What issue is most important to you in the upcoming election?
The economy
Abortion access
Vaccine mandates
School Choice
Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
Dakota Leader
Subscribe for Free Email Updates
Search Articles

Your donations help to keep The Dakota Leader free for all to read and enjoy! Please consider a monthly donation.

Post an Event

View All Calendar Events

“Vote YES on Amendment C – 2022”
Letter to The Editor By John Mills, Representative District 4 (candidate for District 8 House)

During this primary campaign season the question I have heard most is “What is up with Amendment C?” People are confused. I agree the ads we hear are confusing.

For me there are 3 reasons to vote YES on Amendment C:

First – the legislature voted in support of this amendment and put it on the ballot. Why? Legislators recognize that out-of-state money has increasingly been used to influence, confuse and manipulate voters, and so they approved this measure as an additional safeguard to help keep taxes low.

Second – The proposed change makes it harder to raise taxes. The Title of the act says what we need to know. It reads; ”A Constitutional Amendment Requiring Three-Fifths Vote for Approval of Ballot Measures Imposing Taxes or Fees or Obligating over $10 Million.” That’s pretty simple. If approved, Amendment C would require 60% of voters to pass a new tax or fee. We already have higher thresholds like this to raise taxes for a school or municipal bond, and we have an even higher bar, requiring a 67% vote of legislators, to raise a tax or fee. It makes sense to have that same protection for other taxes and fees that can be voted on.

Third – The old adage “follow the money” says a lot on this one. Finance reports just became public this past week. They show that the 'vote no' contributors are a handful of organizations from Washington DC, and large non-profit corporations who contributed a combined total of $1.5 Million. Money they have been using to flood the airwaves and fill our mailboxes in an attempt to confuse us. Isn’t it interesting that these groups, who want it as easy as possible to raise taxes in South Dakota – don’t pay taxes in South Dakota?!!

I hope you will join me and vote YES on Amendment C.

--Rep. John Mills (R-Madison)

Post Date: 2022-06-01 15:06:59Last Update: 2022-06-01 15:44:32


South Dakota State Senator Sends Letter To SD 25 Constituents, Disclosing Lisa Rave’s Conflicts of Interest
Urging Voters To Follow The Money...

A letter was sent to the republican voters of South Dakota's district 25, which sits just outside of Sioux Falls. State Senator Marsha Symens (R-SD25), discloses that the conflicts of interest for candidate Lisa Rave, and her familial ties to the pharmaceutical industry are too immense for her to remain silent.

Political insiders tell The Dakota Leader that the state's response to COVID-19 has likely placed a sizable target on the faction of lawmakers who fought to uphold the rights' of the people, during the pandemic restrictions. Representative Tom Pischke (R-Dell Rapids), is one of those lawmakers who spoke out, loudly protesting lock-downs, while aiding efforts to keep South Dakota open. Pischke now faces off with a well funded Lisa Rave, for the Senate seat of district 25. Senator Marsha Symens outlines Rave's familial ties, and funding sources in the letter below, obtained by The Dakota Leader for publication.

The letter is published in full, and reads as follows;

"Greetings My Fellow District 25 Republicans,

"Due to the many misleading mailings we have received regarding the candidates, I felt compelled to share with you what I know regarding the candidates running for the Senate in the upcoming June 7th primary. It is why I ran for office in the first place.

"In August 2020, I was asked to run for the Senate seat vacated by Sen. Langer's resignation because the "establishment-picked replacement" posed an enormous conflict of interest; that replacement's husband and son are lobbyists in Pierre.

"The replacement was to be Lisa Rave - a solid voice for BIG healthcare / BIG pharmacy organizations and all the lobbyists.

"Instead, the nominating committee selected me as the better candidate. It is election time and Lisa Rave is running again. Only this time, you, the voters of District 25, get to have your say in voting for the candidate you deem better suited to represent us which is why I am writing to you. You need to know what she is not telling you.

"There are several legislators who have their hearts in the right place, and want to represent the citizens of our great state. Lisa Rave, however, has not been forthcoming as to her connections in Pierre to SDAHO (South Dakota Association of Healthcare Organizations) which employs her husband, while her son lobbies for Sanford. The former Senator/Representative husband turned lobbyist could improperly influence Lisa Rave regarding legislation that impacts their industry. Will Lisa Rave vote for the best interests of people of our district, or for the best interests of the industry that her family lobbies for?

"The conflicts of interest posed by Lisa Rave are too immense to remain silent.

"Also, the two lobbyists, the father/son duo, have worked hard to kill legislation that would protect children from dangerous gender altering procedures and hormone blockers. They have also lobbied against legislation that would protect against vaccine and mask mandates.

"Tim Rave and their son, Mitch, lobby for the financial interests of the medical institutions in our state, not the best interest of its residents.

"We also received a postcard calling for the "draining of the swamp". The irony of that card is that it targeted four legislators; two being freshmen legislators. In my opinion, the swamp consists of career politicians which funded and created those negative mailers.

"Due to redistricting, District 25 changed dramatically, combining 5 sitting legislators into one district. This was an attempt to push out solid Conservative legislators that do not vote the way the establishment would like. We need a strong candidate to beat a well-funded ($33,000 at present), highly powerful group behind the push for the lobbyist's wife. That same group wants to silence the legislators who do not feel the government should be able to force you to wear a mask, force you to take a vaccine, and vote to spend your hard-earned taxpayer dollars on every pet project that the lobbyists want.

"What I know about Heinneman and Crisp is limited. They have been in the legislature before and decided to run again. Check out their voting records to see if they are the candidate for you.

"Currently, Tom Pischke is the incumbent who voted for your freedoms to prevent mask and vaccine mandates. He voted against proposed legislation that would have locked down the State. He supports the Convention of States resolution to impose term limits on Congress; he fully supports our 2nd Amendment rights; and fights hard for the communities in our District. Tom has “A” ratings from Family Heritage Alliance Action, Americans for Prosperity, South Dakota Gun Owners Association and the National Rifle Association. He also boasts a perfect 100% voting record from South Dakota Right to Life for his entire Legislative career in the House. On top of that, he has one of the most Conservative voting records in the entire Legislature according to South Dakota Citizens for Liberty and American Conservative Union. I am asking you to be informed of your choice of representation, as it matters more than ever.

"Tom Pischke has my support because I know him to be a conservative voice for the citizens of our district and our state. Join me and get out and vote June 7th.

"Best Regards,

"Senator Marsha Symens

"Paid for by Marsha Symens for Senate. Not paid for at taxpayer expense."

--Senator Marsha Symens (R-SD25)

Post Date: 2022-06-01 14:12:00Last Update: 2022-06-01 15:06:59


OP-ED “The Looming Energy Catastrophe”
A must see energy literacy briefing video for every driver being ripped off at the gas pumps.



