Representative Jeff Bathke Announces Reelection Campaign for District 20 House

Mitchell, SD– State Representative Jeff Bathke announces his re-election campaign, representing District 20 and the great State of South Dakota. District 20 includes the communities and citizens of Jerauld, Sanborn, Miner and Davison Counties.
Representative Bathke has spent the last six months deployed to the Middle East, conducting operations in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt. “I don’t like missing the 2026 Session, but maintaining stability in the Middle East has a direct effect on the residents of South Dakota. I am proud of our accomplishments here, and God willing, will return to South Dakota in the Spring.

Bathke currently serves as the Command Sergeant Major of the 650th Regional Support Group in Sloan, NV. He has completed two previous deployments, serving in several countries to include Kuwait, Iraq, Syria, and Jordan. “Considering the current activity in the Middle East, this has been a very interesting mission. We have troops in harm’s way across several countries and hope for the best, so we all come home safe.”

Bathke’s reliable presence in the legislature utilizes his experience in local and state government, as well as his military career. “In the last session, there were many bills related to state and local government, as well as prison construction and reform. Spending the first half of my career working in the SD Prison System, and the second half in Planning & Zoning and Emergency Management for Davison County, I found myself highly involved in legislative discussions. My goal is to leave this place a little better than I found it, for my five grandchildren.”

Bathke serves on the House Taxation and Local Government Committees. He uses a common-sense approach to maintain local control and eliminate un-needed government regulation. His previous accomplishments revolve around funding for 911, agricultural drainage, Veteran’s headstones, and the Veteran’s Cemetery. “I try to maintain regular contact with the local government leaders, small businesses, and school administrators, the true experts in the community”. Bathke sees the most important issues in 2026 as property tax relief, data centers, funding for the Big Three (Education, State Employees, and Healthcare Providers), and prison reform.

Representative Bathke can be reached at jeff.bathke@sdlegislature.gov

I did notice that a few of you have been grousing because you didn’t care for me pointing out the unforced error from yesterday’s state of the state address.   Good people can agree to disagree.

But if you’re looking for what an attack on the administration actually looks like, look no farther than the self-important South Dakota Free-dumb caucus’ latest press release from Republican party pariah Rep. Phil Jensen, Senator California Carley and others who attacked the Governor’s proposal, declaring “outrage” and calling it “Crony Capitalism” and “Centralized Economic Planning”:

Contact: Representative Phil Jensen
Telephone: (605) 209-7404
E-mail: chair@sdfreedomcaucus.com

CAUCUS RETURNS TO BUSINESS AS USUAL: STATE PLANS FOR MORE CRONY CAPITALISM

PIERRE, S.D. — This week the South Dakota Freedom Caucus returned to the Capitol for 40 legislative days of fighting for freedom over favoritism. Immediately back, the citizens were presented Tuesday with Governor Larry Rhoden’s State of the State address, which was a mixed bag of encouraging South Dakota values, along with plans for future crony capitalism.

The South Dakota Freedom Caucus issued an expansive warning of the theme of Governor Larry Rhoden’s State of the State address, warning that the administration’s “Opportunity Agenda” is a blueprint for centralized economic planning that betrays free-market principles and mirrors systemic corruption seen in neighboring states.

The caucus argues that Governor Rhoden’s vision relies on state agencies acting as “economic allocators,” using the Future Fund to pick winners and losers by handing out taxpayer dollars to politically favored corporations. This interventionist model, the caucus warns, gives unfair preference to select businesses while forcing the rest of South Dakota’s entrepreneurs to compete against their own tax dollars.

“True conservatism is about a level playing field, not a government-steered marketplace where bureaucrats decide which projects are ‘bold’ enough for public subsidy,” said Senator John Carley (R-Piedmont), Vice Chair of the South Dakota Freedom Caucus. “What we heard today was not a celebration of the free market; it was an endorsement of a managed economy. Using the Future Fund to distribute taxpayer-funded aid to select corporations while our own small businesses struggle to keep the lights on is not economic growth—it is the definition of crony capitalism.”

Caucus leaders expressed particular outrage at the Governor’s decision to explicitly celebrate the CJ Schwan’s development from the podium. The project is currently embroiled in a mounting ethics scandal involving a “revolving door” between the Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GOED) and private beneficiaries. Reports have highlighted that former GOED Commissioner Steve Westra, who oversaw the initial aid to the company, is now a Vice President for the firm. Additionally, the current Chair of the state Board of Economic Development, Jeff Erickson, maintains deep ties to the very company receiving millions in state grants and tax rebates.

