I caught this in my facebook feed this evening; where State Senator Michael Rohl came out and expressed his support for the Jungle Primary measure that we’ll be voting on this fall, Amendment H.
In several instances in the past, the prior versions of the jungle primary effort hadn’t been ready for prime-time. However, in this election, despite opposition from the political parties, the measure seems to have both more money, as well as more support, as evidenced by Rohl’s breaking the ice when it comes to current elected officials willing to support it.
You have to admit that Michael’s argument is the same one that many Republicans, including myself, used this last session in support of the political parties casting aside the convention nomination process for constitutional offices, and putting those positions on the ballot, as nearly every other partisan elected office is; allowing them to be nominated by all the voters in the Republican or Democrat Party, as opposed to the few who show up to convention?
That was narrowly rejected, despite multiple attempts. And it still remains misguided.
Admittedly, it puts a number of people in a logical quandary. The arguments against both the jungle primary and the candidates for constitutional office being selected in a primary are largely the same; that it takes the grassroots out of the process, and people will come in and buy elections.
But… isn’t that what just happened this past June when voter turnout was at rock bottom? A few special interests came in – in some cases flagrantly ignoring state laws – and bought elections quicker than you could say “Tammanay Hall.” Campaign finance limits? Pfft! They could just file a new report with creative accounting. No disclaimers on materials? We’ll just ignore that!
If all the bogey-man arguments that had been used against the easy reform measures to expand voter participation came to pass despite the attempts at reform failing, then they’re not really much of a scare-tactic anymore, are they? “Special interests are going to come in and buy elections if we let more people vote?” TOO LATE. They just did that.
Maybe Michael Rohl is the first elected official to say the quiet part out loud. That the system might need to be shaken up a bit more than we would have guessed.
And I’d agree that more people participating in the election process is always better than just a few coveting it.
It’s time, I hope H passes
If you never want to see an independent candidate on a general election ballot again go ahead and vote for this. Independents should oppose this.
A general election between Marty Jackley and Dusty Johnson will decrease general election turnout. Without a presidential candidate on the ballot in 2026 why would democrats turn out to vote?
Senator Rohl nailed it
With open primaries the Zoo Rats would have dominated. Instead we ended up with Stinky Dumpster divers. 🙁
Still licking those wounds from the primary admit you made bad choices lick the wounds again and move on . You were defeated soundly.
Just askin’, who are the party bosses these days?
The party bosses are all high powered lawyers. Schoenbeck-Mortensen are one side of the axis, the other is Odenbach-Hansen.
Everyone has party choice. Independents, Libertarians, etc. are not denied the right to vote in the primary. They are not victims. In fact, they can switch voter registration for the primary, vote, and then switch back IF they choose.
The “Rohl-way,” which Schoenbeck appears to support, would allow every South Dakota DEMOCRAT to vote in South Dakota REPUBLICAN primaries and hence influence each race toward the more progressive left-leaning Republican candidate. If you have left-leaning beliefs, it makes perfect sense why people like Rohl support this. However, to me, it makes more sense to allow each wing of the Republican party battle it out, primary by primary, without allowing outside influence (i.e. bias) by people who clearly do not share the values of either wing of the Republican party.
Well then you should start paying for your primary, instead of having independents and Dems paying for it. The taxpayers don’t pay for a Republican convention – but they do pay for elections, including primaries. You want to set the rules, pay your own bills.
Common sense at 1:44… It’s not the GOP’s fault that the Democrat Party has shriveled to nothing in the past 20 years. When Dems have better candidates and a winning message, they’ll start winning the general elections. In the meantime, I don’t want them anywhere near primaries that they could choose the Republican candidates.
Republicans don’t want Democrats voting in GOP primaries and telling Republicans who thier candidates should be. Democrats don’t want Republicans choosing what their values are.
I’s won’t be on the general election ballot. Neither will smaller parties. This measure decreases voters choices on the general election ballot.
This is a dumb proposal. I hope H goes down.
Weird that this last session Republican Party bosses didn’t want Republicans to vote for their Republican nominees for statewide offices like AG or SOS either. Why are people so afraid with letting SD voters have a say? “Under God the People Rule” is our motto for a reason.