Please enjoy and share this educational energy literacy briefing, a 5-minute video by Costa Mesa Brief at a California Chevron gas station. The video talks about the outrageous gas prices and tells us what is behind the increases, where it is heading and what, if anything, we can do about it. I think you will find his no-nonsense approach and perspective unique, sobering and very informative.

The video explains the impact on fuel prices from California government-imposed reductions in the supply chain of crude oil has increased imported crude oil from foreign countries from 5 percent in 1992 to more than 60 percent today of total consumption, and Biden’s pledge that “we are going to get rid of fossil fuels” is impacting fuel prices.

At today’s price of crude oil well above $100 per barrel the imported crude oil costs California more than $150 million dollars a day, yes, every day, being paid to oil-rich foreign countries, depriving Californians of jobs and business opportunities, and drivers to pay premium prices for fuel.

Californians are consuming more than 50 million gallons of fuel daily for its 35 million vehicles which is slightly more than one gallon per day per vehicle.

Californians continue to pay more than
$1.00 more per gallon of fuel than the rest of the country primarily for the State, Federal and Local taxes, and the Government environmental compliance programs such as the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), Cap and Trade, Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), and the Underground Storage Tax. Those costs ‘dumped” onto the posted price at the pump are not transparent to the public.

As renewable energy is only intermittent electricity from breezes and sunshine as NEITHER wind turbines nor solar panels can manufacture anything for society. Climate change may impact humanity but being mandated to live without the more than
6,000 products and the various fuels manufactured from oil will necessitate lifestyles being mandated back to the horse and buggy days of the 1800’s. Life without oil could be the greatest threat to civilization’s eight billion residents, resulting in billions of fatalities from diseases, malnutrition, and weather-related deaths.

Also manufactured from the supply of crude oil, to meet the demands of the economy, are the fuels to move the heavy-weight and long-range needs of more than 50,000 jets for the military, commercial, private, and the President’s Air Force One, and the more than 50,000 merchant ships that move products throughout the world.

When the public continues to demand increasing needs for the transportation fuels and the products made from crude oil, limiting the supply of oil by governments and the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) movement to manufacture those items is a guarantee for today’s shortages and inflation.

 Ronald Stein Pulitzer Prize nominated author and
Policy advisor for The Heartland Institute on Energy http://www.energyliteracy.net/ 

Help Support The Dakota Leader... DONATE TODAY!

--By Ronald Stein Ambassador for Energy and Infrastructure, Irvine, California

Post Date: 2022-06-01 14:09:07Last Update: 2022-06-01 14:12:00


How Teachers’ Unions are Failing our Students

A battle is raging within our school districts across the country, and South Dakota is not immune.

The National Teacher's Union (NEA) and the South Dakota chapter of the NEA (SDEA) are influencing state policies, and harming students with radical political agendas. It's important to note that teacher unions are not beholden to students or parents, but were originally created to protect teachers and help increase their wages, and benefits via collective bargaining agreements. The union's lobby has now become so powerful and political in South Dakota, that the SDEA is directly responsible for stopping Gov. Noem's Critical Race Theory ban, the original Women in Sports bill, the bathroom bill, and more. Each time the SDEA has lobbied against a policy, certain lawmakers have capitulated to their demands.

Currently, the NEA and the SDEA have teamed up with the pharma lobby, paying millions of dollars to oppose Amendment C. Amendment C is a measure that would require 60 percent of voter turn-out to agree on any given tax increase proposed by future ballot measures. The South Dakota state legislature has a 2/3rds majority tax protection, that requires 67 percent of lawmakers to vote for tax increases. However, special interests are currently bypassing those protections via ballot measures, which has prompted South Dakota lawmakers to author Amendment C.

Now Influence Watch shares an in-depth look at the Teacher's Union, and how their internal policies have disproportionately impacted the most vulnerable populations in the wake of COVID-19. Find out how the NEA is directly impacting un-enrollment rates, and what it's costing our school districts and communities.

The Influence Watch Podcast

"By fighting to keep schools closed—excuse me, open for virtual learning—for a full year in the jurisdictions in which they hold the most power, teachers unions sought to expand their power. Now public-school enrollments are tumbling and evidence is piling up that the school closures harmed students’ mental health and expanded the racial achievement gaps the unions claim to seek to close. Joining me to discuss the teachers unions’ attempts to spin their school closures and her organization’s efforts to counter their influence is Ashley Varner, vice president of communications and federal affairs for the Freedom Foundation."

--Re-published from Influence Watch with Commentary by The Dakota Leader

Post Date: 2022-05-31 13:25:53Last Update: 2022-05-31 14:09:07


Noem Backed Primary Candidate, Caught In Scandal
Timothy R. Goodwin Caught Misleading Voters, According to Ethics Complaint

According to an ethics complaint sent to South Dakota's Secretary of State, Steve Barnett yesterday May 25, 2022, Timothy R. Goodwin has materially misled voters and violated South Dakota campaign laws.

The complaint, obtained by The Dakota Leader, states that Goodwin's campaign failed to amend his political action committee for the Senate, used false endorsements, fictitious PAC names, and has misled voters asking them to "re-elect" Goodwin who is the primary challenger to conservative republican and incumbent Senator, Julie Frye-Mueller.

According to the Secretary of State's website, Timothy Goodwin's campaign has received $5,000 from Governor Kristi Noem, via her South Dakota Strong Leadership PAC. Meanwhile, Senator Lee Schoenbeck's "South Dakota Strong PAC" has spent thousands of dollars to attack Sen. Julie Frye-Mueller this election cycle.

According to reports, Senator Lee Schoenbeck has spent hundreds of thousands to attack a faction of conservative republicans with mailers and negative ads. Meanwhile, despite denying involvement with Schoenbeck's efforts, campaign reports show that Noem has not only endorsed, but has also funded the primary opponents of the exact same faction Lee is attacking. The list includes South Dakota's most outspoken lawmakers, who previously led the efforts against vaccine mandates, state closures, CRT, and tax increases.

After reading the complaint allegations, The Dakota Leader reached out to Representative John Mills (R-Madison), to independently verify
that Goodwin had in fact misrepresented endorsements of support to potential voters . Mills tells The Dakota Leader,

"someone asked about the endorsement from me on Goodwin's website, I wasn't aware it was there. That endorsement was from a previous election. Since then, Goodwin has drifted left. I have asked him to remove it, and he has said he would."

As of today, May 26, 2022 the endorsement of Rep. John Mills has been removed.

However, the website still lists an endorsement from, "Lee Qualm, House Majority Leader, To The Voters of District 30." In a rather ironic turn of events, Lee Qualm is no longer in office, due to the same efforts currently being employed by Sen. Lee Schoenbeck during this election, that were used to replace Qualm with pharma backed shoe-in, Erin Tobin.

