South Dakota Libertarian Party Executive Committee member Bob Newland may have just cut the number of Libertarians on the South Dakota ballot by one third.
Amidst a Facebook discussion of the "huge success" of the SDLP convention last Saturday, I noted that Secretary of State Jason Gant still hadn't added the six Libertarian nominees to the official candidates list as of the end of business Tuesday. Newland replied with this possible explanation for the hold-up:
Newland says he received voter registration forms from Ryan Gaddy and Chad Haber on Saturday, August 9, at the convention. The SDLP nominated Gaddy and Haber that day for Public Utilities Commission and attorney general, respectively. Newland says he mailed those forms to Minnehaha County Auditor Bob Litz on Monday.
Now step carefully. There is no need to submit a voter registration card unless one is not registered to vote or unless one is changing one's party registration. Assuming Gaddy and Haber are rational individuals, not given to unnecessary actions, we may reasonably conclude that they handed those forms to Newland on Saturday because they had not yet registered as Libertarian voters.
However, one does not become a registered Libertarian voter the moment one hands a voter registration card to Bob Newland. That voter registration doesn't kick into gear the moment Bob Newland drops that card into the mailbox. One becomes a registered Libertarian voter after the county auditor receives and processes that card. That didn't happen Saturday at convention. It didn't happen Monday at the mailbox. It still hasn't happened in the eyes of the Secretary of State, whose official voter registration database as of end-of-business Tuesday still showed Haber registered Republican.
But back to Saturday. Let's read SDCL 12-6-3.2:
Candidate required to register with party. No person may sign a declaration of candidacy or be nominated as a political candidate for a party unless that person is a registered voter with that party affiliation [South Dakota Codified Law 12-6-3.2].
That law is written in present tense: is, not will become or has applied to become.
That's why, the night before the 2010 Democratic convention, Ben Arndt had to get Lincoln County Auditor Kathy Bonnema to come back to the courthouse after 8 p.m. on a Friday to officially re-register Arndt from Republican to Democrat so the South Dakota Democratic Party could nominate him for lieutenant governor the next day. If Arndt had not done so, then-Secretary of State Chris Nelson would have declared Arndt's nomination illegal and refused to place him on the ballot.
If what Bob Newland says is accurate, if Gaddy and Haber were just handing in their voter registration applications at convention Saturday, if their actual Libertarian voter registrations had not been processed by the county auditor at the time of their nominations, then state law obliges Secretary of State Jason Gant to reject their nominations.
I thought the reason Ben Arndt had to change was because he was initially trying to run as a republican which wasn't allowed.
I registered to vote in AZ and I know its a different state, but they told me because I was doing it through someone that the day I filled it out I was officially registered, I just wasn't on the voter rolls until it went to the county auditor.
If Lora Hubel can't get on the ballot, two Libertarian wannabes don't stand a chance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5csNO3oMrQ
Cite the law on changing party affiliation.
You can fool some of your readers.
"How long does it take to process my registration? Back To Top
It can take several weeks. Most states send out voter registration cards within 5 to 7 weeks after receiving the registration. If you do not, contact your state election office to check if you are registered. In any event you should check your registration at least a week prior to the voter registration deadline in your state, in case you need to fill out a new registration form or correct your form."
Would that also be true for changing parties? If so, that may mean that just because the form is submitted on Monday, that the process is done by the next day.
If Gant rejects Haber's nomination and mike from iowa rejects Haber's nomination,I guess that makes it you nanny muss and I don't like or trust Gant.
"Voldemort" is some anonymous coward. This discussion is for real South Dakotans, not children pretending to be fictional characters. Why hide from a simple discussion of state law? However, I leave the question up for two reasons.
One, it shows the false ad hominem attack used by people who'd rather not face the facts that I report. At no point do I publish articles with the intent to fool people. I don't even like April Fool's jokes.
Two, it asks an unnecessary question. I have cited SDCL 12-6-3.2, which makes clear a nominee must be a member of the party nominating. That statute is blessedly concise and direct. Unless someone plans to appeal to Bill Clinton's lexical legerdemain, is appears to mean right now, at the moment of nomination, is candidate X a registered voter with that party affiliation?
As for the timeframe of when one actually becomes what the voter registration card says one is, well, one does not hold that status until the official with the authority to grant that status has processed the application for that status. It's just like how one is not officially a candidate until the official with the authority to grant that status has certified one's nominating petition or the certification of nomination (depending on which office we're talking about) submitted by the party.
That one is not a registered voter with a specific party affiliation until the county auditor has processed that application is made clear by laws like SDCL 12-4-3.2, which makes it a crime for a person conducting a voter registration drive to withhold completed voter registration forms for more than ten days (good job, Bob, sending those two forms in ASAP) or beyond the voter registration deadline. That's why SDLP chairman Emmette Reistroffer got busted in 2010: failing to submit those forms to the county auditor leaves people who thought they were registering to vote unregistered. The statute exists to protect voters from being tricked and disenfranchised.
