this weekend are in:
Brookings Brookings City & County Building 9:00 – 10:30
Huron Huron City Hall 9:00
Rapid City New Classroom – School of Mines 9:00 – 11:00
Spearfish BHSU Joy Room 9:00
Vermillion Vermillion City Hall 10:00 – 12:00
We are making a difference and our voices are getting stronger – please continue to help us move the Governor’s plan forward so we can improve health care in South Dakota.
Thank you!
P.S. Watch for a message early next week about the launch of our social media efforts and website to help encourage even more people to contact legislators and show support for this plan!
And they have a logo, and everything. Not sure what form their social media campaign is going to take, but I’m sure this will be interesting to watch.
I don’t recall if I’ve ever had two advertisers so diametrically opposed before.
On the left, you have the Yes on 17/Specialty Care providers opposing House Bill 1067, and on the right, you have another coalition fighting in favor of it. As illustrated above, I envision the ads shooting artillery at each other across the page, much like the battle that’s going to take place over the measure in the South Dakota Legislature.
I’d spoken earlier that this is certain to be the most, if not one of the most controversial measures this session, and it hasn’t even hit it’s first hearing. (That’s next week in House Commerce) It’s being heard in the committee being chaired by the sponsor.
For information on the measure, I’d invite you to click on either, or both of the ads, and see what you think.
This one is hot off the press. In response to efforts from groups lobbying in support of House Bill 1067, the South Dakota Association of Specialty Care providers commissioned and has just released a spot designed for television:
The ad takes aim at the measure primed by Representative Tim Rounds, and minces few words, as it portrays a ballot on the measure being shredded.
Why do I think the back and forth on House Bill 1067 is only going to continue to heat up?
(REDACTED), do you know what $10,000 by January 31st will mean for Paula’s campaign?
It will mean we can truly begin to make way for progress in South Dakota. We all know
“Please sir, May I have some more?”
what we need to do–improve our education system, stop corruption in government, and strengthen our economy. Now it’s a matter of making sure we have the resources to get that message out, and that $10,000 will mean that our campaign starts this election year off as the clear choice for South Dakota.
Help us reach that goal by clicking here and making a contribution. It really has never mattered more.
If you’ve saved your payment information with ActBlue Express, your donation will go through immediately:
Donate $15 today >>
Donate $25 today >>
Donate $75 today >>
Donate $150 today >>
Or donate another amount
You wouldn’t be receiving this email if you didn’t share Paula’s vision for a South Dakota where working families are a priority, not an after thought. But part of that vision requires having the money in the bank to spread the word and win this race.
We’ve never been more confident that we’re on the road to victory.
Help us keep this campaign strong and build momentum before Election Day. Click here to donate $15 or more now!
Thanks for stepping up!
Zach
Kind of just lays there like road kill, doesn’t it? It’s plagued by the same problems all of Hawks’ fundraising efforts have had to date. Did I say ‘fundraising letters?’ I meant ‘all campaign communications.’ They’re just awful.
$1.5 Million Cash on Hand.
Hawks is going to have to show her cards in the next few days as to how dire her campaign coffers are, $10,000 monthly campaign fundraising gimmick or not, as the end of year report should be coming out any day now.
In contrast, while we wait to see if Hawks raised somewhere between $5000 to $40,000, I just received word that South Dakota’s Congresswoman Kristi Noem is going to be posting a report with about $1.5 Million cash on hand.
So, after paying for staff, consulting, postage, and the always welcome ad on South Dakota War College; she has $1.5 million in the bank to run for office, and point out the very, very liberal record of Paula Hawks.
In the face of Hawks’ e-mail begging for 10k, I think that qualifies as a mic drop for Noem. Boom.
You may not realize it, but South Dakota’s US Senator John Thune, and the Senate Commerce Committee had more than a bit part in resurrecting production of the penultimate 1980’s vehicle:
The closely held Texas company has a business refurbishing the original DeLoreans and settled with the estate of John DeLorean’s wife last year for the name and trademarks of the original company. It plans to sell about 300 replicas of DeLorean DMC-12s with modern engines, CEO Stephen Wynne told KPRC-TV in Houston.
and..
The cars will keep the look of the original, with a stainless steel exterior and those iconic gull-wing doors, and the company aims to keep the cost below $100,000, KPRC reported.
Republican Senator John Thune of South Dakota, the chairman of the Commerce Committee, bragged about Congress’s role in the car’s resurrection.
“The FAST Act included provisions to create opportunities for job creation by reforming regulations that often don’t make sense and stifle small businesses,” he said in a statement. “I’m excited to see this part of our reform bill is making a difference for a small business and fans of an iconic 1980s car.”
