South Dakota Has a Primary Problem

Joe Kirby, Chairman of South Dakota Open Primaries announced, “We have a primary problem in South Dakota. Only 17% of voters turned out for the June 2024 primary election. It appears over 70% will vote in the November general election. Why the difference? Because many South Dakota voters are denied a meaningful role in the state’s closed primaries.”

“Public officials are quick to criticize voters when turnout is low. But the problem isn’t the voters. South Dakotans have proven they love to vote in important elections. The state’s antiquated closed primary system prohibits them from doing that.”

“The closed primary system made more sense when there were two strong political parties in the state and very few independent voters. But the world has changed. The South Dakota Democratic party has become mostly irrelevant with no Democrat currently occupying statewide office and only about 10% of legislative positions. Meanwhile, the number of independent voters who choose not to affiliate with either party has skyrocketed to 155,000. The number of independent voters in the state far exceeds the number of Democrats.”

“Amendment H is on the November 5^th ballot and would solve South Dakota’s primary problem. All candidates for an office would be listed on a single ballot. All legal voters would get that ballot. The top two vote getters would move on to the general election. Most importantly, all voters would get to vote.”

“The state of South Dakota estimates an open primary would attract another 50,000 voters. We think that their estimate is low. South Dakotans have proven at multiple general elections that they will turn out in large numbers when there are interesting and competitive races. Open primaries promise to increase the number of candidates as well the competition in our elections.”

The following chart uses data from the South Dakota Secretary of State’s website.

YEAR	General Election	Primary Election
2016	70%	21%
2018	65%	27%
2020	74%	28%
2022	59%	32% (Amendment C drew a crowd)
2024	>70% estimated	17%

Kirby added, “We have a primary problem in South Dakota.155,000 independent and not affiliated South Dakota voters currently have little to say about who represents them and leads the state. That’s not fair. Nor is it good for our state. After all, democracy works best when all voters get to vote. Vote YES on H!”

####

Attorney General Jackley, SDSU, USD File Motion To Keep NCAA lawsuit in State Court

PIERRE, S.D – South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announces his office and the South Dakota Board of Regents, on behalf of South Dakota State University and the University of South Dakota, have filed a motion seeking to have its lawsuit against the NCAA heard in state, not federal, court.

The motion, filed Tuesday in South Dakota U.S. District Court in Sioux Falls, is in response to a motion earlier filed by the NCAA requesting that the lawsuit be moved to federal court.

“For a case to be moved to federal court, the federal court must either have original jurisdiction or involve significant federal issues, and the NCAA fails to satisfy either requirement,” said Attorney General Jackley. “We believe this case should remain in state court, regardless the NCAA settlement is unfair to smaller universities and female athletes.”

Attorney General Jackley and the Board of Regents, SDSU and USD filed its lawsuit in September in Brookings County Circuit Court, arguing a proposed $2.8 billion settlement between the so-called “Power Four” conferences unfairly forces smaller schools like the South Dakota schools to be responsible for a disproportionate share of the settlement cost. The lawsuit also states the female athletes would receive only 10 percent of the settlement proceeds.

The judge will rule on the motion at a later time.

South Dakota’s response to the NCAA can be found here:

Congressman Dusty Johnson is on the air with his new Campaign commercial Ports to Prairies. Click on the image and check it out!

Congressional hopeful Democrat Sheryl Johnson’s campaign is going to quietly wind down at this point. Because with 20 days to go until the election, with only $16k in the bank, she’s not going to do much else.

Sheryl Johnson Oct 2024 Fec by Pat Powers on Scribd

Sheryl had a passable quarter for a first time statewide candidate with $77,917.03 in receipts.  The problem is that she has nothing for the homestretch after spending $100,232.72, which included her existing cash on hand. That left the SD Mom for Congress with $16,263.08 cash on hand to run the rest of the campaign.

Or more likely, make sure her staff is paid, get things returned, and quietly close things down in the remaining days until November 5th.

Attorneys General Jackley, Kobach, and Wrigley Argue DACA Rule Would Place Undue Burdens on States

PIERRE, S.D. – South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley, Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, and North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley Tuesday argued in North Dakota U.S. Federal Court that a proposed federal rule that treats DACA recipients as legal citizens would impact the financial health and public safety of States.

“The burdens fall on the States when Washington fails to address illegal immigration and secure our Southern Border,” said Attorney General Jackley. “It has affected the public health and safety with the flow of meth and fentanyl from the Southern Border into our States. The financial burden of this proposed DACA rule for South Dakota families is real, ranging between $26 million to $35 million per year.”

Attorney Generals in 19 States filed the suit this August challenging the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ final rule regarding eligibility of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients for a Qualified Health Plan through an Affordable Care Act exchange.

The federal court has now taken the case under advisement and ordered the federal government to produce factual information to the States. A decision will be announced in the near future with the Rule going into effect Nov. 1, 2024.

In addition to South Dakota, Kansas, and North Dakota, other Attorney Generals who joined this suit are from Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.

-30-

 

Senator Thune continues to add to his unmatched campaign account as he prepares to help candidates across the country.

John Thune Oct 2024 FEC by Pat Powers on Scribd

Senator John Thune filed his latest FEC report today, underlining why he’s going to be the next majority leader as he transferred an incredible $4 Million to the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

The Senator raised $865,939.28, and spent $4,173,553.55, including that big transfer. And he still has $15,210,883.39 cash on hand.

