REGION’S ATTORNEYS GENERAL APPLAUD UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT FOR DECISION IN FAVOR OF VIRGINIA, ALLOWING REMOVAL OF NON-RESIDENTS FROM VOTER ROLLS

PIERRE, S.D. – We told you yesterday about South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley, Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers and Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird all joining together to let the United States Supreme Court know of their support of Virgina’s move to remove non-citizens from their voter rolls.  On Wednesday the High Court issued their decision allowing the Commonwealth of Virginia to do just that.

Jackley had praise for the Court, quoting from a news release from the Attorney General, “This decision is about election integrity and the rule of law, the Court’s decision reaffirms that you must be a citizen of the United States to exercise the right to vote.” End quote

Jackley, Hilgers and Bird were among 25 Attorneys Generals who had filed an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to halt a lower court’s decision to reinstate potential non-citizens to the state’s voter rolls.

 

HEALTH-RELATED NONPROFITS ARE FUNDING OPPOSITION TO SOUTH DAKOTA’S AMENDMENT F

SOUTH DAKOTA (Joshua Haiar / South Dakota Searchlight) – Most of the campaign spending on a ballot question regarding work requirements for Medicaid expansion recipients has been on the “no” side, with major donations from nonprofits that advocate for people with serious medical conditions.

Amendment F would change the South Dakota Constitution to allow legislative consideration of work requirements for people receiving Medicaid under expanded eligibility approved by voters in 2022.

The sole statewide ballot question committee organized in response to the measure is Vote “No” on Amendment F. The committee recently reported raising $470,000 since September and spending $250,000. Contributions included $313,000 from the American Cancer Society, $65,000 from the American Heart Association and $33,000 from the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society.

Additionally, AARP South Dakota reported spending $97,000 directly on Amendment F advertising, without giving the money to a ballot question committee. The group has a page on its website that encourages South Dakotans to vote no on the measure.

There is no ballot question committee organized specifically to support Amendment F. Ads on YouTube urging a yes vote on Amendment F and a no vote on other ballot questions identify a political action committee, Concerned Citizens of South Dakota, as the responsible entity. The committee reported spending about $6,000 on advertising in its most recent report.

In 2022, South Dakota voters expanded Medicaid eligibility to adults with incomes up to 138% of the poverty level. The expansion is now part of the state constitution and can only be altered by voters. It includes a ban on “greater or additional burdens or restrictions” such as a work requirement.

Earlier this year, legislators decided to put Amendment F on the Nov. 5 ballot. It would allow lawmakers to consider a work requirement if the federal government permits it. The Democratic Biden administration does not allow it, but future Republican presidents might.

 

OUT-OF-STATE NONPROFIT OUTSPENDS IN-STATE GROUPS IN SOUTH DAKOTA OPEN PRIMARIES CAMPAIGN

SOUTH DAKOTA (Makenzie Huber / South Dakota Searchlight) – An out-of-state nonprofit that hasn’t disclosed its donors is outspending in-state opponents and supporters of an open primaries ballot question ahead of South Dakota’s Nov. 5 election.

Article IV is an issue-advocacy nonprofit in Arlington, Virginia. It has spent $889,145 on large postcards and online advertisements for Amendment H, according to reports filed with the South Dakota Secretary of State’s Office.

Some of the postcards feature images of soldiers with tape over their mouths, along with a claim that Amendment H would “protect veteran voters” who “aren’t able to participate fully in our political process.”

That claim is related to South Dakota’s current primary election system, in which Republicans only allow Republicans to vote, while Democrats allow Democrats and independents.

Amendment H, one of seven statewide questions on South Dakotans’ Nov. 5 ballot, proposes opening up future primary elections and placing all candidates, regardless of party, on a single ballot open to all voters. The top two vote-getters would advance to the general election. In races with two winners, such as state House districts, the top four would advance to the general election.

Some veterans have spoken out against the Article IV postcards, saying they use veterans as props for a political agenda, and also saying veterans are currently able to register for a political party and participate in the party’s primary election. Some of Article IV’s other postcards are more generally supportive of Amendment H and do not mention veterans.

More about Article IV

Article IV is a 501(c)(4), a type of nonprofit sometimes described as a “dark money” group because it’s allowed to engage in political campaigns and doesn’t have to publicly disclose its donors.

Nobody from Article IV returned messages from South Dakota Searchlight, and the group’s website reveals few details beyond a mission to “improve the health of American democracy by instituting reforms that align citizens’ interests with politicians’ incentives.” The website also describes a form of open primaries as a solution: “Top-4 and Top-5 nonpartisan primaries where everyone, regardless of party, can participate are better than the alternative.”

