VDA Testimony to SD Senate State Affairs Committee Hearing on March 5 in Opposition to HB 1256

On March 5, I testified before the SD Senate State Affairs Committee in Pierre and delivered the following statement in opposition to House Bill 1256:

“Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee.

My name is Zebadiah Johnson from Sioux Falls, SD. I’m here on behalf of the Voter Defense Association of South Dakota, and I am testifying in opposition to HB 1256.

The VDA opposes HB 1256 because we believe that this bill introduces ambiguity into the petition validation process. 

In Section 2, the bill states [QUOTE] “If the address provided by the individual is not substantially the same as the address at which the individual is currently registered to vote, the secretary of state may not count the signature” [ENDQUOTE]. The phrase “substantially the same” is not defined in this bill or in the relevant chapter of law, SDCL 2-1.

Additionally, the goal of a signature drive is to collect signatures from qualified voters in the state – not qualified voters who know their exact voter registration address as currently on file with their county auditor. Under the current system, the Secretary of State’s office matches petition signatures to records in the voter rolls. Our understanding is that the Secretary of State’s office can also use signatures used on DMV driver’s license forms as well. The current system is effective and largely runs without issues – we compliment the SoS’s office on that fact. We see no need to interrupt or complicate a functional system for validating signatures.

We believe that South Dakota’s signature validation process should set out clear and unambiguous requirements. Respectfully, we do not think that HB 1256 meets that standard.

And given the fact that our existing validation system is functioning well without any issues, there is no need to place this new restriction on the initiative process.

We would ask that you oppose this bill. Thank you.”

[END]