Category: Uncategorized

Instead of New Years’ Eve, in South Dakota should we be calling this Campaign Eve?

Petition circulation kicks off tomorrow, and within a few weeks’ time, we’ll get to see who we have running for what office. If you’re considering it yourself, take a moment to read what I put together a couple of days ago to help you not to screw up your petitions.  (We don’t need anymore budding Bosworth’s, do we?)

The other thought that came to mind was the fact that Democrat Party Chairwoman Ann Tornberg had been promising for most of the year that Dems would have a candidate for US Senate. And yet we still hear crickets.  Any potential Dem challenger has managed to skip the entire preceding year where US Senate candidates typically scramble to meet people, raise their name ID and try to bring in cash.  Now, instead of noting the missed opportunity of days that they missed, starting tomorrow, we’ll have to start counting down the days they’re not out there gathering names on petitions to run.

If you can’t tell, I’ve been pretty doubtful that Democrats could live up to Tornberg’s boast that they had someone to run. And I still am.

With Tornberg so far unable to produce all these people she claims will be running, the downside for the leader of the Democrats is that with all of her continuous and boastful claims of Democrats running people in all statewide and in just about all 105 legislative races, she’s placed her credibility on the line.   She risks her name becoming an adjective for failure.

Truly, all of us who prognosticate on the future of the political scene do it without the benefit of knowing what events will occur in the intervening 11 months until the election.

You never know, we could experience the Rapture, and God could decide to leave the Liberals behind on a devastated and depopulated planet. With Democrats shifting further to the left in a conservative South Dakota that’s decidedly moved towards the right, that might give them a fighting chance to field candidates and win elections.

But short of that happening, I feel pretty secure in stating that Republicans are going to have a pretty good year in South Dakota in 2016.

Whether Democrats are able to find a warm body to take on John Thune for the US Senate is immaterial as to whether he, Kristi Noem, Chris Nelson, and a vast majority of Republican Legislators are going to win office in 2016.

In most instances, the races are inevitable, or they have already been won.

John Thune is featured in the Argus Leader talking about what the Senate has accomplished in the last year, as well as what we can see coming up in 2016:

The state’s senior senator spoke with reporters from Argus Leader Media to outline his office’s legislative successes and Congress’ accomplishments in 2015. Among them was the first comprehensive highway funding bill in 10 years, the first major overhaul of federal education policy since 2002 and trade agreements with Asia and Europe.

His office also ran political cover for the expansion of the Powder River Training Complex, which increases training opportunities for bombers at Ellsworth Air Force Base, making the base more relevant in the event of another round of closures.

and..

“There’s a whole long list of fairly consequential legislation that finally moved,” Thune said.

Congress also passed legislation that added new requirements to the country’s visa waiver program. That program allows visitors from 38 countries to travel to the United States without first having to obtain a visa. The program makes it more convenient for U.S. citizens and the citizens of the 38 countries who participate to travel internationally.

Read the entire story here.

Congresswoman Kristi Noem had endorsed Marco Rubio for president several weeks back. But, how important is that endorsement to his winning the presidency?

One theory is that it could make all the difference in the world.

Sen. Marco Rubio has occupied an odd place in the GOP race all year: Never the front-runner, but always — in theory, on paper, hypothetically — on the verge of breaking out.

On Tuesday, Rubio once again showed signs of imminent liftoff after snagging one of the biggest endorsements in the race so far in Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina.

Gowdy, the high-profile chair of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, is the increasingly rare politician who’s popular in both conservative and establishment circles. He easily could have succeeded John Boehner as House speaker had he chose to run.

and..

Rubio has good reason to think his plan might work. The most prominent political science theory today is that party elites tend to pick the eventual nominee over the course of an “invisible primary” that takes place in the months and years before voters head to the polls, at which point rank-and-file partisans usually fall in line behind their choice.

and..

So how’s Rubio been doing on that front? Sure enough, he’s made gains as rivals like Bush and Scott Walker have fallen. Bush took an early lead in endorsements from top donors and federal lawmakers that he still holds, but Rubio has racked up more support from both in the last three months than anyone else in the race. Among the big names: Rising stars Cory Gardner and Steve Daines in the Senate, well-known figures like Kristi Noem, Darrell Issa, and Mia Love in the House, and major party funders like billionaire Paul Singer.

All this is good news for Rubio, who surely has more names ready to roll out before voting begins, but it’s still a long way off from a tipping point.

Read it all here.

Could Kristi be helping to coalesce the party around the man who might be our nation’s next president?