Qualm, who was targeted by Lee Schoenbeck via PAC-N-Heat, and the SDAHO PAC, had attack mailers sent to his home district, resulting in the loss of his election. Proving the endorsement on Timothy R. Goodwin's website to be materially false, per the ethics complaint filed.

Last election, Schoenbeck was able to replace six conservative lawmakers with a mere $30,000 and cleverly worded attack mailers. However, Schoenbeck has more money at his disposal to "reshape the legislature," this campaign cycle.

Campaign finance reports show that Schoenbeck's
"South Dakota Strong PAC" has spent $138,000 dollars this election to continue his efforts of removing republicans like Sen. Julie Frye-Mueller, Speaker of the House Spencer Gosch (R-Mobridge), Rep. Fred Deutsch (R-Florence), and Rep. Tom Pischke (R-Dell Rapids), and many others that appeared on Gov. Noem and Lee Schoenbeck's "hit-list."



The Full Campaign Ethics Violation Report-

"Campaign Finance Reporting Complaint Against Candidate for District 30 Senate, Timothy R. Goodwin

"I, Toni E. (Tonchi) Weaver, a resident and registered voter in South Dakota, do swear that to the best of my knowledge on this day, May 25, 2022, that the following statements are accurate and true. I submit to the Secretary of State a formal challenge to Republican candidate Timothy R. Goodwin for violations of SDCL§12-27 and urge the Secretary of State and South Dakota Attorney General to levy appropriate civil and/or criminal penalties as provided in SDCL §12- 27-29.1, and I offer these facts in support of my challenge:

"Fact #1 Candidate Timothy R. Goodwin is acting as Treasurer for his own campaign organization known as “Timothy R. Goodwin”. The committee known as “Timothy R. Goodwin” is the sole active committee for candidate Goodwin on the South Dakota Secretary of State website as of 1:32pm MDT on May 21, 2022. (Evidence: Screen capture)

"Fact #2 Candidate committee known as “Timothy R. Goodwin” has never been amended or corrected to indicate that the candidate is seeking the office of Senate in District 30. The last filed statement of the committee indicates that the committee is for the purpose of seeking the office of Representative. (Evidence- Screen capture)

"Fact #3 On March 1, 2022, candidate Timothy R. Goodwin filed with the Secretary of State an adequate number of signatures on petitions to nominate him as a candidate for State Senate in District 30. He failed, however, to file a new committee or to amend or correct the existing committee as seeking the office of Senator. (Evidence: copies of petitions)

"Fact #4 Candidate Goodwin has to date purchased billboards and campaign ads and mailed campaign flyers that bear ‘paid for by’ statements for non-existent committees. These fictitious committees include: #1 - ‘Paid for by Goodwin for Senate” #2 - “Paid for by Goodwin District 30” #3 - “Paid for by Goodwin 4 District 30” #4 - “Paid for by Tim R. Goodwin” (Evidence, photographs and hard copies)

"Fact #5 Candidate Timothy R. Goodwin maintains a website at www.timrgoodwin.com that asks potential voters visiting the site to: “Re-Elect Tim R. Goodwin, June 7, 2022 South Dakota State Senate – District 30”

"This is false and misleads potential voters to believe that Timothy R. Goodwin is the Senate incumbent when in fact he is the challenger to the current incumbent. He is currently an elected Representative in the House of Representatives. (Evidence: Screen capture)

"Fact #6 Candidate Timothy R. Goodwin lists testimonial endorsements on the same website that appear to be endorsements from an entirely different race. They include-

#1 Endorsement Pete Burkett, Custer County states that “Tim is the current state legislative representative for District 30 and he is running for re-election”. Mr. Burkett does not indicate that the candidate is running for the Senate.

#2 Endorsement Jacob Wilts, a former intern for the Republican Party House of

Representatives in 2019. Mr. Wilts states that he is “...writing this letter in support of the re- election of Representative Tim Goodwin.” It is obvious that this was an endorsement written for the 2020 primary election.

#3 Endorsement John Mills, Representative District 4, titled his statement “Re-Elect Tim Goodwin – District 30 – House”. This is clearly from a previous race and not an endorsement for the Senate. Note: Representative John Mills is currently running in District 8 and no longer represents District 4. A phone call to Representative John Mills May 25, 2022 confirms that no endorsement for District 30 Senate was made by him.

"#4 Endorsement Representative Lee Qualm, House Majority Leader makes the statement that Representative Goodwin served as a Majority Whip “for the last two years”, but Representative Goodwin has currently served a total of four years as a Majority Whip. Qualm’s statement also encourages people to “...vote for Tim Goodwin in the June 2nd primary.” That was the primary election date in 2020, and Lee Qualm was defeated in the 2020 June primary, so this, too, is a bogus endorsement. A phone call to Lee Qualm May 25, 2022 affirms that no endorsement for District 30 Senate was made by him. (Evidence: Screen captures)

"Fact #7 Candidate Timothy R. Goodwin’s campaign material and website gives the official government email address of Representative Goodwin – Tim.goodwin@sdlegislature.gov for campaign contact information even though the campaign organization lists a non-government gmail address. (Evidence: Photographs, Screen captures, Hard copies)

"Fact #8 Candidate Timothy R. Goodwin lists the House Lobby phone number (605-773-3851) as the contact number for the candidate making LRC employees de facto campaign assistants. (Evidence: Screen captures)

"Fact #9 A Pre-Primary campaign finance disclosure report for a non-existent legislative candidate committee named “Goodwin for Senate” was filed May 23, 2022 under the committee named “Timothy R. Goodwin”. The candidate name is different from the candidate’s name as it appears on the ballot. The candidate’s committee email address provided is an official email address: Tim.goodwin@sdlegislature.gov

"Fact #10 Not all PAC donations listed on page 6 of the fictitious “Goodwin for Senate” disclosure that SOS attributed to “Timothy R. Goodwin” are verifiable. A crosscheck of the PAC reports shows that PACs report donations made to the following campaign committees: “Timothy R. Goodwin” (existing); “Goodwin 4 District 30” (fictitious); “Timothy Goodwin for Senate – District 30” (fictitious); Goodwin for SD Senate” (fictitious); “Timothy Goodwin” (fictitious) and “Tim Goodwin” (fictitious). March 25, 2022

"AMENDED TO ADD-Fact #11 Candidate Timothy R. Goodwin used the official State Seal of South Dakota on the same campaign website where he asked for voters to “re-elect” him to the Senate. This is unauthorized use of a state symbol. (Evidence: Screen captures) "Remedy- The Secretary of State and South Dakota Attorney General must take immediate and appropriate action.

