Jackley: Preliminary Autopsy Results Released in Platte Fire

@SoDakCampaigns

jackleyheader2 Marty JackleyPreliminary Autopsy Results Released in Platte Fire

PIERRE, S.D – Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today the preliminary autopsy results have been released in connection to the house fire that occurred in Platte, S.D. on Thursday, September 17, 2015. Preliminary autopsy reports indicate that cause and manner of death for Nicole, Kailey, Jaeci, Connor and Michael Westerhuis were homicide by shotgun wounds. Cause of death for Scott Westerhuis was shotgun wound with manner of death as suspected suicide based on the current investigation findings.

“We have experienced the tragic loss of an entire family including young children that has affected an entire community. Based on evidence of foul play continuing to be uncovered, law enforcement remains committed to a complete and thorough investigation,” said Jackley.

“We at the Charles Mix County Sheriff’s Office express our deepest sorrow to the families involved and to the Platte community,” said Charles Mix County Sheriff Randy Thaler.

The Charles Mix County Sheriff’s Office and the Division of Criminal Investigation continue their investigation into the circumstances surrounding the manner of death of Scott Westerhuis, including interviews, evidence collection and forensic testing.

-30-

Regarding Rick Weiland’s plan for public campaign funding….. Does anyone think it’s a GOOD idea?

@SoDakCampaigns

And Slick Rick Weiland is back at it again. The ballot explanation for his measure to have taxpayer funding of campaigns has been released into the wild by the Attorney General (Which you read about here first, btw), so it’s just a formality by filing it with the SOS to begin circulating.

First, they have to fix all 36 pages of the measure on to a petition form with the signature blanks – it’s a legal requirement, and will be absolutely laughable to see them do it. I suspect it’s going to fold up and look much like the South Dakota road map by the time they’re all done cramming it on there.

But that’s not my point regarding writing about it today. My question is openly wondering how many of you out there think such things in the measure like public financing of campaigns is a good thing?

I mean, we’re having trouble finding the revenue to pay teachers more, and here’s a politician asking for the public to pay for political campaigns?  Somehow, I don’t think that’s going to fly, and may just leave a bad taste in taxpayer’s mouths.

One thing that’s been pointed out to me is that most states that have public financing of campaigns also have a state income tax as well, so they’re a bit more flush with cash for this sort of thing. I really doubt that’s the kind of trade-off South Dakotans would have any interest in making.

“The best way to predict the future is to create it.” (Peter Drucker)

Troy Jones

I don’t put a lot of stock in the current status of the “horse race” as a predictor of who will be the GOP nominee. At this stage in recent elections, Michelle Bachman, Herman Cain and Rick Perry were way out front and we know how that turned out.  However, after a few months of the field campaigning and raising money and after two debates each watched by over 23 million Americans, I think we can start looking into the future.

The following are some inferences from the most recent CNN poll which was taken after the debate held at the Reagan Presidential Library hosted by Nancy Reagan.

Those who should consider dropping out (6 candidates). I reach this conclusion because to stay in could damage their long-term reputation and possibly future prospects for elective office.   To expect lightening to strike is not realistic.

The following is the combination of those Republicans who consider these candidates their first choice AND/OR their second choice.

Santorum (2%), Walker (2%) (explains Walker dropping out), Graham (1%), Pataki (1%), Gilmore (less than 1%) & Jindal (less than 1%).

Those on the bubble (5).   These candidates whose total between first and second choice is still under 15% (all others are at least 20%). They have got to move up or they will just become after-thoughts. With the race still fluid (over 70% of those polled still have an open mind and may change their preferred choice) and may pick up support from those who drop out, this is not a level that is sustainable to be considered a serious candidate in a smaller field.

Huckabee (14%), Cruz (11%), Christie (9%), Paul (7%), & Kasich 3%.

Top-tier candidates (5). Carson (33%), Trump (32%), Fiorina (26%), Rubio (24%) & Bush (20%). The following is gleened from the poll about these candidates.

