Mark this down in the dumb idea column.
There’s a “subscribers only” article in the Argus this morning about a group organizing to bring a new ballot measure that would create a mechanism to add legislators and state officials to those elected officials who could be recalled from office by popular vote.
The challenge they face is that the proposal is a solution in search of a problem. that no one is asking for.
While Reistroffer, a registered Republican, is best known for his pro-marijuana advocacy at the Capitol, he says his effort to get the question of recalls on the ballot isn’t about a single-issue. Rather, it’s about adding another layer of accountability to the South Dakota government.
He admits he was inspired to look into options about forcing the removal of elected officials from office after lawmakers and the governor enacted plans to delay implementation of a medical marijuana program. But he said recall elections could be used in response to any issue where voters and their elected leaders do not see eye-to-eye.
“recall elections could be used in response to any issue where voters and their elected leaders do not see eye-to-eye?”
Well, we have that mechanism now. And one of the more significant challenges in proposing a dumb idea like this is that if you go and look, you’re not going to find an example of the existing recall law in effect being used successfully in the last decade.
Seriously. I made a list:
South Dakota Recall Elections 2011-2021:
- Dave McGirr recall, Huron, South Dakota (2011) (Came up short on Signatures)
- Deb Schmidt recall, Whitewood, South Dakota (2011) (retained with 59% of vote)
- Carl Shaw recall, Edgemont, South Dakota (2014) (Petitions rejected, and lacked reason for recall)
- Bill Campbell recall, Hartford, South Dakota (2015) (Recall petitions failed under state law.)
- Harold Gray recall, Nisland, South Dakota (2017) (The town board was unable to accept the petition, as some were petitioning against other board members)
- Jerry Toomey recall, Mitchell, South Dakota (2017) (Group failed to submit signatures for the recall effort within the 60-day window allowed by law)
One municipal recall effort in the last decade that actually went to a vote, and they decided they liked their mayor after all by 59%.
Not exactly a bell ringer of an idea that people are pounding on the door to expand on.
Nevermind when it comes to state legislators, by the time you can possibly get around to recalling them after they take an action you’re literally on top of the next election cycle where they could run again.
Is someone angsty against our federal delegation because they may have acted like statesmen in Washington? Too bad.. a law of this nature isn’t going to apply to federally elected officials. And if someone may have acted criminally, as we are finding out, there are mechanisms that can and will be used and everything will be done and handled in the light of day.
But as for laws that aren’t used now, that no one is asking for an expansion of? We have enough government now.
Hard pass.
This is what you get when you have a governor and legislature that ignores the will of the voters. Anti-democratic behavior has consequences.
I am with you… kinda. So long as the voters continue to vote in the exact same people who fight against their will, the legislature and governor will continue this behavior unabated. South Dakotans will do what we always do: whine, stomp our feet about bad government, and then vote the exact same people in. We deserve what we get.
uh, yeah. It’s called Democracy. Look it up.
…k? This was a weird, sophomoric response, but go off, I guess.
Agreed, Pat. This recall idea is not just dumb, it’s also dumber.
Our entire legislature is renewed every two years. If someone doesn’t like their representation, they should recruit a candidate, support them or run themselves.
I know these all sound good on the surface but the reality is different.
1) We are a republic which means we have an election, choose our representatives, they do what they think best, we reassess them in the next election based on their body of work. The more “others” we have the less accountability for those we elect because resources get more split.
2) Similar to things like jungle primaries, the more “hoops” you make the more you favor the rich and powerful over time because they have the resources to fight multiple fights.
The stoners made errors again but this time drafting IM26 and Amendment A, were warned not to proceed since they were flawed, did not adhere to the warning, measures passed due to all the out of state drug money spent in state, declared unconstitutional and the legislature had to clean up the mess. Stoners then blame governor and legislators for their own mistakes.
I will never get this “stoners” insult people keep throwing out. Just because I don’t see the logic in regulating random objects, that could hurt people if used incorrectly, I am a “stoner”. The thing that is “flawed” is your logic and the SD inner party’s respect for democracy. Over-rule the will of the people due to some technicality, in order to continue to subsidize the police state, give me a break. When we no longer have the ability to shape the service we receive, is it really still a service to us? Maybe they will take the guns next??
Not conforming to the Constitution is not a technicality, unless of course the Constitution has no meaning. But if that is the case, the amendment has no meaning either. And, then the question is what does?
That’s a bit dramatic, let’s be real, the only reason the measure needed to be a constitutional amendment was for it to not be reversed by the legislature (I know, who would have thought). Therefore, if you want to truly respect the constitution, then respect democracy and drop the police state.
Furthermore, who does the constitution belong to, one would think the citizens should shape the constitution not the appointed people in the courts? It’s a dangerous precedent to set and accept just because you believe in a police state.
I could see Cory from the Out of State Name Callers Blog standing outside of Kessler’s trying to get others who suffer from Noem Derangement Syndrome to sign another petition. Would his out of state name callers come back to the state to help another demon weed cause? Would they even be able mentally or physically get back to South Dakota? If they do they are sure to be thick and dank with smoke of the demon weed, and as such illegal under state and federal law.