Dated May 26, 2022"

The implications of these violations, under South Dakota State law, could disqualify Goodwin from the election, should SOS Barnett pursue the charges. Weaver however, says she is doubtful that Secretary of State Steve Barnett will do anything about the violations.

Editor's Note- A previous version of this article stated that Lee Qualm had lost re-election in the House. It has been updated as of 10pm central, May 26, 2022 with the accurate information.

We Need Your Donations To Keep Up This Work! Help Support The Dakota Leader... DONATE TODAY!

--Breeauna Sagdal- Health and Policy Journalist for The Dakota Leader

Post Date: 2022-05-26 12:24:55Last Update: 2022-05-27 14:41:54


Stockholm+50 attendees need to address the impact on the world without fossil fuels
OP-ED by Ronald Stein, Policy Advisor for Heartland Institute and Ambassador for Energy and Infrastructure U.C Irvine

Efforts to cease the use of crude oil could be the greatest threat to civilization’s eight billion people, since everything that needs electricity is made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil, there will be nothing new to power without crude oil!

Summary--Ridding the world of fossil fuels will lead us back to the decarbonized world of the 1800’s without the electrical power needs of iPhones, defibrillators, or televisions, as they are all made from products manufactured from crude oil.

The Stockholm+50 in Stockholm, Sweden, will commemorate the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment and celebrate 50 years of failed global environmental action. The meetings on June 2nd and 3rd will follow months of consultations and discussions with individuals, communities, organizations, and governments around the world.

The rise of the 'Green World Order' that will be addressed at the Stockholm+50 needs to address the impact on the world’s 8 billion residents in a future world without fossil fuels, as efforts to cease the use of crude oil could be the greatest threat to civilization’s eight billion, and may result in billions, not millions, of fatalities from diseases, malnutrition, and weather-related deaths while trying to survive without the fossil fuels that are benefiting society.

Yes, the climate is changing, as it has been for four billion years, and will continue to change. Yes, there will be fatalities from the coming climate changes. Climate change is expected to cause approximately 250,000 additional deaths per year, between 2030 and 2050 due to malnutrition, malaria, diarrhea, and heat stress. However, the idea that global warming poses an immediate existential risk for the world, is irresponsible. The risk of climate change is small, in comparison to a world without fossil fuels, as current governments and corporate leaderships are attempting to revert to the decarbonized status of the early 1800’s and before.

As many world leaders gather in Stockholm, the world faces a planetary crisis of pollution and waste, biodiversity loss, and climate changes, as well as other planetary ills that are affecting current and future prosperity and well-being. An unhealthy planet threatens human health, prosperity, equality, and peace, but the world also faces the threat of ridding itself from the same fossil fuels that allowed the world to populate from 1 to 8 billion in less than two hundred years.

Life Without Oil is NOT AS SIMPLE AS YOU MAY THINK as renewable energy is only intermittent electricity from breezes and sunshine and NEITHER wind turbines, nor solar panels, can manufacture direct energy for society. Climate change may impact humanity but being mandated to live without the products manufactured from oil, will necessitate lifestyles being mandated back to the horse and buggy days of the 1800’s and could be the greatest threat to the planet's eight billion residents.

World leaders make no mention that the entire pharmaceutical industry, chemical industry, material sciences, energy, transportation, heating, etc. are dependent on the same fossil fuels that they want to rid the world of. Attempting to attain a decarbonized world like the one that existed in the 1800’s and before, could result in Billions of fatalities.

We cannot continue poisoning the planet in the name of progress, just to satisfy our endless electricity demands, fueling the rise of 5G, automated machines, vast data-centers, and digitization.

The current fossil fuel infrastructure is less invasive than mining for the exotic minerals and metals required to create the batteries needed to store "green energy". In developing countries, these mining operations exploit child labor, and are responsible for the most egregious human rights' violations of vulnerable minority populations. These operations are also directly destroying the planet through environmental degradation. The 2022 Pulitzer Prize nominated book
“Clean Energy Exploitations - Helping Citizens Understand the Environmental and Humanity Abuses That Support Clean Energy, does an excellent job of discussing the lack of transparency to the world of the green movement’s impact upon humanity.



Of the three energy sources many refer to as "fossil fuels," (coal, natural gas, and crude oil) crude oil is the only source primarily used to manufacture products for society, that are the basis for entire economies.

Crude oil is virtually useless, unless it’s manufactured (refined) into oil derivatives. These oil derivatives are the base chemical structure of more than 6,000 products found in our daily lives. Many of these products did not exist before the 1900’s, nor did the fuels to move the heavy-weight and long-range needs of more than 50,000 jets, more than 50,000 merchant ships, the entire military and space programs.

The liquid fuels and products produced from the hydrocarbon processing sector has aided the advancement of rocket technology, leading humans to break the boundaries of space by placing satellites into geosynchronous orbit. These technologies have significantly evolved the way that humanity communicates, navigates, and explores our home planet to the distant cosmos.

Wind turbines and solar panels may be able to generate intermittent electricity, but they cannot manufacture anything. By-the-way, all the products needed to make the parts for vehicles, wind turbines, solar panels, planes, ships, medical supplies, tires, asphalt, and fertilizer are made with the oil derivatives manufactured from crude.

The need for electricity will decrease over time without crude oil, with no new items to power. Everything that needs electricity, from lights, vehicles, iPhones, defibrillators, computers, telecommunications, etc., are all made from the oil derivatives manufactured with crude oil. Meaning if fossil fuels are completely removed, as proposed, we would no longer have products that even require electricity. And, the deterioration of current items made with oil derivatives will slowly become obsolete over the next few decades, as replacement parts run out.



World leaders need to identify an alternative path that focuses on the reduction of certain demands, or identifies the replacement of, or clone for, crude oil. If world leaders have learned anything from the opioid crisis, it is impossible to remove supply overnight without having an alternative in place first.

Concurrently, the world needs to stop building pointless infrastructure and goods for the sake of producing them. It's time to refocus on meaningful and appropriate products and technologies that support society and economies. Imagine if each human planted one tree, picked up one piece of trash or simply pulled the plug on one human degrading electrical device.

With today’s technology to work and educate remotely, via virtual connectivity, we should reallocate resources to get people out of the cities and back into rural areas. It's time to focus on adaptation, conservation, and resource efficiency. Systems need to be re-balanced, natural and symbiotic, rather than parasitic, and we need to subordinate technology rather than allow it to rule us. Oil is a magic substance when used correctly and burned cleanly, but it can be the death of us all if used poorly.

The world needs to REDUCE not ELIMINATE crude oil and reduce its footprint as much as practical and possible, as that may truly be the only plan that will work to save most of the world’s eight billion residents.