Give the voters the facts, present your case, and trust the process. Let the people decide!
So your supported candidates on the Little Lee side mostly get their butts kicked. Now we need to change the whole process? Either get better candidates or encourage candidates to get their people to show up and vote. Everyone already has a voice, it’s based on which party you select to be with. Independents said they don’t want party affiliation, meaning they don’t vote in a partisan primary (at least on the Republican side).
Right.
Conventions are bad. Move them to primaries.
That side loses primaries.
End the party primaries. Go to open primaries so dems can choose Republicans.
Turnout will be low in a general election if we have 2 Republicans running against each other.
Why does anyone care about voter turnout? If you’re informed, please go vote! If you’re not informed, please go get informed! Common sense!
The only way you can actually increase voter turnout is by turning politics into a spectacle of entertainment for public consumption, or by dumbing down the election process altogether.
Do we want a dumb process?
…
Apparently so…
Mr. Odenbach, who some say is a bit of a leprechaun, is terrible feared of Mr. Rohl and his common sense on this issue. The Messrs. Odenbach and Hansen will be really red-assed when this thing passes, but they brought it on their ownselfs.
Odenbach is general. Keep the Irish out of this.
German
With open primaries there would be no more Republican primary or Democrat primary. It would be a South Dakota primary and all voters could vote in it. The top two most popular candidates move on. I’m not sure what is so threatening about that to anyone. The winner would probably be popular.
It diminishes the general election. It eliminates choices.
Looking forward to the new legislative leadership like Ismay, Voita and the new crew. They are gonna shake things up!
The above comment by “springer” isn’t me, the Springer who has been posting on here for years. Please choose another moniker.
Posted by the original Springer.
The Real Springer at 7:51… That is unfortunate. Let’s hope that poster changes his web name.
Thank you. I just read your well written comment above and wholeheartedly agree. That is exactly why I oppose Amendment H.
A registered democrat can choose to label themselves on the ballot as a republican if this passes. Crazy to think that there are political leaders within the Republican Party who are okay with that, and that voters don’t, at the very least, deserve to be able to trust the info on their ballots.
Democrats labeling themselves as a Republican on the ballot (in order that they can win an election).. Already been happening for 20 years.
Right. Now they just want to make it easier to deceive voters.
If you want an open primary as they say, why bother with a primary at all. Save the money and have one vote in November with all candidates. Anyone a winning majority of the votes would be elected, anyone not the top two could have a runoff. It is done in Louisiana.
Humorous how many alleged “conservatives” defend having taxpayers covering them sucking off the public. A real test of who is and isn’t .
The parties aren’t controlling elections they aren’t paying for, the party system is a vetting process to fast-track the most viable candidates to public office without all the riff-raff of multiple unknown candidates jumping in without doing the work first and edging out a vote because: although the members of both parties (who happen to be more politically educated than NA/Independents) know the candidate is useless, the candidate can still easily buy, lie, or manipulate their way into office without any party opposition. (*cue the “they’re doing that right now!” without actually giving a name*)
No party? No accountability.
What do you prefer: Some city-nonce to move here from California with their millions of dollars that no longer has value where they’re from and buy up an election to turn us into them, or a local person recognized by an organized group of like-minded individuals (party) funds their campaign with voluntary donations and narrows it down to the single best option? Or maybe you’d like to revisit IM-26 from 2016 and just pay them all equally out of the taxpayers’ pockets for equality among campaigns, yeah? Because that is fundamentally exactly where this is headed if you don’t wise up to it real fast.
I understand better than anyone the number of election-denying radicals, racists, and overall RINOs who have been getting involved in the party lately and do everything in their power to keep lowering the party’s standards to match whatever morally decrepit pit of fanaticism the Democrats continue to manifest within their party, but that doesn’t mean you toss parties out of the primaries, that means you grow a set and speak out against them publically, REGARDLESS OF HOW IT AFFECTS YOUR CHANCES OF REELECTION! You don’t just kneejerk some unintelligent and poorly written legislation to fix a problem we don’t have with a solution that is void of logical applicability.
You want a 3-party system? Sure, but the 3rd will just vote with one party over the other 95% of the time.