In the case of the nominees in question here, until those forms reach the county auditor, those nominees' voting registration status remains what it was last week. And if that status was not registered Libertarian voter, those nominations are null and void.
Even more relevant is SDCL 12-4-6.1:
"Effective date of voter registration. A voter registration shall be considered to be effective on the date which the card is received by the county auditor. However, if the card was completed at one of the agencies listed in § 12-4-2, is received by the auditor within five days following any registration deadline and is dated by the deadline, the card shall be considered to be effective on the date which it was signed at the agency. If a card does not contain all of the information required by the form prescribed pursuant to § 12-4-6 or if the card contains information which is not correct, it shall be considered to be effective on the date all of the correct, required information is supplied to the county auditor."
Haber was saying last Friday that he had registered at the drivers license station. That's the office authorized by SDCL 12-4-6. If that's the case, then he's fine. But Bob Newland is not a drivers license station, and the forms submitted to him would not be considered effective until the county auditor receives them.
JeniW, I don't think there is much delay in South Dakota's voter registration system. Our friend Kal Lis re-registered to switch his party affilaition on Friday. The Yankton County auditor did the job on the spot, and his name was in the state database by the end of the day.
I still fail to see the reason for waiting until the last minute. If you are truly committed to what you are doing in this case, why wait until the day of the convention to fill out the change form? Unless you know the law and this is all just an attention grabbing scheme. On another note, I renewed my drivers license three weeks ago and changed from R to D at that time, did the change on Thursday and the SOS website was updated the following Monday (I didn't check it Friday).
Joseph, indeed, the above statute seems to suggest there's a difference between Arizona law and South Dakota law. Who was registering you: someone at AZ DMV, another public official, or a party member doing a voter registration drive?
If only Chad Haber had known ahead of time that he would seek the Libertarian nomination for AG he could have gotten registered in time without the drama.
If only Chad Haber knew where to register he could have gone to the Minnehaha County Auditor's office and gotten it done.
Why didn't anyone tell Chad Haber how to change his party registration correctly? This has to be someone else's fault. Has to be. This guy was rich and successful so he must know what he's doing if nobody interferes with him. I wonder if Joel Arends gave him bad advice on how to affect a party change?
The Lord will zing light into the minds of all doubters and inspire them to click "Like" for Libertarians and aspirants thereto.
Chad Haber has demonstrated that he may not know how to change his party registration correctly, and we know he doesn't squat about properly circulating and submitting nominating petitions thanks to his wife's adventure. So, with Haber not receiving a lick of law school education, we South Dakotans are expected to believe he's the man to replace Jackley in the AG's office??
I personally think it is bad business to 1. Wait until the last minute to change one's registration (although we can argue that they actually missed the "last minute" by a mile because they should have allowed time to process the changes before the convention) and 2. to accept a form that has not been processed and approved as proof of a party affiliation change.
The law, in the case of voter registration, creates structure and consistency across the board so it must be followed carefully, particularly when one is running for a government office if one is to earn the trust of voters. Overall, I expect candidates to be responsible and punctual when they are conducting business. Procrastinating when changing party affiliation is neither. I also expect any party that desires my membership to conduct themselves in a professional manner concerning candidates that demonstrate a lack of responsibility and punctuality (in other words, I expect party leaders to see through the antics of such potential candidates and make wise decisions based on their observations). As harsh as those statements may sound, I have a right to have expectations as a South Dakota voter.
Hold the heck on the minute here. I'm pretty sure that Lee Stranahan and Junior strenuously assured everyone that they were with Chad Haber at the DMV the day before the convention where Chad changed his registration. [This thread is located on the Libertarian party Convention Facebook page] Who do we dare believe? Bob Newland who has nothing to gain by fabricating a story of a voter registration turned in directly to him or Lee "I wouldn't know the truth if it bit me in the ass" Stranahan?
12, the generous interpretation would be that both Newland and Team Haber are telling true stories. Maybe Haber took the belt-and-suspenders approach to make sure his registration was changed. Unfortunately, the Newland suspenders won't hold up the legal britches... which fact anyone versed in South Dakota law and specifically election law precedents would have known and acted to avoid getting stung by.
R, money is useful for buying convention attendees and contractors to raise money. Money is not terribly useful in changing the wording of the law... at least not until session. ;-)
"The law... creates structure and consistency"—ah, that explains why the parties under discussion here are having such difficulties.
Dave—exactly.
Bob—the Lord has a pretty poor track record on clearing up doubts in my mind. I await the Secretary of State's ruling.
Near as I can tell ain't no auditor's office open on Saturdays in South Dakota so why hold your meeting and change party registrations on a Saturday? Is there a grace period in effect for candidates?
OTOH if you take abstinence only away from sex education and apply it to avoiding work and personal responsibility,it seems that Haber and company fit that bill.
The Secretary of State's office historically has a pretty good record of adhering to voter intent. The intent of the actions pertinent to this discussion is clear.
I agree that it was not a good idea to have not changed registration prior to the SDLP convention, but most likely not fatal.
