DRA Legislative Questionnaire Responses, Part Four of Five
In mid-September, Dakota Rural Action sent out a questionnaire to all candidates running for State House and Senate. Below are the returned responses to the following question:
The last two legislative sessions have brought a spate of bills that impact the people’s right to initiate laws and constitutional amendments, as well as their right to refer laws passed by the legislature back to the ballot.
What is your position on initiative & referendum, and in what ways would you work to protect, enhance, or change that process?
District 1
House of Representatives
Steven D. McCleerey “This process is the best for the citizens of our state to rebut what the legislature does. The Republican legislature did this to the citizens of S.D. to make it more difficult for the rights of the people to have a say in S.D. Government”
District 3
House of Representatives
Cory Allen Heidelberger “Initiative and referendum are a vital check on an arrogant, unresponsive Legislature. Initiative and referendum also provide citizens with a useful means to participate directly in making the state and local laws under which they live. I will continue to support the people’s right to petition and put laws to a public vote at the state and local level. I will also work to repeal every scrap of overregulation the Legislature has used to insulate itself from the rightful power of the people.”
District 4
House of Representatives
Daryl Root “The U.S. was set up as a republic, not a democracy. I oppose initiatives & referendums as it allows a simple majority to oppress the minority. It’s the duty of citizens to vote for legislators who will protect everyone. However, since we have them, a much larger percentage should be required to make Constitutional changes.”
John Mills “South Dakota was at the forefront to establish an initiative process. Unfortunately, it has been put to the test and in some cases abused. Some changes were needed to insure the process remains viable but it is protected from abuse. The voters will decide this November if there threshold to protect our constitution should be increased.”
Kathy Tyler “The initiative and referendum process in South Dakota was very workable. I would like things to go back to the way they were. We are an intelligent people and can make decisions best for our state. Can it get out of hand? Possibly. But what’s been done in the past two years is an insult to our citizens.”
District 6
State Senate
Teresa Ann Robbins “I am aware that a very small quantity of public initiative measures has been brought forward historically. I believe that South Dakota was founded on the principal of citizen investment and active engagement in preservation of self-government. It is in this interest that I believe that it will always be in the interest of citizen engagement with the practices of their government to preserve the strengths of this democratic process. “
District 7
House of Representatives
Bill Adamson “The direct democracy initiative process by voters should be preserved. I oppose any undue restrictions on the initiative process. I oppose IM 24 which bans out-of-state contributions and restricts the ability to place initiatives on the ballot (it would likely be unconstitutional), and oppose Amendment X which requires a 55% super-majority for constitutional amendments. The principle of majority rule should prevail in elections. I oppose Amendment Z which restricts constitutional amendments to only one single subject which would restrict the public’s ability to address complex issues. I support Amendment W to revise campaign finance and lobbying laws (which addresses corruption), creates an accountability board (investigate scandals) and stops legislative changes to initiatives without voter approval.”
District 8
House of Representatives
Chris Francis “I support the people’s right to bring initiatives, referendums, and refer laws. I will vocally support our state’s long storied history of citizen led democracy and action. Our state legislature should be held accountable when they undermine these processes, and I will do what I can to ensure our collective voices are heard.”
District 11
House of Representatives
Margaret Kuipers “I do not believe we should restrict the voice of the people of South Dakota. Being able to bring initiatives and referendums to a vote of the people, by the people, should always be preserved and not limited.”
Sheryl Johnson “I think they are fine as is and it has worked well in the past. I am opposed to groups that are trying to make if harder for the voter’s voice to be heard”
District 15
State Senate
Reynold F. Nesiba “Most of my political experience has been with initiated measures. I worked on the sales tax repeal in 2004, ran the measure to limit the use of state airplanes to state business in 2006, participated in gathering signatures and making arguments for the increased minimum wage in 2014, and was a leader on IM 21 to cap the interest rate on payday loans to 36%. We must defend this right. I will bring legislation next session in an attempt to reverse some of the bad bills that have passed over the last two years. If we can’t get it done through the legislature, we should put it on the ballot.”
District 16
State Senate
Liz Merrigan “Many officials, after they’re elected, don’t appreciate or support political activism. Citizens must be involved or we are doomed. My position on legislation policy always rests on one position- Will it make the world a safer, cleaner, and more beautiful place?”
