Jongeling Announces Bid for District 6 House
Community Advocate & Leader to Bring Commonsense to Pierre

LINCOLN COUNTY–Republican Jerry Jongeling announced his bid today to represent Tea, Harrisburg and southwest Sioux Falls in the State House of Representatives for District 6. The open seat is being vacated by Rep. Aaron Aylward.

“Thanks to the encouragement of friends and family, I’m excited to throw my hat in the ring to fight for Lincoln County in the State House,” said Jongeling. “It’s an important time to get involved to make sure the decisions in Pierre reflect our county and our values. As your next Representative for District 6, you can rely on me to be a strong voice for lower taxes, a strong economy, and defending our freedoms.”

On his platform of commonsense solutions, Jerry will defend the values that define South Dakota: hard work, fiscal responsibility, and the protection of personal liberties. Following in the footsteps of his friend and campaign committee chairman, former District 6 Legislator Herman Otten, Jerry will stand up for Lincoln County in the Legislature.

“Jerry is a dedicated member of the community, and will be an excellent Legislator. He has my full support and endorsement,” said Otten. “I’ve seen firsthand Jerry’s ability to bring commonsense and South Dakota grit to problem solving. That’s exactly what we need more of in Pierre.”

Jerry lives in rural Lincoln County with his wife Alecia. The couple is parents to Carter (22)—who serves in the Air National Guard—and Alyssa (18). He holds an associate’s degree in electrical construction and maintenance from Mitchell Technical Institute. Jerry worked for 14 years in commercial electrical construction before joining the City of Sioux Falls where he serves as the Light, Power and Traffic Superintendent. In 2019, he was appointed to the Lincoln County Planning and Zoning Commission. Jerry also serves on the Heartland Energy Board of Directors, the state’s largest consumer power district, and the South Dakota Municipal Electric Association board.

The Republican Primary Election is Tuesday, June 2, 2026. Visit www.JerryForSD.com for more information and follow the campaign on Facebook at facebook.com/jerryforsd.

###

After it cost me an arm, leg, and part of my soul, my South Dakota political ribbons arrived from Texas this morning – and they are nice!  The picture I had from earlier did not do the Pettigrew ribbon justice:

The Teddy Roosevelt – William Taft – Chas. H. Burke for Congress ribbon.. I’m guessing is for the 1908 Congressional race, as Roosevelt and Taft were on the same team at that point before the split in the Republican Party (sound familiar?).

The Frank Pettigrew – the Pickerel Statesman – First Senator from South Dakota ribbon- From the 1894 or 1900 race.  Given the style of other ribbons I own with this style fringe (Wolsey for Capital 1890) this might be the earlier 1894 race.

And a real gem – this 1890 South Dakota Republican Ticket ballot ribbon – which makes it tied for my 3rd oldest ribbon. AND it has a crazy slate of collectible “themes” connected to it;   It has the 1890 vote for Pierre as the permanent seat of government.  It is connected with the state’s Women’s Suffrage movement (Shall the word “male” be stricken from section 1 article 7 of the constitution). AND it is a super rare campaign piece advocating for Governor Arthur C. Mellette, South Dakota’s first Governor.

The rest of the piece leads me to believe that this originated from here in my residence of Brookings as it advertises for several candidates which match those noted as being on the Republican ticket in the October 10, 1890 Brookings Register.

Some great items returned from the wilds of Texas back to the bosom of South Dakota!

And it helps me fill out a frame for South Dakota’s first US Senator!

House Judiciary Committee took solid action this morning on two bills that I had written about last week and yesterday that had A LOT of problems, and were just generally offensive to free speech as well as government transparency.

House Bill 1083, which wanted to “establish the crime of felony stalking of a public official” was sent to the 41st day on a vote of 11-2, despite testimony from the Governor’s office that claimed the punitive action against those disclosing information about public officials hinged on “intent,” and would not stifle free speech.  The law was widely supported by representatives of law enforcement – and I’d agree with them, due to the nature of what they do – but the devil is in the details as the lobbyist for the defense attorneys pointed out the constitutional issues, and just picked it apart noting that the the bill wanted to include using biometric data (a.k.a., a picture of someone’s face) as stalking.   It was also noted that we already have laws in place for much of what this legislation was attempting to re-do.

And then the committee started in. It did not survive the gauntlet of attorneys on House Judiciary who pointed out the bill’s problems. Rep. John Hughes led off the cross-examination of the bills main proponent quickly followed by most of the other attorneys on the committee including the chair. It was easily defeated.

