On March 20, South Dakota Governor Dennis Daugaard signed SB 69, which injures ballot access for newly-qualifying parties and independent candidates. The bill had passed the legislature on a party-line vote, with Republicans supporting the bill and Democrats opposing it.
The bill says members of qualified parties can no longer sign an independent candidate’s petition. No other state currently has such a requirement. Arizona passed this restriction in 1993, but it was declared unconstitutional in 1999.
The bill also moves the deadline for a newly-qualifying party from the last Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in March. For 2016, the deadline moves from March 29 to March 1. South Dakota generally has harsh winters, and the bill requires a new party that is formed at the beginning of an election year to gather over 7,000 valid signatures in winter weather.
The deadline for a new party was put into April in 1984, and in 2007 moved to late March.
Comments to come later.
If a law such as this has already been declared unconstitutional by the Courts, then why does another Legislature go ahead and write and pass the same bill? Surely someone in the South Dakota Legislature who was opposed to this bill brought this fact out.
Is it an attitude that the Legislature just don’t care, and will take their chances the Courts will not issue a similar ruling of unconstitutionality?
This is why most politicians are crooked, and we need a new party to control politics in all states and in Congress.
The ACLU has a lobbyist in Pierre and she told the legislators about the 1984 decision. They just don’t care. If the state loses a lawsuit, the taxpayers pay but the state legislators don’t pay, except to the extent that also are taxpayers.
One more chance to do a PROPER court case —
1. Every election is NEW.
2. Separate is NOT equal — Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954
3. EQUAL ballot access tests for each candidate for the same office in the same area.
4. Sue for $$$ Damages to bankrupt the robot party hacks involved.
Any chance of a referendum to overturn this?
Texas does not let Republicans and Democrats sign independent petitions.
https://vimeo.com/8540988
I’ve never thought about this. But why don’t we ALL google the email address of the Governor’s office, and send him an email, asking why did he vote to pass into law this injurious bill? It would be interesting if enough of us were to do it to see just what or how he would respond. If we get no response, then let’s ALL use the telephone usually given and just keep calling until we get someone on the phone of explain.
There are many way we can keep the pressure on the Establishment which won[t cost us nothing but our time. I say, let’s go for it. Are yow with me/
This is not entirely correct! The petitioning for a new party’s formation is going on right now. The signatures needed 7,000+ can just not be older than 1 year so we have spring and summer to do this.
The problem with the change of deadline and the ONLY winter months issue will effect trying to get Governor and federal candidates on the ballot. It will be probably even more impossible with these changes.
Jim Riley’s remark above is not true. Texas does let Democrats and Republicans sign an independent candidate petition. Texas says people who vote in primaries cannot sign for an independent petition, but that is not the same thing at all. Texas always has such low turnout in its primaries that a large majority of party members are not primary voters and can sign for an independent.
It is nonsensical to characterize someone who does not vote in a primary as a being a “party member”.