Pulled up a couple of posts I did this last year during the debate over SB40 which both contain information which continues to be valid during the debates being held in the legislature beginning tomorrow over House Joint Resolution 5001, which proposes to put it to a decision of voters whether or not they want to continue allowing political parties to nominating several statewide candidates at a convention, or to allow all Republicans to weigh in. First, from a post I made on Feb 14, 2023..
..It would be interesting to look at the public offices in South Dakota where we select the partisan candidates in a primary election process to represent those parties in the November election, and those we select at the Republican or Democrat State Conventions.
US Senate – Primary
US House – Primary
Governor – Primary
Lt. Gov – Convention
Atty General – Convention
Secretary of State – Convention
State Auditor – Convention
State Treasurer – Convention
School & Lands – Convention
Public Utilities Commission – Convention
State Senate – Primary
State House – Primary
Circuit Court Judge – Primary (if more than 2 for each seat)
County Commissioners – Primary
State’s Attorney – Primary
Sheriff – Primary
County Auditor – Primary (and/or county finance officer)
County Treasurer – Primary
Register of Deeds – Primary
PrimaryCoroner – Primary (or appointment after 2023 per HB 1057)
and.. If you think about it, the argument against the constitutional offices being decided by the voters in a primary is largely being made by precinct people.. who themselves are chosen in a primary. I imagine they would be the first people against precinct committee positions being chosen and filled by a small group of party insiders.
Next, a post that goes back further in state history, to the last time the legislature had a debate of this nature, when it was decided to move several offices at the top of the ticket away from party conventions to a statewide primary:
Apparently, up until that time, those candidates had been vetted exclusively by party nominating committees, and by 1929, legislators had had enough complaints that they had to do something to change the system.
From the Aberdeen American News, via Argus Leader, 22 Jan 1929, Tue · Page 6
It appears that the problem before was that the choices that ended up in front of them were not great via that party system of vetting, and “party followers are too often given the choice of voting in the fall for a candidate they do not want.”
So far, I think I’ve read it a couple of times today on how South Dakota Republicans have had precinct people since about 1917. And the people claiming this are woefully misinformed.
If someone is going to talk about the issue, they at least owe everyone the duty of honesty and accuracy. I wrote about this last year during the debate over SB40, and it remains true.. Precinct people were not part of the process until 1990:
In the 1990 GOP convention when GOP Chair Dwight Adams (Doing double duty as Mickelson re-election chair) threw the doors open to bring more people into the process in exchange for precinct peoples labor, it was lauded as an expansion of the process. In fact, I wrote about it in Dakotawarcollege’s early days waaaaay back in 2005:
Dwight took the party representation for the State Party convention and blew it wide open. He went from having county representation comprised of only a few select individuals on a county wide basis to opening it up to dozens or more per county. He opened up participation and guaranteed that precinct level representatives would be part of county delegations at the state convention. What he did was in effect a molding of the command structure of the party to a military model. It was an organized and well defined structure from the state chairman at the top down the precinct level.
The system was transformed! The “carrot” was that the precinct level people could vote for the candidate of their choice and on issues at convention. But in turn, they also had to be active in precinct level activities, such as poll watching, etc. This in turn gives the party a literally endless pool of volunteers and activists – activists, many of whom someday might be candidates.
With the simple change of a set of rules, the number of people who attended conventions exploded. While the loyal opposition still might be pushing 100 or so for their convention, in some years the GOP has had numbers exceeding 800 or more. (Why do you think Frank Kloucek sometimes makes an appearance at our convention? It’s where the people are). County GOP meetings have people attending simply because they identify themselves as precinct people – another positive effect.
I would make the argument that no other single factor has helped ensure the party’s continued electoral success than making it more participatory. It’s not that people didn’t identify before – party registration numbers illustrated that – but more people than ever could dig into the nuts and bolts work that happens behind the scenes with the party.
The issue that has come about since I wrote that piece in 2005 is that there’s a lot of the precinct process that has changed in the years since 1990. Technology has made precinct watchers obsolete. The phone tree has been replaced with auto dialers and call centers, and a lot of their job has gone away. But, while the call to action for working together has gone away, it’s been replaced in some cases by those who have no interest in being representative of their communities for the GOP, and are more interested in weaponizing the process. These are the people who are recruited for one candidate, only to vote and never be seen again. These are the same people who complain incessantly that when a convention is held, it should all be a free lunch, as a number attempted to do in 2022.