House Bill 1084, again was trying to create a special class of protected politicians in terms of the voter database. This bill enjoyed many of the same supporters, but Justin Smith, the lobbyist for the South Dakota NewsMedia Association joined the fray, and pointed out the problems that this bill had.  Rep. Matt Roby stepped in with an amendment which stripped out the offensive protections for elected officials, leaving the address redactions for law enforcement and judges in the measure, making it a much more palatable bill.  I believe it passed 12-1 (and if I got that wrong, I’ll correct.)

A bad bill sent to the perdition of the 41st day, and another one reasonably fixed.  That’s a good committee result by anyone’s standard.

Attorney General Jackley Announces 11 Indictments in Connection  With Suspected Prison Drug Overdose Death

PIERRE, S.D. – South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announces that 11 people, including seven prison inmates, three private citizens, and one person who was a state government employee at the time, have been indicted in connection with a November 2025 drug overdose death of an inmate at the Mike Durfee State Prison in Springfield.

Timothy Tyree, 46, was reported deceased Nov. 17, 2025.  An autopsy revealed he had ingested synthetic cannabinoids (K2). During the same time, other inmates had indicated that they also had ingested K2.

“Our investigation uncovered a criminal conspiracy in which four private individuals—including one employed by the prison—were smuggling illegal drugs to inmates,” said Attorney General Jackley.  “Illegal substances inside our prison walls create a dangerous environment for both inmates and staff. That’s why this year I introduced legislation to strengthen our law for anyone attempting to smuggle these poisons into our facilities and to deter and stop these drugs from resulting in another tragic overdose.”

Those charged are:

*** Vanessa Baker, 54, Echo, MN on five charges: Distribution of Controlled Substances Resulting in Death; Aiding, Abetting, or Advising Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Distribution of Controlled Substance; and Delivery or Intent to Deliver Unauthorized Article to Inmate. Faces a combined maximum sentence of 60 years in prison or jail.

*** Morgan Benson, 27, Sioux Falls, SD on five charges: Distribution of Controlled Substances Resulting in Death; Aiding, Abetting, or Advising Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Distribution of Controlled Substance; and Delivery or Intent to Deliver Unauthorized Article to Inmate. Faces a combined maximum sentence of 60 years in prison or jail.

*** Tricia Bradley, 56, Springfield, SD on five charges: Distribution of Controlled Substances Resulting in Death; Aiding, Abetting, or Advising Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Distribution of Controlled Substance; and Delivery or Intent to Deliver Unauthorized Article to Inmate. Faces a combined maximum sentence of 60 years in prison or jail.

*** Wicanhpiduta Brant, Inmate, Mike Durfee Prison on six charges: Distribution of Controlled Substances Resulting in Death; Aiding, Abetting, or Advising Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Distribution of Controlled Substance; Delivery or Intent to Deliver Unauthorized Article to Inmate; and Possession of Prohibited Controlled Substance by Inmate. Faces a combined maximum sentence of 70 years in prison or jail.

*** Tyler Gallant, 36, Inmate, Mike Durfee Prison on six charges: Distribution of Controlled Substances Resulting in Death; Aiding, Abetting, or Advising Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Distribution of Controlled Substance; Delivery or Intent to Deliver Unauthorized Article to Inmate; and Possession of Prohibited Controlled Substance by Inmate. Faces a combined maximum sentence of 70 years in prison or jail.

*** Kok Put Kach, 41, Sioux Falls, SD on five charges: Distribution of Controlled Substances Resulting in Death; Aiding, Abetting, or Advising Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Distribution of Controlled Substance; and Delivery or Intent to Deliver Unauthorized Article to Inmate. Faces a combined maximum sentence of 60 years in prison or jail.

*** Duoth Kek, 40, Inmate, Mike Durfee Prison on five charges: Distribution of Controlled Substances Resulting in Death; Aiding, Abetting, or Advising Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Distribution of Controlled Substance; and Delivery or Intent to Deliver Unauthorized Article to Inmate. Faces a combined maximum sentence of 60 years in prison or jail.

*** Komakeg Loyira, 30, Inmate, Mike Durfee Prison on five charges: Distribution of Controlled Substances Resulting in Death; Aiding, Abetting, or Advising Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Distribution of Controlled Substance; and Delivery or Intent to Deliver Unauthorized Article to Inmate. Faces a combined maximum sentence of 60 years in prison or jail.

