Voting, Elections, constitution, amendment

Changes to Constitutional Amendment Process To Be Debated

February 06, 2017

The South Dakota Senate is getting set to debate Senate Joint Resolution 2 which would significantly alter the way constitutional amendments would be placed on the ballot.  SJR2 would require a 2/3 vote of the legislature to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot (currently it takes a majority).  SJR2 would also increase the number of votes to pass a constitutional amendment from 50% to 60%.  Watch the bill's action at

Voting, Elections, initiated measure, ballot

Task Force Proposed to Revise SD’s Initiated Measure Process

February 06, 2017

The South Dakota House of Representatives will take up HB1141 in the next week or so.  The bill would create a task force to study and propose changes to South Dakota initiated measure, referendum and constitutional amendment processes.  The task force would be comprised of the Sec. of State, the Attorney General, legislators and the State Chamber of Commerce.  The proposed changes would be brought forth during the 2018 legislative session.  Check the bill out here:

initiated measure, constitutional amendment, voting, elections, legisalture

Changes to Initiated Measure Process Proposed in SD Legislature

January 26, 2017

Much is afoot in the SD State Legislature concerning changes to the way initiated measures are brought forth.  Here's what we've seen so far:

Senate Bill 67 (Revises number of signatures need for an initiated constitutional amendment) - would base the number of signatures needed to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot (10%) on registered voters as opposed to the number that voted for Governor in the last gubernatorial election. Almost doubling the number of signatures needed from approx. 27,740 now to 52,000+ (depending on when the reg. voter number is calculated).
See the link to the bill and its status here  (first hearing is Wednesday, Feb. 1st in Senate State Affairs)

Senate Bill 59 (Revises effective date of initiated ballot measures to July 1st) an accompanying bill would have all approved ballot measures go into effect on July 1st of the following year - this would allow the legislature more time to review approved ballot measures.  Currently, ballot measures that are approved by the voters go into effect the day after the canvassing (official count is certified), which usually is mid November.  This bill has already passed the SD Senate and is on its way to SD House Committee, here is the bill and its status  (passed Senate and assigned to House State Affairs - no hearing date)

House Bill 1069 (Repeal of IM 22) - this bill has been fast tracked and has already passed the SD House and SD Senate Committee and  is on its way to the SD Senate floor.  This bill repeals Initiated Measure 22 which was passed by the SD voters in November 2016 by 51% to 49%.  You can see its status here  (passed House, passed Senate State Affairs Cmte. and is on calendar for second reading Thursday, Jan. 26th for Senate floor debate but may be pushed to Tuesday, Jan. 31st)

There are a number of other bills that are moving their way through the process that address some elements of Initiated Measure 22 such as:  campaign ethics, campaign finance, etc.  

We will keep the above updated when new information is available. 

voting, petitions, elections

Is the initiated measure process broken in South Dakota?

January 20, 2017

South Dakota is given credit for being the first state in the nation to adopt the initiative and referendum process 118 years ago, allowing citizens to propose initiated state statutes.  The right to amend the South Dakota constitution through this process was given to the citizens in 1972.  Since 1898, South Dakota voters have seen as many as 14 ballot measures in 1916 and a low of one in several other years, with the most recent being 1993.


This past November, ten measures were certified to appear on the South Dakota ballot.  Four were approved and six were defeated.  In recent days, several state legislators have indicated that they will be introducing bills during the 2017 legislative session that could significantly alter the petition process.  It will be important for citizens to provide respectful, informative input to their legislators concerning any potential changes to the ballot measure process.  You can find your legislator’s contact information at


In South Dakota, we have four distinct processes we use to make changes to state laws and/or the state’s constitution.  Three are initiated by the citizens and one by the legislature.


The Initiated Measure process is used to add to, amend or repeal existing state laws.  Petitions must have signatures of registered voters equal to five percent (13,871) of the total vote for Governor in the last gubernatorial election.


A Referred Law is a petition process that prevents a measure passed by the legislature from becoming effective.  It must also have signatures of registered voters equal to five percent of the total vote for Governor in the last gubernatorial election.  Petitions must be filed within 90 days of adjournment of the legislative session in which the measure was passed. 


An Initiated Constitutional Amendment is a petition process that proposes to amend, repeal, or add to provisions in the state’s constitution. This petition has a much higher threshold than an Initiated Measure, requiring signatures of registered voters equal to ten percent (27,741) of the total vote for Governor in the last gubernatorial election.


Lastly, South Dakota’s constitution allows the legislature to refer a newly passed law directly to the voters for their approval.  This process takes a majority vote of the legislature and cannot be vetoed by the Governor.


Here’s a look at a few plans that are currently being considered to change the above processes:


One plan is a model based on portions of the recently passed (November 2016 - 55.7% to 44.3%,) Colorado law (Amendment 71) that requires initiated measure petition circulators to get signatures from two percent of the registered voters in each of the thirty-five senate districts.  As stated earlier, South Dakota now requires signatures from five percent of those who voted for Governor in the last election (no geographical representation required).  Another plan may include changing this five percent to be calculated based on the number of registered voters (which would more than double the current number of signatures needed).  While on another front, some legislators are kicking around the idea of increasing the number of votes necessary in the legislature to refer a constitutional amendment to the voters (currently requires only a majority). 


When Colorado leaders were crafting changes to their constitution regarding the ballot measure process, supporters such as State Senator Jerry Sonnenberg, Governor John Hickenlooper and four former governors stated that it should be more difficult to modify these documents.  They indicated that requiring a broader sample of voter support ensured that citizens from across the state had a say in which measures were placed on the ballot.  They, along with a host of other state leaders, pointed to the apparent ease of collecting signatures in heavily populated urban areas compared to sparsely populated rural areas, where rural citizens had a limited voice in determining which issues appear on the ballot.


While on the other hand, several grass-roots organizations in Colorado including the Colorado Fiscal Initiative, New Era Colorado, Conservation Colorado and others said that some of the changes will make it more difficult for citizens to exercise their right to initiate modifications to state statute or the constitution.  Leaders from these groups said that sometimes the will of the people or issues of broad public interest are not adequately addressed by the political process.  They are concerned that requiring the collection of signatures statewide would make the process of placing an initiative, referred law or constitutional amendment on the ballot even more difficult and costly, leaving only well-financed campaigns able to carry out the complicated signature process.


These as well as other arguments will be brought forth in the coming weeks during the 2017 South Dakota legislative session.  Yet, we all can agree that South Dakota citizens should be informed not only regarding the candidates on their ballot, but just as importantly about various ballot measures that could fundamentally change our state’s laws or constitution.  State officials, such as Attorney General Marty Jackley, have been contemplating what could be done to make sure that voters get accurate information about ballot measures.  While State Senator Jim Bolin (Canton) and Representative Don Haggar (Sioux Falls) as well as others are looking at ways to require a broader sample of voter support.  These efforts could have a profound impact on our current ballot measure process.


What do you think?  Is the South Dakota ballot measure process broken?  Your state legislators want to hear from you about this and other topics of interest.  They rely on citizens like you to provide respectful, informative input concerning issues.  You can find your legislator’s contact information at


Rob Timm, CFRE


Chiesman Center for Democracy


Since 1995, the non-profit, non-partisan Chiesman Center for Democracy has been dedicated to promoting active civic education and engagement across South Dakota through its various programmatic activities.  To learn more go to

legislature, elections, voting

Who are my legislators?

December 30, 2016

Curious about how to get in touch with your legislators prior to and during the upcoming legislative session?  Check this link out from the SD Legislative Research Council.

Page 1 of 10 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›