Carson: Carson made a strong impression (positive or negative) on only 7% of the debate audience. I think that is consistent with his low-key style but will it get him the nomination? Carson has the highest Favorable rating (65%) and Net Fav/Unfav rating (55% is by the far the best suggesting he still has upside potential.

Trump: Like Paul, 20% more of the audience thought Trump did the worst than thought he did the best in the debate. Since Trump announced, his Favorable rating (52%) has gone up 2% and Unfavorable rating (40%) declined 2%. A lot of activity and coverage with very little movement. With only 8% of the GOP voters wanting more information to form an opinion of him and a small Net Fav/Unfav. Rating, Trump has to do something different to prevail.

Fiorina: She clearly made the biggest impression in the debate. 52% of the GOP viewers thought she did the best in the debate while only 2% thought she did the worst. While her Favorable rating (54%) has climbed 9%, her Unfavorable rating (17%) also climbed 6%. Personally, I think she needed to have had a lighter moment and looked less stern when she wasn’t talking. However, Fiorina’s Net Fav/Unfav rating of 37% still can expand as 29% of GOP voters still don’t have enough information to form an opinion.

Rubio: He clearly had the second best debate night. Rubio’s Favorable Rating (57%) has moved up 13% since July (second only to Fiorina) while his Unfavorable remained at 16%. Combined with his Net Favorable/Unfavorable rating of 41% (highest after Carson) and near-Fiorina-like 27% who need more information to form an opinion, Rubio appears to have strong upside.

Bush: As of right now, he has numbers that are Trumpian. Additionally, only 13% don’t have enough information to form an opinion of him. If it weren’t so early, one could almost put him on the bubble.

The following is a table of those who were in the main debate

  First or Second Choice Fav. Rating Unfav. Rating Net

Fav./ Unfav.

 Best

In

Debate

 Worst

in

Debate

 Debate

Net

 
Carson 33% 65% 10% 55% 3% 4% -1%
Trump 32% 52% 40% 12% 11% 31% -20%
Fiorina 26% 54% 17% 37% 52% 2% 50%
Rubio 24% 57% 16% 41% 14% >1% 13%
Bush 20% 49% 38% 11% 2% 9% -7%
Huckabee 14% 53% 28% 25% 1% 7% -6%
Cruz 11% 52% 22% 30% 3% >1% 2%
Christie 9% 44% 32% 12% 6% 3% 3%
Paul 7% 38% 37% 1% 2% 22% -20%
Kasich 3% 24% 25% -1% 2% 1% 1%

It is still early. And the primary elections are still months away. Any of these candidates can be viable when voting starts. But, the field will likely be narrowed to 5 or 6 candidates. Whether formally or informally, the field is realistically down to these10 candidates.

Four months ago, the “Big 5” were Bush, Walker (dropped out today), Paul, Rubio & Cruz with Perry (dropped out) barely looking in. Today, we have Carson, Trump, Fiorina, Rubio and Bush. What it will be in four months is hard to predict.

But, we do know what each have to do.

Paul and Kasich have the biggest hill to climb. Too small a Net Fav./Unfav. Rating. They have to convert Unfavorables into Favorables quickly and get the preponderance of the 25% who don’t know enough about them into a Favorable impression.

Christie’s challenge is part Paul/Kasich above & Huckabee/Cruz below.

Huckabee and Cruz have to find a way to convert their Net Fav./Unfav. Rating into support. Huckabee’s challenge might be easier as his social conservative rhetoric can generate support for those who have this agenda highest on their radar. Cruz’ challenge is he can’t out-“ousider” Trump, Fiorina, or Carson. Does he change his rhetoric/focus or does he hope Trump implodes?

Bush and Trump have to reduce their Unfavorables. If they can’t do that, it will be hard to increase their support as First or Second choices.

Carson, Fiorina, Rubio have the easiest road in their immediate future. They have all the best combination of underlying data and have no apparent negative trends. Their message is not only increasing support but it doesn’t seem to have a concurrent effect of increasing their negatives. They just need to continue to position themselves to attract supporters of those who drop out.

