Why is Forward SD spending money in a race with no opponent? Goofyness ensues

I had a note where someone was pointing out an anti-Chris Nelson ad running on Rick Knobe's Viewpoint University down at KSOO. It was of concern, because it supposedly lacks a disclaimer.

And today, the Rapid City Journal is running a report on how Forward South Dakota, the anti-video lottery people, are running anti-Chris Nelson ads on TV as well. Read up on why they think it's necessary:

The sponsor of a proposed initiated measure that seeks to repeal video gambling is running radio and television ads that criticize Secretary of State Chris Nelson for refusing to put the measure on the fall ballot. “Who’s pulling the secretary’s strings? Is this another favor to protect special interests, or has our state video lottery addiction become so strong that our current administration will steal our right to vote,” say the ads being run by Forward South Dakota, the group promoting the repeal of video lottery.

The ads say somebody is trying to manipulate the secretary of state, and the television version shows hands pulling the strings of a puppet that resembles Nelson.

Nelson said Wednesday he is surprised by the ads because the issue is before the South Dakota Supreme Court, which will decide whether the video lottery measure should be on the fall ballot.

“It has absolutely nothing to do with special interests. It has everything to do with the law,” Nelson said.

Nelson and Attorney General Larry Long announced on May 30 that initiated measures seeking to repeal the video lottery and a tax on cellular telephone companies could not be placed on the ballot because of a 1995 state Supreme Court opinion. That ruling said an initiated measure could not be used to repeal an existing law.

Forward South Dakota has asked the high court to take another look at the issue and order Nelson to put the measure on the November ballot.

Daniel Brendtro, a Sioux Falls lawyer who is treasurer of Forward South Dakota, said he believes no law gives Nelson the discretion to interpret the South Dakota Constitution and decide what goes on the ballot.

Brendtro said he understands that a video lottery supporter called the secretary of state to raise the question of whether the 1995 ruling should be used to keep the measure off the ballot.

“It’s this bigger issue behind the scenes we’re trying to get at,” Brendtro said.

Nelson has said he sought the attorney general’s opinion after someone contacted him about whether the 1995 decision would apply to the video lottery and cellular telephone measures.

“What I take that to mean is a video lottery attorney or a video lottery proponent called and said let’s get this thing fixed with a technicality, rather than actually letting the people have a say,” Brendtro said.

Nelson said Wednesday he doesn’t disclose the details of conversations, but he believes that he had to get the attorney general’s advice after the question was raised. He said he wants the Supreme Court to clarify how constitutional language applies to such measures.

“That’s the thing I find strange about this whole advertising campaign,” Nelson said. “We’re dealing with legal issues here. The legal issues are squarely before the South Dakota Supreme Court and they’re going to decide what in fact is proper and how this thing needs to be handled.”

Nelson said he “wasn’t a fan” of the 1995 Supreme Court decision. “It’s forcing me to do something this year that I certainly don’t like to do.”

However, Nelson said he also believes the attorney general’s analysis is sound.

Read all of this goofyness here. (They put this guy in charge of a statewide race?) Maybe this is why Dan Brendtro couldn't get through a State's Attorney race, his only other attempt at elective office - he's blowing money that he needs to run that statewide race on trying to fight a sidebar issue that's already at the Supreme Court.

In other words, he's missing the forest through the trees.