Ronald Stein http://www.energyliteracy.net/

--By Ronald Stein Ambassador for Energy and Infrastructure, Irvine, California

Post Date: 2022-05-24 14:47:10Last Update: 2022-05-26 11:28:45


ARS-Americana Debuts With a Collective Collage
“What Do You Want To See In An Art Community?” By Anna Cole

A-R-S is Latin for art...but actually means the "highly skilled work" or method of art. The last A in ARSA stands for Americana - classic and full of community.

ARSA’s Community Day at the Caille Library on Saturday, May 21st, was the second event of a new organization that took root in Sioux Falls in February 2022, and aims to provide “encouraging, ethical, and truthful art in our communities”.

The event, hosted by founder and CEO Hannah Van Steenwyk, provided a collaborative art environment for all ages that was free and open to the public. Using four large-scale poster boards and markers for guests to draw with, the event prompted the community to share their vision, in answer to- “What do you want to see in an art community?”

Van Steenwyk explained that she chose the materials for their simplicity and accessibility, and drew sketches on small pieces of paper to provide ideas and help people feel more open about expressing themselves. She discussed the way that even children have, over-time, become more afraid of making mistakes, but says that “art is one area for healthy, constructive criticism,” due to its subjective nature. “That skill has been lost,” Van Steenwyk says.

"ARSA’s Community Day is designed to be a space where everyone can create art without the fear of making mistakes," Van Steenwyk shares.

Over the past eight years, Van Steenwyk says that she recognized a growing need for an art agency within South Dakota. “South Dakota needs an art agency,” Van Steenwyk tells The Dakota Leader, "I felt called by God to create an organization that is able to provide sustainable artist residencies in addition to hosting events, workshops, and competitions in Sioux Falls."



It took years to build upon the initial idea for ARSA, due to the challenges of securing funding after becoming a non-profit organization. As many great artists often do, Van Steenwyk was focused on more than one thing at a time. "As an artist, I strongly believe that you don’t need to do one thing with your art career, everybody can be creative, no matter what their primary source of income is or how they spend their time." She believes that art is everywhere, and that everyone has the ability to create and contribute beauty to this world. "Everyone can bring art to their day jobs, if you work at a gas station, why not ask your boss if you can draw with sidewalk chalk during down time and bring more customers in that way, for example?" Van Steenwyk also described how someone can work as an accountant and still be artistically-minded, finding the expressive side of that job, even if it isn’t obvious.

As a Christian, Van Steenwyk has observed that there are many conservative Christian artists in South Dakota who don’t feel as though they can participate in the art community, due to political bias. However, as Van Steenwyk emphasized, “art is not a left or right thing, and our mission at ARSA is to help everyone express themselves artistically." Van Steenwyk shares that she wants to use the inclusive, welcoming energy of her events to bring hope back to people, especially after the disruptions of the last few years, resulting in pandemic restrictions.

ARSA will be hosting a second Community Day at Siouxland Downtown Library on Tuesday, May 24th, from 6-8pm. Free pastries will be provided by La Luna Cafe, and guests can continue to draw on the poster boards, which will be on display at La Luna Cafe, once completed. Tuesday night’s event will also feature an announcement about what ARSA’s new space will look like, and what opportunities, events, and residencies will soon be made available to the public. ARSA will also be offering more information at their booth at Union Gospel Mission’s "Rock the Block Party" on May 29th from 11am-5pm at 701 8th street. Artists who are interested in getting involved can find more information and sign up for ARSA’s newsletter at Arsasd.com.

Help Support Community Journalism... DONATE TODAY!

--Anna Cole- Arts and Entertainment Columnist for The Dakota Leader

Post Date: 2022-05-23 17:12:41Last Update: 2022-05-23 14:44:51


Foundations Destroying American Public Education (full series)
Re-Published by The Dakota Leader with Full Permission From Capital Research

The article published by Capital Research on May 20, 2022 titled "Foundations Destroying American Public Education," written by Luke Rosiak, has been re-published in full with permission to The Dakota Leader.

Summary- The world of K–12 education policy has long been dominated by philanthropic foundations. Much of the education “reform” sweeping across America has been financed and pushed by elite, well-heeled foundations. They have used the billions from their endowments to create various associations and activist groups to promote these changes. The Ford, Kellogg, and MacArthur Foundations commanded assets of nearly $27 billion and, between them, doled out more than one billion dollars in 2015. For example, it is philanthropic foundations who have injected critical race theory into society. The Ford Foundation spent $665 million on “racial equity” between 2011 and 2020.

Pierce Delahunt is a trust-fund baby with an inheritance in the millions, generated from a chain of successful outlet malls. By thirty-two, Delahunt took “nongendered pronouns” like “their,” was a self-styled anarchist and communist, and was directing the inheritance to nonprofit groups that advanced those causes. Their parents were socially liberal and Delahunt often heard things like “be kind to all, and mindful of those less fortunate.” But after learning “social justice throughout high school,” Delahunt realized that was not equity. They expressed distaste for concepts like “NeoLiberalism (an intentionally repackaged Capitalism), ‘Classical Liberalism’ (similarly repackaged Conservatism), Liberalism itself (as opposed to Leftism) . . . and other liberation-washed practices of oppression.”[1]

With time and money at their disposal, Delahunt “put a lot of energy into critiquing this country. I enjoy problematizing in general.” Though outlet malls provide name-brand goods at deeply discounted prices, allowing lower-income earners to enjoy the same luxuries as the rich, Delahunt was ashamed of the source of their wealth, saying, “When I think about outlet malls, I think about intersectional oppression.” They decided to donate their inheritance to anticapitalist groups that “tackle the externalities of discount shopping.”[2]



Delahunt now has a master’s degree in education and gives speeches to children, such as one geared toward middle and high schoolers called “Vegan Praxis in a Political Context of White Supremacy.” As a professional biography says: “Their research was a study of activist-education programs throughout the country. They grew up in occupied Lenape territories of New York and New Jersey, and . . . teach social emotional learning, activism, social justice, and Leftist eco nomics.”[3]

Key to Delahunt’s activities was a group called Resource Generation, a group funded by the Ford Foundation and the W. K. Kellogg Foundation to coax guilt-ridden young scions of millionaires into steering their families’ funds to activist groups that oppose capitalism. Delahunt is one of a thousand or so dues-paying members of Resource Generation, a network that stands to influence a combined $22 billion in inheritance. The group held “workshops on family dynamics” to train young inheritors how to siphon off their parents’ money on the premise that capitalism is based on “stolen land, stolen labor, and stolen lives.”[4]

This is typical of how philanthropic foundations like Ford and Kellogg work. Elite, well-heeled foundation executives use the billions from their endowments—a massed through capitalism—to create various associations and activist groups. Those nonprofits radicalize youth by associating racism with America, and America with capitalism. The foundation money serves as seed money that is eventually leveraged by another source. The foundations have created their own mouthpieces, and gotten others to pay for it.

