Expanding on the press release from the group opposing the pot legalization measure, Protecting South Dakota Kids, I wanted to dig into their campaign finance report.. which is an interesting collection of odd bedfellows in South Dakota politics.
While on one side of the equation, with the Fred Deutsch led effort, you have donations from Tonchi Weaver and Citizens for Liberty, but on the other, you have donations from Al Kurtenbach and Daugaard for South Dakota. Which seems to say that despite differences within the various factions of the South Dakota GOP, on occasion disparate groups of Republicans can come together and agree on something. In this instance, that legalization of marijuana isn’t the way to go.
Read the report for yourself below.
Protecting SDKids PAC Filing by Pat Powers on Scribd
I attended a meeting recently – respectfully – with Sheriff-elect West and Sheriff Dean.
I parsed the entirety of the materials that were distributed before hand and provided some thoughtful responses point-by-point for anyone wanting to see the most recent information available on the cannabis issue:
https://plainstribune.com/cc4l/im27
IM27 looks very similar to the CC4L initiative proposal, but it is not as good in my opinion, and may have been injected into the politoco as a true poison pill (if it doesn’t pass, watch the prohibitionists point their jagged fingers shouting “See! SD doesn’t want your evil marijuana! SD needs more whiskey and fentanyl and opioids and speed .. I mean adderall!)
My operating hypothesis: If IM27 passes, someone in the prohibitionist movement will have really screwed-up, and it will be one of the biggest down-low upsets in political history.
Sincerely,
John Dale
Cannabis Consumers for Liberty
Spearfish, SD 57783
I wonder if these donors also contribute to those in need via their places of worship, organizations, etc. Some like to put money on “morals”…when it’s convenient for them.
Did you bother to look at the list? I think you can answer your own question.
Yes I looked at it and my experience with the morality police is they’re big on publicity and do nothing behind the scenes.
I was waiting to have the volunteers wrap my last minute Christmas purchases last year at the empire mall. I had two young kids yelling at me and the mall was busier than heck that time of year. I didn’t even realize it was Gov. Daugaard and his daughter wrapping my stuff. Made complete sense with his long connection with the Children’s Home Society and they are the folks always doing the free-will donation gift wrapping. Normally you notice anyone of that height standing that close to you, but that’s always how Daugaard made his presence known. By quietly getting into the trenches and doing the work himself and along side his team.
All volunteers, we come from different political backgrounds, perspectives and beliefs but we are completely united in our opposition to IM27.
Giving credit where credit is due. Those involved with the Protecting South Dakota Kids opposition to IM 27 Campaign have done a superb job. I am incredibly grateful!
I have also shared with other volunteers, community members and elected officials outside of South Dakota the Greg Belfrage Show interview with Ed Moses, videos and other valuable info utilized in this campaign.
Going forward it provides an excellent resource for South Dakotans and those outside of the state. After IM27 is defeated out of state Big Tobacco 2.0 and their paid instate shills will not stop.
Look how many attack me when I present the reality, that a large majority of South Dakota Citizens/residents do not support legalization of pot when I share the results as such:
38 Counties – 60.8% of the voters overwhelmingly said NO to Amendment A.
13 Counties – 57.1% of the voters overwhelmingly said YES to Amendment A.
12 Counties – the voters voted 50-50 on the Public Matter of Amendment A.
Evidence shows, the only support of Marijuana is in 13 Counties, but cause it got 54% of the popular vote, these marijuana supporters claim victory, but yet, cannot accept the fact, that it would have allowed a small MOB RULE group of Citizens to over rule the majority.
Thank God, that No law can go into effect until 100% of the Citizens “Consent to be Governed as Such”
IM 27 is going to get upper 40% at worst, and very well could pass. The establishment politicians resisting this are only exposing themselves as being completely out of touch with the electorate.
If a majority of the electorate is opposed to legalizing pot, just curious how the above commentator thinks it makes sense to say that agreeing with the majority of the electorate could be described as “being completely out of touch with the electorate”? Just asking??
Lee, if you did your job medical marijuana would have been legalized years ago through legislation. But you didn’t.
Same thing is happening here with recreational marijuana. If it doesn’t get a majority this year it will soon, Fred’s cartoonish efforts notwithstanding. You know this. But the legislature will not address it, because it’s made up mostly of cowards hiding from their duties.
Look no further than the results on Amendment C for a brilliant illustration of how out of touch you establishment types are with the rank and file Republican electorate.
Read your answer. In high school debate they call that a shift. In the local bar they’d probably just call you scared to face facts (they’d use stronger language, likely involving certain fowl).The kids would say: “so you got nuth’n”
Have a great day
And psychologists call this projection.
Why did you take no action on medical marijuana, Lee? 70% of SD voters wanted it.
Dereliction of duty, that’s why.
