In it’s inaugural set of stories, news website South Dakota Searchlight interviews interim Attorney General Mark Vargo, who opines that South Dakota political parties should consider selecting their candidates for Attorney General in a different way:
“I will say that I do think it would be smart to consider whether or not that nomination process should be through a convention or through a primary,” Vargo said.
Currently, delegates at political party conventions nominate the candidates for the state’s top law enforcement job. Meanwhile, voters in primary elections choose nominees for some other statewide offices, including the governor and the state’s three congressional seats.
Whenever a statement like this doesn’t contain a reason “why”, I assume it’s, “so we can retain and/or grow power despite our own incompetence, lack of courage, and lack of vision.”
Mr. Vargo, in addition to not supporting the claim above which would allow incompetent people to retain power (regardless of whether current people are incompetent) and disregards the value of republican governance (he seems to be advocating for more pure democracy, taking the power of delegates to become an informed representative republic outside MSM channels capable of reaching the body politic on behalf of the wealthy), has a very doltish and big/pro government approach to marijuana.
The “medical defense” aspect of IM26 was not a poison pill. It was a legal inoculation against parallel construction. It was a guard rail for law enforcement to protect the will of the people to have access to cannabis.
This was smart, however, to address “alcoholism to domestic violence, drug addiction, homelessness, and mental illness.”
Saner cannabis laws will help mental illness of those who know the prohibition of cannabis causes more harm than good and wastes millions of dollars in state money every year.
I also appreciate what Mr. Vargo says regarding leading the target. If we had better knowledge before session, we would get much better laws.
Interesting interview.
That is all.
A guy who could never get elected in either process wants to twll us how to do it….no thanks
Has he ran before? I’ve only been following politics in SD for about 10 years. He was state’s attorney in Rapid City, he took a small paycut (~$1,300) to be interim AG. Why would he care to run state-wide when he can do similar work on a local level and not have to deal with the politics?
No, he has not. Just another troll who must have a grudge against him.
Except that he’s been elected by the people of Pennington Co. the last three elections for states attorney.
It’s good for Jackley and Barnett now but bad for them 12 years ago as young candidates. It’s good for Chris Nelson now but not in 2002.
Lots of impulsive thinking going on. I don’t think we want candidates sucking up hundreds of thousands of dollars that could be used for other races.
The pot of money is only so big to go around.
Absolutely agree with a Primary vote. This is harder work for the candidates and that’s fine. They should have to make their case to all the party’s voters, not just the few hundred who bother to show up to convention. It’s way too easy for a few motivated people to stack the convention to their liking.
I do not think it should be changed. The current system has worked very well for decades, and now there is one hiccup and some people want to change it all. Who was a bad AG before this, Marty Jackley, Mark Barnett, Bill Janklow, Larry Long? They were all picked at Convention.