Following Directions and Taking Pride in Your Work
Beginning at an early age, my teachers consistently reminded me throughout my years in school to proofread my work. I will admit that this was great advice. Growing up in public schools, I learned to review my assignments and correct errors before handing in my homework. Proofreading my work led me to reap the reward of good grades.
This habit not only saved me from the embarrassment of making careless mistakes, but it also taught me to take pride in my work. Every work product is a reflection of me as a person, and I believe it is important to put forth my best effort in everything I do.
I am sure some of you know people who do not take pride in their work and hand you something unprofessional or incomplete. Now, imagine a surgeon hastily performing open-heart surgery and closing you up without checking to make sure no surgical sponges have been left inside your body. A retained surgical sponge can cause serious complications, including infection and, in some cases, death. Surgeons and their teams must follow established procedures and verify their work because overlooking a simple step can be life-threatening.
I would expect my opponent, Democratic Socialist Celestine Stadnick, a 35-year-old former schoolteacher who now serves as principal at Little Wound Middle School, to understand the importance of proofreading and following directions. After all, educators routinely instruct their students to follow directions.
“Put your name at the top of your paper.”
“Place your pencil on your desk, so I know everyone is ready to take the exam.”
“Line up for recess in alphabetical order by your last name.”
“No running in the hallway.”
Students are routinely expected to follow directions, and educators are responsible for reinforcing those expectations.
Yet, based on the petition issues described below, my campaign questioned whether Stadnick, a college-educated adult, based on her LinkedIn page, followed the instructions and legal requirements when completing her own petition.
What Happened With the Petition?
Now, imagine filing a petition to run for political office. The petition form contains instructions and requirements that each candidate is expected to follow. See below:
Stadnick submitted the following signature on her petition for State Senate:
Stadnick also signed, under oath, the following affidavit on Independent candidate Joe Flood's petition as follows:
The following is a screenshot of Stadnick's voter registration information. Do you see the problem?
My campaign filed a petition for judicial review and a notice of appeal challenging the South Dakota Secretary of State's decision regarding Stadnick's petition. Stadnick's petition started with 155 signatures. After the appeal in the Sixth Circuit Court, Stadnick had 53 signatures remaining - barely enough to keep her on the ballot (50 valid signatures are required to gain ballot access as a state legislator in District 27).
One of the challenges my campaign raised was that the address Stadnick provided on her petition did not match the address in her voter registration record.
My campaign argued in court that Stadnick's signature on her petition did not match the voter registration records.
The address on her petition states:
Medicine Root Drive, Kyle, SD, with no house number.
Her voter registration record lists the address as:
193 Wanbli Wakitan Canku Drive, Kyle, SD 57772.
South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) 2-1-15 addresses the requirements for signatures on candidate petitions. The law clearly states that if the address provided by an individual is not substantially the same as the address at which that individual is currently registered, the Secretary of State may not count that signature. See statute below:
Stadnick's own attorney in the courtroom said, "The candidate lied under oath," by misrepresenting her own voter registration address on the petition she filed with the Office of the Secretary of State (See Sixth Circuit Court Case Hearing Transcript, Page 68, Line 20: Case # 32CIV26-000124, Kathol v. Johnson, et. al., May 14, 2026).
Here is what the Honorable Sixth Circuit Judge Margo Northrup had to say about Stadnick's signature when the matter came before the court:
Here is what the judge had to say about a petition requiring the signatories' voter registration information is mandatory and an essential element:
My campaign subsequently appealed the Sixth Circuit Court's decision to the South Dakota Supreme Court on May 29, 2026. That appeal remains pending.
My campaign was unsuccessful in getting the Supreme Court to rule on the merits of the case to require the Secretary of State to decertify Stadnick's petition prior to the August 18, 2026 candidate certification deadline. In the State Supreme Court brief, I argued that Judge Northrup used judicial reconstruction to keep Stadnick on the General Election ballot.
Consequently, my campaign will not receive the relief it sought through this appeal. With early voting having begun on September 18, 2026, the case will likely be rendered moot. Below is the Supreme Court's order denying my emergency motion for special relief and pending appeal, with no explanation.
Accountability Matters
The point of this post is straightforward: following directions, complying with the law, and taking responsibility for one's work matter, especially when seeking public office.
If Stadnick cannot follow the requirements for completing a candidate petition satisfactorily, why should voters entrust her with the responsibility of writing or passing new legislation?
If a candidate fails to follow a seemingly straightforward legal requirement when completing a petition, what assurance do voters have that she will carefully review proposed legislation before casting a vote? As a state senator, she would help make decisions that affect the lives of her constituents. Those decisions deserve careful consideration, attention to detail, and accountability.
Remember, South Dakota has only 35 state senators. Each one has an important responsibility to represent the people who elected them. Each senator's vote carries significant weight when passing legislation.
When you go to the polls on November 3rd, I urge you to vote for integrity, transparency, and accountability.
Vote Anthony Kathol for State Senate District 27.
And yes, unlike my opponent, I proofread my work and can follow simple directions.
Take care, and God bless.
Comments