But then, the road to Pierre is paved with good intentions. People walk on the pavement all the time.
I spoke with Obrien Co.,iowa auditor's office this morning and they seemed to believe if the candidate's party affiliation change wasn't recorded in "their" office when he was nominated,his nomination would be voided. But maybe that is just iowa's way of doing things.
Maybe Haber can officially change his first name to Caprice. It seems fitting somehow.
Cory, where "team BoHabAhan" is concerned, you're clearly infinitely more generous than I am. As a South Dakotan and as a voter and as a human being, even, I've had more than I can stomach of that ilk. I'm more inclined to trust Bob's truth.
Today is filled with irony. Hubbel can't get on the ballot without an activist judge writing new law and Haber can't be the nominee for Attorney General (chief law enforcement officer in South Dakota) unless the law is ignored.
Next thing I'll learn is the Cory runs out of gas on his way to Spearfish, he "prays" for someone to stop and help him, and a farmer in a pickup with a gas tank in the back drives by.
Election laws? Where Chad Haber is going he won't need election laws! :)
Narcissist: (noun): a person who is overly self-involved, and often vain and selfish.
Now, what did I do with that picture of the Bosworth-Habers??
Troy, I passed more than a couple farmers in pickup trucks. I made it to Spearfish with half a tank to spare. But there are many adventures and opportunities for divine intervention ahead.
Meanwhile, Todd Epp reports that the SOS is investigating exactly the concerns I described above.
David Montgomery reports that while SDLP chair Emmett Reistroffer says his party is remaining neutral on Gaddy and Haber's potential DQ (what? no defense of its own nominees?), the SDGOP is considering legal challenges to both nominations.
What a great day to be in South Dakota!
Welcome back, Cory!
Was in Sioux Falls today and saw a Ryan Gaddy for PUC that was graffiti spayed on someone's property. Do the graffiti artists think this will help with votes or make people mad with graffiti?
For the record I am a former Democrat turned Libertarian. In the Argus article Haber claims that he put in a voter registration card earlier in the week. If so, from my past experience the change over seems like it's pretty quick, within a few days of you changing you party. Party chair Newland even says "that 'the process was legal' and believes the law allowed his same-day registration." That contradicts what the text of the codified law that Cory pointed out in his law. Plus why mail them, when you could turn them in person if they need they need to be processed quickly? This entire saga with the party over the past year is really making me lose faith with the Libertarian Party of South Dakota especially losing major party status, not putting up a candidate for governor and then nominating Chad Haber for Attorney General against a guy who is charging his wife for election fraud and now this?!?!?
Max, all it takes for a political party to gain a little credibility is a few people (more than 5, less than 50) creating presence and some folks donating money. That's what the Democrats and Republicans have (they have more than a few such people), and that's part of what's wrong with them. For 22 years the SDLP has been maintained by a core of people ranging in number from 1 to 10.
It has achieved a voter registration total in SD of about 1400. We only get operating funds from about 25 of them. Every four years the SDLP has to spend about $75k to petition to regain "party status." We have been unable to field a candidate for governor who could garner 2.5% of the vote, which would maintain "party status" and obviate the need for re-petitioning.
You'd think 2.5% would be doable for a monkey, but it has not been, so far.
You're probably right about having someone take the voter registrations to the Minnehaha Co. auditor on Monday, but if Cory's interpretation is correct, even Monday would have been too late. I had about 30 voter registrations to deal with, allocated among five counties. I've never had an auditor say that the date of signing was anything other than the date of registration according to the voter's intent. Obviously, regardless of the date of signing, no registration can be recorded until it arrives at the auditor's office.
Everyone who claims to be a libertarian does so for a reason. Likely that reason is one of the reasons used by the people who have petitioned, re-petitioned, and re-petitioned again, and who have run for offices in elections in which they knew they would be ridiculed and in which they knew they would not break 5% in the vote.
The first thing to do when one has a complaint about how things are run is to ask oneself what (s)he can do about it. There's action and there's money, which can buy action. How much of either have you invested in the SDLP, Max? If it's none or close to it, then why would we even care if you claim to be a libertarian?
All it took for a Haber to get nominated was a few people (more than 5, less than 50) creating presence and paying some membership dues. He bought his way in...or out...depending on future developments.
Rocky, that's what happened. It's what's done all the time at Republican and Democrat conventions, although most candidates and nominees have been "members" for some time.
Mr. Newland, I think you were absent for my June breakfast rant, but I spoke on exactly the issue you describe. I could fix your problems, sir, if you would invite poor old grudznick to your Libertarian powwows and provide some cold beverages and warm sausages.
F[-] off, grudznick.
Anyway, the whole argument here approves to have been rendered irrelevant by a 1986 SCOTUS decision. Take a look...
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/479/208/case.html
Rocky, notice that the Republican and Democratic conventions have mechanisms that prevent an outsider from hijacking a nomination by bringing a mob to convention. The GOP and Dems select delegates through their county parties. One cannot simply show up at the GOP or Dem convention, pay dues, and become a voting participant in the convention.