When I was writing about kooky Toby Doeden statements yesterday, it was more for humor’s sake, but apparently at a rally he held yesterday, it sounds as if he underlined some of his batsh*t crazy, promoted unfounded conspiracies, and demanded a return to the days when people were “marrying young and having children.”
From the Aberdeen Insider:
“Whether they’re Republicans or Democrats, they’re all part of the same oligarchy system,” Doeden said, stressing his belief that political outsiders like himself and Former President Donald Trump are the way forward.
He made claims that Johnson has been recruiting left-leaning individuals who plan to switch parties and run for the South Dakota Legislature.
and..
Doeden also said he will stand to promote traditional family values, such as marrying young and having children, and what he calls other conservative, Christian values.
“oligarchy system?” Why do I have the feeling we’re paying far too much attention at this point?
First off, for starters, does he have any examples that Dusty Johnson is recruiting “left-leaning” individuals to run for the legislature? Or who those people are? Because it sounds like he’s just talking out of his tail. Secondly, the whole “marrying young and having children” line sounds as if he wants to impose some sort of religious theocracy on the country.
At this point, I’m happy to encourage my 16 year old to get good grades, pick up his room and get the dogs out. I don’t need to push him to get married and reproduce at this point.
The more we hear, the less seriously we should be considering the Doeden candidacy. But, I will admit – it provides a lot of comedy.
South Dakota Retailers Elect President, Officers, Board Members
PIERRE, SD – Kevin Nyberg of Nyberg’s Ace and Dakota Workwear in Sioux Falls and Watertown has been elected President of the South Dakota Retailers Association Board of Directors. Board members are responsible for setting general policies, establishing goals and objectives, and determining legislative positions for the influential statewide business organization, founded in 1897.
Having served on the board since 2016, Nyberg officially received the gavel from outgoing President Travis Anderberg of Miller during the association’s annual business conference on January 8 in Pierre.
“It’s an honor to serve as President of one of the country’s oldest and largest state retail associations,” Nyberg said. “I’m proud to follow my dad’s service in leading this organization that does so much to support businesses in communities throughout South Dakota.”
Nyberg’s father Roy also served as Retailers Association President in 1989.
In addition to Nyberg, three other business owners were named as officers: Sarah Hustead of Wall Drug as President-Elect, Jason Harms of Harms Oil Company as Secretary-Treasurer, and Travis Anderberg of Miller Rexall Drug as Past-President.
Four first-term board members were elected to serve in 2024, including Angi Hanzlik of Berry + Basil in Chamberlain, Andy Jerke of James Valley Landscape Solutions in Mitchell, Samantha Tupper of Wink’s Fine Jewelry in Brookings, and Pat Wiederhold of Granite Sports in Hill City.
“Our board consists of outstanding South Dakota business professionals, and our newest members are no exception,” said Executive Director Nathan Sanderson. “With their dedication and expertise, we will continue to provide our members with unmatched information, advocacy, and services.”
Outgoing board members were also recognized for their contributions: Jenny Behlings of Jenny’s Floral in Custer, Gary Cammack of Cammack Ranch Supply in Union Center, Clancy Kingsbury of Who’s Hobby House in Rapid City, and Hillarey Warner of HH Design in Britton.
To view a complete list of South Dakota Retailers Association board members or to find out more about their efforts to foster a successful business climate in South Dakota, visit sdra.org/sdrabod.
WHO’S AFRAID OF THE PRECINCT PEOPLE?
by State Rep. Scott Odenbach (Dist. 31)
A bill with the potential to radically change South Dakota’s political landscape has been introduced this session that would throw out our time-tested tradition of choosing statewide candidates. It should be opposed by all those who would preserve our Republican form of government.
Unlike SB 13 which would change state law to let the candidate for Governor choose his/her own Lieutenant Governor, which most everybody supports, HJR 5001 (https://sdlegislature.gov/Session/Bill/24594) would clutter the November ballot with an unnecessary CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT requiring ALL non-judicial statewide nominees to be selected during the primary election, rather than chosen by the convention delegates as has been done since 1917.