There are hundreds of such activist groups, local and national, pushing complaints about “systemic racism,” equity, and the evils of capitalism to public schools and children. It is a veritable industry, breathtaking in its volume and complexity.

But like the Hydra of Greek mythology—the immortal, multi-headed snake monster that, if someone cut off a head, would grow two more in its place—these activist groups are all parts of one machine. Pick any one of them, and its funding is likely to tie back to the foundations, primarily Ford; Gates; W. K. Kellogg; Annie E. Casey; MacArthur; and Surdna. There is also the New Venture Fund, a group that pools money from all of these foundations and then distributes it.



The Ford Foundation spent $665 million on “racial equity” between 2011 and 2020. But foundations do not simply subsidize existing, independent nonprofits. They decide what they want to allocate their focus and money to, then a crowd of activist groups lines up with grant proposals promising to do just that, even if it means diverting from what those groups would have otherwise done. In October 2020, Ford announced $180 million in new funding for racial equity, with a focus on litigation—perhaps suing over racism and fighting for the likes of racial quotas in the courts. In making this decision, Darren Walker, the gay black former securities trader who leads the foundation, was like a coach calling the play, sending his players out into position, and setting the course of American activism.[5]

Equity grantee groups are professional outfits, but many operate in largely esoteric areas such as school board policy making and curriculum development, where the “other team” is simply regular parents, who rarely have the time or know-how to resist, or even notice these efforts. The obscurity of their work makes them harder to challenge.

In 2016, Hillary Clinton spent more than half a billion dollars on her presidential campaign. By comparison, the Ford, Kellogg, and MacArthur foundations alone commanded assets of nearly $27 billion and, between them, doled out more than one billion dollars in 2015.[6] Imagine having the resources of two presidential political campaigns without having to worry about expensive advertising, because the arena they were influencing was, to the average citizen, so small and arcane.

Then imagine that in this presidential campaign, there was no opposing candidate—essentially no organized faction presenting a competing choice.

Then imagine that the views being pushed by this campaign were far more extreme than a mainstream candidate like Clinton—ideas that, if Americans had been paying attention, most would oppose, regardless of political party.

Now imagine that the people behind this campaign were among the wealthiest, most powerful people in America, working in close coordination, and that their arena was the nation’s K–12 schools. This is how this game is actually being played.

In this framework, the foundations seek to transform America in ways few Americans would want, and to do it, they seek to transform your children, by influencing the largest and most intimate thing government does: operating America’s public schools. For some reason, this is viewed as an obscure policy arena by most people, who spend more time paying attention to things like presidential politics. But it shouldn’t be. And the philanthropic foundations should not be thought of as merely the rich families who paid for some art museums or public television programming. These rogue foundations are perhaps the most radical, powerful, and least understood force in American politics. And their aspirations go far beyond the outcome of an election.

Please visit Capital Research for all citations and sources.
--by Luke Rosiak

Post Date: 2022-05-23 16:50:21Last Update: 2022-05-23 17:15:37


Amendment C Made Easy
UPDATED 5/24/22 By Representative Kevin Jensen

UPDATED NOTE 5/24/22 “I want to clarify my position - I Voted yes, and I encourage others to do the same as I think it should be more difficult for out-of-state groups, and corporations to raise your taxes.” - Rep Kevin Jensen on follow-up.

Everywhere I go while campaigning in District 16, the most frequently asked question is “What’s the deal on Amendment C?” The truth is, one side is doing a terrible marketing job and the other is just flat out deceiving you.

Let’s start with some facts. In order for the legislature to raise taxes and spend money, a two- thirds majority is required in the House and in the Senate and the Governor must sign it. That two thirds is of what we refer to as ‘members elect,’ which means two thirds of all the elected legislators, not just two thirds of those voting. If 5 people are absent it still takes two thirds of both houses, or of all 105 legislators, to pass it. If they are absent it is considered a 'No' vote.

There are currently 640,185 registered voters in South Dakota. According to the Secretary of State’s office there are 576,829 ‘active’ voters. I am not certain what they deem is an active voter, but these numbers do not include deceased individuals. So, to keep the math simple I will use the number 600,000 to represent ‘the voters.’

The ‘vote yes’ campaign keeps using the phrase – ‘60% of the voters.’ That is a little misleading because there are potentially 600,000 voters (using the example above). The truth, is that it currently only takes a simple majority of THOSE WHO VOTED to raise your taxes. If we have a 60% voter turnout, that means only 360,000 people voted. A simple majority is then 180,001. So in this scenario, it only takes 180,001 voters to raise your taxes, which represents less than one third of the total number of potential voters.



And now, the misleading ads. The ‘vote no’ campaign makes claims that it ends majority rule and it allows the minority to raise your taxes. Well folks, the TRUTH is, that is what we already have! In almost every possible scenario, a minority is all that is required to raise your taxes, even if Amendment C passes. In my previous example it CLEARLY shows that a minority of the voters can raise your taxes, and unless we get all 600,000+ to go to the polls it will likely always be that way.

Amendment C raises the requirement to raise your taxes from a simple majority of 50% of those voting to a majority of 60%. Using the previously used number of 360,000 people voting, it would raise the number required to increase taxes to 216,000. That clearly is still a minority of all the voters (600,000).

What neither side is telling in the ads is that none of Amendment C goes into effect unless the ballot measure or Constitutional amendment you are voting on commits the state to spending 10 million dollars or more. If it does not commit over 10 million in taxes or fees, the 50% simple majority is still the law.

Help Support Community Journalism... DONATE TODAY!

--Kevin Jensen Majority Whip District 16 SD House of Representatives

Post Date: 2022-05-23 14:01:28Last Update: 2022-05-24 12:13:04


The Full List of Conservatives That Gov. Noem and Sen. Lee Schoenbeck are Working to Replace
By Breeauna Sagdal

Sources tell The Dakota Leader a full hit-list of who to support and whom to oppose this primary, was recently circulated by Senator Lee Schoenbeck (R-Watertown), and sent to South Dakota political insiders with money. As reported by Joe Sneve of The Argus Leader, the hit-list is comprised of South Dakota's most conservative representatives in the State's House and Senate.

During a recent debate in Watertown, Schoenbeck alleged that Gov. Kristi Noem fully supported his efforts to rid the state of "wack-a-doodles," meaning the most conservative voices that opposed Noem's efforts to shut down the state during COVID-19. Even within the state of South Dakota, it is not widely known that a group of 29 conservatives in the house voted against Noem's bills to close the state on March 30, 2020, while the
Lt. Governor, Larry Rhoden and the senate leadership drank at a nearby lobbyist's house.