Several months ago, I said the state of the horse race in the polls doesn’t tell us anything definitive about the end result. Candidates still need to go out and make something happen.
So what has happened? Not much. Trump has vacillated up and down 5% from 30% and is roughly at his peak. Cruz has risen roughly 13% concurrent with a 17% drop of Carson. Except for a short-lived bump by Fiorina, everyone else has basically vacillated just a few points up or down.
Some facts (or meaningless trivia?) since 1972 when Iowa and New Hampshire became the “official” starts of the regular season:
There is a maxim three tickets get punched in Iowa. (ticket=have a chance to get the nomination)
Similarly, there is a maxim two tickets get punched in New Hampshire.
In the last cycles in Iowa, the top three candidates cumulative poll support is quite close to their cumulative realized voter support. To large degree, the volatility was with the candidates below the top three when on occasion someone jumps into the top three.
Also in the last two cycles, winning Iowa often results in underperforming pre-primary support in the polls. However, being #2 or #3 in Iowa seems to provide a New Hampshire bump.
In Iowa, in both 2008 and 2012, the undecided were about 10%. This year they are less than 3%.
In New Hampshire, in both 2008 and 2012, the undecided were also about 10%. This year they are less than 5%.
So, where are we?
Iowa
Unless Trump’s debate decision or his weak Iowa caucus ground-game significantly impacts his performance, Trump will punch an Iowa ticket.
Cruz appears to have the most formidable Iowa ground game and will punch a ticket in Iowa (likely finishing either 1st or 2nd). While 2nd in NH, his ground game is considered not top tier and his lead is very small over Kasich, Rubio & Bush who all seem to have better NH organizations.
Rubio’s 3rd place standing in Iowa is a strong 6% lead over Carson and very strong 10% lead over Paul. He is likely to punch his ticket in Iowa but far from assured as I discuss below.
Carson, Paul and Bush are on the bubble looking in. In 2008, Thompson surged (+4.4%) and squeaked into 3rd. And, in 2012, Santorum really surged (+16.9%) to go from 5th to 1st. There is room for only one of these three to stop Rubio from punching his ticket. For Carson and Paul, this is do or die. Carson is the most likely to benefit from a Trump fall-out in Iowa if it occurs. Bush can hold on because he has already invested in organization infrastructure even beyond South Carolina and Nevada.
New Hampshire
If Trump doesn’t punch an Iowa ticket, he is virtually assured of doing so in New Hampshire where he has a 19% lead over everyone in the field. I doubt the history of New Hampshire knocking down Iowa winners will be able to prevail over this large lead.
Cruz (12.6%), Kasich (12.1%), Rubio (10.6%), Bush (9.7%) and maybe Christie (6.7%) are fighting for the second ticket. Kasich has been recognized as having the best NH organization and is in a virtual tie with Cruz and Rubio for 2nd place. NH also historically lifts someone who didn’t do well in Iowa. And, Kasich has been collecting New Hampshire endorsements like baseball cards, even from former Senator Gordon Humphrey who proudly said he was to the right of Ronald Reagan.
Wildcard: South Carolina
Because this is a primary unlike others (or at least people are saying it is), a case can be made that South Carolina could be a place to punch a ticket to go onto Super Tuesday. Normally, South Carolina’s role is cancel tickets. But because of Governor Nikki Haley and Senator Tim Scott are rumored to be helping Rubio behind the scenes and may endorse him, Rubio is the only one likely to punch a new ticket in South Carolina. Otherwise, all the SC tickets will likely go to someone who already has punched a ticket.
Super Tuesday and beyond: If we aren’t down to three candidates before, I think we will be after Super Tuesday. Trump and Cruz are most likely to be two of those candidates and currently have roughly 55% of the GOP primary voters supporting them. Whoever the third candidate is, that candidate will need help (Trump or Cruz fade) to get the nomination. Otherwise, by the time the primary gets to South Dakota, we will be choosing between Trump or Cruz.
So what does this mean? John McCain is the only candidate since 1972 not to punch a ticket in both Iowa and New Hampshire and go on to get the nomination. If history repeats itself, right now it looks like Trump will likely punch a ticket in both states and only one of Cruz or Rubio can.
And, if Cruz or Rubio don’t, does that mean the nomination is essentially over? Or, because this election where there is nothing that resembles history, does one only need to punch a ticket in Iowa OR New Hampshire to move on or could the nominee could come from someone who doesn’t punch a ticket in either state? How many candidates will be viable on Super Tuesday? Who will they be? Did Trump’s absence in the final Iowa debate help or hurt him? Did Trump’s absence help or hurt anyone else? Did Cruz and Rubio both flub their responses to the video clips on illegal immigration?