However, as Bush and Trump have experienced, being at the top invites greater scrutiny. In 2008, McCain came back from the “dead” because he had the mettle to survive the bumps. Same with Romney in 2012.

We might still be in the pre-season of this primary but it won’t be long before we can with greater assurance predict the contenders and the pretenders.  What do you think the bottom five have to do to move up?  What do you think will cause candidates in the top five to drop out?  Its going to happen.

P.S.  As I was finishing this post, I found out Walker dropped out.  I didn’t change the text as I think it reminds us of what can happen in just a few months.

Bob Ellis abandoned GOP because we’re not manly enough for him. Maybe he should be more like Princess Elsa and “Let it go.”

@SoDakCampaigns

According to the latest at American Clarion, I guess some of us might need to add “dually” tires to our full-size pickups, spit more tobacco, and make more fart jokes. Because BY GOSH THE REPUBLICAN PARTY ISN’T MANLY ENOUGH FOR BOB ELLIS!:

He’s exactly right. Weenies don’t fight. Wimps don’t fight. Wusses don’t fight. Oh, they’ll whine and bellyache all day long.  But have you ever seen a weenie fight a determined enemy? Have you ever seen a wimp stick his neck out to fight a vicious enemy? Have you ever seen a wuss take on tyranny?

I tried desperately (and in vain) to point this out in 2014 during the U.S. Senate race in South Dakota last year.

and…

And some people wonder why I am no longer seen in “Republican” and “pro-family” circles and events anymore. (The smell of urine is overwhelming)

I desperately hope the people of the United States are much wiser with their choice of presidential candidates than the gutless excuse for “conservatives” and “Republicans” in South Dakota have been.

Read it here.

(Uh oh. Bob must have seen my ill-fated attempts to kill the fly pestering me at my desk while I’m trying to work today. Dammit. I wasn’t manly enough to take that sucker down. )

Between Bob’s comments today, his Rambo Jesus versus Wuss Christ declarations, and his endless obsession over gay sex, I’m just wondering how wimpified all the rest of you pasty man-boy Republicans have become to lose his support like this! Candidates – If you want his support in the 2016 election, you all had better get to working out to build those muscles, so Bob can see the pictures of you all manly & bulky and oiled up! (Thongs optional when you send those to Bob, BTW).

Seriously though, I can hardly stop laughing over the silliness of it all.  Have the Gordon Howie lapdogs like Bob Ellis just lost all connection with reality and polite society?  Between Bob Ellis talking about people being wussy, and Lora Hubbel talking about politicians needing “bigger balls,” I’ve kind of lost track of what grade we’re all supposed to be in.

Fine. They hate the Republican party. Bob voted against the Republican in the last election, and calls us all names, and Lora converted to indy. And calls us all names. We get that. Somehow, we’ll figure out a way to soldier on.

But if that going to be your position, why do they continue to rail on about it? Shouldn’t they by like the magic princess in “Frozen” (..which having a young daughter, I’ve seen far too many times), and just “Let it go.”  Of course, having mentioned that, I’m sure I’ll be told I’m introducing my kids to demons, since in the movie she has magic powers.

The point is that no one is forced to participate in Republican politics. Nope. Not at all. If a person wants to, they’re very welcome to. But don’t expect to be sat at the table when you spend your time calling people names like a 2nd grader. You’re far more likely to be mocked, and no one is going to want to play with you. Or take anything you say seriously.

There are a lot of Republicans at the grassroots who actually do drive the debate, and the direction of the party in remaining true to conservative roots. They do it every day in their communities, and as part of something bigger at the state level. But those who spend their time calling everyone names? Not so much.

They’re purely there for entertainment purposes only.