"In the primary, she's (Gov. Noem) probably the greatest asset we have," Schoenbeck stated during the Watertown debate, with conservative challenger and Watertown City Council Member, Colin Paulsen. "Our oars are rowing in the same directions," Schoenbeck told the audience regarding his joint efforts with Gov. Noem to replace conservatives.

Daniel Horowitz of The Blaze,
recently wrote an op-ed detailing Gov. Noem's support of the candidates who are opposing the very same conservative incumbents that Lee Schoenbeck is attacking, via mailers. In his op-ed, Horowitz shares a partial list of the those who the South Dakota establishment is to support and oppose.

The Dakota Leader now brings readers the entire list.

Editor's note- Names outlined in red, only represent those who are known conservative incumbents in the House and Senate, running for re-election.

Gov. Kristi Noem has denied involvement, telling supporters that she is not working with Sen. Lee Schoenbeck. However, as shown in The Argus Leader article, Noem has offered candidate school seminars, made endorsements and is supporting the primary challengers to the incumbents denoted on the list in red.

While Noem's South Dakota PAC states that it is not willing to "go negative," Noem has publicly chastised Republican incumbents that have opposed her actions. Conservative Representative Fred Deutsch (R-Florence) was recently attacked by Gov. Noem, and his primary challenger Stephanie Sauder, when the two women appeared together on a radio program. Noem accused Deutsch of doing damage and being a poor legislator, while openly endorsing Sauder to replace Deutsch. Noem has also endorsed/supported Rachel Dix, the primary opponent of conservative Sen. Al Norvstrup (R-Aberdeen). Dix, who is on the board of two housing authorities, was a registered Democrat prior to filing this primary. Dix is running as a Republican, on a left-leaning "woke" platform of subsidized housing, socialized medicine, and social justice policies.



Possibly most damning however, is Noem's refusal to publicly disavow any connection to Lee Schoenbeck's efforts, along with her endorsement of Lee's son, Jake Schoenbeck currently running for the House.

Meanwhile, Schoenbeck via his South Dakota Strong PAC, (not associated with Noem's South Dakota Strong PAC) is going negative, and attacking these same incumbents with mailers, billboards and t.v ads.

According to one South Dakota senator who has asked to remain anonymous, "everyone knows Noem and Schoenbeck are working together, you'd have to be blind not to see it."

Help Support The Dakota Leader... DONATE TODAY!

--Breeauna Sagdal- Editor At Large

Post Date: 2022-05-21 14:49:50Last Update: 2022-05-21 17:12:41


A Movie Review of ‘2000 Mules’, by Patrick W. Schubert Sr.
Left Wing-Right Wing...Same Bird

I was born and raised in NJ, so Liberal tricks, frauds and scams rarely surprise me... I've watched videos of Union Bosses brag about voting machines in their halls and members being paid (minimum wage) to "plug the machines". I've been in the candidate process here and in NJ to share important info and get a hands on experience. It has not disappointed.

I have always contended that many blue states have been working to master the "art" of voter fraud. 2000 Mules has confirmed they have built a massive illegal [RICO] enterprise way beyond the scope of what I imagined. I felt as if 2000 in Florida was a test ground for creative ways to steal votes. In time those practices were perfected by the creation of Dominion and Smartmatic electronic voting systems. Nobody has to litigate a vote if its just changed...

The numbers of PROVEN vote irregularities in Arizona alone is catastrophic to a free and fair election system. A multi level assault on our right to vote and have the system properly determine the CORRECT outcome is now a myth we can tell our grandkids about. We've gone from Dewey Defeats Truman to an election system dictators like Saddam Hussein, President Xi, Mao and others have used thru time to oppress their citizens.



The idea and practice of voter fraud has always existed. IT IS NOT THE MYTH THE LEFT, OR RIGHT, CLAIMS IT TO BE...

From 1787-1791 the side of the process that eventually 'evolved' into today's modern DNC refused to ratify the Constitution over the issue of slavery. It was critical that all states were signed onto the Constitution to make a complete and united nation. The settlement was the 3/5ths clause. This was legalized voter fraud. The 3/5ths clause gave a slave master 3 extra votes for every 5 slaves they owned. Do you think the slaves got to vote those 3 votes? Many large enterprises in slave states may have had thousands of slaves that gain them hundreds and possibly thousands of votes. The 13th Amendment ended Slavery and made the voter fraud of the 3/5ths clause a violation of the law of the land. I did the math, roughly 42 MILLION votes were stolen from people who should have been Americans during the lifetime of the 3/5ths clause.

After the ratification of the Constitution, the politicians that eventually became the RNC across this brand new nation were being elected to offices at all levels. From northern free states to southern slave states, they were taking the lead and pushing for the abolition of slavery. The future Democrats decided slavery was important enough to start a war over.

From the Constitution, to Civil War, to Reconstruction- the Democratic party has oppressed people and infringed on We The Peoples Rights', related to voting. During reconstruction many Republicans would win local and state offices, then have their offices assaulted and be forced to resign their offices to the Democrats under threat of violence or death. Once they got the offices they would reinstate the now illegal practices related to enslaving other humans.

This is the point where some claim that the parties switched, and the republican party became the oppressors. This is a fallacy, based upon revisionist history, like Critical Race Theory today. During the post reconstruction period, the democratic party used groups like the KKK and labor unions to keep people of color from voting and working to support their families.

Today, the same issues are occurring. Rather than the KKK, we see ANTIFA engaging in the same terror and voter suppression tactics employed in the Jim Crow South. Millions of dollars are used to influence minority votes with carefully crafted messages, used to socially engineer consent, and bypass scrutiny. Ghettos, like Priutt-Igoe have been created with million and millions of dollars as test studies, to see just how much a population can endure, while still believing in the system that enslaves them. Rather than address it, or try to solve the issues, republicans of today, go along as the data benefits them too.

2000 Mules exposed that during the 2020 election the NRSC paid people to watch drop boxes. They reported issues with pictures and video. Please tell me how the #2 member of the Senate could not have known about the reported fraud but stood staunchly against any investigation. The movie used absolutely provable methods to identify a portion of the fraud that was perpetrated in the days leading up-to, and after, the 2020 election. It was a multi-state, criminal enterprise that should really only be classified as an act of treason. I believe that our duly elected President, along with other down ballot candidates, were denied their offices via this coup. The result of this coup, denied the people of their right to a well functioning government, meant to protect, preserve & defend our union.

The movie was a simple sampling of one aspect of the attack. From machine vote swapping to fraudulent ballots, poll worker malfeasance, to illegal proxy voting, IRS approved charities creating ballots or assisting fraud and illegally spending money to influence elections, to the left with millions from Big Tech and PACs with anonymous donors from undisclosed nations, there is a lot that needs to be corrected if we ever want another free & fair election. The longer this situation persists, the harder it will be to correct.