Sidenote on Democrats: They have never nominated a candidate who didn’t punch a ticket in either Iowa or New Hampshire. Wonder what that means ifSanders wins Iowa.
Is Superbowl weekend coming up? Because it looks like someone is getting plenty of astroturf ready.
Well, not so much in Santa Clara, California where the game is being played. I’m referring to what appears to be playing out in Pierre over House Bill 1067.
What started this is that I received an e-mail from a legislator last night who said he and many others had been getting a string of e-mails all day from people howling about 2014’s IM17, and how they needed to get right on fixing it with House Bill 1067.
Here is the e-mail I received from a legislator
Pat, House members have started to receive email today regarding HB 1067. I could be wrong, but this smells of a Sanford scam to me. I’ve attached the email received so far. You can make up your own mind if it smells or not. It would be interesting to learn if the addresses and email are real. Anyway, the email is attached for you. We’ve been getting one periodically since this am.
And here are the e-mails he was asking about and provided to me (editing note – I’ve redacted last names, e-mail or any physical addresses that were sent along in these e-mails)
Dear Legislators,
You have the opportunity to strengthen the mandate and support the will of the people by supporting HB1067, while preserving the ability of South Dakotans to purchase health benefit plans tailored to their needs and budget. The current statutory language did not go far enough in mandating choice as to a patient’s provider. It needs to be changed to make clear that health insurance companies need to offer a broad network plan – a fact made plain by the fact that the matter is currently in litigation. HB 1067 fixes that by mandating that health insurance companies offer a broad network plan which includes ALL providers in the health insurer’s panel. The beauty of HB 1067 is that it not only offers choice as to provider BUT ALSO offers choice as to health benefit plan. Without HB 1067, South Dakotans could be put in a position of ONLY being able to purchase a broad network plan, which may not be what they want, need or can afford. HB 1067 is a common sense bill that offers voters the choice as to provider they were promised with IM 17 and keeps health insurance options open and affordable. It is the best of all possible worlds, and I fully expect you to support this common sense bill. Thank you for your consideration.
Regards,
Blayne H.
____
I am writing because I just learned the truth about what happened with IM 17 and I am shocked. I am asking you to protect my choices of insurance by supporting HB 1067. We South Dakotans expect our legislators to guard against this type of self- dealing activity even when the self- dealers are physicians as is the case with IM 17. Please tell me you will do the right thing on this important issue.
Dana C.
____
To whom it may concern:
I have never written a legislator before but when I learned that I was taken advantage of with a misleading marketing campaign promising choice I was compelled to contact you. If you don’t protect us against those types of activities in South Dakota, who will?!?! Please support House Bill 1067 and give us BACK the choice to make our OWN decisions of health plans and not let a group of doctors who want to make money have total disregard for what I can and cannot afford!!!!
Katrina W
____
Dear Elected Official,
I outraged after hear the truth about what happened with IM 17. I am asking you to protect my choices of insurance by supporting HB 1067. We expect our legislators to guard against this type legislation and do what is best of the people and not to be miss led by miss information by physicians.
Please tell me you will do the right thing on this important issue.
Concerned South Dakotan
Beth P.
____
Dear Legislators:
In my past 40 years as a South Dakota voter I have never gone public with my opinions other than at the polls with my X in the box for my vote. I am writing to all of you today about the Initiated Measure 17 vote in 2013 that was a farce to the people of SD. This is not a Democratic or Republican issue, this is a real people of SD issue. I am tired of hearing what is going to be good for me from my Representatives and then to find out you have lied to us in being blindsided. I have paid more attention this go-round and have looked at the You Tube videos of Black (Blake) Curd and am so disappointed in his untruths. I didn’t get a choice, where is my promise from all you who said this would get me a voice and a choice in my healthcare. Nothing changed except if I change insurance companies. I am really disappointed in the Legislators of SD. Look at the mess on TV for the Presidential campaigns, I always could say well that is Washington and I am from SD. In SD we don’t do crap like that, I am beginning to think SD has its very own Donald Trump in DR. CURD. PLEASE, please correct this mistake and vote for House Bill 1067 and give me back the choice to make my decisions of insurance plans and not let a group of physicians who want to totally disregard what is so important to me, the VOTER.
Terry & Chris H..
____
I don’t, typically, write legislators but feel the need to do so this year to ask you to support House Bill 1067 – “An Act to Promote Quality, Competition, and Freedom of Choice in the Health Insurance Marketplace”.