To be clear, if these nominations are spoiled, I don't blame Newland. I blame the idiots who declared themselves ready to be candidates for statewide office but, like Annette Bosworth, couldn't pass the basic civics literacy test of learning and following the laws governing candidacy.
Bob, the link you provide to Tashjian vs. Republican Party (1986) could provoke discussion. However, it is not a perfect precedent. Tashjian establishes that a party has a right to decide who can vote in its primaries, elections that in this case, in Connecticut, are conducted differently from those in South Dakota and which do not apply to the offices in question here. The decision talks about conditions placed on voters. Here, we are discussing conditions placed on candidates.
So far, SDLP chair Reistroffer says the party is remaining neutral. Bob, do your comments here suggest the party will defend its non-Libertarian nominees if SOS Gant refuses to put them on the ballot?
But remember, Bob, your nominees face problems beyond state law. Your own by-laws, as presented on the SDLP website right now, specify that voting members (Article 2, Section 1), party officers (Art. 3 Sec. 1), and nominees/candidates (Art. 5, Sec. 1). Did the SDLP amend any of those by-laws at convention prior to nominations? If not, and if Gaddy and Haber were not registered Libertarians at convention time, the SDLP's own by-laws say their nominations and any votes they cast during convention were invalid.
We'll go to Pierre with torches and pitchforks.
Bob, you need to run for office in Pierre. I know you do not want to bite off that whole head again but it is how you will best serve your and my interests. I hope to see in my time you running again.
Also, Mr. Newland, that pike that you borrowed a few years ago, after you march it to Pierre could you clean it up and get it back to me? I have a piking looming.
It would be interesting to read what grudz would say in defense of his existence.
God knows as your dog knows, Bob
Bog blast all of you
Bob, that would be like Elmer Fudd or Fred Flintstone trying to justify themselves. Grudz is a figment. But you gotta admit, that pike thing was pretty funny.
I obviously missed a chapter here and don't know the history of grudznick (although it sounds like a fascinating read), but when I see a party leader tell someone to "F[-] off" followed by a statement about heading to Pierre with torches and pitchforks... well let's just say it makes sense why the SDLP can't gain any traction and why none of their candidates can collect more than 5% of the vote.
If you want to be taken seriously, you need to act serious. Reistroffer seems to get it, but a coach can't win the Super Bowl with a group of flag football players he rounded up from the local youth attitude adjustment center.
Craig, while I agree that party leaders need to exercise a certain caution and tact, I wonder if there may be a place for Newland's no-nonsense straight talk in helping a struggling party get attention and draw supporters. (Trust me, telling grudz to f-off won't lose the SDLP any votes.)
But wait: I just used the term no-nonsense in relation to a party that illegally nominated Annette Bosworth's husband for a job he is utterly incapable of doing. My mistake.
Craig, it appears you have all the seriousness needed for a pretty large group of people. Take a pill, lighten up. After all, this is politics; it's not like it was something important.
Grudz has pikes he loans out? Was he some sort of radical in his younger days?
and a coach can't win the Super Bowl with elite talent if the other team scores more points. Or controls the scoreboard. Or makes up the rules in their favor. Or.......
grudz was bathed in castor oil and abused by his mother's horse daily.
LOL. With grudz you never know, Nick. It could have been a Northern Pike that somebody "loaned" him. Or maybe he's just always been a piker (a person who makes contemptibly small bets.)
Craig, somewhere on this blog's archive, if you're really interested, (and only a very few would be... sorry, grudz) you should be able to find places where grudz has self-identified as a troll. If you watch him closely (and again, who but anthropologists and students of low-grade, postmodern fiction would really want to?) you'll see that "he" is a fictional, two dimensional literary character, kind of like Yoda's-son gone-haywire due to too much Wookie in him.
Say Bill, aren't pikes a sharp "poking stick"? I seen to remember a few years back on a now defunct blog we had to sharpen the poking sticks for use on a certain corn town troll.
Great fun.
Not sure about Yoda's son gone haywire, I suspect the pikes are some left over from grudz's participation in the Haymarket Riots, seems about the right age range.
Yup, Nick pikes are the ultimate poking stick, alright. You suppose grudz has his eye on that same old sow?
Why would the Libertarian Party nominate someone who did not have ANY history with their party?
Why should you have to have history? I think Libertarians are running to change Pierre.
He may have been a whaler or a logger. Isn't Bob Marley minus some whalers?
"Why should you have to have history? I think Libertarians are running to change Pierre."
Wouldn't it be advisable to know HOW the candidates intended to change it before they are nominated? History is important Tara, because it gives you an idea of what a candidate stands for. When they have no history, for all you know they could be closet Republicans who are just running to prevent a legitimate Libertarian from attacking their candidate during the general election.
How a party nominates someone who hasn't expressed any Libertarian principles is beyond me. This is why the Dems and Reps have delegates that for all intents and purposes are pre-vetted themselves, and who in turn pre-vet the candidates. It isn't a perfect solution, but it prevents someone from being nominated based upon the fact they were able to find 15 of their friends to support them.
What happened at the Libertarian convention should be an outrage to anyone who has been a legitimate Libertarian. It shows what is wrong with the process - not what is right, and it hasn't delivered a full slate of true Libertarian candidates. Instead, it has made a mockery of the process. The best thing that could happen to the Libertarians is when they lose their status as a recognized political party, because if may give them the opportunity to rebuild under new leadership and form some type of a cohesive, unifying platform that they can stand behind.
Oh who are we kidding.... free pizza!
Michael B. asks:
>"Why would the Libertarian Party nominate someone who did not have ANY history with their party?"
Here's my perspective as Chad's main opponent for the nomination.
There were approximately 35 eligible voters at the convention. Sixteen of them voted for Chad. One of those had a long-standing grudge against me for endorsing John Thune in 2002. Three of them were convinced I'd be a bigger embarrassment to the party than Chad because of a Pat Powers post at South Dakota Smear College two days before the convention.
The other twelve Haber voters, including Chad himself, had almost as little history with the party as he did and came to the convention mainly or solely for the purpose of voting for him.
Five people cast what may have been protest votes for "none of the above" or for Bob Newland (who didn't even participate in the debate). About four or five more didn't vote at all. I suspect some of these 9-10 voters may also have been influenced by the Powers post to believe I was just as bad a candidate as Chad.
For the record, I knew the law requiring candidates to have their registrations filed before the convention. Haber spokesman Lee Stranahan and his son Shane directly and boldly asserted that they'd witnessed Chad's registration as a Libertarian late Friday afternoon (August 8) at the DMV at 2501 West Russell in Sioux Falls. If they hadn't, I very likely would have protested Chad's nomination.
I'm wondering why on earth it's taking Gant so long to make this call.
Michael B and Tara Unfortunately the SDLP Convention was hijacked by opportunists who conveniently and quickly joined SDLP to use the process within the party rules to gain nomination for candidacy state offices. The SDLC simply didn't have enough participation from their longstanding membership at the convention to prevent the hijacking.
Those opportunists Tara are simply using the SDLP to advance their own scams and schemes at the expense of the party and the victims that are owed money or are unknowingly still donating.
This is why Reistroffer openly criticized Haber days after he announced he would hijack the party. and on the Facebook event you can see he was trying his best to prevent the Haber's insanity from taking over... he condemned Ryan Gaddy's ridiculous campaign announcement including vulgarity and tried to censor Lee and Corey from going nuts in the comment section... wasn't very 'Libertarian' to censor others on a public forum or condemn another candidate's free speech but he had the ability to do it and decided it was time to fix the image of his party.. Reistroffer is a PR professional and was later elected President of the Party. Reistroffer was quoted nicely by David Montgomery being fair to Haber but basically saying it was Haber's responsibility to get registered if he wanted to be nominated... Reistroffer isn't a radical Libertarian, but a reasonable Libertarian, and so I do still have faith that this party can build up for future elections... but I guess we will wait and see.. will reason prevail or will Haber cause us all to question the legitimacy of the third party process all together.... what the heck ;-)
Kurt, Chad and the rest of the Libertarian Party showed how you don't need a bus load of delegates the day of the convention to make sure you get the nomination. These are just regular people off the street that decided, hey we're not happy with the same ole same ole politics of SD. Let's gather some friends, family, people off the street and see if maybe we can make a difference on a political ticket that isn't controlled by 2 establishment parties. I commend anyone willing to throw themselves to the wolves. And by the way the Libertarian candidates are a reflection of the majority of the people. I can relate to a Ryan Gaddy far better than a John Thune or Kristie Noem.
I forgot to throw in Dennis Daugaard, Mike Rounds and Marty Jackley. I lasted about 15 minutes last night at the sex trafficking fundraiser. I would rather listen to Ryan Gaddy. He wants to make a difference for sick people in SD.
Tara did you have a chance to ask Chad what happened in Utah and other ventures the press has wanted to ask Chad about yet he avoids answering them?
You criticize George Carlin with his potty mouth. Well Ryan has similarities. SD has got to quit being so politically correct and not worry about what people think.
First question should be: is the potential candidate qualified for the position?
If he is not then he should not be given a place on the ballot. Details are important.
Tara Volesky wrote:
>"These are just regular people off the street that decided, hey we're not happy with the same ole same ole politics of SD. Let's gather some friends, family, people off the street and see if maybe we can make a difference on a political ticket that isn't controlled by 2 establishment parties."
Many of the convention delegates were grieving, emotionally vulnerable people whom Chad Haber and Lee Stranahan specifically targeted, recruited and manipulated to their own selfish ends.
Kurt did Pornahan, Haber and Gaddy recruit these delegates from Van Epps Park or a homeless shelter in Sioux Falls?
Let this be a cautionary tale. Political parties need to be a little more diligent who they let in. Even parties held by Mr. Newland.
I like candidates that are a little ruff around the edges and don't come across as Ken and Barbie dolls. Haber must be making a few waves because now the Hit Man for the Republican machine is trying to do the same thing and silence Haber and Gaddy just like is doing to Myers and Hubbel. More of SD taxpayer's money down the drain. All Gant would have to do is call Richard Winger the top expert from Ballot Access News and he would probably tell Jason to quit wasting your time and the people's money and put their names on the ballot. This is getting pretty ridiculous.
http://www.mprnews.org/story/2014/08/14/independence-party
Bob, I will agree with Craig that you might need to take certain aspects of running a aprty more seriously, like parliamentary procedure... assuming of course, that your involvement with the SDLP is serious political activism and not merely a sincere but deliberately quixotic gesture with no long-term game plan.
"You criticize George Carlin with his potty mouth. Well Ryan has similarities. SD has got to quit being so politically correct and not worry about what people think."
Tara, please dont even try to compare Ryan to George Carlin. Ryan has set legalization back five years because of his antics. Let's face it, if you look and act like what the anti crowd expect a marijuana user to look like, you are in the way of real progress.
Ryan wouldnt even be equal to a boil on Carlins ass. Not funny, has unrealistic expectations of what he's accomplishing, and thinks he can force change by being loud and obnoxious at a news conference. No wonder no reputable news agency wants anything to do with him. That's bullshit!
Every sane person that sees Ryan is thinking the same thing. "Is that what pot makes you act like?
I'm sorry, but if you want to be respected, you first have to learn to respect. Right now I don't respect Ryan or you for sticking up for him.
Folks SD is having trouble climbing out of the 1950s. The state is acting a lot like a 4-H calf that isn't broke to lead. Sometimes you have to push a little, sometimes you have to pull a little, and there are times that you have to just plain sweet talk it into moving.
To think I almost changed to libratarion. SDs libratarion party is a bad joke, no platform, no common sense, and no real libratarion candidates, just party pirates looking to score.
The Blindman
Lee Stranahan has consistently called Cory a proven liar, let's see who is the provent liar.
On the day of SDLP convention, I asked Lee if Haber was indeed a registered Libertarian and he assured me that he was despite the fact Cory had posted Haber's most recent voter registration and that he was a Republican.
Throughout my discussion Lee assured me that Haber was a Libertarian and that he and his son Shane was with him when Haber changed his registration at a Sioux Falls DMV.
Now I find out that Haber gave his voter registration card to Bob Newland the day of the convention and that the change still isn't posted to SOS database.
You can view my conversation with Lee on the Ryan Gaddy Hosts Pizza Party link and see the glaring lies Lee Stranahan told.
If Stranahan was so confident that Chad changed his registration at the DMV, why did he find it necessary to change it again by giving Newland new registration cards?
Who is the liar Lee?
I heard he registered twice.
Bill if you were championing legalization I'd be very tempted to be very supportive but this Ryan character really turned me off and reminds me of the idiots who are what we'd call in the 80's as "waste products". I'd look at the profiles from the posters from the SDAP facebook page and the vast majority were kids in the late teens and 20's working dead end jobs many in fast food.
When I've watched the conduct of Ryan,Tanya and read the postings and profiles from other SDAP posters I'm thinking they are simply using medical marijuana as a way to legalize recreational just be lethargic, self medicate and not learn to cope with the challenges of everyday life.
Ryan Gaddy is not qualified to run for PUC. It's simply just another guerrilla marketing campaign for SDAP/605 Holistic Health.
The more I read about Hemp the more I feel it should be legalized ASAP here in South Dakota. Canadian and Kentucky farmers are cashing in and the Canadian government is funding research in promotion and the various uses for Hemp from the insulation properties to super insulation properties and ease of installation by home builders to various fibers, oils for medicine and health foods to it's use in Bio Diesel but I'd like to stress non GMO non Monsanto Hemp. Hemp's use has a rich history.
Gaddy's tactics don't help the cause!
It takes money to start and maintain a business, will there be enough investors in SD to support the growing and processing hemp into practical and useful products?
Sorry folks im having trouble seeing what thread im posting on tonight. I'll try again later.
The Blindman
Somewhat of a correction some of those kids that posted on the Ryan Gaddy's SDAP facebook page in favor of legalization site were still in high school working at fast food.
Lynn, you are right on the hemp issue. We are importing $600 billion dollars of hemp products every year just from Canada. The farmers and entruapenurs should love it.
Cannabis is not native to the New World: its introduction in the wild threatens native species as the Anthropocene. Only in controlled environments should any non-native species be cultivated.
Until EPA gets control of non-point pollution introducing a non-native genetically engineered species to Colorado is controversial for all the right reasons.
"Gossypium hirsutum – upland cotton, native to Central America, Mexico, the Caribbean and southern Florida, (90% of world production)"
Any strain of cannabis approved by a South Dakota legislature for mass production would be a Frankenstein species controlled by the same chemical ag multi-nationals that prop up the SDGOP: be sore afraid.
Tara, I heard it was $2.2 trillion. That's only about four times as preposterous as $600 billion. I don't know what the figure is, but it is significantly lower than $600 billion, I can assure everyone.
Whatever the figure is, there IS a market, and US farmers should be given a stab at it.
This is where Bob, Bill D. and I diverge: Minnesota did exactly the correct thing by giving therapeutic cannabis distribution to pharmacists. Hemp in American fields is the wrong approach while greenhouses should be producing cannabis for personal use only.
So Larry, don't you think there is a market for industrial or agricultural hemp in SD? Just curious.
No, Tara: i do not; and, it would be environmentally irresponsible to undertake such a quixotic venture.
Larry when Hemp was grown here in the US prior to Randolph Hearst's campaign to make it illegal how did they manage it? What are your concerns as a cash crop here in South Dakota? Water consumption? Chemical input? Is it that invasive like Kudzu being the scourge of the South brought over from Japan?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_schidigera would be the preferred fiber-producing species.
Think about it: the introduction of the Chinese Ring-necked pheasant displaced the wild turkeys that fed on grasshoppers now Snow Geese are pests. Humans monkeying with the future is iffy at best, init?
Lynn, unlike Larry, I have no concerns as to the viability of hemp as a cash crop in SD nor do I fear that it is an invasive specie. It can produce more gallons of usable fuel per acre of land then any other crop that we can raise here. There is already a market for it, you can grow it almost anyplace and it will not only grow but thrive, and it is the only plant that will stop erosion in its tracks.
The research being done now in the medical fields will no doubt add to its attractiveness.
http://www.projectcbd.org/news/dr-goldstein-on-caring-for-kids-with-epilepsy/
That's right hemp as medicine! While both marrijuana and hemp contain both THC and CDBs they are at opposite ends of the spectrum from one another when it comes to getting high. The highly touted “Charlotte’s Web,” actually has more CDBs then THC. They are also useing CDBs to treat autism. Remember that all autism cases are not the same. There are a certain number that respond to THC, and some that respond to CDBs.
https://cannabisforautism.wordpress.com/tag/cbd/
"In 1619, because hemp was such an important resource, it was illegal not to grow hemp in Jamestown, Virginia. Massachusetts and Connecticut had similar laws. During the 1700's, subsidies and bounties were granted in Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, North & South Carolina, and the New England states to encourage hemp cultivation and the manufacturing of cordage and canvas. Unfortunately, these actions failed to establish a permanent hemp industry in any of these states."
http://www.hemphasis.net/History/harriedhemp.htm
Hemp could very well change our reservations from being the left out stepchild to the smart kid in the family. Think jobs, land that could have never grown a cash crop being utilized to enrich the tribes without trying to force the feds to make good on their promises.
This is to broad a subject to get into here but a little research will show the way.
The Blindman
Tara: registered twice? Why? Just to provoke more confusion amd spectacle?
Cory, you can't trust the SOS. Mike and I have dealt with them and they assured us, Hubbel will be on the ballot. I can't believe how incompetent Mr. Gant is. Cory would you hire me to be a debate coach for you? Seriously, I have never experienced anything like this. Cory, I want to hire you to give golf lessons........get the picture?
Tara, don't you think registering to vote twice would kind of be illegal or something?
Here's what I think, when I challenged Lee on Chad's voter registration on the SDLP Convention Facebook page, Lee simply made up the story about registering at the DMV. Lee made no mention of giving Chad's voter registration to Bob Newland on Saturday during our exchange.
Voter registration is, simply, bullshit. Maybe there's some legitimacy in registering a person as a "voter," but there is no legitimacy in forcing the voter to identify himself with an arbitrary and whimsical "party platform."
Chatter and haggle, but think about the insanity of forcing a person who wants to participate in a democratic government to declare he identifies with a political "party" whose nominees for office do not adhere, in policy statements, to their own "party's" "platforms."
The applicant may say (s)he's an "Independent," but that designation denies you participation in all but Libertarian primary elections.
Roger, I don't know if registering twice is illegal, but I think the SOS should make it as simple as possible for the general population to register and have access to the ballot. The general population are not attorneys. We are just common citizens that want to participate in the political process.
Bob, North Dakota is with you in dismissing voter registration. They don't do it; citizens just show up at the polls, present valid ID, and vote.
Tara, I don't think it's illegal to register twice; the later registration simply takes precedence. But why do it unless changing information?
Another question that triggers my lie detector is this: If Lee and Shane Stranahan had really been there to witness Haber's registration at the DMV on August 8, why wouldn't Lee have registered Libertarian at the same time?
Chad was already registered to vote, all he was doing was changing his political affiliation, correct?
I believe that it is illegal to register to vote twice, let's say for example, registering to vote listing a home address in Lincoln County, then registering to vote listing a different home address in Minnehaha County. If registered to vote in two different counties, that would amount to being able to vote twice for the same candidate.
Independents can vote at all general elections, school board elections, and etc. What the Independents cannot do is vote for a Republican during a primary election. They can vote for a Democrat during the a primary election.
It really is not all that hard to register to vote, or change party. There are deadlines, which makes sense, if we want to make sure the person who registering to vote qualifies as a U.S. citizen, is or will be 18 years old at the time of the election, and other requirements set by the law.
Chad maybe filling out two forms at different times/places to change his party is not the same as registering vote, it is just duplicating.
The question I have is why did he wait until the last minute? Travel to the Administration building, fill out a form, then be back home within an hour. Do we really want/need someone in office who procrastinates until the last minute or later? Would Chad as AG procrastinate on getting prepared to pursue a legal issue/case until the day before a scheduled hearing?
I realize there may be need for change in the voter registration system, but we all know that is not why Chad waited until the last minute. He just procrastinated. It is very irritating that his supporters are trying to turn his procrastination into a noble act. Irresponsibility is not noble. He knew the law and could have simply complied. This whole argument is ridiculous.
Also, it is in no way noble to ruin another legitimate candidate's chances of being nominated by hijacking the party's convention. That is NOT the way to make change!
For the record, I am only 24 years old with limited political experience and I find these shenanigans VERY disheartening...I don't feel at all empowered to make change when the system is being manipulated. Chad and Lee have manipulated the system as much as any other corrupt politician has (they just hide it under the guise of bringing relief to the people). The current laws and regulations exist for a reason: to keep potential candidates in check. I can't believe they have been able to slither through the system in such a manner. There are more upright and commendable ways to go about it. I am not voting for ANY candidate that shows such moral delinquency and disregard for the law. Period.
Rant complete.
Dr Boz has a far better chance of being appointed Surgeon General that hubby Chad has of being legally elected to any position. It ain't gonna happen. Rules apparently don't apply to the few,the proud,the afflicted.
JeniW, I agree that filling out two voter registration applications with different information with the intent of creating two separate records for oneself in the voter registration database would be illegal. The possibility of such outright voter fraud is a reason the SDGOP should be demanding a complete investigation of Haber's varying stories.
Bravo Ashley... bravo. Could not possible agree with you more.
@Bob... someone who registers as an Indy can participate in all of the primaries with the exception of the Republican primaries. I sort of understand their logic there because in theory you could get a large number of Dems to register as Indys only to vote for the candidates least likely to win.
For example, if they could have managed to unify and motivate tens of thousands of Democrats (try to contain your laughter for a moment) to register as Indy and then vote for Bosworth for Senate during the primary... they would be effectively granting Weiland the win during the general election. Same is true if the GOP could motivate people to register as Indys to vote in the Democratic primary and select a candidate who has zero chance of winning. The only difference is in this state the GOP doesn't need to bother - because they pretty much have a lock on political offices anyway.
That said, anyone who registers as an Indy doesn't associate themselves with a particular party platform - which is the entire idea of registering as an Indy. A lack of registration might be more convenient that that is a moot point here... ignorance of the law has never been an excuse, and considering how Haber brags about how hard he worked on his wife's campaign and how it was his full time job for the past year you might assume he would be well versed in the basics of elections.
So what is his excuse for waiting until Saturday to change his party affiliation? Laziness, ignorance... or both? Those aren't qualities I want in my next AG - but perhaps some Libertarians disagree.
Check out Louisiana's latest primary vote and see what happens when people can register as a different party and vote in the primary for the lesser of two evils. Thad Cochran owes Black Dems a world of favors for tjeir help in defeating the t-bag express.
Craig,
Allowing Indy's to vote in a primary doesn't increase the risk of the scenario you laid out. Dems could have by the thousands registered Republican and voted for Bosworth.
I changed my registration from I to R within a minute to vote for Lora Hubbel. Talk to the top expert in the nation, Richard Winger. This is nothing but control and intimidation. Don't you see, the GOP and Marty Jackley do not want anymore parents like Brady Folkens mother or Doug and Candie Boes coming out and exposing crimes against children. They have to put him on the ballot.
In primaries where there are no candidates other than Republicans, perhaps everybody should register as an R so they can exercise the franchise. A vote is a terrible thing to waste.
Bill, goo idea. You Democrats can then vote for the anti-crony capitalist limited governments conservatives. And in the General, vote the same way knowing the Neo-Marxist Big Government Democratic candidate is part of the problem, not the solution to crony capitalism.
Vote for Bosworth?!
Thank you for the big laugh of the day. :)
way to go Ashley! our future!
Kal, the problem is if a Democrat registers as a Republican then they cannot vote in the Democratic Primary. There is a risk either way, which is why I understand the GOP not allowing anyone other than a registered Republican to vote in their primaries.
If the Democratic Party ever gets to the point it is actually competitive, I can see them going back to only allowing registered Democrats to vote in their primary as well. It reduces manipulation of the vote. However the way it is now, allowing a few Indy's to vote in the primary doesn't seem to cause any harm, and spurs motivation for those same Indy's to see that candidate all the way through. It is a good strategy when you're the challenging party, but not so great if your control is established.