State Senate hopeful Jordan Youngberg has long given his notice of his intent to run for the District 25 seat currently occupied by State Senator Tom Pischke.
And today it is no longer intent, as Youngberg has filed his petitions with the Secretary of State to be placed on the ballot for that office.
Rounds, Sinema Introduce Legislation to Increase Transparency and Accountability for Financial Regulators
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) introduced legislation to increase transparency and accountability within the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC). The FSOC Improvement Act would enhance transparency and procedural fairness of the systemically important financial institutions (SIFI) designation process.
Specifically, this legislation would codify 2019 guidance that requires FSOC to determine whether systemic risks could be better addressed through means other than designating a financial institution as a SIFI. It would also require them to consult with the primary regulator and the company on other means to address potential threats to financial stability. Finally, the legislation enhances transparency at the FSOC by requiring the council and its member agencies to report on crisis planning activities and potential threats.
“I believe the FSOC Improvement Act is a crucial step towards enhancing the effectiveness and transparency of our financial regulatory system,” said Rounds. “SIFI designation is a blunt tool that comes with a significant increase in regulatory burden for individual companies. By allowing an affected institution to modify its business, structure or operations prior to the SIFI designation, we are creating a more resilient financial environment for the American people, fostering economic growth and stability.”
“We’re fueling growth and creating careers for Arizonans while increasing transparency,” said Sinema.
Rounds first introduced the FSOC Improvement Act in 2018 during the 115th Congress. Rounds reintroduced this legislation to the 116th Congress in 2019, with Sinema as an original cosponsor.
SIOUX FALLS–District 14 State Senator Larry Zikmund announced his intent to seek reelection for the Legislature today. A respected leader in the Capitol and Sioux Falls, Larry is an experienced and effective public servant advocating for the people of District 14.
“District 14 voters have honored me with the support over the years, and I’ll work hard to earn their support again in 2024,” said Zikmund. “South Dakota is moving forward in the right direction, but we need to keep working on the issues impacting Sioux Falls’ growth and prosperity. Experience matters, and that’s what I’m offering District 14.”
Zikmund was first elected to the South Dakota House of Representatives in 2014, where he served until winning the vacant Senate seat in 2020. He is a member of the state budget setting Appropriations Committee, the Vice-Chair of the Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, and member of the Retirement Laws. A veteran himself, Zikmund is especially proud of his work to support active service members, veterans and their families including his leadership to help build the new South Dakota Veterans Cemetery in Sioux Falls.
District 14 encompasses southeast Sioux Falls in Minnehaha County between Cliff Avenue and Veterans Parkway. Election Day is Nov. 5, 2024.
A measure to ask South Dakota voters to choose for themselves whether they would like the same opportunity to choose their Attorney General and other offices in a primary election as they have to select their Governor or legislators failed in committee after sponsors could not convince the House State Affairs Committee to send the resolution on to the floor.
House Joint Resolution 5001, a measure proposing and submitting to the voters at the next general election an amendment to the Constitution of the State of South Dakota, requiring all non-judicial offices elected by a statewide vote to be nominated at a primary election failed to gather sufficient votes in committee to move the measure to the floor after testimony from several interested parties, including South Dakota Republican Chairman and Senator John Wiik.
The discussion over moving offices out of the convention process has arisen after a trend has emerged at State Republican Conventions of groups of activists registering as precinct people showing up only to vote, and not otherwise participating in any Republican Party activities. Controversy over these activists grew after the last Republican convention after many of the agitators forced a vote to make the convention free, which would have bankrupted the Republican Party. The measure narrowly lost by 5 votes.
It remains to be seen if the proposal will come back in another form during this legislative session, but this remains a problem which the Republican Party will have to face in the months to come.
What do we do about HJR 5001?
By Sen. John Wiik, SDGOP Chairman
As I traveled back and forth to Pierre this weekend, my phone was ringing constantly. What do we do about HJR 5001? What are you going to do? What can I do? After an Executive Board meeting and over 50 phone calls about this matter, I felt that three things needed to be said and to be solved before we can move forward on this issue.
The 2022 convention. Most of this issue stems from the Republican convention of 2022. I understand the frustration with the events of that convention, and I have been looking for solutions. That frustration comes from a disconnect between our voters and our delegates. As a party, we then failed to achieve the primary goal of a convention—to unify the party around our candidates and march together locked arms to victory in November. In some respects we are victims of our own success, having reached over half of SD voter registrations and over 90 percent of state legislative seats. Factions have developed within our midst. The only opponent some can see is the other side of our own party.
The gradual replacement of the SDGOP with the House and Senate Republican PAC’s. This development has become an incredible convenience for the executive board and Chairman of SDGOP, but having those hands off the wheel have not served the county party organizations well. The county parties see their influence falling away and are perhaps trying to find new ways to stay relevant in this changing political landscape. In the same frame of thought, the Senate and House caucuses are gradually able to be more detached from the county party organizations.
A tremendous change I have witnessed, perhaps since the 2021 passing of Rush Limbaugh, has been a lack of civility in disagreement. We are a big tent party and there is absolutely no officeholder or even voter that adheres to this platform to the letter. I served on the last two platform committees, one as chairman. The pressure to tighten the platform to fit a certain mindset within the party is real, and only serves to frustrate everyone. Many floor debates are heard quoting the planks of the platform that fit a certain mindset—while another plank is quoted back to the other side of the same issue. There is room for disagreement within our party. Our common goals of small stable government, economic growth and adherence to our Constitution will continue to push us forward in a common direction, but we need to learn that disagreement is ok. We’re operating in the arena of ideas, and we can debate without the fear of retribution for a different idea. The basic ideas of conservative Republican policies are proven to work, and unlike Liberal and Progressive ideologies, the more we debate our ideas, the better they become. It’s up to us to educate our voters and respond to our own party without harsh lecturing. We need to engage each other and maintain civility in all circles.