Governor Appoints Olson To Game, Fish And Parks Commission

PIERRE, S.D. – Gov. Dennis Daugaard announced today that he will appoint Russell Olson of Madison to the South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks Commission.

“Russ will be a great addition to the Game, Fish and Parks Commission. He is an avid outdoorsman who is committed to conservation,” said Gov. Daugaard. “I appreciate Russ’ willingness to serve in this important role.”

Olson is the chief executive officer of Heartland Consumers Power District, based in Madison. He served in the State House of Representatives from 2007-09 and the State Senate from 2009-13, serving for three years as senate majority leader.

“As a lifelong resident, with generations of hunting and fishing traditions on both sides of my family, I want to do my part to make sure that the next generation of outdoor enthusiasts are able to enjoy the outdoors as I have,” said Olson. “It is vital that we continue to build better relationships with landowners as they hold the key to access and stewardship of one of South Dakota’s most precious resources.”

Olson will replace Duane Sather of Sioux Falls, who is retiring after four years on the commission. Olson’s term ends January of 2020.

-30-

I was just speaking with a member of the appropriations committee today, discussing legislation and the state budget, when they brought up a point on trying to formulate the budget, and how a monkey wrench could be coming coming up with the cash to pay for K-12 Education, etcetera.

Governor Daugaard has noted that any Medicaid expansion is going to have to come from existing funds, but that’s going to put a lot of pressure on appropriators to come up with “existing funds.” But what about those other areas? Some legislators are talking about raising the sales tax for education, and Representative May has her name as prime sponsor on a committee bill that has been introduced to allow counties to add to their coffers through sales tax.

You can introduce anything, but the question is going to be whether it will pass. And will your constituents burn you in effigy for it? So, to informally put our finger in the air, you can vote in this years’ last SDWC poll, and let us know – Do you support an increase in the Sales Tax?

We’re giddily counting down the hours until the 2016 election season officially kicks off in the new year. According to state law, January 1 marks the first day that petitions can be circulated in South Dakota.

While petitions are not required for running for President, the rest of you don’t get off so easily.

Currently, signature requirements under state law are based on the amount of the vote the political parties received in the previous Gubernatorial election. A law was passed last session to change that, and base it on registration numbers, but a bunch of liberal activists didn’t like it, so we’re going to be voting on that as a referred law this coming November.

For those wondering how many signatures you will need, as retrieved from the Secretary of State’s web site:

U.S. Senate, U.S Representative

• Republican: 1,955 (1% of the vote for the 2014 Republican Gubernatorial candidate: 195,477) (SDCL 12-6-7)
• Democrat: 706 (1% of the vote for the 2014 Democrat Gubernatorial candidate: 70,549) (SDCL 12-6-7)
• Independent: 2,774 (1% of the total vote for Governor in 2014: 277,403) (SDCL 12-7-1)
• Newly Recognized Political Party: 250 (SDCL 12-5-1.4)

To Form A New Political Party

• 6,936 (2.5% of total vote for Governor in 2014: 277,403) (SDCL 12-5-1)

State Legislators

• Republican and Democrat: 50 signatures or 1% of the vote for their party’s Gubernatorial candidate in the 2014 election, whichever is less (SDCL 12-6-7.1)
• Independent candidate: signatures equal to 1% of the total vote for Governor in 2014 in their district (SDCL 12-7-1)
• New Political Party: Five (5) signatures (SDCL 12-5-1.4)

Legislative District	Democrat	Republican	Independent	New Political Party
1	50	50	195	5
2	50	50	181	5
3	39	50	121	5
4	45	50	152	5
5	19	50	78	5
6	20	50	93	5
7	28	50	93	5
8	23	50	91	5
9	18	45	65	5
10	18	50	71	5
11	22	50	92	5
12	22	50	79	5
13	26	50	91	5
14	26	50	92	5
15	16	23	41	5
16	18	50	81	5
17	21	45	71	5
18	21	50	78	5
19	18	50	90	5
20	18	50	81	5
21	19	50	81	5
22	21	50	78	5
23	17	50	92	5
24	16	50	96	5
25	19	50	88	5
26	26	39	68	5
26A	16	11	29	5
26B	11	28	40	5
27	25	29	57	5
28	19	50	74	5
28A	13	16	30	5
28B	7	36	44	5
29	13	50	76	5
30	21	50	105	5
31	20	50	89	5
32	22	50	89	5
33	18	50	82	5
34	22	50	92	5
35	14	42	58	5

County Officials and Party Delegates (filed with county auditor)

• Partisan Candidates: whichever is less, 50 signatures or 1% of the total vote for your political party’s candidate for governor at the last gubernatorial election in the county or commissioner district (SDCL 12-6-7.1).  May only gather signatures from the political party the candidate is registered to vote with.