You want a 4 party system? The first two of those parties will gang up against the one they dislike most, and that party will latch onto the remaining party just to stay relevant, which the remaining party will accept due to the threat of impending attrition.
You want a 5 party system? 6 party system?
No party system? Really? You would have to create overreaching legislation just to prevent parties and their chosen nominations, and even then it would all be in vain. You want to outlaw group-campaigning? How about PACs? How about donations altogether? Why don’t we just let people write in their vote and have no candidates at all?!? The two party system is not a choice, it’s a natural biproduct of true democracy and everyone with a penchant for political history knows this to be the fact. We do it for convenience and for the sake of getting the single best candidate from each party. Don’t like it, register independent! (It’s almost like that was always an option!) True conservatives know you can’t legislate culture change, you can’t force people to think for themselves, and you sure as hell can’t prevent them from forming a party to keep their candidates honest and accountable to their platform! And guess what? Even if you do– Even if you TRY, the Democrats will unite in force, strategize, and they will take our state so fast you won’t have time to say “RINO!” Look at their coffers! LOOK AT THEIR COFFERS, SCHOENBECK! How do you think that money will be spent if jungle primaries pass? I’ll tell you! It’ll be spent a hell of a lot more effectively, and it will be spent on electing morally bereft Democrats who will topple our nation and our state. DID YOU FORGET THAT DEMOCRATS EXIST HERE TOO???
It’s hard enough for people to keep up with the fluid nature of the two parties we currently have and what they stand for, now you want them to be forced to research the beliefs of every individual candidate? And that’s going to create more involvement in politics, you say? Come on, guys, don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining. That’s just such a blatant disingenuous “I know this is wrong but I stand to benefit from it so I’m going to say it’s right” comment. Stop with that, we see straight through it every single time. It’s a Democrat tactic if ever there was one.
Schoenbeck, I respect your commitment and devotion to your self-serving agenda, I really do, especially at times like this when it’s obvious to everyone in the party that even you know you’re just playing more of your political games in a blatant attempt for a discrete bit of power, but how rich is it that you say you want to “defend having taxpayers covering them ‘sucking off’ the public”? While it doesn’t surprise me that you’d die on the hill of preventing your fellow man from being sucked off, you should at least have the intellectual honesty to realize that that is exactly what will happen if this garbage were to ever pass.
Pro Tip: It won’t pass, and the party will remember the foolish work you did against them in November. I still support you, Lee, but on behalf of the party, please pull your head out and shake it off on the porch before you step back inside the tent.
Mark my words, gentlemen: The day the Republican Party loses our political majority is the day South Dakotans lose South Dakota. Don’t be fools!
Another Knudson Kirby Progressive emerges from the Blue closet.
Here’s an idea. How about making the registration deadline to vote the same day as when early voting begins? This will make Ds & Is register as Rs in order to vote in the primaries rather than roughly 30 days after early voting begins. How many people change party affiliations after being influenced by those who already voted early to join whatever cause they believe in?
The current system excludes thousands of SD voters and results in a whole bunch of uncompetitive elections. 17% turnout to vote. The system is broken. Shame on those who deny that because of self-interest.
No one is excluded now. If you are an independent but
feel strongly in favor of a certain candidate, simply change your registration and vote in the primary of that party, then change back to independent. Simple. Amendment H simply invites fraud and manipulation. Vote NO on Amendment H.
Yeah there are plenty of Democrats that register as Republicans so they can vote in the Republican primaries.
Plenty, but not enough. We shouldn’t solve problems that don’t exist. And we sure as hell shouldn’t solve them with an even bigger problem.
Oh, and who are these elites I keep hearing about? This is South Dakota, nobody is “elite”. What does that even mean? A person who was simply elected to an “elite” position? 2/3rds of our state’s top elected officials grew up on podunk family farms with scarcely any money and no connections to Pierre.
How about we define whatever makes a person an ‘elite’ and do away with that first just to get these darn windmills out of the way… although it wouldn’t, because it seems that the real ‘elites’ are the ones who post about how unhappy they are about their campaign contributions to their business buddies being nullified by actual salt-of-the-earth South Dakotan candidates…. err, elites. Yeah, ‘elites’.