District 19
State Senate
Ardon Wek “I support the initiative and referendum process. It is the people’s right. I don’t think it should be encumbered and I will fight to preserve this right.”
Stace Nelson “I have been the biggest defender of the voters’ rights to initiatives and referendums. Despite my personal opposition to IM22 in 2016, once it became law, I was obligated by my sworn duty to defend South Dakotans’ enacted law and defend it against the unethical and UnConstitutional efforts employed to repeal it in HB1069. If re-elected, I will continue to respect the will of the voters and defend their process and their duly passed laws.”
District 19
House of Representatives
Alison Bowers “Initiative and referendum offer citizens the chance to be directly involved in the making of their local and state laws and I would absolutely protect it. In 2016, South Dakotans voted to pass Initiated Measure 22, and the legislature immediately repealed it. This was incredibly disrespectful, especially since IM 22 sought to reform campaign finance and ethics laws. If elected, I would work to protect citizens’ rights to initiate laws and constitutional amendments without unnecessary legislation and arbitrary requirements meant to impede voter participation.”
Roger Hofer “Wanting 55% approval for the people’s right to initiate laws is wrong.”
District 25
State Senate
Peter Klebanoff “This is one of the reasons I chose to enter the race for District 25 Senate. My incumbent challenger was one of the sponsors of the ‘emergency repeal’ of IM22, which I find to be despicable display of arrogance and directly contrary to the will of the people… and it wasn’t the first time.
I’ll admit, not be a practiced law-maker, I do not have the ‘magic formula’ for how to ensure that the process is both accessible and effective, but I do know that is what I want and I’m smart enough to consult with experts, gather facts and work to develop the necessary protection to ensure that South Dakotan’s don’t lose their right to direct participation in our democracy through the initiative and referendum policy.
I would add that it would be interesting to explore if there are ways to keep PACs and ‘industries’ from litigating to have initiatives want by the people removed from the ballot.”
District 26b
House of Representatives
Debra Smith “I am strongly opposed to making the referendum process more difficult and would work to reverse the measures that have passed, as well as make sure that no more such restrictions are placed on the citizens’ rights to refer laws to the public vote.”
District 30
State Senate
A. Gideon Oakes “Initiated measures and amendments are the people’s Plan B when the legislature fails to represent them. To make the process more difficult flirts with unconstitutionality in my opinion. I’ve always been a big believer in the doctrine of “If it’s not broken, don’t fix it.” The burden of proof must always lie on the proponents of change, and in most of these cases, I have not seen sufficient evidence that change is necessary.”
Kristine Ina Winter “The people’s right to petition must be preserved. I consider initiated and referred measures to be a type of petition. Would not support laws that diminish these avenues of citizen participation.”
District 30
House of Representatives
Karen McGregor “I support the citizen’s right to propose initiatives and will protect that right if elected. We have a long history in SD of citizen initiatives and so far, it has worked pretty well.”
Whitney Raver “Based on current knowledge, I wouldn’t change a thing. It’s vital to a healthy democracy – especially in a state with such limited political opportunity – that citizens be empowered to participate in legislation through initiated measures. I will protect citizen representation.”
District 32
House of Representatives
Susan Kelts “We should be proud that South Dakota is the birthplace of Initiative and Referendum, allowing citizens to stip in when the Legislature fails to enact necessary laws. Initiative and Referendum may not need enhancement but certainly does not need restriction “
District 33
State Senate
Ryan Ryder “Our State Senators and House members do know “know better” than the citizens of South Dakota. I would support the previous initiative & referendum procedures, or – at a minimum – absolute transparency from the House and Senate meetings, as to why any such initiated legislation would need to be altered before going on the ballot.”
District 33
House of Representatives
Lilias Jarding “Initiative and referendum are cornerstones of our state’s political system. The legislation that hurt these processes last session must be overturned, and the two Constitutional Amendments are bad ideas.
District 34
House of Representatives
George Nelson “I am against any legislative action that will minimize citizen’s rights to bring to a public vote issues currently allowed to be placed on the ballot.”
District 35
State Senate
Pat Cromwell “I would not support any bill which makes the initiative & referendum process more difficult.”