*** Saquan Pemberton, 30, Inmate, Mike Durfee Prison on six charges: Distribution of Controlled Substances Resulting in Death; Aiding, Abetting, or Advising Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance Resulting in Death; Distribution of Controlled Substance; Delivery or Intent to Deliver Unauthorized Article to Inmate; and Possession of Prohibited Controlled Substance by Inmate. Faces a combined maximum sentence of 70 years in prison or jail.

*** Keith Hawk, 30, Inmate, Mike Durfee Prison on two charges: Possession of Prohibited Controlled Substance by an Inmate and Unauthorized Possession of a Controlled Substance.  Faces a combined maximum sentence of 15 years in prison or jail.

*** Trenton Redwater, 27, Mitchell on two charges: Aiding, Abetting or Advising Possession of Prohibited Controlled Substance by an Inmate and Keeping Place for Use or Sale of a Controlled Substance. Faces a combined maximum sentence of 15 years in prison or jail. He was an inmate at the time the crime was committed.

The maximum sentences for some of the indicted defendants may be enhanced by habitual offender provisions or by state law which allows for certain criminal penalties to be doubled when committed by prisoners of a state correctional facility.

South Dakota’s Division of Criminal Investigation (DCI) and the Department of Corrections Office of the Inspector General investigated the death. The Attorney General’s Office will prosecute.

The defendants were indicted last week by a Bon Homme County Grand Jury. They are presumed innocent under the U.S. Constitution.

Charges have now been filed in four of the eight suspected drug overdose deaths of prison inmates that occurred in 2025. The other three are currently proceeding through court. The four other cases remain under investigation.

-30-

Was this Karla Lems’ Lt Gov Campaign finance report or her legislative report? Because we’re not seeing a lot of people all-in on her race to be Hansen’s Lt. Governor:

Karla Lems Year End Report by Pat Powers

Unitemized Contributions of $500.00, with a few others maxing out under itemized Contributions at $23,550.00. And a family member did make a $20,000.00 loan.

They did stick $30,144.94 of the advertising budget under this committee. No info whether wrapping the camper was part of the expense.

The Hansen for Governor part of the campaign committee probably needs to impress us with how much they were able to haul out of pizza ranch fundraisers. Because otherwise they should pack it up, and the salad bar should be closed due to wilted lettuce and weak fundraising.

I had this forwarded to me tonight, and frankly, it’s kind of dumb. And whiney. A subset of the South Dakota Republican Party is apparently on a campaign to defund public broadcasting.

Is it because philosophically they don’t believe this should be a function of state government? Well, not really if you read into their lament. It’s because they feel picked on.

From: sjcvrk@reagan.com <sjcvrk@reagan.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2026 12:25 PM
Cc: Jeannie Franceus
Subject: ACTION NEEDED SOONEST ON THE SDPB RESOLUTION
Greetings! This is a status update on the resolution recommending defunding of SDPB political programming.
1. First of all, twenty-three county e-boards signed onto the original version.

2. Since then, feedback from several sources identified a couple of suggested changes that make great sense for inclusion in an update to the language of the resolution. These changes were iterated before and after the testimony given to the Joint Appropriations Committee on Wed, 21 January by Jeannie Franceus:

A. It was noted that SDPB funds critical infrastructure for the state’s emergency broadcasting system (incl. Amber alerts) that includes towers, communications systems, facilities, etc. The resolution needs to be refocused on only defunding the biased programming to make it easier for the legislators to take action (and not vote no because it would otherwise result in defunding critical stuff).

B. Sen. Taffy Howard brought up the concept of using subscription services to fund popular programming like high school sports events (just like a lot of networks use these days). It makes eminent sense to include and recommend this in the updated resolution for the legislature to determine.

3. The original version was given by Jeannie to the JAC with the comment that a “final version” would be updated and delivered “in a few days,” including with potentially more signatories.

4. Accordingly, this email is a request to review the updated version that is attached and go to the well again with your e-board to ascertain whether your county will sign on.

5. If we can break the threshold of 30 counties signing on, Chairman Eschenbaum has agreed to sign it out on behalf of the SDGOP, otherwise, the wording will say what it does in the attached version (“the undersigned members of the South Dakota Republican Party…”).

6. As before, if you can’t get an “e-board signature,” please provide the names and titles of individuals among your e-board who will sign.

Please take action soonest so that we can impact the JAC’s deliberations on this topic.

Many thanks in advance for your prompt reply! As before Jeannie will be whipping your votes.