Same will happen with recreational marijuana. If it doesn’t pass now it will soon, and it’ll be yet another example of you not doing your job.
ok I am confused, the above commentator calls out the Legislature for going against the voters wishes, but voting is nothing more than the expression, or an opinion of what the majority of citizens may or may not want, It is no different than the 105 legislator voting to adopt a law. No law can stand if at least 1 citizen stands up against it and does NOT consent to be governed as such. Does not the S.D Constitution mean anything to these people? Do we not have until July 1st of each year to question, file grievances, let alone challenge any such adopted law, whether adopted by 200,000 voters or by 51% of the legislator….
What the marijuana group wants us to believe, is that we are direct democracy, and the popular vote is a end all, see all, catch all. It is not.
The 2020 Results on Amendment A show a very different story:
In 38 counties, the popular vote was NO by 60% of the voters;
In 13 counties, the popular vote was YES by 57% of the voters;
In 15 counties, the popular vote was mixed, 50-50 for or against.
Despite getting 54% Yes votes, which I can safely say the strong majority of votes derived from those 13 counties due to the fact of those counties, they have nearly 430,000 registered voters today, as compared to those 41 counties who have 150,000 registered voters across the state, it is not rocket science to see where the votes came from .
If the above commentator wants to make a baseless comment how the legislators go against the peoples all cause they vote against the peoples wishes based on popular opinion of the voters, well…
The legislators are NOT elected by a statewide popular vote, they are elected by the very voters in each individual district, precinct, across all 66 counties.
That means, if the Legislature is truly a Direct Representative of the very people they represent, they do NOT represent the statewide popular opinion, they only represent the people in small, elected districts, or precincts.
If my district voted NO on Marijuana, then I expect my Representative to also vote NO on Marijuana in the legislature itself, let alone, at least take the time to discuss the public matter, let alone attempt to incur, debate, and find some compromise on adopting a law that makes sense.
There is this misconception that the legislature goes against the will of the people, that is entirely untrue, they only have to represent the small group of voters who elected them within their district, not those voters outside their district.
The Governor therefore, must represent the Citizens At-Large, this means ALL Counties, all districts, all precincts Equally, as they stand on all public matters.
In a Republic, we are protected from mob rule, in a Republic, the PEOPLE discuss public matters as one group of sovereign people, either by means of our Legislature, or by a Statewide Convention of the People of whom get to elect delegates to speak for them.
Governor did the right thing in 2021 – when confronted with the fact that 38 counties said no, 13 counties said yes, and in 15 counties they were evenly split on the public matter of legalization of marijuana, she allowed for both sides to confront each other in a public court room before a judge. This process was one of three ways the people can challenge a recently adopted law – in this case, it pits the people from both sides of the issue against each other to ask questions, present evidence, to challenge the concept, to gain an assessment, opinion, and recommendation of the court.
Lets be clear, the voters have voted 4 times to legalize Marijuana in 2002, 2006, 2010, and 2020 – all four times a large majority of our counties, precincts, yet alone, legislative districts expressly said NO.
How are the legislators suppose to vote in the S.D Legislature?
This is also why as a State, we as people elect Delegates and Precinct Committee men and women to act for us in a Convention to vote for and elect at large representatives such as Lt Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State, State Auditor, and so forth.
While the citizens (registered voters) can petition to nominate candidates for the general ballot, when it comes to our At-Large Candidates, who represent ALL Citizens equally, the landowners or property holders who helped form the state by ceding parts of, or all of their land for public use, placed in our constitution to “Choose” those at-large candidates within a “Convention” format whereas the elected Delegates and Precinct Committee men and women can all meet 1 day of the year, to sit down, discuss, and to debate the nominees, talk to them, ask questions, while finally voting to CHOOSE who they desire.
They do not necessary have to attend all the public events of the convention, they simply need to at least, meet with the nominees, concur with them, then finally, on one day, vote for who they like, as they themselves are elected within their precincts.
This process is how we protect the majority of citizens from mob rule of a popular statewide opinion.
I, as a proud citizen of S.D have always favored public debates, let alone getting out and helping to educate the citizens, informing the voters, and by debating with those citizens, yet alone the very others who are elected by those citizens. As a precinct committeeman, it is my job to relay what the people support in my precinct to the legislator who represents our precinct, of which resides in a Legislative District.
That is how a TRUE REPUBLIC works – the people act as one, on all public matters of the State, and where they disagree, NO act can be adopted, let alone can it stand legally, or lawfully.
South Dakota is a REPUBLIC of Free and Independent, and Sovereign People, who each have an equal voice. All citizens act as one in a convention format to discuss All Things Public.
If you think anyone is reading this incoherent jumble of words you might be more stoned than Newland.
That may be your problem, you do not read, nor understand the constitution. Thank You for the response, but your “No Name” means nothing.
I think Mike might be “on it.”
Kinda amazing they raised “420” thousand