End voting by mail. Voter ID should be mandatory in all 50 states. Make ballot harvesting a Class 1 felony with stiff penalties. These processes will only suppress illegal voting.

Yes, 2000 Mules was an eye opening experience but as the cool kids say "Its just chump change..." Both parties have dominated the playing field and turned the process into an influence auction. We must put the citizen back into politics.

--Patrick W. Schubert Sr.

Post Date: 2022-05-20 13:23:06Last Update: 2022-05-20 15:53:54


OP-ED “A History Lesson on American Independence”
By Mike Zitterich

When the United States became a free and sovereign people, acting as 13 Individual States, it had agreed to several terms as mentioned within the 1783 Peace Treaty of Paris.

The Declaration of Independence which the Americans had adopted in 1776, during the Revolutionary War which lasted from 1775 to 1783 when the treaty was adopted, was essentially an "Amnesty Plan" to free and provide sovereignty to an entire people residing in the Thirteen American Colonies.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness....That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." - Declaration of Independence

The document basically 'freed' all individuals being ruled by Great Britain's crown, allowing them to create their own form of government. Upon that date, we have hereby accept that all Americans are to be free and sovereign, and that meant anyone born on American soil within the colonies themselves.



Upon ending the war, we had agreed to the 1783 Peace Treaty of Paris, which essentially ended the war, and whereas Great Britain and the King hereby acknowledge the fact that the American People are now sovereign, and are now lawfully allowed to become 13 Sovereign and Independent States or countries. Yes, we were individual counties agreeing to come to each other's defense in times of war.

But part of the Treaty of 1783 also protected British citizens in becoming American citizens of the states themselves-

"That there shall be no future Confiscations made nor any Prosecutions commenced against any Person or Persons for, or by Reason of the Part, which he or they may have taken in the present War, and that no Person shall on that Account suffer any future Loss or Damage, either in his Person, Liberty, or Property; and that those who may be in Confinement on such Charges at the Time of the Ratification of the Treaty in America shall be immediately set at Liberty, and the Prosecutions so commenced be discontinued." -Article 6 of the 1783 Treaty

All was right and good for more than thirty years, but as the States came together to form the United States Government in order to form a more perfect union in 1789, the states then adopts a new document called the U.S Constitution, which gave authority to a centralized government which now has the right to manage Foreign Commerce, Monetary, Immigration, and Defense. and thanks to this newfound power, the Congress acting alone has the ability to grant the free right to "American Citizenship" by providing Naturalization Documents to all Immigrants or individuals who are wishing to reside, work, and travel inside the 13 States.

In order to repair this issue, the State Legislatures then proceed to adopt an amendment to the U.S Constitution, within that amendment are the words that read as follows:

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." - 13th Amendment 1810

What the amendment did was block all Individuals residing in America from ever becoming a citizen of one of the Sovereign States, and by not not becoming a citizen, that person could no longer hold public office of trust or government office such as President, Governor, State Legislator, Mayor, City Council Member, Local Judges, Congressman, U.S Senator, nor become a Supreme Court Justice. It meant that no "person" claiming a Loyalty, a gift, present, or some form of emolement by a King or Foreign Government, could ever become a citizen of any of the American State's.

Eleven of the States had adopted the amendment by 1811, and by 1812 the Virginia legislature had agreed by public vote of that body to also adopt the amendment, which would have gone immediately into effect, by doing so, we as a country would have violated a major agreement as part of the 1783 peace treaty, to serve, protect all rights and privileges of british citizens whom were born, residing in America at the time.

During the summer of 1812 - the British government drove its army down to the District of Columbia and stormed the Capitol Building, the White House setting them on fire, ransacking all of our documents. This triggers the War of 1812 which lasted for three years prior establishing a new compact with Great Britain. Which became known as the Treaty of Ghent which resolved the conflict, but reaffirmed many of the agreements made in 1783, and if you read the resolution today, the 1783 treaty is clearly a major part of the 1815 resolution.

"All Prisoners of war taken on either side as well by land as by sea shall be restored as soon as practicable after the Ratifications of this Treaty as hereinafter mentioned on their paying the debts which they may have contracted during their captivity. The two Contracting Parties respectively engage to discharge in specie the advances which may have been made by the other for the sustenance and maintenance of such prisoners." - ARTICLE THE THIRD (Treaty of Ghent) 1815

When we agreed to this second treaty, it basically affirms the fact that All Citizens of both Nations shall enjoy the same equal rights and privileges as citizens in both countries as they reside and act as legal persons in the United States. It became the leading principle that later became known as the Monroe Doctrine, whereas both countries agreed to become trade partners, work together, but respect each other's territories.

So in the end, a former citizen of Great Britain has the free right under our Constitution to become an American Citizen. All citizens have equal rights and privileges provided to natural born Americans, so long as the Federal Government provide to them the naturalization documents of which allow them to apply and submit to each "State" the right to become an American Citizen. This, of course, allows them to hold any public office or trust within the United States today.

Per the 14th Amendment, adopted years later, in 1868 - the Federal Government has the full right to not only naturalize all Immigrants coming to America, they have the right to officially, and lawfully hand out U.S Citizenship of the United States itself. So where the individual States do not hand out citizenship of the State itself, the United States Government will provide to them U.S Citizenship of the "Territory" of which it bound each of the Fifty States, in order to protect "citizens" as if they are "citizens" of the State itself. Thus, every American Citizen is endowed with equal Civil Rights, Immunities, Privileges, and Liberties outlined as a God-given, inalienable, or un-alienable guarantee, which is protected under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S Constitution.

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, whereas No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability, whereas The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void, whereas The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article." - 14th Amendment



With that, the final 'agreement' with Great Britain was made complete - The Federal Government has made it so, that ALL PERSONS born or naturalized on American Soil can now become legal Citizens of this Country, and have the full right and privilege of all civil rights, liberties, citizenship, and the right to run for public office so long as they conform to all the laws of the United States as U.S Citizens of the Territory.

The Declaration of Independence, the Treaty of Paris of 1783, the the Constitution, the Treaty of Ghent (1815), and the 14th Amendment forever changed the fact, that the People of Great Britain and the United States have the free right to become U.S Citizens freely at anytime they wish to apply for such naturalization as "Free Americans" so long as they are born on American soil.

While the original 13th Amendment was hereby destroyed, the 14th Amendment replaced that amendment thru an act of war, by the International Bankers who wished to hold the Americans to a foreign debt that was owed prior to the revolutionary war.

--Mike Zitterich- Historian and Policy Columnist for The Dakota Leader

Post Date: 2022-05-19 14:17:29Last Update: 2022-05-19 14:43:48


Read More Articles