Currently SDCL 12-5-21, states:
The state convention shall nominate candidates for lieutenant governor, attorney general, secretary of state, state auditor, state treasurer, commissioner of school and public lands, and public utilities commissioner and in the years when a President of the United States is to be elected, presidential electors and national committeeman and national committeewoman of the party.
Using this tried and true method, we’ve elected Attorneys General such as Bill Janklow, Mark Meierhenry, Mark Barnett and Marty Jackley; Secretaries of State such as Gladys Pyle in 1927, Alice Kundert in 1979, Joyce Hazeltine in the 1980’s; Monae Johnson in 2022, and long-time public servant and good guy Chris Nelson (who may hold the world record for attending Lincoln Day dinners); School and Public Lands Commissioners such as Jarrod Johnson, Brock Greenfield and Ryan Brunner; Auditors like Alice Kundert and Vern Larson; Public Utilities Commissioners like Kristie Fiegen and Gary Hanson; and Treasurers including Rich Sattgast and Josh Haider.
Not a bad record of good public servants in my opinion! And NOT a system that is broken or needing radical change.
HJR 5001 is a continuation of the outrage expressed by some in the establishment wing of the GOP because too many movement conservatives showed up and caused trouble for their favored candidates at the last convention. To fix the situation, they’d upend decades of grass-roots involvement by “We the People” of South Dakota, replacing it with more expensive, nasty, statewide primaries, cutting off their nose to spite their face while enriching campaign consultants. A never-ending deluge of postcards, ads, robo-calls and signs would follow every two years. All for a bill that had so little support in the legislature last year that it’s now been resurrected this session as a constitutional amendment. If every losing bill is just later referred to the voters, why have session every winter?
A few headlines from the past few years illustrate the high stakes:
“George Soros’ quiet overhaul of the U.S. justice system” (Politico, August 30, 2016);
“How George Soros funded progressive ‘legal arsonist’ DAs behind US crime surge” (NY Post, December 18, 2021).
“George Soros’ prosecutors wage war on law and order” (Heritage Foundation, June 22, 2023);
Who really believes that in a small state like South Dakota, we’re better off letting big corporate donors or out of state interests bankroll and select their favored candidate(s) for our statewide offices rather than local party activists who live here and care about their respective platforms and party principles? Precinct people personify “educated voters,” as they are some of the most involved individuals amongst the electorate. They have put themselves out there to run for office to be able to participate at the convention.
I haven’t spoken to one voter who is asking for this. They want us to protect property rights, balance economic growth with preservation of our land and water, and cut taxes. This is a manufactured crisis by politicos who think they can get their way by buying future elections. Who really thinks that a good candidate for Attorney General should have to raise a minimum of $500,000.00 just to compete with the favored candidate of an establishment able to raise that kind of money with a few phone calls? Who would ever run for Commissioner of School and Public Lands if they needed to come up with hundreds of thousands of dollars just to get in the ring? Who’s ready for Summit Carbon to spend $2 million against Kristie Fiegen next time so they can force their way through our PUC?
All people who love our South Dakota way of life should call their legislators and demand a NO vote on HJR 5001.
Did they need the cash bar, or the mayor of Aberdeen to get people to attend?
So what will the topic of the event be? Given Doeden’s history of postings to the Internet, I’d say that we could hear about America’s most important topic.. the state of Travis Kelce and Taylor Swift’s romance, and how it’s a plot by the superwealthy to push the COVID vaccine!
“Reportedly, #traviskelce was paid $20m to push the covid vaccine… And you thought Travis and Taylor Swift dating was organic and cute. When will ALL Americans wake up and realize that the super wealthy control what you do, what you think, and soon will control even more.”
And that person who publicly posted that to facebook wants to actually represent our state in Congress?
Stronger, Healthier SD GOP, an Open Letter to Republican Party January 15, 2024 by Rep. Will Mortenson (R-Fort Pierre)
I remember my first GOP convention vividly. So much enthusiasm for our candidates and our causes. So much pride in our state and our core values. So much community, kindness, and shared history. Since then, I’ve been a state party employee, a county delegate, and worked hand-in-hand with the state party and county party on a variety of causes. I’m a proud Republican and care deeply about the trajectory of our party and state over the next several decades.