Some information about the group is available in public IRS documents that nonprofits are required to file. Article IV’s 2022 filing — the most recent one located by Searchlight — said the group had $11 million in revenue and made contributions to primary reform efforts across the country, such as a $12,600 donation to Open Primaries Inc., $342,000 to Oregon Ranked Choice Voting and $400,000 to Utah Ranked Choice Voting.

In-state campaign finance data

Meanwhile, in-state supporters and opponents of open primaries have formed ballot question committees, which are required to disclose donors and additional details about fundraising and spending.

A pro-Open Primaries ballot question committee spent $439,211 on advertising between May and Oct. 15, according to its latest campaign finance report, while opponents spent $18,481.

South Dakota Open Primaries Chair Joe Kirby said his ballot question committee does not have direct contact with Article IV, nor does the committee have control of what the organization advertises.

That’s “the way the system works,” Kirby added.

“That happens to politicians, too: Outsiders spending money for or against them,” Kirby said, adding that there is a national interest in election reform. “There’s not much you can do about that. Outside interests have a big say in all elections, including the governor and congressional delegation. It’s not unique to our ballot issue.”

In another example of outside “dark money” influencing a South Dakota ballot question this year, supporters of an amendment that would restore abortion rights in South Dakota received $540,000 in donations from Think Big America, an issue-advocacy nonprofit in Illinois.

Article IV spent its own money directly on advertising rather than donating to the Open Primaries ballot question committee. The Open Primaries committee has raised over $750,000 since May, mainly from a group of business leaders in Sioux Falls, while opponents hadn’t broken $100,000 in fundraising a week before the election.

Three-fourths of the Open Primaries ballot question committee’s $777,225 in fundraising came from eight households in southeastern South Dakota.

Those eight are:

$250,000 in total contributions from chair of the committee Joe Kirby and his wife, Jennifer, of Sioux Falls.

$110,000 from Dave Knudson, a Sioux Falls lawyer and former South Dakota lawmaker, and his wife Deanna, who serves as treasurer of the committee.

$103,400 from gas station and convenience store chain Heinz Inc. owner Tom Heinz and wife, Jane Heinz, of Dakota Dunes.

$50,000 from Matt Paulson, of Sioux Falls, owner and founder of MarketBeat.

$25,000 from Dana Dykhouse, of Sioux Falls, CEO of First PREMIER Bank.

$25,000 from Dan Kirby, of Kirby Financial in Sioux Falls and Joe Kirby’s brother.

$25,000 from Nathan Peterson, of Sioux Falls.

$10,000 from Kevin Schieffer, of Sioux Falls, former president of the South Dakota Board of Regents.

Other major contributions include $100,000 from Marc Merill, co-founder and former CEO of Riot Games, in Santa Monica, California, and $25,000 apiece from Avera Health and First PREMIER Bank, both based in Sioux Falls.

Opponents to Amendment H formed the Vote No on H ballot question committee and raised $90,276. The ballot question committee’s largest contribution was $35,000 from James Koehler, an Aberdeen businessman and namesake of the Northern State University Koehler Hall of Fame Field.

 

SOUTH DAKOTA HIGHWAY PATROL ANNOUNCES NOVEMBER SOBRIETY CHECKPOINTS

PIERRE, S.D. – The South Dakota Highway Patrol has announced sobriety checkpoints will be conducted in 17 different counties during the month of November. These checkpoints will take place in the counties of Bennett, Brule, Codington, Davison, Hanson, Jones, Lake, Lawrence, Lincoln, Meade, Moody, Pennington, Roberts, Sanborn, Spink, Walworth, and Yankton.

The monthly checkpoints are designed to discourage people from driving impaired. The checkpoints are funded by the South Dakota Office of Highway Safety and conducted by the South Dakota Highway Patrol with the help of local law enforcement.

Officials remind drivers that impaired driving is never a good idea regardless of whether there is a checkpoint planned in their county. People who have been drinking are urged to designate a sober driver or take an alternate form of commercial or public transportation.

Both the Office of Highway Safety and the Highway Patrol are agencies of the South Dakota Department of Public Safety.

 

AFTER ILLINOIS GOVERNOR DUMPS $500K IN SOUTH DAKOTA’S ABORTION BATTLE GOVERNOR KRISTI NOEM CUTS CHECK

PIERRE, S.D (Joe Sneve & Austin Goss / The Dakota Scout) – Political influencers and high-profile public officials on both sides of the aisle — and inside and outside of South Dakota — are exerting their financial might as the state’s fight over abortion access enters its final days.

