Here we go. Senator California Carley as joined by Representatives Aylward, Baxter, Jensen and Jordan who have put in a bill – Senate Bill 66 – to violate the voting rights of the disabled, and to deny them the use of assistive voting technology.
Why? Because the election conspiracists don’t like them? Those pesky disabled people with their federal laws guaranteeing their rights. It’s as if they view them as only an obstacle to the goofball crowd’s demands for the finger and toe counting of ballots.
As posted to the LRC’s website:
2026 South Dakota Legislature
Senate Bill 66An Act to prohibit the use of automatic tabulating equipment and electronic ballot marking systems.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of South Dakota:
Section 1. That a NEW SECTION be added to chapter 12-1:
The State Board of Elections may not authorize the use of any automatic tabulating equipment or electronic ballot marking system.
The governing body of a political subdivision having supervision of an election may not adopt, implement, or use any automatic tabulating or electronic ballot marking system in an election.
Read the rest of Carley & crew’s discriminatory measure here.
Underlining the problem with their nonsense – IT VIOLATES FEDERAL LAW. It always has!
Voting technologies designed to improve the accessibility of ballot marking, verifying, and casting for all voters are required by federal law. The National Disability Rights Network (NDRN) and the undersigned organizations declare that any state or jurisdiction that terminates use of an accessible voting system is in clear violation of existing law and is at high risk of litigation.
And..
Accessible voting technologies currently in use for in person voting were designed to ensure that all eligible voters have access to a private and independent ballot. They are required by federal law, and their use is mandated in all local, state, and federal elections. Hand marked paper ballots are not accessible and do not meet the requirements of federal law. People with disabilities have the same right as their fellow Americans to cast a private and independent vote to ensure their voices are heard on every Election Day; it is the responsibility of state and local election officials to make this right a reality.
Read the 2022 letter from the National Disability Rights Network here.
So California Carley and the election conspiracist’s choice for Secretary of State – Heather Baxter – have introduced legislation to try to deny the ability to vote for a segment of our society, even though it is clearly and demonstrably against federal law?
What are these people thinking?
Half a brain at best.
Reason #75 why I will be voting for Bill Meirose.
Dumb and Dumber
SB 66 would ban automatic vote-counting machines and electronic ballot-marking systems. If passed, every ballot in South Dakota would have to be hand-counted, no matter the size of the county or the number of ballots cast.
That sounds simple, but at scale it means:
• far more election workers
• longer counting times
• higher local costs
• delayed election results
Current law already requires paper ballots, public testing, audits, recounts, and bipartisan oversight. SB 66 doesn’t improve that system — it throws it out and replaces it with a rigid, one-size-fits-all mandate.
Here’s how I assess the bill:
Problem Definition
The bill is driven by distrust of voting machines, but it does not document a systemic failure in South Dakota elections. Existing safeguards are already extensive.
Mechanism & Clarity
The ban itself is clear. But clarity of prohibition is not the same as good policy. SB 66 repeals an entire statutory framework instead of addressing specific, documented weaknesses.
Fiscal Reality
This is a major unfunded mandate. Counties must absorb staffing, overtime, facilities, security, and administrative costs associated with statewide hand counts.
Local Government Impact
Counties carry nearly all the burden. Rural counties face staffing shortages; larger counties face scale and delay problems. No flexibility is provided.
Implementation & Enforcement
Hand counting every ballot statewide is not scalable. The bill provides no workable plan for staffing shortages, ballot security during extended counts, or timely certification.
Incentives & Unintended Consequences
Long counts increase fatigue and human error. More errors mean more challenges and disputes — undermining confidence rather than strengthening it.
Scope & Mission Creep
SB 66 is not targeted reform. It repeals nearly an entire chapter of election law governing tabulation, audits, and certification.
Accountability & Transparency
Public hand counting is visible, but the bill removes standardized testing and audit requirements. Transparency without structure is not accountability.
Liberty / Local Control / Fairness
This is a statewide mandate that strips counties of discretion and flexibility, regardless of size, capacity, or local conditions.