That’s why I was encouraged that Rep. Tyler Tordsen introduced HJR 5001. That measure would submit the question to the voters: should nominees for statewide office be chosen through Primaries or Conventions? Rep. Tordsen’s resolution would open up our nomination process to every Republican from the grassroots voters to the county party officials to the state Chairman, and everyone in between. Our primary voters would decide who should be our nominee in the general elections in November. The proposal will make our party stronger and healthier.
In recent years, the convention devolved from a party promotion and unity event to a forum for political knife-fighting by party insiders. The sense of enthusiasm, pride, and community was replaced by partisan infighting, which started as a national phenomenon and has gradually infected our state as well. HJR 5001 gives us a chance to return the convention to its prior purpose: getting Republicans together to meet, share enthusiasm, and get prepared to help our candidates and our causes succeed on the ballot at the November general election.
Today, our system shuts out too many voters. It vests all authority in the few-hundred who sign up to go to convention. The last couple statements are tough for me to admit. I know these party delegates personally. Many are close friends of mine. But, just because I know the party delegates and like them doesn’t mean we should not include the hundreds of thousands of Republican voters I don’t know. We need to consider what is best for our state and the voters, not just what is good for our friends.
A little over a year ago, the Republicans in the House of Representatives elected me to be their Majority Leader. I have worked hard to serve the caucus members and advance causes where we take caucus positions. I took over a caucus that had been fractured in years past. Decisions were made top-down, and rank-and-file members felt like they had no voice. I was resolved to change that. Our caucus was made healthier, stronger, and more cohesive by giving every member a voice. We have had less infighting and we are getting more conservative victories ever since. I believe the same will happen with our state party with the enactment of HJR 5001.
I know full-well that many county party officials and convention delegates will disagree with me. I know many of my caucus members disagree with this position (that’s OK: I work for them, not the other way around). I have been talking all weekend to former colleagues and friends from across the state, really digging into ways to make our state party better. That is a good thing. We shouldn’t vilify one another over attempts at the same goal: party strength, health, and unity. We have important battles to come in this state. If we want to win them, we need a robust party where all Republicans get a voice. I hope you’ll consider joining me in supporting HJR 5001.
In my search for adding value and readers to the website, I keep wondering if a podcast would help keep things lively and fresh?
I do participate in them from time to time, often with friends Murdoc & Jake at Dakota Town Hall. And what many of you might not know is that this last year, I (we) did pilot a podcast with a couple of politico friends, which ended up not coming to fruition because of life and job changes. But I haven’t let the concept go. I actually did radio during my last year or so in High School (many, many years ago on KGFX, your kind of country), so it’s not that part that’s daunting, and I have the equipment. I mainly have a hang-up on that I’d like to do things differently.
I find myself more interested in doing a video podcast, as I find it more personal. Technically.. the problem there is two-fold. The lighting in my area isn’t where I’d like it.. which I can probably fix with what’s on hand. And I don’t know that I’ve hit on software/camera combo that I like well enough. Production-wise, there’s the writing and the editing. Piloting a few episodes, I need to have a good idea of what I’m going to say to reduce rambling, and the ahhs.. and uhhs.. and keeping it moving is important, so editing is important. So there’s additional time that’s involved.
I’ve always shied away from it because I’ve feared it would be a time-suck, and I find my time stretched pretty thin anyways. But it has been one of those things that continue to nag at me, as in “I should be doing it.”
What are your thoughts? Would a podcast/vodcast add something that you as a reader aren’t getting already?
The ick factor just got turned up to 11 this morning with a story from The Dakota Scout how former candidate and current prison inmate Joek Koskan is trying to explain the nuances of incest to the court as a way to reduce the sentence he received for his crimes against his daughter and society:
Koskan argues he shouldn’t be required to register on the sex offender registry because the incest was “consensual.”
“Furthermore,” he writes, “incest is more similarly situated to bigamy than to aggravated incest as both bigamy and incest require consensual relationships that are prohibited by law and not offenses involving minors or forcible acts. Both bigamy and incest are considered non-violent low level felonies.”
and..
Koskan is representing himself. His lawsuit was filed in Federal District Court for the District of South Dakota.
WHO’S AFRAID OF THE PRECINCT PEOPLE?
