GOP: Don’t sign on the line unless you know what it is!

And demand to see a state ID to make sure they’re a resident!

6 Replies to “GOP: Don’t sign on the line unless you know what it is!”

  1. Anonymous

    Ask if they are a resident of South Dakota, but first take a look at the petition and see if they have their name on it as gatherer, and take a selfie with them. I was approached at the Sioux Falls zoo by a guy who claimed to not know he couldn’t collect sigs if he wasn’t a resident, and then he skedaddled.

  2. Springer

    Even if you think you know what the purpose of any initiative is, and what the ramifications would be if passed, you really don’t. We were made acutely aware of this after the IM 22 debacle. Don’t sign anything, and VNOE on every one of these umpteen if they happen to make it to the ballot!

  3. WOW

    The fair is busy with petitioners. I listened to one of them tell people he had a petition for open primaries. He went on to say that it was passed by the voters last time. WHAT?? Study the facts before signing anything.

  4. Fred Deutsch

    Until abuse of the petition process can be reformed, I won’t be signing any of them. I really like the ability of direct citizen involvement via petitions, but the process has been corrupted by out-of-state interests and out-of-state rich people. Let’s fix the process so people know what they’re voting on – “yes” should mean “I want this to pass” and “no” should mean “I don’t.” Every ballot petition should be part of the ballot for voters to read when they vote (summaries are not sufficient) so voters can read every word and they know exactly what they are voting on; should be restricted to under one-half page in length so voting doesn’t take three hours; should be authored by people that are residents of SD; should not allow words to be redefined outside of common meaning (e.g. the suicide measure re-defines “self-administer” to mean “ingestion” – this misdirection allows proponents to say the bill requires that only the patient can self-administer the deadly drug, when in fact it means only the patient can ingest it – this allows another person to administer the lethal drug, and is consistent with euthanaisa); and should not be allowed on the ballot if the AG or court believes it is unconstitutional. The constitutional test or challenge should come “before” we vote, not after.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.