The measures — carried by Republican lawmakers — would shorten petition signature collection periods, require signatures from specific geographic areas and increase the voter approval threshold for constitutional amendments. Opponents argue the changes would hinder South Dakotans’ ability to bring issues to the ballot.
The state has three types of statewide ballot measures: constitutional amendments, initiated measures and referendums.
To be placed on the ballot, citizen-backed constitutional amendments need petition signatures from registered voters equal to 10 percent of the votes cast in the last election for governor. The current signature requirement is 35,017. The Legislature can also send its own constitutional amendments to the ballot.
Initiated measures propose a law, and referendums send a law passed by legislators to the ballot, with each requiring signatures equal to 5 percent of the votes cast in the last governor’s race. That threshold is 17,508 signatures.
South Dakota was the first state in the U.S. to allow an initiative and referendum process in 1898. In 1972, the state constitution was amended to allow constitutional changes by initiative. In 1988, the state’s voters changed the constitution to eliminate a requirement that an amendment be submitted to the Legislature for approval before placement on the ballot.
Shortening the Signature Window
One bill would move the deadline for submitting petition signatures from May to February in the year of a general election. Supporters said the change is necessary to ensure adequate time for signature verification and legal challenges before the election.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Jon Hansen, R-Dell Rapids, helped lead a legal challenge against last November’s constitutional amendment that would have placed abortion rights in the state constitution.
The bill’s opponents, including voting-rights advocates and some Democrats, argued that reducing the signature collection window by three months will make it harder for grassroots campaigns to qualify for the ballot. They contended that South Dakota already has a restrictive petitioning process, and the change would disproportionately favor well-funded groups that can afford to hire professional signature collectors.
Signatures From Every District
Another bill would require petition signatures for constitutional amendments to be gathered from each of the 35 state senatorial districts in the state.
The bill requires that a petition gain signatures from a number of registered voters in each district equal to 5 percent of the total votes cast for governor in that district during the last general election. The bill also retains the requirement that the total number of signatures on the petition must equal at least 10 percent of the votes cast statewide for governor in the last general election.
Supporters said the bill would ensure amendments have broad, statewide support before they reach the ballot. They said the current system encourages petitioners to focus on Minnehaha and Pennington counties, where most registered voters live.
Opponents said voters across the state already have a say when they cast their ballots, making an additional hurdle unnecessary.
Joe Kirby, of Sioux Falls, helped lead an effort during the last election that would have instituted an open primary election system in the state. He called the bill “effectively the death of constitutional initiatives.”
“This gives any one county veto power over whether an initiative gets on the ballot, no matter how many people want it on the ballot,” Kirby said.Raising the Threshold for Constitutional Changes
The bills addressing the signature window and geographic requirements are on the governor’s desk, for his decision to sign them into law or veto them.
A resolution passed by the Legislature that does not require the governor’s signature will ask voters to increase the approval threshold for constitutional amendments from a simple majority to 60 percent. The measure will appear on the general election ballot in November 2026. Ironically, the measure will need only a simple majority for approval.
Supporters said the change is necessary to protect the state’s constitution from being amended by outside interests and prevent policy from being inserted into a document that’s intended only to stipulate the structure and powers of the government.
Rep. John Hughes, R-Sioux Falls, sponsored the resolution.
“Our constitution is more than a statute,” Hughes said in a statement. “It is a contract between the state itself and the people that assures us that if we live here, raise our families here, worship here, and conduct our vacations here, we can count on certain core values remaining constant.”
Opponents said initiated constitutional amendments are necessary because lawmakers sometimes refuse to adopt a popular policy, and because lawmakers can repeal or amend a regular initiative on their own but can’t change the constitution without public approval. They said raising the threshold would make it significantly harder for South Dakotans to amend their constitution.
Opponents also alleged that the measure is an attempt to stifle citizen-driven initiatives and would ensure that only proposals with backing from powerful political and financial groups can succeed.
Other Legislation
Other bills approved by the Legislature that would impact the ballot measure process include legislation that would require petition signers to list the address and county where they are registered to vote, rather than merely the address where they reside, and prevent the Secretary of State’s Office from counting signatures without the information; change how petitions for ballot initiatives must be formatted, including stipulations about minimum font sizes; allow fiscal estimates for ballot measures to be updated closer to elections (that bill has been signed by the governor); and require the secretary of state to review ballot initiatives for compliance with the state’s single-subject rule, which is already required for constitutional amendments.
Some other bills addressing ballot measures failed.
One failed resolution would have required ballot measures rejected by voters to wait a full election cycle before being resubmitted. Another failed bill would have banned paid petition circulators and imposed felony penalties for violations.
This story was first published in South Dakota Searchlight. Read the original here.