• Independent Candidates: signatures equal to 1% of the total vote for all candidates for governor at the last gubernatorial election in the county or commissioner district (SDCL 12-7-1).  May gather signatures from any registered voter.

• Newly Recognized Political Party: Five (5) signatures (SDCL 12-5-1.4)

Independents might seem to have a much heavier burden, but in actuality, not so much. Whereas members of organized parties have to go to the extra step of determining who is a member of their party, Independent candidates can obtain petition signatures from everyone, regardless of party.

The minimum number of signatures that a candidate for the legislature has to obtain is 50 signatures or 1% of the vote for their party’s Gubernatorial candidate in the 2014 election. For Democrats, they are only required to hit that high bar of 50 signatures in only two legislative districts. Republicans are required to obtain that number in 29 of the state’s 35 legislative districts.

On the low end of the spectrum, Democrats are only required to pick up 7 signatures to run for office in District 28B, and 14 in District 35.

Republicans have a low mark of 11 and 16 signatures in the split house legislative districts of 26A and 28A, and a minimum of 23 in the Sioux Falls Cathedral area comprising District 15.  (We don’t run a lot of candidates in those areas, BTW).

Obtaining signatures to run for office is actually not that terribly difficult.  What’s probably more challenging is doing it correctly, as Annette Bosworth might attest.   What can’t be stressed enough is “DON’T FUDGE YOUR PROCEDURES, AND TURN THEM IN EARLY.”  Seriously.

As Annette can attest, courtesy of her felony convictions, is that the circulator is required to witness each and every signature, and to attest to the fact they did on the back of the petition in front of a notary. You cannot fudge this procedure. There’s a good chance you could get stung for it.

I also admonish you to turn them in early. You have until March 29, 2016 for Primary Election candidates (meaning partisan political candidates) to turn them in. Those who turn them in early get a sucker. Actually, no. They don’t get anything – but if the petitions are screwed up, you still have time to go back and fix them, or to obtain more signatures.

There are always 3 or 4 candidates who screw up something, whether it’s they, or someone else filling out the header of the petition. I’ve even seen it coming from County Auditor’s offices, where an employee of the County Auditor screwed it up. If you turn them in early, you have plenty of time to go back, and fix it with new signatures.  If you turn them in on March 29th…  Well, not so much.

You could write a book about the information you should be aware of when you circulate petitions for office. And actually, someone has.

How to Circulate No m Petition State Leg County Candidates

The above guide provides some basic information about circulating and turning in your petition, as posted on the Secretary of State’s web site. Everyone taking out a petition from the state or county generally receives one of these, as well as a guide on reporting your campaign finances to the appropriate entity.

It’s not rocket science. It’s just an election, and it comes with an instruction book.   So read up, start early, circulate it correctly, and don’t fudge your signatures.

What else do you need to know?  🙂

Secretary of State Shantel Krebs Certifies Third Ballot Measure

Pierre, SD – Today, Secretary of State Shantel Krebs announced that an Initiated Measure To Set A Maximum Finance Charge for Certain Lenders (36% rate cap) was validated and certified to be on the November 2016 general election ballot as a ballot measure the citizens will vote on. The sponsor turned in 19,936 signatures to the Secretary of state’s office. An initiated measure requires a minimum of 13,871 signatures from South Dakota registered voters. Once the signatures were delivered to the Secretary of State’s office, a 5% random sampling was conducted. It was determined that 86.4% or 17,222 of 19,936 signatures were in good standing. This will be Initiated Measure 21.

This is the third initiated measure to be approved by Secretary of State. A total of 8 measures were submitted for review. This office will continue the signature validation process of the remaining 5 measures in the order they were submitted to the Secretary of State. A total of 275,000 signatures were submitted among all petitions.

Those looking to challenge the Secretary of State’s certification of a ballot measure have 30 days from the date they are certified, which would be January 27, 2016.

As we wind down the hours until the new year, I just wanted to point out that we have some advertising opportunities available for people looking to reach an audience that is among the most public affairs minded and politically engaged in the state.

Dakotawarcollege.com has a couple of openings in it’s advertising line-up, including the top position in the right hand banner. Once these top level spots are filled, they may be locked up through the election.

Additional advertising spots are also available in the left column of the page.

Advertising on the Dakotwarcollege.com website is based on a first come, first serve basis for the available positions.  Advertising slots are 300×200 pixel ads, which may scale slightly depending on WordPress theme, and may be either static image, animated .gif, or flash file, as long as the file size is within acceptable file parameters, does not impede the loading of the website, or interfere with existing code.