Impact on Families & Voters
SB 66 creates real risk of voter disenfranchisement, even if unintended:
• voters with disabilities lose accessible ballot-marking tools
• working families face longer lines and fewer polling options
• rural voters face longer travel and staffing constraints
• all voters face delayed results and reduced confidence
Disenfranchisement doesn’t require bad intent. It happens when voting becomes harder, slower, or less accessible.
________________________________________
Bottom Line
SB 66 replaces a structured, tested election system with an inflexible, unfunded mandate that increases costs, delays results, reduces access, and risks disenfranchising voters.
SB 66 tears down an entire framework and hopes for the best. That’s why SB 66 is a bad bill
So if I remember right, it’s because the machines used for the disabled print out a bar code to where the person voting has no solid info ensuring their votes were recorded correctly by the machine. There’s also an issue with HAVA funds and this claim that states must use those machines because of HAVA, when the fact is the state hasn’t received HAVA funds for years so isn’t under any obligation to use these machines.
Just offering what I’m trying to remember about that subject.
Thanks!
You do not remember right. But that’s been established a long time ago. The print outs have the names of the people voted for on them. You can physically see and read the names. These have been ran through tabulators many times and the vote has always come out correct.
Most recently, SD received a $1,000,000.00 grant from HAVA funds in 2023. And guess how all these machines (that help disabled people vote) were purchased? And. Whole bunch of other election stuff. Using HAVA funds. Meaning we have to remain in compliance with HAVA.
This isn’t hard to understand. At least for anyone with an IQ higher than luke warm.
While I may at times find myself in disagreement with Ms Hoffman, she was not rude in the post and was simply stating what she believed was correct. The fact that she was in error doesn’t justify being belligerent. I’m only mentioning this because I have seen, what I believe, is an honest effort by Ms Hoffman to learn more about the processes and functions of government and is beginning to see that not everything is as black and white as we would like it to be. I’ve seen an effort to learn about both sides of a issue and I certainly don’t want to dissuade her from that mentality. Let’s support each other in gathering facts and having open dialogue based on those facts, rather than emotion.
You must not see any of her Facebook posts.
Surprised Carl Perry has not added his name yet to this one.
Carl will not put his name on this bill because Brown County Auditor Lynn Heupel is one of the strongest supporters of vote tabulating machines in the state of South Dakota. Carl was witness to the recount for the city council race in 2025 that was decided by just one vote. Vote tabulating machines were used used for both the count on election night and for the recount. The loser of the recount immediately conceded afterwards.
Good bill. Comply or we’ll just start deporting you until you do.
None of this statement makes any sense. Unless you’re being sarcastic. Hard to tell with some of the people that live in this state.
We require compliance, or else.
If only we knew where all this election conspiracy originates.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5457359-trump-mail-ballots-voting-machines/
Looks like this is different than California Carley’s bill as Trump is worried about mail in ballots and voting machines. Carley’s bill addresses Tabulators.
And ballot marking machines for the disabled.
Wonder if it also affects military voting? Not that they’d say that part out loud.
“or electronic ballot marking system”
aka THE MACHINNEESSS!
This is the same thing they tried in Lawrence, McPherson and Fall River counties I believe. Those petitions were rightfully denied on advice from some very qualified people.I also believe that a couple of nitwits from Lawrence county brought a lawsuit against the county not once but twice to do away with the HAVA machines and failed both times. What a waste of time.
All part of the same goddamn idiotic conspiracy.
Cut these people some slack.
They have only a fixed amount of time to put together legislation.
When the whale oil burns out of their lamps the session is over.
Then the darkness sets in. ..
I’m pretty sure that’s when their best thoughts emerge.
Maybe Travis Ismay can help.
I really hope this is sarcastic. These individuals are elected officials, and you’re okay with legislation that blatantly violates federal law in the attempt to spark a Supreme Court decision. It’s been his entire motive the whole time. He and the Freedumb Caucus use taxpayer dollars to force the state to be sued in the hope that the court sides with the state and they can alter case law.