Pulled up a couple of posts I did this last year during the debate over SB40 which both contain information which continues to be valid during the debates being held in the legislature beginning tomorrow over House Joint Resolution 5001, which proposes to put it to a decision of voters whether or not they want to continue allowing political parties to nominating several statewide candidates at a convention, or to allow all Republicans to weigh in. First, from a post I made on Feb 14, 2023..
..It would be interesting to look at the public offices in South Dakota where we select the partisan candidates in a primary election process to represent those parties in the November election, and those we select at the Republican or Democrat State Conventions.
US Senate – Primary
US House – Primary
Governor – Primary
Lt. Gov – Convention
Atty General – Convention
Secretary of State – Convention
State Auditor – Convention
State Treasurer – Convention
School & Lands – Convention
Public Utilities Commission – Convention
State Senate – Primary
State House – Primary
Circuit Court Judge – Primary (if more than 2 for each seat)
County Commissioners – Primary
State’s Attorney – Primary
Sheriff – Primary
County Auditor – Primary (and/or county finance officer)
County Treasurer – Primary
Register of Deeds – Primary
PrimaryCoroner – Primary (or appointment after 2023 per HB 1057)
and.. If you think about it, the argument against the constitutional offices being decided by the voters in a primary is largely being made by precinct people.. who themselves are chosen in a primary. I imagine they would be the first people against precinct committee positions being chosen and filled by a small group of party insiders.
Next, a post that goes back further in state history, to the last time the legislature had a debate of this nature, when it was decided to move several offices at the top of the ticket away from party conventions to a statewide primary:
Apparently, up until that time, those candidates had been vetted exclusively by party nominating committees, and by 1929, legislators had had enough complaints that they had to do something to change the system.
From the Aberdeen American News, via Argus Leader, 22 Jan 1929, Tue · Page 6
It appears that the problem before was that the choices that ended up in front of them were not great via that party system of vetting, and “party followers are too often given the choice of voting in the fall for a candidate they do not want.”