Amendment G ballot question committees have continued to rake in cash since last week’s campaign finance reporting deadline, with amendment sponsor Dakotans for Health and No G for SD and Life Defense Fund filing dozens of supplemental disclosures in the final days of the 2024 election cycle.

On Monday, Gov. Kristi Noem’s national political action committee, registered to the second-term Republican, announced it had contributed $25,000 to No G for SD, the ballot question committee behind an onslaught of advertising opposing the proposal to loosen South Dakota’s near-total ban on abortion.

“The most precious gift that God blesses us with is life,” Noem said in a news release. “I will continue to stand for the freedom of every baby to be born, and I hope that the people of South Dakota choose life.”

She’s not the only sitting governor to wade into the battle over Amendment G, which proposes to enshrine abortion access into the state Constitution.

After initial campaign finance disclosures filed ahead of the Oct. 22 deadline showed No G for SD and Life Defense Fund were together outpacing Dakotans for Health over the summer and early fall, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s Think Big America nonprofit, which bills itself as a social welfare and abortion rights advocacy organization, closed the gap with a $500,000 contribution in support of Amendment G.

The governors’ contributions brought praise and appreciation from the respective ballot question committees.

“We are extremely pleased that Think Big America … has decided to give South Dakota women a hand in their fight against the more than two million dollars contributed by Right to Life and their allies to those in favor of retaining South Dakota’s total abortion ban,” Dakotans for Health co-founder Rick Weiland said. “It certainly helps to level the playing field.”

Pritzker’s wife is South Dakota native Mary Kathryn Muenster. She used to work for Sen. Tom Daschle.

Kathy Thorson, No G for SD chairwoman and campaign treasurer, noted the flood of campaign advertising that contributions from Noem and all its financial backers are paying for.

“Women and men all across South Dakota have generously donated to oppose Amendment G because it’s so extreme,” she said. “As you can see from our report, we’re spending these funds on explaining how extreme G really is.”

Lt. Gov. Rhoden also appears on No G for SD’s supplemental disclosure report, cutting a $10,000 check from his campaign committee for the cause. Congressman Dusty Johnson has engaged in a radio campaign encouraging people to vote against the measure.

Church continues to flex

Since the initial disclosure deadline, when No G for SD reported another $50,000 from the Catholic Diocese of Sioux Falls, bringing the church’s total financial contribution toward the campaign committee to $190,000, another $25,000 from the Catholic Chancery Office in Sioux Falls also appears on a supplemental disclosure by Life Defense Fund, while the Rapid City Catholic Diocese also chipped in $10,000 to No G for SD.

 

IOWA SECRETARY OF STATE DOUBLING DOWN ON NON-CITIZENS REGISTERED TO VOTE

DES MOINES, IA – Less than a week before the election, Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate says he stands by his decision to challenge the voter registrations of more than 2,000 people. Pate says the people had reported at some point over the past decade, that they weren’t citizens, but voted or registered to vote.

“There are names in my opinion. When the dust all settles we will have people who shouldn’t be voting,” Pate said.

Pate acknowledges that not every one of the 2,200 names on his list is not a U.S. citizen. This comes after some county auditors, like Linn County Auditor Joel Miller, have reported that some of the names on Pate’s list are citizens.

“We have had 15 confirmed U.S citizens that are on that noncitizens list as of last night. So, I submitted another 13 names today. I’m expecting all of those people that were on that list are going to be US citizens as well,” Miller said.

Pate says he had to use Iowa Department of Transportation records to try and discover potential noncitizens who have voted, because the federal government won’t give him access to a database that contains information on people’s citizenship status. “Because of the timing of drivers licenses, some of them may have become a citizen since they filled out that form. It’s very frustrating. Very frustrating,” he said.

Pate says he felt the need to challenge these names due to conspiracy theories and concerns over the election’s integrity.

“Because we’ve had so much pressure put on the elections process across the country about not only noncitizens but on anything that’s not got full transparency in an election. And this is as close as we can come to providing that transparency at this time,” he said.

Miller, who ran against Pate in 2022, says if 10% of the voters flagged so far in Linn County are actually citizens, Pate’s list is flawed. “So that list should not be used we should. We should not be implementing them on election day on a statewide basis. If it’s that way in Linn County, with our 150, I’m sure it’s that way across the state of Iowa,” Miller said.

Pate says that none of the voters who are being challenged have been removed from the voter rolls. They can still come and vote on a provisional ballot. They’ll have to come back and show proof of their citizenship, like a passport, and their vote will be counted.