Let’s round up all these mythical “elites” and un-elite them, ‘delite’ them, as it were, shall we gents? Who should we start with? Name an elite, tell me makes them elite, and then I’ll just go on over and un-elite them right now. I’ll even record it and post it for you all to see!
dumb
I stand by my original post and if you live in District 1 – know I care more about you as a South Dakotan than I do what box you checked when you registered to vote….. notice I said “registered to vote” not “signed up for a private political organization”.
I’ll leave it as this …..
Awfully swampy comments section…. seems like a lot of misinformation and fear of your own neighbors coming from the SD political class…
I couldn’t imagine being bold enough to think a private political organization was more important than my friends, family, neighbors, and community… and then asking them to vote for me. Let alone have the gull to suggest the taxpayers should fund a closed primary they can’t participate in unless they join a private organization, but I suppose that’s why so many Anonymous posters don’t put their name on it. They care more about stacking the deck for an organization than they do about that very organizations core beliefs.
I can still remember when South Dakotans would rise above the political bullshit spewed from DC and actually put South Dakotans First…. It wasn’t a tag line… it was a way of life. A place where we didn’t let private organizations tell us who we are or what we believe. You can’t be America First/ South Dakota First, if it’s actually 2nd to a private political organization.
The party’s have a role… and an important one…. But they are not the lead act…. South Dakotans are. This establishes a South Dakota Primary that is funded by South Dakotans and accessible to South Dakotans; which is why I helped circulate petitions months before this years primary even happened. How can you be South Dakota First if you aren’t willing to listen to the people of South Dakota? It’s not Republicans first, it’s not Democrats first, it’s SOUTH DAKOTA FIRST….. and if you think Republicans or democrats are more important that South Dakotans as a whole, you need deeper soul searching than you’ll find here.
No individual should need to join a private organization/party to participate in something taxpayer funded. Period.
They seem to have forgotten, but Political Parties don’t own the government or the elections. The People of South Dakota do… buckle up, it’s gonna be a bumpy ride.
I’ll second my friend from the Northeast. Well said.
**Cue the slow clap!**
South Dakota would be a better place if all our legislators had this level of commons sense and practicality – advocating for the best interest of the constituents as a whole, instead the self promotion itself interest of the extremest few.
no more independents on the general election ballot.
Maybe no dems.
It’s a really interesting way to eliminate choices for our voters.
How many legislative races are essentially decided before November? If one only party shows up for a race, 10-15% of the district voters may decide that district’s representation in June, instead of the 75% one would typically see in November.
You misused the word ‘private’ about 5 times and I stopped reading. HA! A “Conservative” who doesn’t understand private vs public…
Who owns the parties? Tell me their names won’t you? Who is the privatized owner of the parties and who were they purchased from before the current owner?
Anon 8:14
Are you suggesting that Clerance Thomas and Scalia (as well as the majority of the supreme court) are both wrong in saying that political parties enjoy first amendment rights as private organizations? Are they not also registered with the state as non profit organizations? A private organization doesn’t need an owner, it needs a chairman or leadership structure in bylaw.
California Democrat Party v jones
Washington State Grange v Washington State Republican Party
Pretty clearly stated that political parties can’t be forced to let all voters vote in their primaries, because they are private organizations that can exclude membership based off beliefs – even if it is unclear who can assert the right. A top 2 primary doesn’t force a party to accept membership, it simply says the top two vote getters shall advance….. political parties spent decades arguing they are private and can’t be forced to let non members in – now they can reap their reward.
Glad you line up with liberal justices like RBG – but I’ll take the legal opinion of the Scalia’s of the world.
Senator Rohl gets it. Simply put, the fewer-than-17% (less than 7% for Dems) are choosing or Legislators. Simple fact: only the highly-motivated show up for the primary, pushing the general ballot to the extremes.. 85% of South Dakotans are not so. They lean toward common sense. We have a lot of ballot issues in our state THAT PASS because such ideas never make it out of committee. Those of us who testify before committee (otherwise known as floggin’ yer Johnson) know that the decision to pass a measure or not happens behind closed doors in caucus.
The system is broken and the Legislature doesn’t reflect the true values of good, hard working south Dakotans.
Time for a change.