TNX
Stu
Bon Homme County

Resolution Recommending the Defunding of Politically-Biased Programming by the South Dakota Public Broadcas… by Pat Powers

“WHEREAS, SDPB is a division of the South Dakota Bureau of Information and Telecommunications, a state agency, which pays the salaries of SDPB employees, buys equipment for the network and provides space for the network operations through the University of South Dakota, a state-supported school, all of which are used to regularly report disparagingly of conservative Republicans and their values while reporting supportively of liberal Democrats and their values.”

This does not seem to be a philosophical debate about what should be versus what should be not a function of state government. It seems that a few members of the central committee just want to go crying because they think someone is picking on them.

At the same time they think Public Broadcasting sure can go ahead and put in the equipment and capabilities of broadcasting pay-per view. But don’t report despairingly on them or be mean.

They note that if enough crybabies sign on that people are picking on them, the state Republican Party chairman will claim that it came from the entire Republican Party.

Instead of a bunch of whiners.

Maybe to further emphasize my point on why the addresses of legislators should not be hidden from the public; I tried sending this in an e-mail to committee members early this afternoon. None of them got it.   

If the system rejects e-mail to legislators’ e-mail addresses, maybe – just maybe – they should have information available to assist people sending them an old-fashioned letter.

– pp

——————–

Good afternoon.

I wanted to send a note to you in opposition to House Bills 1083 and 1084 that you will be hearing tomorrow in House Judiciary Committee as these bills are deeply flawed in several different ways. Even if some problems can be addressed, there are portions that rise to the level of being offensive to the concepts of open government and transparency in South Dakota.

I had previously written an essay on some of the problems with this legislation..

The pitfalls of creating a protected class of elites. And what about all the elected officials they leave for the wolves?

..But to give you the highlights of why these bills are bad:

With House Bill 1083, We are creating yet another new crime in South Dakota – intentionally or not – directed against those in the media.  I would draw your attention to the fact that the crime of stalking is proposed to include in it’s language in Section 1 of the bill:

(4) Knowingly disseminate, post, or publish, by electronic means, another person’s employment, home, or school address or location, or identifying information, as defined by § 22-40-9, without the other person’s consent, and with the intent to intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to the other person or the other person’s immediate family, as defined by § 22-1-2.

Consider the result of this language. Under the passage of this law, it could become a criminal act for a newspaper to publish on-line that the subject of a story works at a certain business.  And it goes farther than that. What happens when property transfers are posted publicly? That often will include names and addresses. Will 22-19A-1 now become a risk of criminality for the publisher after this very common disclosure of public information that is filed and available through county websites?

Whether it intends “to cause emotional distress” might be arguable. Intent may be in the eye of the beholder and a question of fact that will have to be drug through the courts. One person’s journalism might be triggering of another’s distress.  I myself often report using the very tools made available to the public – the publicly available and accessible state voter list and corporate records – all currently public documents available from the state of South Dakota. All containing addresses.

Will disclosing the contents of public documents now run the risk of an arrest, investigation and felony prosecution? Because I would venture prosecutors and law enforcement will then be spending resources trying to determine where that line is drawn.

Further problematic is Section 3 of House Bill 1083, as it creates and carves out special protection for certain elected officials, yet leaves off others. Under this bill, Statewide officeholders are granted special protections. So are Legislators.

But County Commissioners, County Auditors, County Register of Deeds, County Finance Officers, Mayors, City Councilmen/Commissioners and School Board members are among the many others left out.  This seems to be very inconsistent, and makes little sense.

Regarding the rest of this section of the proposed measure, by all means, protect law enforcement officers and members of the justice system who are charged with investigating and prosecuting criminal acts. But to create felony level penalties for the media or public citizens pointing out conflicts of interest for elected officials is an extreme measure, and more than chilling for free speech.

House Bill 1084 is also problematic and inconsistent.  As noted under Section 4 with the proposed addition to laws:

 Any home address, home or personal telephone number, or the personal e-mail address contained in the historical archive of the statewide voter registration file is not open to public inspection if the information is for:

(1) An individual elected or appointed to statewide or legislative office;

(2) An individual elected or appointed to a federal office;

The proposal to redact the home address of legislators from the public record is against the public interest, as it takes away the ability of the public to verify whether the declared residence of the legislator is factual in terms of their qualifications for the office they are currently serving in.    A legislator or other elected official might send a postcard with an address of their choosing. But with the passage of this law, how can the public verify that this person sending them correspondence is actually their neighbor?

