And then there were none…. Measure to allow killing grandma NOT turned in, recreational pot, etc.

Well, 5pm has arrived, and there’s a few petitions that we didn’t see turned in.

First and foremost we did not see the measure to allow assisted suicide, a.k.a. the “Kill Grandma” measure, from the New Approach SD group, who barely made the signature requirement with medical marijuana, which will likely find itself disqualified, having significantly fewer signatures than 2016’s failed attempt. The same group failed to turn in their petitions circulating for recreational marijuana.

An alternative ballot measure for legalizing marijuana never really got of the ground. Neither did a Constitutional Amendment to prevent the legislature from fixing or repealing bad ballot measures for seven years (Like 2016’s IM22).

I was surprised we saw reduced numbers for the pot measures than they had in 2016. Normally, you’d think they’d get better the second time around.

Do you think people more aware of what they didn’t want to put on the ballot? Are they growing tired of the professional petitioners?

What do you think about all of this?

10 Replies to “And then there were none…. Measure to allow killing grandma NOT turned in, recreational pot, etc.”

  1. Fred Deutsch

    I’ve got to give credit to the marijuana & assisted-suicide supporters for busting their butt in a hard fought battle. I sincerely mean that. The difficulty Ms. Mentele had collecting enough signatures both last election cycle and this one is pretty good evidence the vast majority of South Dakotans don’t support suicide and marijuana. They didn’t lose by not trying, they lost because they were trying to sell what people didn’t want to buy.

    To say we’re ecstatic about the results today is an understatement. Now it’s time for us to go on the offense.

    Reply
  2. grudznick

    Tell your grandma to VNOE
    The weed people are notoriously lazy and no doubt are getting distracted with a short attention span and couldn’t pull together enough good signers. I predict they fall short, once Ms. Krebs pulls out her school teacher glasses and reviews them all.

    Tell your grandma to VNOE!

    Reply
    1. KM

      Been awhile since your comments needed an extinguisher to be put out…hot, hot, hot. Stepping up your game is always fun for the SDWC readers.

      Reply
  3. Springer

    People are getting wiser and more cautious this year about signing anything that is put in front of their faces. If this trend continues, maybe the out of staters will give up on SD and move on to somewhere more in tune with their liberal ideas. We can only hope.

    Reply
  4. Anonymous

    The marijuana measures didn’t get enough signatures because there wasn’t enough money backing them. Those campaigns were 100% an in-state, grass-roots effort. No pun intended.

    Kudos to Mr. Deutsch for the classy comment. He’s probably right about the suicide and recreational marijuana measures, but there’s no way that the “vast majority” of South Dakotans don’t support medical marijuana. On that particular issue, it’s just the opposite. They likely don’t have enough signatures to find out, but it’s guaranteed to pass if it happens to sneak its way onto the ballot.

    Reply
    1. Pat Powers Post author

      Last time it was on the ballot, it was defeated in a more pronounced manner than it was the time before.

      Reply
    2. Springer

      Two points. If an idea is good, people will not have to be paid to gather signatures. Second, if a recreational pot measure is couched as a medical pot measure, it won’t fly. People see thru that. If people want medical pot to become legal, then treat it as a medicine as narcotics and other drugs are now….Dr prescribed, tightly controlled, available thru a pharmacy. But of course that is not what these backers had in mind.

      Reply
    3. Anonymous

      The evidence is that South Dakota does not support your assertion. In fact, one wonders how you came to that conclusion.

      Reply

Leave a Reply to Fred Deutsch Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.