The 2008 Ballot issue dance card.
A blogging colleague had sent me a note on one my favorite people of interest, California’s own Bonnie Russell. If you’re not familiar with her, Bonnie was involved in 2006’s goofy Amendment E, and would often refer to the SD blogosphere using a creative term such as “blieggers.”
Get it? It’s the combination of the word “Liar” and “Bloggers.” I’m sure she spent many hours crafting that in an attempt to gain the upper moral ground. That, and because it sounded slightly more mature than calling us “poopy-heads” when she’d get destroyed by the blogosphere on a daily basis over her ridiculous pronouncements.
Anyway, you’ll also find Bonnie sometimes acting as spokesperson for NVO, a.k.a. National Voter Outreach. They’re a hired gun for signature collection, and had been part of the reason the amendment was put on the ballot in SD. I was reviewing some of their materials, when a topic for posting struck me.
Not on 11% Russell, mind you. But on what the 2008 Ballot might hold for voters.
A review of the South Dakota Secretary of State’s website shows that there is a dance card, and it’s already starting to fill with measures that are actively being prepared for circulation. So, what’s at the top of the dance card?
Surprisingly, there is a measure being circulated right now at this moment. At the same time that Representative Hal Wick prepares for a primary against Bill Earley for the honor of beating Democratic Senator Sandy Jerstad, he has a measure that he submitted earlier this summer with regard to “a commercially unreasonable delay in the delivery of securities.” You can go check out the petition here at the Secretary of State’s website.
Another measure has been submitted for review to the Legislative Research Council by Duane Sand of the American’s For Prosperity organization. Entitled the “Kids and Teachers First Transparency Act” the premise is that a “school district shall spend at least sixty-five per cent of its operational expenditures on classroom instructional expenditures.” Read the LRC Style and form drafting comments here at: lrccommentssdkidsteachersfirst.pdf
College kids will probably rejoice at this one. An attorney in Flandreau, N. Bob Pesall has submitted an initiated measure for LRC comment for “an act amending the graduated drinking age.” From the LRC Comments, this proposed initiated measure would appear to be a measure designed to lower the drinking age in South Dakota back to the days where we had a graduated age of 19 and 21. (Woo Woo! 3.2% beer is going to make a comeback.)
“The Personhood measure is being proposed by a young man by the name of Daniel Woodard living in Sioux Falls who is taking this measure somewhat from proposals being floated by the American Life League. Yes, that would likely make it an abortion related measure. It may have something to do with this suggested legislation from the ALL, but it remains to be seen.
I also hear you’ll find legislation introduced during session, which may or may not end up as a referred measure regarding a searchable budget database for state spending. There’s another one that might be coming your way as well.
I’ve got notes out to many of the authors to try to find out more on these measures.
Until then, stay tuned. There’s a lot more coming.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
How is Larry related to former NBA basketball star Bill Russell? They have the same last name…they must be related.
As a police officer in South Dakota, I have long advocated for a reduction in the drinking age. Get fewer drinkers out of cars, off of the roads, and out of college party houses and into licensed establishments where they can be turned away because of their intoxication levels instead of consuming until they overdose on alcohol at some party or frat house.
Obviously PP’s big buddy Brock is already researching his ‘original’ legislation on the ALEC website. I wonder if that’s where all his bills come from.
Curious that there have been no comments at all about “The Personhood Measure.” Most curious, indeed. 18 months ago there would have been a flood of them.
This is Daniel Woodard. I did this measure on my own, not with American Life League (ALL), a conservative pro-life group. National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) is a liberal pro-life group whose state affiliate in Georgia is pushing this exact same measure. Some independent pro-lifers in CO are also pushing one there. The S.D. pro-life groups are interested, but not for Nov. ‘08; think Nov. ‘10 or ‘12. The deadline to collect the 33,000 petitions is 2 months away, so it’s not going to get on the ‘08 ballot unless the legislature passes it. Anyway, I’ve moved to Virginia. Maybe I’ll move back in a few years after I’m done with school.
This Personhood measure is a state-level measure that’d amend the S.D. Constitution. I could change it to start the process of amending the U.S. Constitution by calling for a constitutional convention, but that’s overkill. A federal preborn personhood amendment would ban abortion. The US Supreme Court would only interpret this state-level amendment to ban abortion if they determined that the 14th Amendment applies to unborn children (which the Republican Platform says it does), thereby banning abortion in all 50 states. What’s more likely is that it’d apply to unborn children only insofar for purposes of fetal insurance laws, fetal homicide laws, etc. Still, it’s worth a shot, and it’s relatively easy to do.
Anybody who’s interested in picking up where I left off, or wants to push it in the future, or just wants more info on preborn personhood, my email is ncw13@juno.com
Look at http://www.personhood.net . This is pretty much what I desire for S.D. The US Supreme Court allows for States to determine that corporations are legal persons, all of which do except for Nebraska, but only agricultural corporations. One year before Roe v Wade, the US Supreme Court said that endangered animals and endangered swampland are legal persons. If these things meet the criteria for legal personhood under the 14th Amendment, then unborn children more than meet the criteria. The original intent was for the Amendment to apply to unborn children, seeing as how the States that ratified the Amendment passed abortion penalties at the same time without “exceptions”.
Notable by his absence is Bill Stegmeier.
Didn’t Bill just get done not 8 weeks ago telling you “Hey PP. Just like the Argus cartoon said, I’ll be back!”
Guess not.
Something else interesting from that NVO site are the hearings involving the investigation of NVO for their hijinx in Oklahoma that resulted in so many fraudulent signatures on a petitions that an initiative there got thrown off the ballot.
Because the judge dared to question NVO, Bonnie threatened the judge and staff with her http://www.usajudges.org site. I am not 100% sure Bonnie works for NVO anymore.
In this April 13 hearing in Michigan on the issue of whether Johnson/NVO had to respond to the Oklahoma subpoena:
http://www.directdemocracy.com/images/stories/april%2013%2C%202007%20hearing.pdf
Page 10 details Bonnie’s little threats involving usajudges.com in order to pressure the court to lay off NVO’s Johnson. Of course, Bonnie refused to ID herself when she called; on page 12 of the transcript Johnson idenitifies the person who called as “probably my PR person” (i.e. Bonnie Russell). The judge condemned the act as an attempt at “manipulation”.
When the hearing resumed on April 17:
http://www.directdemocracy.com/images/stories/april%2017%2C%202007%20hearing.pdf
the court noted Bonnie was shooting her mouth off to local media, denying she ever mentioned http://www.usajudges.com to the judge or his staff. Of course, two of the judge’s staff swore out affidavits that indeed she did very much mention it (page 3-5). Again, the judge accused Johnson and Russell of using usajudges.com for “manipulation” of the case (page 8).
Most amusing of all is that NVO has put this right on their website.