Our non-campaign season traffic averages 1000-1500 unique individual visits daily.*  At times of flurried activity, the SDWC has reached as high as 6900 unique visits in a day (And that’s visits, not hits).

Information on ad prices, ad positions, and required ad commitments may be directed to the webmaster by clicking here.

—–

And while I’m on the subject, whether your business is politics or retail, organizational or service, if you find yourself in need of high quality print materials such as business cards, postcards, or brochures, or collateral items such as signs, banners, pens, or pins, or anything that helps you promote your business or campaign, drop me a note today.

___

*If we use our internal Webalizer server stats to measure, we’re at 4600+ visitors hitting about 20k pages daily. Different traffic measurement tools will yield vastly different results.

Yesterday, the New York Times picked South Dakota in trying to illustrate a gulf between our congressional delegation and the Governor on the implementation of Medicaid expansion as a provision of Obamacare:

John Thune of South Dakota, the No. 3 Republican in the Senate, voted earlier this month to repeal major provisions of the Affordable Care Act and to end its expansion of Medicaid, arguing that the health law was “unpopular and unaffordable.”

A week later, his state’s Republican governor, Dennis Daugaard, announced that he wanted to make 55,000 additional South Dakota residents eligible for Medicaid under the law.

“I know many South Dakotans are skeptical about expanding Medicaid, and I share some of those sentiments,” Mr. Daugaard said. “It bothers me that some people who can work will become more dependent on government.”

“But,” Mr. Daugaard said, “we also have to remember those who would benefit, such as the single mother of three who simply cannot work enough hours to exceed the poverty line for her family.”

In state after state, a gulf is opening between Republican governors willing to expand Medicaid coverage through the Affordable Care Act and Republican members of Congress convinced the law is collapsing and determined to help it fail. In recent months, insurers have increased premiums and deductibles for many policies sold online, and a dozen nonprofit insurance co-ops are shutting down, forcing consumers to seek other coverage.

Read that here.

Is there really a gulf between Daugaard and Thune on Medicaid expansion? I don’t think so.   Both Daugaard and Thune have been steadfast on most provisions of Obamacare being “unpopular and unaffordable.”  But focusing on the provision to expand Medicaid as justification for a rift doesn’t seem to work to say there is.

South Dakota is a bit of an outlier in this argument, as Governor Daugaard has only vowed to expand the program if the money could be found without raising fees or taxes. And he’s negotiating with the Federal Government to cover health care expenses for Native Americans through IHS, instead of dumping them off as an expense of State Government as a strict condition of even considering the expansion in the first place.

That doesn’t sound as if we are absolutely going to do it. It sounds more like “we may, but…”

State Democrats in the state have been falling over themselves to call this a victory for their agenda... but they should not start clucking so quickly.

When Daugaard says “It bothers me that some people who can work will become more dependent on government,”  Dems should consider that there are people in the process who are not just bothered, but dead set against any expansion of welfare. Couple that with the fact that the expansion proposal could be derailed at any point by any number of things, Medicaid expansion in the state could come to a careening halt.

Also consider the aforementioned fact that if the money can’t be found within the confines of the budget, the deal is off.  And don’t forget, the federal government has yet to signal that they’d even consider signing off on the IHS proposal.

Despite what the New York times is proclaiming, Daugaard is not painting himself into a corner to accept expansion unconditionally.  In fact, it’s the very opposite. it’s very conditional, and it may not happen, except to solve another problem our state has in the federal government not paying medical expenses for a group of people they should be covering.

If anything, it may be using the carrot of a program the Federal Government wants to get them to reach completion of their promise of another.

Well, get ready for a week of bad news.

It’s not that I’m somehow prescient, and able to tell you that bad things are going to happen this week.  It’s just that this tends to be a week where people have a tendency to dump bad news, because it’s going to be quickly lost.

Now some believe it’s an awful week to release bad news, because it’s a slow, slow time in the media.  But in my experience in South Dakota, it’s the time when people are paying the least amount of attention.  It’s the lull between Christmas and New Years’ Eve, and once past that, people are gearing up for the State Legislative session which starts up (January 12th for those who are wondering).

It’s also typically a short week, This year, we have Monday…  Tuesday… Wednesday…  And then everyone is distracted with a revelrous and raucus holiday, and then three more days until people are back at their desks. Oh, and look, here’s all this news about what’s coming up in the legislative session, and here are all these people running for office…

If you had to dump bad news, this is probably the time to do it.