“It is a slap in the face to South Dakota taxpayers for the Governor to take a victory lap on a project currently clouded by documented ethics concerns,” said Representative Phil Jensen (R-Rapid City), Chairman of the South Dakota Freedom Caucus. “We’ve seen what happens when government agencies operate without accountability—look at Minnesota, where the ‘Feeding Our Future’ scandal resulted in the defrauding of over $9 billion or more of taxpayer dollars. South Dakota is heading down that same dangerous path when we allow a revolving door to spin between regulators and the corporations they subsidize. Highlighting CJ Schwan’s as a success story while these questions remain unanswered proves that this administration is more interested in protecting the powerful, not the people.”

The Freedom Caucus also challenged the Governor’s celebration of massive federal funding inflows, specifically the $189.4 million award mentioned in his address. Aaron Aylward (R-), former Chair of the Freedom Caucus, argued that “’federal dollars’ do not come from some magic pot of money from elsewhere – these are our income taxes, as well as the printed money that causes inflation and are a large part of the reason that everyone demands ‘cost of living’ increases.” Also, the caucus pointed out that federal dollars are not free dollars and that leaning into Washington’s purse strings inevitably compromises South Dakota’s sovereignty.

“Federal dependency is a drug that masks the underlying rot of a growing state bureaucracy,” said Representative Tina Mulally (R-Rapid City), Treasurer of the South Dakota Freedom Caucus. “Governor Rhoden celebrates nearly $200 million in federal handouts as a ‘win,’ but every dollar from Washington comes with strings attached that ultimately tighten around the necks of South Dakota taxpayers. If we want South Dakota to remain free, independent, and self-governing, we must stop building our budget on the shifting sands of federal debt.”

While the caucus commends the Governor for his recognition that property tax is a vitally important topic that requires action, many worry that the Governor’s property tax proposal is a “shell game” designed to distract from the need for genuine spending restraint. Rhoden’s plan to allow counties to replace property taxes with a half-cent sales tax was framed by the caucus as a step in the right direction, but not near far enough, with the detrimental side effect of no requirements for government to curb spending.

“Replacing one tax with another is not tax reform; it is a tax shift that keeps the government’s footprint exactly the same size while shifting the bill to the another taxpayer,” Mulally added. “By moving the burden from property owners to everyday transactions, the Governor is merely rearranging the furniture in a burning house. Real relief starts with right-sizing government and cutting spending—not creative bookkeeping.”

In contrast to the Governor’s proposal, Senator Carley has introduced SB 58, which would take the bold step of reducing property tax mill levies to zero, forcing the state to address its spending habits rather than just finding new ways to bill its citizens.

“The people of South Dakota didn’t send us to Pierre to swap one tax for another; best case, that can buy some time for real relief” Carley concluded. “They sent us here to eliminate the burden. SB 58 is one of the few serious proposals on the table that offer a path to permanent relief by dismantling the property tax machine entirely.”

Governor Rhoden also discussed his GRIT tax force, in which he seems sincerely to be looking for solutions to state-wide infrastructure failures and security as a state. However, more government involvement is not the solution, and the caucus warned that historical examples of government takeovers of infrastructure have not ended well, and result in rationing and government control of who is allocated power, water, and gas. While utilities do not fall under real “free market” principles this is not a direction that South Dakota should go. Infrastructure and the security thereof is a massive need, and the caucus encourages the companies involved in that to shore up their defenses without government takeovers.

The South Dakota Freedom Caucus is calling on the Legislature to reject this move toward centralized planning and return to the principles of limited government, transparency, and the free market.

Isn’t Tina on the executive board for the SDGOP as their treasurer complaining about State Government’s creative bookkeeping?  I seem to recall her name on all those reports that show zero donations..  Anyway, we’ll have to see how California Carley’s and the rest of the crew’s legislation fares.

And session moves on.

Thune: Republicans Plow Ahead on Confirming the President’s Nominees

“Republicans remain committed to ensuring that he has his team in place so that he can do the work the American people elected him to do.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) today delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor:

Click here to watch the video.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) today delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor:

Thune on Democrats’ War Powers Hypocrisy

“Democrats are taking up this bill because their anti-Trump hysteria knows no bounds.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) today delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor:

Attorney General Jackley Announces Former SDSU Equestrian Coach Indicted for Using State Resources for Personal Use

 PIERRE, S.D. – South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announces that the former equestrian coach at South Dakota State University has been indicted on one felony count of Grand Theft for using SDSU and taxpayer resources for her personal use.

Kamerra Brown, 38, of Brookings was indicted Thursday, Jan. 8, 2026 by a Brookings County Grand Jury. The sentence carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison if convicted.