Well, it’s here. Attorney General Explanation Released for Initiated Measure to Revise State Campaign Finance and Lobbying Laws

@SoDakCampaigns

(Somehow, I’m very doubtful that this is going to make the ballot with 45 days to go. – PP)

jackleyheader2

Attorney General Explanation Released for Initiated Measure to Revise State Campaign Finance and Lobbying Laws

Marty Jackley PIERRE, S.D.- South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today an Attorney General Explanation for an initiated measure has been filed with the Secretary of State. This statement will appear on petitions that will be circulated by the sponsor of the measure. If the sponsor obtains a sufficient number of signatures (13,871) on the petitions by November 9, 2015, as certified by the Secretary of State, the measure will be placed on the ballot for the November 2016 general election.

  1. An initiated measure to revise State campaign finance and lobbying laws, create a publicly funded campaign finance program, create an ethics commission, and appropriate funds

Under South Dakota law, the Attorney General is responsible for preparing explanations for proposed initiated measures, referred laws, and South Dakota Constitutional Amendments. Specifically, the explanation includes a title, an objective, clear and simple summary of the purpose and effect of the proposed measure and a description of the legal consequences. The Attorney General Explanation is not a statement either for or against the proposed measure.

To view the Attorney General Explanation for the measure, as well as the final form of the measure submitted to this office…. (View below, because I’m bringing it to you – PP)

Campaign Finance & Lobbying Init Measure

To date the Attorney General has released Attorney General Explanations for the following:

  1. An initiated measure to set a maximum finance charge for certain licensed money lenders
  2. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to allow referral of state and municipal laws affecting public peace, health, safety and the support of government and also to limit the ability to amend or repeal initiated laws
  3. An initiated measure to legalize marijuana for medical use
  4. An initiated measure to decriminalize the possession of one ounce or less of marijuana and marijuana paraphernalia
  5. An initiated measure to criminalize the transfer of alcoholic beverages
  6. An initiated measure to criminalize the transfer of tobacco and tobacco paraphernalia
  7. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to provide for state legislative redistricting by a commission
  8. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to expand rights for crime victims
  9. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution limiting the ability to set statutory interest rates for loans
  10. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution establishing nonpartisan elections
  11. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution establishing nonpartisan elections and requiring secret ballot elections for certain legislative officers
  12. An initiated measure to give certain organizations the right to charge fees
  13. An initiated measure to revise State campaign finance and lobbying laws, create a publicly funded campaign finance program, create an ethics commission, and appropriate funds

The current king is seeking to expand his territory. Huether eager to be king of us all

@SoDakCampaigns

Interesting comments in the Argus Leader Article on Steve Hildebrand this past weekend.

Aside from the face it was a nearly slobbering love letter from the Argus to one of President Obama’s former campaign chiefs, if you got past Stu Whitney, and read what Hildebrand had to say about Democratic Mayor Mike Huether, it’s very clear that there’s always been a “Glorious 10 year plan”  and it culminates with Huether running for Governor:

Hildebrand was credited with sharpening the campaign message and delivering a strong turnout on election night as Huether became the first political newcomer in 25 years to win the job, defeating city councilor Kermit Staggers with 57 percent of the vote.

and…

huether“If Mike were to change his ability to let citizens participate, to let longtime friends participate, to let neighborhood organizations participate, he might gather a lot of support, but he has been very much an individual leader who doesn’t really involve anyone else in his decision-making,” said Hildebrand. “He’ll have a hard time getting support from anybody if that’s the kind of person he continues to be.”

As for Huether’s contention that being mayor of Sioux Falls is his “dream job,” his former campaign manager disputes that characterization and says they had conversations about him running for governor before the mayoral push.

“Mike has wanted to be governor of South Dakota since he was a kid,” says Hildebrand. “It was never about being the mayor of Sioux Falls, it was always about being governor. He came back from San Antonio (where he worked for Citibank) with a big fat file that said, Huether for Governor.”

Read it here.

So, coming back from out of state, Huether was said to have a “big fat file that said, Huether for Governor.”   Wow.  Although, I’m not shocked at his utter hubris.

Even though he’s the state’s highest elected Democrat, does anyone think Huether could get past a Republican in the general election?  Of for that matter, could he survive a primary against a Democrat with more statewide appeal?