 

Dusty Johnson just posted what might be his best quarterly fundraising total ever in the congressional race. Not to mention he just broke $5 million cash-on-hand.

Dusty Johnson Oct 2024 FEC by Pat Powers on Scribd

In a 250-page plus Federal Elections Commission filing, Congressman Dusty Johnson has managed to hit new heights in flexing his fundraising ability in the race for Congress, as he reported raising $562,655.82 from his primary campaign committee, along with transferring another $90,900.00 in from his Joint Fundraising Committee, plus $18,959.80 in interest – totaling $672,515.62.

I had to call and ask, and campaign staff are reporting to me that this appears to be Congressman Johnson’s highest quarterly total ever.  That’s against only $139,215.51 in campaign expenditures.

But the big number Dusty put up was a new peak in fundraising where I believe he broke the ceiling for his cash on hand, setting a new benchmark of $5,198,727.36 cash-on-hand to use in his race against Sheryl Johnson. Or not.  Johnson is not done raising money this year either with a number of fundraisers yet to come in the remaining three weeks before the election. Including one in Brookings that I’ll attend next week.

Congressman Johnson is on a huge roll towards election day.

And perhaps an election beyond.

Governor Noem and Colleagues Defend “Help Not Harm” Legislation  

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem and nine fellow governors submitted an amici curiae brief to the United States Supreme Court for the United States v. Skrmetti case. This case regards the constitutionality of a Tennessee law that, similar to South Dakota’s “Help Not Harm” law, bans harmful, irreversible medical procedures on vulnerable minors. 

“South Dakota’s kids are our future, and I will always stand up for the next generation of South Dakotans,” said Governor Kristi Noem. “The Biden-Harris Administration intervened in this case, but the federal government has no business forcing states to perform harmful, irreversible, and unscientific medical procedures on children.”

In 2023, Governor Noem signed House Bill 1080, which passed 60 to 10 in the House and 30 to 4 in the Senate. It is now codified at SDCL 34-24-33 through 34-24-38. 

Governor Kristi Noem is joined on brief by South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey, Arkansas Governor Sarah Sanders, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, Georgia Governor Brian P. Kemp, Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry, Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt, and Utah Governor Spencer Cox.

### 

Tourism Coalition of South Dakota (TCSD) Urges Voters to Reject IM-28
IM-28 is a Threat to South Dakota’s Communities and Tourism Industry

Pierre, SD, October 15, 2024 – The Tourism Coalition of South Dakota (TCSD) opposes Initiated Measure 28 (IM-28), warning that the measure would create serious financial challenges for communities large and small across the state. From family-owned businesses to major tourist attractions, the consequences of IM-28 would affect every corner of South Dakota’s tourism industry.

Potential $646 Million Revenue Loss

IM-28 could strip up to $646 million from South Dakota’s budget, a deficit that would impact all communities and essential state programs. With 80% of state expenditures going to education and health & human services, the resulting budget shortfall would disproportionately affect children, patients, and seniors. “The loss in sales tax revenue would force devastating cuts to local programs, which are essential for attracting visitors and supporting local businesses across South Dakota,” said Carmen Schramm, Executive Director of TCSD. “IM-28 would hurt every South Dakotan — from small business owners to large employers, and from city streets to rural roads,” added Schramm. “We cannot afford to weaken the funding that supports our towns, schools, and health services.”

Impact on Local Communities 

The effects of IM-28 extend beyond the state budget. South Dakota communities will be prohibited from taxing items the state cannot tax under SDCL 10-52-2, which states that “no tax may be levied … unless such tax conforms in all respects to the state tax.” Since IM-28 eliminates taxes rather than setting them at 0%, this provision would significantly impact local budgets. This means that towns and cities will lose a critical source of revenue, including taxes currently collected on tobacco, vapes, and other related products. As a result, additional cuts to local budgets could affect essential services like law enforcement, road maintenance, public pools, and parks.

Risk of Income Tax

IM-28 could also fundamentally change South Dakota’s tax system. With such a significant revenue shortfall, there is concern that a ballot measure might be introduced to establish an income tax to compensate for the lost funds, placing a heavy financial burden on taxpayers statewide.

A Coalition to Protect South Dakota’s Future 

The Tourism Coalition of South Dakota (TCSD) has joined more than 60 organizations and over 75 cities and towns that have passed resolutions in opposition to IM-28 as part of the “No on

IM-28” campaign. This coalition is working to educate voters about the serious risks posed by IM-28 and the potential harm it could inflict on the state’s economy. You can visit their website to learn more: nosdincometax.com. “IM-28 is poorly drafted and will lead to major cuts to the state and municipalities or it sets us up for major tax increases,” said Nathan Sanderson, Executive Director of the South Dakota Retailers Association. “Don’t take the bait; vote no on IM-28.”

About the Tourism Coalition of South Dakota (TCSD):

The Tourism Coalition of South Dakota represents a diverse group of businesses and organizations working to promote and protect South Dakota’s tourism industry. TCSD advocates for policies that support tourism’s role as a key contributor to the state’s economy, ensuring the industry’s sustainable growth.

###

I had my nose buried in work tonight, and had forgotten I needed to monitor this eBay auction.. but luckily no one else wanted to get in on this sale.  And I managed to acquire another State Capital fight ribbon that I didn’t have. This time from either the the 1889 or 1890 battle when Watertown was in the fight:

It has been trimmed up and has a little wear, but as I’ve said before these ribbons are not an everyday thing to stumble across. So any time I can find one is a happy occasion.