VDA Testimony to SD Senate State Affairs Committee Hearing on March 5 in Opposition to HB 1184

On March 5, I testified before the SD Senate State Affairs Committee in Pierre and delivered the following statement in opposition to House Bill 1184:

“Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the Committee.

My name is Zebadiah Johnson from Sioux Falls. I’m here on behalf of the Voter Defense Association of South Dakota, and am testifying in opposition to HB 1184.

We oppose HB 1184 for the following reasons:

First, this is a bill searching for a problem. The current filing deadline is 6 months prior to the election – more than enough time for certification by the Secretary of State’s office, ballot printing, and all other elements of the initiative and election processes aside from litigation, which I will touch on later. 

Second, the proposed deadline eliminates spring circulating. Signature drives depend on warm-enough weather in order to collect the required signatures – the months of March and April see substantial signature collection efforts that would not be as effective if conducted in December and January.

Third, this deadline would be the second earliest of all states that use direct initiatives. Of those states, only Florida would have an earlier filing deadline, by a few days. 19 states use direct initiatives, and this bill would place our deadline far earlier than 17 of our direct initiative state peers.

I’d also like to point out that moving the filing deadline farther from the election makes initiative efforts less relevant to the voters. Circulating closer to the election presents voters with policies closer to when they could potentially decide them.

Finally, if the goal of this bill is to allow more time for litigating the qualification of ballot initiatives, then the legislature should propose a bill to expedite judicial review of those challenges – not deprive initiative campaigns of time to engage with voters and exercise their political free speech and constitutional ballot initiative rights. Expedited review already exists for initiative pre-circulation certification, why could it not exist for other types of legal challenge.

South Dakota’s initiative process works well and is in line with initiative policies around the country. We view this change as a solution without a problem and would ask you to oppose this bill.  Thank you. ”

[END]