US Senator John Thune’s Weekly Column: President’s Energy Agenda Bad for South Dakota

Pat Powers

thuneheadernew John_Thune,_official_portrait,_111th_CongressPresident’s Energy Agenda Bad for South Dakota
By Sen. John Thune

South Dakotans frequently share with me their frustrations and concerns with Washington’s overreach into Americans’ lives. Despite the progress the new Senate Republican majority has made on many issues that impact hard-working families and small businesses across the country, the fact remains that Washington continues to be plagued by the failed leadership of the Obama administration.

Every September, we mark an anniversary that has become symbolic of the administration’s obstructionism: the filing of the construction permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. This year marks seven years since the permit was first filed. Even though the Obama State Department has reviewed hundreds of thousands of comments and completed five environmental impact statements, all of which found the pipeline would have no significant impact on the environment, the administration has continued to slow-walk an important infrastructure project that would immediately create “shovel-ready” jobs during construction, including 3,000-4,000 direct and indirect jobs in our state alone. The construction and operation of the pipeline would also bring crucial tax dollars to South Dakota municipalities along the route and bolster America’s energy independence.

Legislation to approve the Keystone XL pipeline was the first bill the GOP-led Senate considered this year. It passed with a strong bipartisan vote of over 60 senators supporting the bill. In February, President Obama sided with the liberal wing of his party and vetoed this legislation that would bring more energy to the United States and more economic growth in South Dakota. This is not the kind of leadership that will get our economy working again.

I recognize that the Keystone XL pipeline is only one project, but the administration’s attitude toward important energy investment has become all too pervasive. On August 3, the Obama Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its final rule against affordable electricity generation. This plan will increase electricity bills for Americans across the country, hurting job growth and families’ pocketbooks as it forces our most reliable and affordable sources of power generation out of operation – all while countries like China and India continue to pollute and exploit a competitive advantage of cheaper energy.

In the coming weeks, the EPA is expected to finalize what is estimated to be the most costly regulations in the agency’s history via a lower smog standard. The proposed range for a lower standard will draw large swaths of the country into nonattainment including areas in South Dakota, subjecting communities to stiff federal penalties, increased business costs, restrictions on infrastructure investment, and lost highway dollars. Even areas in marginal attainment will face steep challenges in attracting new economic development.

These and other regulations are hampering America’s economic recovery and have real-world impacts on South Dakota families and small businesses. Many of our efforts in the Senate to combat these regulations have been thwarted by a president committed to cementing his legacy. Unfortunately for hard-working Americans, the president’s legacy will be one plagued by obstructionism and federal overreach, the consequences of which will have a lasting impact. That is why Senate Republicans have been committed to enacting a pro-growth agenda that would help revive businesses, reduce tax and regulatory burdens, restore American values, and grow the middle class. The president might fight against this progress, but we’ll continue to fight back.

###

US Senator Mike Rounds’ Weekly Column: Back to School

Pat Powers

RoundsPressHeader MikeRounds official SenateBack to School
By Senator Mike Rounds
September 18, 2015

With September in full swing, students across the state are back in the classroom to begin a new school year. Making sure our kids receive a top-notch education is important to me as a former governor and state legislator, current U.S. Senator and most importantly, a grandfather to eight. The young people learning, growing and thriving in our schools today will be our next generation of engineers, economists, lawyers, doctors, business owners and community leaders. A strong education system will help secure a prosperous future for our children, our communities, our country and our world.

For the first time in years, Congress came together to strengthen education in America. For too long, our education system has been burdened by sweeping federal mandates and a failure by previous congresses and the administration to implement any new, comprehensive education reforms.  This year, however, the Senate passed the bipartisan Every Child Achieves Act, or ECAA. The ECAA is a complete overhaul of our education system that will bring decision-making abilities back to the state and local level. Parents, teachers and school boards will have the flexibility to implement strategies based on the individual needs of their students, not be burdened with one-size-fits-all federal mandates. The House of Representatives also passed an education reform bill this summer, and the two bills will now go to conference committee to reconcile the two bills before heading to the President’s desk.

