Is Senate Bill 95 the answer to the Bosworth problem?

Here’s the promised election petition reform bill, which would allow for candidacies to be registered for a fee, as opposed to having petitions circulated.

SENATE BILL NO. 95

Introduced by: Senators Otten (Ernie), Monroe, and Tidemann and Representatives Werner, Bolin, Deutsch, Gosch, Heinemann (Leslie), and Qualm

FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to allow certain candidates for elective office to pay filing fees in lieu of submitting nominating petitions, and to create the election filing fee fund.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:
Section 1. That chapter 12-6 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:
    In lieu of a nominating petition required pursuant to § 12-5-1.4, 12-6-4, or 12-6-7, a candidate for the United States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, Governor, or for office in the State Legislature may, within the time limits established for the submission of nominating petitions, submit to the secretary of state a notice of candidacy with the election filing fee in an amount equal to one percent of the annual salary of the office sought as it exists on January first of the year of the election. The form of the notice of candidacy shall be prescribed by the State Board of Elections. The secretary of state shall deposit any election filing fees collected into the election filing fee fund established in section 4 of this Act.
    The candidate shall file the notice of candidacy and pay the election filing fee at the same time. The candidate may pay the election filing fee in cash or by credit card, money order, orwire transfer. Once paid, the election filing fee may not be refunded.
Section 2. That § 12-6-11 be amended to read as follows:
12-6-11. It shall be the duty of the The secretary of state, as soon as the time for filing nominating petitionsin his office or notices of candidacy has passed, shall immediately to certify to the several county auditors of the state the names of the persons in whose behalf nominating petitions or notices of candidacy have been filed in his office as candidates for each political party separately, with including the name of the office for which each person is a candidate, and. The secretary of state shall provide the candidate information separately for each political party and also certify the color, style and form of the official primary election ballot of each political party.
Section 3. That chapter 12-7 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:
    In lieu of a certificate of nomination required pursuant to § 12-7-1, an independent candidate for the United States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, Governor, attorney general, secretary of state, state auditor, state treasurer, commissioner of school and public lands, public utilities commissioner, or for office in the State Legislature, who is not nominated by a primary election or by political party convention, may, within the time limits established for the submission of certificates of nomination, submit to the secretary of state a notice of candidacy with the election filing fee in an amount equal to one percent of the annual salary of the office sought as it exists on January first of the year of the election. The form of the notice of candidacy shall be prescribed by the State Board of Elections. The secretary of state shall deposit any election filing fees collected into the election filing fee fund established in section 4 of this Act.
    The candidate shall file the notice of candidacy and pay the election filing fee at the same time. The candidate may pay the election filing fee in cash or by credit card, money order, or wire transfer. Once paid, the election filing fee may not be refunded.
Section 4. That the code be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:
    There is hereby created within the state treasury the election filing fee fund for the purpose of providing funds for the operation of election services within the Office of the Secretary of State. Any money in the fund is continuously appropriated to the Office of the Secretary of State.
Section 5. That the code be amended by adding a NEW SECTION to read:
    The effective date of this Act is January 1, 2017.

This measure would allow for elections filing fees to be paid in lieu of petitions being circulated.

What do you think? Yea, or Nay?

It would certainly prevent the Bosworth problem from occurring again. And it’s done in other states

9 thoughts on “Is Senate Bill 95 the answer to the Bosworth problem?

  1. Anonymous

    –the answer to the Bosworth problem?

    A few weekends in jail for Bosworth is the answer to the Bosworth problem

  2. Mark N.

    Nay. Everyone should have the same process to get on the ballot. Paying a fee shouldn’t allow a candidate to be exempt from the process.

    And how does this prevent the Bosworth problem? A candidate without the resources to pay the fee could still forge signatures or not properly circulate the petition.

  3. FINALLY!

    I’m all for this, but it needs an amendment to include Attorney General, Treasurer, Secretary of State, Commissioner of School and Public Land, Auditor and PUC candidates. Also, it should declare an emergency.

    Having a two-track system for getting on the ballot is good. Let’s end the faux-populism right here and right now. Petitions don’t prove anything. Let’s stop wasting time with petitions and get right discussing the issues with primary candidates.

    And on top of it, people are cautious about signing and circulating petitions in the wake of challenges, etc. The democrats are absolutely going to work to challenge all petitions and kick people off the ballot.

    1. father of three

      The offices you listed are currently decided by the parties delegates at their state conventions. No petitions or signatures are required. These slates are decided after the primary.

      1. Anonymous

        If that system is good enough for them, then it should be good enough for everyone. Maybe it’s best to do away the primary election all together and have the parties nominate through a convention system. It would at least stop those who don’t participate in the primary election (i.e., most taxpayers) from footing the bill for the Dems, Repubs, and the rest.

  4. Charlie Hoffman

    I see this as having great potential for a campaighn ad.

    “Only one Candidate in this election asked you for your approval to run! The others just bought their way onto the ballot! Vote ________

  5. Anne Beal

    I was at my County Auditors office getting some nominating petitions notarized yesterday and talking about this. We are all tired of this ridiculous exercise. Getting your name in the ballot should be like buying ad space. Let the candidates just pay to have their names listed. The more names on the ballot, the more revenue for the SOS office

    1. Anonymous

      Replying to my own post here, CSPAN had a forum of “lesser known presidential candidates” from St Anselm’s College in NH.
      The democrats had twenty (20!) of them. Most are people who are less-than-lesser known. But many stated how many states had their names on the ballot.
      If each one of these people wants to spend $4K to get his name on the ballot, why not? Show us the money!