You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
32

[–] 1HepCat 0 points 32 points (+32|-0) ago 

Some more detailed arguments against the measure:

"An individual running for office would not be able to self fund their campaign." Campbell said, "That besides being unconstitutional, is absolutely insane. Along with that, IM 22 asks you and us to allow state government out of the general fund to fund campaigns, also insane."

http://www.kotatv.com/content/news/Campbell-calls-IM-22-unconstitutional-and-insane-411445755.html

IM22, an extraordinarily lengthy document, was challenged in the Sixth Judicial Circuit Court, and Judge Mark Barnett placed a preliminary injunction, finding IM22 likely unconstitutional “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

it would basically set up a fourth branch of government made up of unelected commissioners who would have authority to repeal any law passed by the South Dakota Legislature.

Legislators take an oath not to accept bribes. The punishment for accepting a bribe is a Class 4 felony (1939 law). IM22 makes bribery a Class 1 misdemeanor – a lesser sentence.

https://concernedwomen.org/urgent-support-the-repeal-of-south-dakotas-initiated-measure-22/

0
5

[–] Professor_de_la_Paz 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

This should be the top comnent.

4
3

[–] magnora [S] 4 points 3 points (+7|-4) ago  (edited ago)

I mean, of course the established government is going to hate it. They're all corrupt.

"Under this law almost all high-ranking officials would become criminals" pretty much says it all. They can't allow that, that breaks their entire game!

0
2

[–] 1HepCat 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I'm definitely sympathetic to the people's desire for responsive government. I agree the quote you cite is a weak argument. Presumably, the high ranking officials would be protected by the Constitutional provisions against ex post facto laws unless they continue the forward-going illegal behavior. Then again, given the examples I've provided, I agree that the measure doesn't appear to pass Constitutional muster.

Anyway, since most outlets reporting the emergency repeal are very left leaning, I figured better arguments from the repeal side were probably available elsewhere and I think I found some decent ones.

With all of that said, I hope the SD legislature is able to pass some of the more sensible provisions that they claim to support.

0
3

[–] Cantilever 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Great counterpoint