I feel voters were tricked by the people who campaigned for IM17 stating that by voting “yes” to IM17, would allow me to choose my own doctor without additional cost to me. Had I known IM17 would force me to purchase a broad network plan and pay more, I would have fought this Initiative more aggressively. As I look back, I now understand why the doctors who own their clinics paid $2 million dollars to pass this Initiative.
I can’t afford an increase in health insurance costs and don’t need or want to see a special doctor at one of their expensive clinics. The only reason IM17 passed was because they lied and made people think it was about choice.
IM17 was a dirty campaign and now a dirty law. It was funded by self-interested doctors and politicians looking to line their pockets while making South Dakotans think it was a good and fair law.
Please vote for HB1067. As a constituent, I understood I would have a choice in my health care provider but that’s clearly not what IM17 provided. Instead, a vaguely worded law was put into place that requires me to be part of a broad network insurance plan. How is that “patient choice”.
Thank you,
Lynn J.
The legislator was not sure why and how they were getting a pile of e-mail in this manner, and I didn’t think it was a scam, as opposed to some sort of automated constituent communication program. But Its kind of tough to judge without knowing whether these were real people or not.
Just out of curiosity, I looked a few of them up on Linked-in. And that’s where a really interesting pattern emerged.
… HB 1067 is a common sense bill that offers voters the choice as to provider they were promised with IM 17 and keeps health insurance options open and affordable. It is the best of all possible worlds, and I fully expect you to support this common sense bill. Thank you for your consideration.
Regards,
Blayne H….
Well, that’s funny. In the e-mail she wasn’t identified as Corporate Counsel at Sanford Health.
And we have the next e-mail…. My emphasis, btw.
I am writing because I just learned the truth about what happened with IM 17 and I am shocked. I am asking you to protect my choices of insurance by supporting HB 1067. We South Dakotans expect our legislators to guard against this type of self- dealing activity even when the self- dealers are physicians as is the case with IM 17. Please tell me you will do the right thing on this important issue.
Dana C….
Darn those self-dealing self-dealers…. Wait a minute… Is that a Sanford employee demanding “Legislators to guard against this type of self-dealing ” as she asks for passage of a measure being promoted largely by her employer? Without identifying herself as such, of course.
I am beginning to think SD has its very own Donald Trump in DR. CURD. PLEASE, please correct this mistake and vote for House Bill 1067 and give me back the choice to make my decisions of insurance plans and not let a group of physicians who want to totally disregard what is so important to me, the VOTER.
Terry & Chris H….
I’m really getting the sense of a pattern here.
I outraged after hear the truth about what happened with IM 17. I am asking you to protect my choices of insurance by supporting HB 1067. We expect our legislators to guard against this type legislation and do what is best of the people and not to be miss led by miss information by physicians.
Please tell me you will do the right thing on this important issue.
Concerned South Dakotan
Beth P….
I’m assuming that none of the doctors she works with would miss led anyone. And here’s one of my favorite excerpts… (my emphasis again)
IM17 was a dirty campaign and now a dirty law. It was funded by self-interested doctors and politicians looking to line their pockets while making South Dakotans think it was a good and fair law.
Please vote for HB1067. As a constituent, I understood I would have a choice in my health care provider but that’s clearly not what IM17 provided. Instead, a vaguely worded law was put into place that requires me to be part of a broad network insurance plan.How is that “patient choice”.
Thank you,
Lynn J…
So, we’re talking about concerns over the self-interested here, at the same time someone is participating in blast e-mailing legislators… while not exactly being candid about at least a facet of their interest.
And then here the kicker – there’s the concern over the writer of the letter being required to “be part of a broad network insurance plan. How is that “patient choice”.” Is she kidding?
To my knowledge, the vast majority of these people, as employees of Sanford Health I’d wager there’s a good chance they’re not actually on a plan regulated by the state, but on a self-funded plan that’s only barely regulated (if at all) by the federal government under the Federal ERISA act. I don’t know that they would be governed by IM17.
So what are are these Sanford employees complaining about!?!
I’d pass on to my friends in the South Dakota Legislature who are concerned about getting hit with all of these e-mails out of the Sioux Falls area – I am quite convinced that they are not a scam, and are all absolutely from real people.
But, at the same time, mind your step. You wouldn’t want to trip over the astroturf.
As promised earlier, former State Representative Charlie Hoffman has turned in his petitions to run as a Republican in the District 23 House race, where Justin Cronin is termed out.
Republican Senator John Thune of South Dakota, the chairman of the Commerce Committee, bragged about Congress’s role in the car’s resurrection.
Is Superbowl weekend coming up? Because it looks like someone is getting plenty of astroturf ready.