With those three things in mind, the crisis points that bring us to the annual introduction of bills or resolutions that will effectively change our entire election system in South Dakota stem from a belief that delegates are straying from the voters. When a Party loses a connection with its voters, it has no business being a 51% registration party. We must not create a situation that seven hundred people can overturn an 80/20 primary election. 56% of those 700+ voters ruled the day—but many in the party believed that too many delegates ignored the will of the voters.
Enter this year’s attempt, HJR 5001. Last year’s SB40, with its problems was much cleaner and would have allowed the legislature to tweak things as we go and fix mistakes. A constitutional amendment is forever. I vehemently disagree with HJR 5001 being a Constitutional Amendment. HJR 5001 has flaws that the legislature will not be able to fix and therefore surrenders its sovereignty to the interpretations of courts.
There are some who believe the only interpretation of this HJR 5001 once the clarification lawsuits start will be to open the primaries and no longer allow Republican voters to choose Republican candidates. Independents and some minor party activity is not adequately addressed, and a judge will have to intervene. Is there a way to fix this? Possibly. I don’t believe that it’s necessary, as we have a system that has provided some of the giants in South Dakota political history. From Bill Janklow and Marty Jackley to Chris Nelson, Josh Haeder and beyond, the SDGOP convention has provided greatness for South Dakota, and we should not surrender that connection we’ve built for our voters.
Finally, I look at our SDGOP convention as a system similar toour Electoral College. If we move to a complete primary system, what is the incentive for a candidate to visit places like Mcintosh or Milbank or Martin? If HJR 5001 passes, it would be entirely possible to stay in counties with single digit prefixes on their license plates and rarely stray from an interstate, leaving the possibility of countless small towns once again left out of another vote or another political decision.
I cannot speak for the entire Central Committee—I can’t even speak for our entire Executive Committee. I can only speak for myself as a small county chairman and the SDGOP Chairman. Let’s keep our disagreements out of the Constitution and open the dialog to solve our problems in our own Party. Please send HJR 5001 to the 41st day on Wednesday and start working together better Thursday and beyond.
Gov. Noem Announces District 34 Legislative Appointment
PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem appointed Becky Drury to represent District 34 in the South Dakota House of Representatives, effective January 16, 2024. The vacancy was created after Jess Olson announced her resignation. Drury will serve during the 2024 legislative session.
“I am proud to appoint Becky to this role,” said Governor Noem. “We have worked together in the past to create real solutions for the people of South Dakota – and I look forward to continuing to work with her in the future.”
Drury has served as the state representative for District 32 since January 2021. She has since moved to District 34. She resigned the District 32 seat in order to take this appointment.
“I’m thankful to Governor Noem for appointing me to fill the vacancy in the House of Representatives in District 34,” said Drury. “It is my honor to continue serving Rapid City. Much like my service on the City Council, where my goal was for the betterment of all of Rapid City, this move will carry on my goal to serve Rapid City and our great state.”
During Rep. Drury’s time in the legislature, she has advocated for victims of child abuse, supported teachers, looked for solutions to workforce shortages, and focused on creating more transparency in state government. Drury has also served as a member of the Rapid City Common Council and on the Wall School Board. She has a Master’s Degree in Administration and a Bachelor of Science, both from the University of South Dakota.
Governor Noem has been continuing the process of considering candidates for District 32. Interested parties can submit resumes and cover letters to Ben.Koisti@state.sd.us by Tuesday, January 23rd, 2024.
Had an observant reader catch this and sent it over..
“Interesting campaign finance tidbit is that Keintz terminated her Lt. Account and transferred $3,352.56 to her Keintz for House.”
Sending a bigger pot of money over to an equally dormant account that had $133 in it… why would this be? The speculation is whether Jennifer is going to join her running mate Jamie Smith with both attempting a return to the legislature in 2024.
Proponents of House Joint Resolution 5001 to propose a vote to choose whether to switch South Dakota to a primary voting system for all statewide offices just dropped a huge bombshell in their pursuit of legislative success.
This afternoon HJR 5001 prime sponsor Rep. Tyler Tordsen released a letter of support from 7 of the 89 living past South Dakota Republican Party chairmen, representing over a quarter century of GOP leadership, urging passage of the measure:
The only ones missing from this list, the 8th living past State Republican Party chair and immediate past Chairman Dan Lederman, currently sits on the State Republican Party’s Executive Board and also serves as chairman of the Union County Republican Party. The 9th, also not signing the letter is former GOP Chair Arlene Ham. (My bad, I missed Arlene when I wrote this, who served as party chair in the late 70’s. Arlene is 88 years old, and I hope she is with us for many more years to come – she’s a great lady!)
The letter is an open letter to all Republicans noting in part:
This constitutional amendment will guarantee that every Republican has a voice in the party’s nominations for Secretary of State, Attorney General, State Auditor, State Treasurer, Commissioner of School and Public Lands, and Public Utilities Commissioner.
We have each had the privilege of leading our party as State Republican Chair, and we know that our South Dakota Republican Party is a strong, growing party. We need to keep the momentum going and invite more participation and engagement in our elections. That’s what HJR 5001 will do.
It’s time to let every Republican participate in our party’s nomination process, and to make our state convention a time of unity as we join together for the fall campaign. We ask you to please vote Yes on HJR 5001.
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.
What do we do about HJR 5001?