While the ECAA is an immense improvement to our education system as a whole, we must do more to make certain all groups and demographics of children are properly cared for under our education system. That is why I am working to improve education among Native American students. High school graduation rates in South Dakota remains steady at approximately 83 percent, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. Unfortunately, for tribal schools in our state and across the country, the graduation rate is as low as 40 percent – half the national average. This is unacceptable.

Native American students—just like all students—deserve a strong education system that prepares them to have a strong and prosperous future. A deficit-neutral amendment I offered was included to the ECAA to address these low graduation rates. The amendment seeks to identify federal barriers restricting tribes from implementing common-sense regional policies and seeks to find ways to recruit and retain teachers and administrators in Indian Country.

With the 2015-2016 school year underway, I would like to thank all the teachers and school administrators who work tirelessly to educate and shape the young minds of tomorrow. South Dakota is fortunate to have top-notch teachers committed to delivering a strong, quality education to our youth. I will continue to find ways to support and strengthen our education system for South Dakota students and eliminate burdensome federal mandates. Future generations will have their own set of challenges and opportunities; a strong education system makes certain they are prepared to meet them.

###

Congresswoman Kristi Noem’s Weekly Column: Life on the Grid

Pat Powers

noem press header kristi noem headshot May 21 2014Life on the Grid
By Rep. Kristi Noem
September 18, 2015

We got together recently with some of the family for a quick lunch after church one Sunday.  My brother-in-law, Wesley, had apparently had enough of seeing everyone on their phones during the meal, so he declared it a “No Cell Phone Event.”  We all pulled our phones out and stacked them one on top of the other in the middle of the table. If only for an hour, we were going to go without our devices.  And you know what?  It was kind of nice.

Sure enough, however, as soon as we’d all been able to get some in-person face time, we all picked our phones back up, logged in, and checked to see what happened in the short time we’d been away.  The reality is that’s the world we live in.  It’s an increasingly connected world that relies on one thing above all else: electricity.

Whether we’re trying to keep our phones charged or the lights on, we need access to reliable and affordable electricity.  For all the debates we have about new sources from which to harvest that power, however, one component is often times left out of the discussion: that is, our outdated electrical grid.

Energy executive Robert Catell told a group of city managers in 2010: “If Thomas Edison came back today, not only would he recognize our electricity system, he could probably fix it [when problems arise].”  Clearly, it’s time for an upgrade.

windgridFortunately, South Dakota is moving ahead of the curve and upgrades are underway.  Earlier this month, I joined a handful of other state leaders and members of Xcel Energy and Otter Tail Power Company to help break ground on the CapX2020 transmission line that will run between a new substation near Big Stone City and an existing substation by Brookings.  For consumers, this ground breaking symbolizes the turning of a page to a new era of energy.  By modernizing and expanding this section of the grid, you will have better access to reliable and affordable electricity for decades to come.

The grid upgrades also enable us to better tap into South Dakota’s diverse energy resources.  Coal and natural gas remain to be some of the most reliable and affordable sources of energy we have access to.  In a state that spends a disproportionate amount of our family budgets on electricity costs, affordability has to be a big factor.  The upgraded grid system will move this kind electricity more efficiently.

But we also live in a place that can capitalize on an abundant amount of wind and hydro power.  Grid upgrades will allow us to take greater advantage of that as well.

Unfortunately, many experts have raised concerns that President Obama’s Clean Power Plan puts a greater emphasis on regulation than innovation when it comes to modernizing our electrical system.  Because the proposed EPA mandates are expected to put added strains on the grid, we could see decreased reliability and higher costs for consumers.  It’s irresponsible to compromise our energy security in this way.

Most of us live our lives on the grid.  Making sure it is reliable and efficient has to be a priority.  It was a privilege to be there while South Dakota took another step in the process of modernizing the grid, but more must be done.  For that to happen efficiently, the federal government has to get out of the way and let innovation lead.

###