Brown is alleged to have used SDSU resources to pay for her vet bills for her horses and to board her personal horses for about a year. Total value is estimated at between $5,000 and $100,000.

The case is being investigated and prosecuted by the Attorney General’s Office’s Public Integrity Unit.

The defendant is presumed innocent under the U.S. Constitution.

-30-

Didn’t Carl Perry learn last time that this is a solution in search of a problem? Because nobody is out there begging that they want more of their paychecks to go to paying insurance.  If you like your homeowners insurance going up, prepare for higher car insurance rates.

House Bill 1059 has been introduced to increase the amounts required in a motor vehicle liability policy.  Increased policy limits means more expensive insurance for everyone, because car insurance is mandatory in South Dakota. It’s like death and taxes.  And Sjaarda, Perry and Representative Scott Moore want you to pay more.  They want to DOUBLE the amount of insurance that people are required to carry in South Dakota, despite there not being a hue and cry for it.

These legislators in their heavy handed-ness want to take our minimum limits from 25/50/25 to 50/100/50 – fifty thousand dollars because of bodily injury to or death of one person in any one accident and, subject to the limit for one person, fifty one hundred thousand dollars because of bodily injury to or death of two or more persons in any one accident, and twenty‑five fifty thousand dollars because of injury to or destruction of property of others in any one accident.

As I skewered this dumb effort back in 2023 with facts, so shall I do so again.  And I direct you to very informative information from the Insurance Institute of America, which shows that – much like our teacher salaries – South Dakota has among the lowest amount of uninsured people in America (42nd in the nation):

We are actually more insured comparatively than we were in 2023. We were at #41 of the lowest uninsured before. Now 3 years later we’re at #42. And Government didn’t have anything to do with it.

Only 9.4% of South Dakotans are uninsured. Yet, despite South Dakotans doing it voluntarily, here these guys are with more government demanding we be MORE insured.  How would that put us in comparison to the rest of the country?

The proposal is to tie us at #2 highest limits in the country with Maine and Alaska.  And higher limits mean higher insurance rates for us all.

I pointed out in 2023 that only things that this measure would do would be to raise rates for all consumers, make it tougher to get insurance, and actually raise the number of uninsured motorists in the state. Just because a person waits a couple years to bring around an idea again does not make it any better.

Noting again as an old insurance agent once told me, if we could legislate responsibility, then we would have no drunk drivers, unintended pregnancies, or need for a Division of Child Support.

But legislators seem to think they can do it with auto insurance, so here we are.

I had never heard the name of Leslie Gerrish until yesterday, when she filed paperwork to form a committee to run for the South Dakota House of Representatives in District 17.

And, then it kind of took off from there. Just doing my usual “who is this person” asking around that I do when someone I’ve never heard of jumps in a race, I find out that she’s supposedly the chair of the Clay County Democrats.  Not a shocker. People are coming out of the woodwork this year.   But then I was told that she’s supposedly Jamie Smith’s campaign manager.

What? As in Jamie Smith, Candidate for Sioux Falls Mayor?  Isn’t she in Vermillion?  But, I was sent a receipt on that one:

So, Sioux Falls Mayoral candidate Jamie Smith had to reach out of town to Vermillion for someone to manage his campaign?

Oh, and it gets better..  Because not only does Gerrish claim to be Smith’s campaign manager, the D17 candidate is proudly Democrat, as seems to check off all the hard-left boxes such for gun-control and in favor of an income tax!

 

“Imagine taxing a luxury vehicle, or (gasp!) even discussing a tiny – and I mean tiny – income tax for the wealthiest. It seems not doable until you crunch the numbers (we have in my household!) and it is not impossible.”

New taxes on whatever she considers luxury vehicles and income tax.. as “doable.” Somehow, I don’t know if she’s polled anyone owning a modern pickup or working for a living if they want new and higher taxes.

But clearly it’s on her mind. Which brings into question what exactly is Jamie Smith’s agenda. Because that’s supposedly who he’s brought on to steer his campaign ship.

And as she prepares to run for office herself.

 

It’s January 13th – do Democrats know where their candidate for Governor is?

I mean, yes, They do have Robert Arnold, a 19 – 20ish year old student running for the office. Who like any other Democrat, will need to turn in 1,232 valid signatures. But Robert isn’t exactly coming in with a network of donors, or activists behind him. He’s kind of on his lonesome.  Which brings into question whether he’s going to have all the names he needs.

There were early rumors that the Democrat Party’s Executive Director Dan Ahlers was supposedly going to jump in, take one for the team, and be the Democrats more seasoned candidate. But I haven’t heard that for ages now. And here were are nearly 2 weeks past the start of petition circulation. Not a peep that anyone is out there running petitions around the state for the other side of the aisle.