As a participant in the American experiment, the public’s right to know is a fundamental principle that citizens should have access to government information and records to ensure transparency, accountability, and informed participation in democracy.  This legislative package is the opposite of this. It is contrary to and attacks the public’s right to know.  It creates a privileged class of elected officials who under these measures do not owe any duty of transparency to the voters, and weaponizes the law against voters to attempt to independently review the claims of politicians.

Ronald Reagan famously quipped “trust, but verify.”  With House Bills 1083 and 1084, that principle is wiped away because there is no trust. And the measure will erase any ability to verify.

Thank you for your consideration of my request.  Please reject House Bills 1083 and 1084.

Border Security Is a Promise Kept
by Sen. John Thune

It’s difficult to overstate how dramatically the situation at the southern border has improved over the past year. In December, there were 10,000 total encounters at the southern border. Compare that to 96,000 encounters the previous December under President Biden, or more than 300,000 in December 2023. After years of crisis, the border is finally secure.

I was recently at the southern border to see for myself the progress that’s been made in just one year under President Trump. What I saw could not be more different from my two visits during the Biden administration. In early 2021, I visited a facility that was already operating at 16 times its allotted capacity soon after President Biden took office. And when I returned in 2023, I heard from Border Patrol agents who had been dealing with a border crisis for two years and were in desperate need of resources and support from the Biden administration – support that never came.

The situation at the southern border today is a complete turnaround from the Biden-era crisis. Border Patrol agents I spoke to on my recent trip told me that the flood of illegal immigrants has slowed to a trickle. Law enforcement officers are being supported in their work and allowed to do the job they were hired to do to protect our border. And the data speaks for itself. Order has been restored, the crisis is behind us, and our country is much safer for it.

I’m grateful to President Trump and his administration for wasting no time securing our border, and I’m proud of the work Republicans have done in Congress to ensure that we sustain that progress in the years to come. Last year, Republicans made a generational investment in border security. We funded completion of the border wall, new technology and surveillance equipment, and expanded detention capacity. We also supported hiring additional Border Patrol agents and expanded partnerships with local law enforcement to enforce immigration law. These resources help law enforcement do its job, keep the border secure, and deter illegal immigration.

During my recent visit, border agents repeatedly emphasized that they are already seeing positive impacts from these investments, particularly with additional personnel and counter-drone technology. Thanks to new technology, Border Patrol can take over or destroy drones operated by cartels at the border, limiting the cartels’ surveillance abilities and capacity to transport dangerous items into our country. And that’s just one example of how Republicans’ landmark legislation is strengthening border security and making America safer.

I believe that we are a nation of immigrants, but we are also a nation of laws, and those laws need to be enforced. President Trump has restored law and order at America’s borders, and I’m proud that congressional Republicans have provided the resources necessary to sustain these important efforts. A safer America starts at our borders, and Republicans will continue to make border security a priority.

###

Defending Life
By Rep. Dusty Johnson
January 23, 2026

BIG Update

Homeownership is the bedrock of the American Dream but has become out of reach for many individuals and families. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is only creating more obstacles to reach that goal for those living on South Dakota’s reservations.

I introduced the Tribal Trust Land Homeownership Act to cut through BIA bureaucratic red tape and require the BIA to meet deadlines and better communicate with lenders. This week, my bill unanimously passed the House Natural Resources Committee. The bill has already passed the Senate, where Senator Thune is the sponsor. I’m hopeful the House will pass this legislation quickly and President Trump will sign it into law soon.

BIG Idea

This week, I voted to pass legislation that supports families and expecting mothers. One of those bills was the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act which ensures that 2,700 pregnancy resource centers across the country have access to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families funding. These centers provide support and supplies to expecting mothers when they need it most. I also supported legislation to require higher education institutions to inform pregnant students of the support and services available to them.

I was recently given an A+ rating on the Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America National Pro-Life Scorecard. We must continue to defend the lives of children in the womb and support families.

BIG News

This week marked a milestone in returning fiscal sanity to Washington. The funding bills passed by the House replace Biden-era funding levels and reprioritize taxpayer dollars to make critical investments in America. These funding packages demonstrate a commitment to cutting wasteful spending while investing in a secure border, a dominant military, and real improvements to American infrastructure.

This bipartisan funding process is how Congress should work, as opposed to funding the government from crisis to crisis.

###

From Facebook, one of Christine‘s biggest fans has made a video in support of her campaign: