Last updated on 2015-11-18
The source of the accusation that Scotland-bound Rev. Rep. Steve Hickey committed Bosworthian fraud on his 2012 nominating petition is Hickey’s former District 9 Republican ticket-mate and seat-mate Bob Deelstra.
In a rare useful turn, Gordon Howie reveals Deelstra’s name by publishing the sworn complaint by another 2012 District 9 Republican Legislative candidate, Lora Hubbel. In her June 26, 2015, affidavit, Hubbel says Deelstra spilled the beans:
A few weeks ago, Bob Deelstra showed me a copy of the petition on which he, himself gathered signatures for Rep Steve Hickey in March of 2012. It was his understanding that if Hickey had enough signatures he would not have to use the ones he (Deelstra) obtained. Bob Deelstra told me that he collected the signatures at the March, 2012, Hartford City Council meeting (see enclosure). As you can see, many of the signature’s [sic] do belong to Hartford City Council members who have said publically that Steve Hickey was not at the meeting and that Bob Deelstra was the petition carrier…even though Rep Hickey did indeed sign the petition’s “oath” pledging that he had witnessed their signatures. In doing so he violated SDCL 28-11-28.1 by filing a false instrument [Lora Hubbel, affidavit, published by Gordon Howie, “Affidavit Filed on Hickey Petitions,” The Right Side, 2015.07.09].
Note that Hubbel’s statement would be inadmissible in court, since it consists entirely of hearsay. She says she heard Bob Deelstra say Hickey did not circulate the petition sheet he swore he circulated. For the charge of petition fraud to stick, Bob Deelstra will have to come forward and say, under oath, what Hubbel says he said.
Note further that Hubbel, like the reporter who opened up this story, Jonathan Ellis, overstates the statements of Hartford City Council members. Only one Hartford City Council member, Mark Monahan, said “absolutely” that Hickey did not circulate the petition he signed. The other signatories’ statements are qualified with “don’t know”s and “do not recall”s that make for good blogging but don’t convict anyone of a felony.
Note finally that Hubbel feels compelled to put “oath” in mock quotation marks. In her defense of convicted felon Annette Bosworth, Hubbel has taken the position that nominating petitions carry no oath to violate:
Note nowhere does it say she must WITNESS the signatures. She must verify it, a significantly lower bar.
Note it says carriers (more than one) must sign the petition (singular)…yet there is only one place for one carrier to sign.
Note the law says “under Oath” yet there is no oath anywhere on the petition for a notary to administer before they sign…AND NOTARIES CANNOT ADMINISTER OATHS…JUDGES DO [Lora Hubbel, Facebook post, 2015.06.05].
Read the oath at the bottom of every 2012 nominating petition, including Hickey’s, as specified by South Dakota Administrative Rule 05:02:08:00.03:
I, under oath, state that I circulated the above petition, that each signer personally signed this petition in my presence, and that either the signer or I added the printed name, the residence address of the signer, the date of signing, and the county of voter registration [SDAR 05:02:08:00.03].
That oath is exactly what Hubbel says it isn’t. But such are the Twister-like contortions Hubbel and other Bosworth cultists must undertake to cling to their spots on the game mat. Hubbel and Bosworth don’t think oaths matter; they are interested in revenge against anyone who helped bring Bosworth to justice.
But what does Bob Deelstra want? Deelstra squeaked into his District 9 House seat in 2010 behind Hickey, winning just 48 more votes than third-place Democratic candidate Trudi Hatch. In 2012, Deelstra lost his seat to Democratic candidate Paula Hawks by 82 votes, as voters went with that Sioux Falls paper’s endorsement of Hickey and Hawks rather than with the unusual bipartisan flyer urging voters to pick Hawks and Deelstra as a team. Deelstra tried again in 2014, but Hawks put him down by 8 votes, while Hickey again won first place, in part by pitching to Democrats.
Contrary to reporter Stu Whitney’s snarky speculation and loan shark Chuck Brennan’s outright jerkery, Hickey is leaving the House for to study Bonhoeffer, not to dodge Deelstra’s charge (and AG Jackley can still press charges against Hickey and drag him back from Scotland if necessary). But Hickey’s resignation gives Governor Dennis Daugaard a chance to pick a replacement. As usual, the most logical choice, absent a special election, is the runner-up in the last election. Deelstra has shown he wants the job in the last three elections. He got it the first time and came awfully close the second and third times. Did he finally decide to use the Bosworth-Hickey petition conflict to regain his seat in the South Dakota Legislature… and if he did, would it be cool for Governor Daugaard to appoint him to that seat?
So if a Republican legislator grows values and the ability to use them in the government, his own buddy in his own district will sabatoge him. Note: is Deelstra also not honest since he did not sign the petitions he himself circulated.
This was done to sabatoge a pastor who had a conscience with payday lending, abortion, death penalty and other things. The Republicans are no longer the Christian right, but the we think we are right and will wreck your reputation if you disagree with us, party. They keep making it real difficult for a pro life democrat with a conscience to switch parties.
So the question becomes, did Deelstra intentionally sabotage Hickey and did he do it with Hickeys approval or did he do it on his own. In that case Deelstra committed libel and was not honest enough to sign the petition himself when he knew what the law says about that type of thing.
So hopefully Steve can find some friends in Scotland who actually have values and ethics. Hubel is also someone who dares to be honest in the Republican party and was slid out of the party as well.
Oh, the pitfalls of attempting to get a position of power. But in a democracy we would have rule from the ballot box rather than rule from the top.
My wife and I started shopping for an RV about 5 years ago. We were going to all the RV shows in and around Sioux Falls. We were getting close to buying a certain model from a dealer located on the North edge of Sioux Falls…enter Mr. Deelstra…He was pretty full of himself, still had on his Rep. name badge as he had just returned from a busy week in Pierre. After my wife (who truly likes people and looks for the good in all) threw up a little in her mouth, she pulled me aside and said, “there is no way you are buying a trailer for that guy.” That is my Bobby Deelstra story…I actually like his Dad, and I think it would have been a great place (location in and by itself) to buy an RV. Two years later we found a great dealership in Watertown…the rest is Rving history :-)
So based on character alone, I happen to think that nothing is out of the question when a person wants a job as bad as this guy has demonstrated he wants it. The sign of a decaying Republican civilization. No Democrats to fight with so lets spar among ourselves just to keep our skills sharp.
I corrected myself and you left that off your article…Notaries CAN administer oaths…but there is not one notary who SAID they administered an oath who actually did on those fraudulent petitions. All the notaries did was witness the signature of the carrier (unless you are Todd Schlekeway, you can get by without the person being there, and if you are Brian Gosch you can sign your own petitions)…none of them administered an oath.
It would be nice if whoever drew up our petitions actually read the law (you will notice that the law actually says that there should be a place for petitioners (plural) to sign the petition (single)…indicating they knew more than one person may indeed circulate the same petition.
Please note that I feel NEITHER Bosworth nor Hickey did anything wrong (except for being a huge hypocrite) when they VERIFIED the signatures on their petitions.
BUT if you place a felony on one person for filing a “false instrument” under SDCL 22 (even here MJ used a fraudulent twist to convict her….this is the SD Chapter regarding HOUSE LIENS!! Who does that?) …according to our SD Constitution, our laws must be equally applied.
betting on Deelstra gets nod from our do nothing Governor in Pierre . Low in behold we couldnt have a dem.
Moses…what do you mean “we couldn’t have a Dem?” The Majority of the legislature are Dems….they just pasted an “R” over their party preference to get elected (or appointed even). Look at the previous REPUBLICAN speaker of the house, Rausch, he was a DEMOCRAT 4 years before the Republican progressives in Pierre gave him the gavel. Look at Daugaard’s appointees (legislature and cabinet)…how many had to switch to the Republican party before they could be appointed?
Why should Hickey get a pass on this? He knew the risk he was taking but took it anyway. Hickey should have to walk the plank to discourage others from doing the same thing to tarnish the will of the people. If you let one thing pass without punishment, you must let all things pass. My question would also be, what kind of treasure awaits Deelstra that he would push his buddy in front of the moving train so he could advance himself? Sometimes 30 pieces of silver is more than just pocket change.
Sorry, Lora, I wouldn’t say any of the current legislators with an “R” behind their names qualify in any way as Democrats. You and I both may dislike their beliefs, opinions, and actions as legislators for different reasons, but they DO NOT act in any firm in a manner that fits with the Democratic Party’s platform.
Et tu, Deelstra?
I like how the koolaid cabal is throwing around conspiracy this and thats, Gant and Jackley didnt want to get involved in Boz’s or Foster’s petitions from the very beginning. A very powerful politician in South Dakota made it very clear to Gant and Jackley that if nothing was done over these petitions there would be hell to pay. 96 tears says “eh tu, deelstra” if people only knew how close to Boz and Haber that republican is… “Eh tu Brute” is so apropos.
Lora, so you’re telling me that “I, under oath, state that I circulated the above petition, that each signer personally signed this petition in my presence…,” the text authorized by law and specified by rule, is not really an oath? Is that circulator’s “oath” essentially meaningless?
If you maintain that position, then how can you in good conscience advocate convicting any person for a violation of a non-existent oath? It would seem the only moral position you can take is to contribute to the Bosworth legal defense fund to bring your legal analysis and nullification of the oath to the Supreme Court. Trying to hang Hickey with the same non-existent oath seems only to compound evil and rise from vindictiveness, not a commitment to justice.
But please, Lora, explain what values you and Bob are upholding here.
And Lora, please, stick with using words as what they actually mean. The Republicans in charge of South Dakota’s executive and legislative branches are not Republicans. They are not members of my party.
Note, Jerry, that I can consistently advocate for Hickey’s conviction. I believe the circulator’s oath means and demands exactly what it says. I believe oaths matter. I believe Annette Bosworth’s conviction was entirely just. If witnesses testify under oath and the DCI finds evidence that Hickey swore the circulator’s oath on sheets he did not circulate, I will support his conviction.
But we’re still waiting for that prosecutable evidence and testimony. The evidence I presented opened the door to an investigation that led the AG to believe he had a case. I await the presentation not just of wild vindictiveness but a winnable case on the Hickey petition.
“The Majority of the legislature are Dems….they just pasted an “R” over their party preference to get elected (or appointed even)”
I don’t care Lora. They are Republicans, not Democrats. That argument is a bunch of crap. The Democrats have no power and very little money. Quit trying to blame the Democrats for Bosworth’s mistakes.
Cory, our petitions are sloppy. You cannot extract legal strictness from a sloppily written document. Regarding the “Oath” …the notary has to sign that they ADMINISTERED an oath…they did not. The petition pulls the word “witness” out of thin air when the law says “verify”. Do you know how many times I have heard instructions in filling out the petition, “just make sure they are registered Republicans in case they check names.” Remember in MAth class if you multiplied 2.340579347 by 1…you cannot have 2.340579347 as the answer because the multiplier was only exact to one digit. The answer would be 2. You cannot have an answer more exact that the least exact factor in the equation. Same here…you cannot squeeze a felony out of something so poorly written.
And then we find out that the SOS cares so little about the election process that they don’t even check ANY signatures unless there is a complaint. No wonder the guy in Watertown thought he could use “Daffy Duck” as a placeholder…I wonder how many other cartoon characters are on petitions from past candidates and initiated measures.
NOW we see the Daugaard appointed MEdical Baord is being sued for corruption…..the same MEdical Baord that our beloved Lt Governor coerced into keeping a KNOWN FELON on staff at Yankton hospital FOR MONEY!!! They don’t care about our well being…their God is business and the “value added” side effects that come with it. HAve you seen that yet…43 pages of accusations that should make our Lt Governor want to blush in shame? Got a copy if you want it.
And regarding your Democrat party…nobody cares if you are Democrat or Republican up in Pierre….its not R vs D….its “lets see how we can screw the little guy by shackling them with Federal mandates.” And the Ds and Rs are on the same side. Granted, outside of Pierre, we hold our beliefs in the party close to our hearts…but that is trashed in Pierre.
“And regarding your Democrat party…nobody cares if you are Democrat or Republican up in Pierre….its not R vs D….its “lets see how we can screw the little guy by shackling them with Federal mandates.” And the Ds and Rs are on the same side. Granted, outside of Pierre, we hold our beliefs in the party close to our hearts…but that is trashed in Pierre.”
There are hardly any Democrats in Pierre Lora and the ones that are there are good people, like Bernie Hunhoff. Very offensive on your part to make a blanket statement like that.
The only one sloppy here is you.
Lora see Travis then you will maybe understand by reading his post.
Owen & et al,
What makes a Democrat or Republican? Is it simply their party registration or how they vote on the issues?
Is a Republican who votes against Republican principles truly a Republican because they registered that way to fool voters? In the past we have seen David Montgomery’s research that shows there are many “Republicans” that vote more often with Democrats than like Republicans.
I would offer that politics are not as simple as Lora and Owen would offer of either these politicians are D or R.
I do disagree with the comments claiming Steve Hickey is being unfairly held accountable. He who is with sin should not have been the first to be throwing so many rocks. Mr Hickey is reaping what he sowed.
Lora, you create sloppiness by throwing lots of irrelevancies into the pot. The oath is a simple sentence, written in layman’s language. When I was circulating the SB 69 petition last month, folks would sometimes ask if that had to do with the Bosworth trial. I’d show them the circulator’s oath and ask them if they understood it. Every one with whom I had that conversation said the oath was clear.
Besides, Lora, we’re rehashing an argument that Bosworth’s well-paid lawyers already floated and lost on. If you really believe what you are saying, then you should be raising no fuss about Hickey.
[Lora, not that it has anything to do with the facts of Hickey’s petitions, but I would like to see the lawsuit you say has been filed against the Medical Board. Please e-mail that to me.]
The D vs R argument is also irrelevant to the facts of the petitions. Appoint Bob Deelstra, and I’m sure Lora and friends will be calling him a RINO, too.
Maybe we just need to reset the whole Legislature. Let the Governor dissolve the House and Senate (probably unconstitutional, so how about demand that every legislator resign?), then call a special election right now, before the 2016 Session. Appoint a committee (chaired by me, because I’m the only person on this room who has run a petition challenge that successfully identified petition fraud and led to criminal conviction) to investigate every nominating petition for the special election. Then we’ll know that everyone in office takes oaths seriously.
Or we can go for the anarchy Lora prescribes: oaths don’t matter, so just photocopy some old petitions, white out the old candidate and circulator names, fill in yours, and get new notary stamps. Why not? Words don’t mean anything! Wheeee!
“In the past we have seen David Montgomery’s research that shows there are many “Republicans” that vote more often with Democrats than like Republicans.”
But DD, amazingly most of what is passed into law is Republican. No money for education or teachers isn’t a Democrat vote.
Increased money for businesses isn’t a Democrat idea.
Funding for roads and bridges? That’s bipartisan because we have to rebuild because Republicans have neglected it in the past.
Sorry DD. I don’t buy your argument.