I can’t help but wonder if Democrats might possibly be going to give Republicans a bye in this contest?

Have you heard anything I haven’t?

Thune: Republicans Deliver Safer Streets, Secure Border

“[A]s we think about our priorities here, it is securing that border, keeping the country safe, it’s about more money in people’s pockets, and it’s about new opportunities for American families to get ahead.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) today spoke at a press conference with Senate Republican leadership:

I was somewhat neutral on Governor Rhoden’s State of the State address as I’m listening to it until a couple of passages in his speech.

First, as I’m sitting listening to it, the Governor had a call against currently public information remaining in the public domain:

To address this, my office is bringing forward two bills to protect the personal information of law enforcement, judges, legislators, and statewide officials by removing it from public voter files. We will also add doxxing to the crime of stalking and increase penalties when it targets law enforcement and public officials. South Dakota will not tolerate threats against those who uphold the law and serve the public.

Read that here.

As Arch Beal would say, “Whoa, whoa, whoa.”  Governor Rhoden announces that he intends to bring a measure against open government?  How exactly do they plan on wording this measure?  And more importantly, how exactly do they intend to curb legitimate news gathering endeavors in the interest of “protecting personal information?”

I have a particular interest in how they they intend to implement this. In case you’ve forgotten, there have been instances – very recent instances – of legislators claiming residency at one location, yet clearly living at another, as I’ve gone into depth on:

First off, looking at Rep. Reder’s voter registration, the live data as of today indicates that he’s supposedly registered to vote at an address in Warner, SD:

Establishing where he claims to vote and supposedly legislates from is 13958 387th Ave, Warner, SD 57479, What else can we find out about that location?

and..

Reder’s foundation that had been at that farm address that he also uses as his legislative address? Interestingly, in filings with the Secretary of State, that Foundation seems to have changed Reder’s address in the corporate filings:

DTOM Foundation Paperwork B0345-5410 by Pat Powers on Scribd

Bagley, Minnesota. Not Warner, South Dakota.

On January 19, 2025 when this document was filed, this document shows Christopher D Reder as hanging his hat in Bagley, Minnesota, or at least where his business is located.  Reder would have been seated in the Legislature on about January 14th. 

Read that entire story here.

Shortly thereafter, Representative Reder resigned in part because he faced a cloud of questions about his residency, including the fact he was claiming an owner occupied tax exemption for property in Minnesota.

Was revealing what he claimed as his home address done so with nefarious intent that wished him harm? No, it was not. Was it a legitimate and germane question from the public as to his qualifications for serving in office? Absolutely. They can’t – or at least should not – have residency qualifications for office if they pass laws declaring that information as unlawful to publicize or hold as secret. It’s against the public interest, as well as that of a free press.

But depending on how this law is worded, will questioning the residency of a legislator, and presenting evidence of one’s thesis become a crime, punishable by law in the State of South Dakota?  I’m sure there are some legislators affected who would like it to be that way.  But this public information needs to remain in the public domain.  Unless we’re now creating a separate class of citizenship for elected officials now.

Maybe I’m a little excited over nothing. But this is a question that the Governor and legislators need to carefully navigate if they choose to claim it a safety measure as opposed to censoring criticism that they don’t like coming from a free press.

—

Also as it relates to the State of the State speech.. I had a call from one of my readers asking me “did Governor Rhoden really talk about women being chaste? I had to look it up, and it means exactly what I thought it did.”

Err.. sorry. Yes, Yes he did.

We are able to enjoy our Black Hills today, in part, because of the foresight of one of South Dakota’s greatest leaders, our ninth governor, Peter Norbeck. As I close today, I would like to read the conclusion to his State of the State Address from 1919..

..I believe in her government, and in her institutions of home and church and school; I believe in the sturdy, intelligent manhood of her sons, and the chaste womanhood of her daughters..

Chaste womanhood. So you don’t have to look it up yourself.

chaste. [cheyst]/ tʃeɪst /

1. refraining from sexual intercourse that is regarded as contrary to morality or religion; virtuous.  2. virgin. 3. not engaging in sexual relations; celibate.

Read that here at Dictionary.com.

Yes, That was the Governor in 2026 quoting the Governor in 1919 (as part of his state of the state) believing in the virginity of South Dakota’s daughters.

In 2026, you might also believe that quoting speeches like that will elicit eye-rolling over the patriarchal statement by the daughters of South Dakota. Because in 2026, those women may have the attitude that their chastity is not the Governor’s business.

I have the feeling I’m going to have a lot to write about this legislative session. (In addition to funding for K-12 education not being mentioned in the speech today).