Press "Enter" to skip to content

Can Recall Improve Government Amidst South Dakota’s One-Party Regime?

Longtime marijuana advocate and petitioner Emmett Reistroffer is trail-ballooning an initiative to give South Dakotans the ability to recall more elected officials. The only officials we can boot from office early are municipal officials (SDCL 9-13-29). If your mayor or city councillor gets out of line, you can circulate a recall petition, collect signatures from 15% of your local electorate (SDCL 9-13-30), and put that municipal officer to a trial by public vote… assuming, of course, you can put up a candidate to replace the malefactor (SDCL 9-13-32).

No other title of South Dakota law includes recall provisions; thus, county commissioners, legislators, governors, and attorneys general can kill people with their cars, lie about it, refuse to resign, and face no consequences until the next election.

Only nineteen states allow recall elections of state officials; Virginia has a curious recall process, untested on state officials, in which the circuit court, not the voters, decides whether to remove an elected official.

Reistroffer has signaled his intention to put South Dakota officials on the recall hotseat by filing a statement of organization for a ballot question committee called South Dakota Voters for the Right to Recall Elected Officials. Resitroffer’s is the only name on the filing, so we don’t know who else might constitute the plural indicated by the name. He hasn’t filed a petition yet for public review on the Secretary of State’s ballot question website, so we don’t know the parameters Reistroffer has in mind for a broader South Dakota recall. Reistroffer tells the press he’s still thinking about what form the proposal should take:

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.

…Reistroffer’s committee hasn’t determined yet if the proposed ballot question will be a constitutional amendment or an initiated measure [Joe Sneve, “Group Aims to Give South Dakotans the Right to Recall State Officials {paywall},” Aberdeen American News, 2021.03.05].

Resitroffer says he’s considering a recall initiative because of the Governor’s and Legislature’s effort to roll back the marijuana initiatives approved by voters last November. I am intrigued by the prospect of twinning a recall initiative with a referendum against the marijuana rollback bill. The same people who would be up in arms (and pens, and clipboards) about the Legislature’s delay of Initiated Measure 26, the medical marijuana measure, would be the same people who’d respond favorably to the chance to vote Governor Kristi Noem or Speaker Spencer Gosch or other anti-democracy pols out of office. An enterprising group of pro-democracy activists would combine the recall petition with a whole host of referendum petitions: take out petitions against marijuana rollbacks, against the Governor’s municipal dezoning law, against Senator Al Novstrup’s anti-initiative 14-point font bill, against the anti-transgender bill that still stands a chance of passing, the weakening of the state’s green building standards, the new annual tax on electric vehicles (who says our Republican Legislature won’t raise your taxes?)… Lay out a buffet of referendum petitions, say to voters, “Look at all the bad laws your Governor signed! Let’s repeal these laws, and let’s give voters the chance to recall the Governor and legislators for doing such bad work!”

But even as I write that sentence, I can’t help shaking the feeling that, if there pro-democracy, anti-incumbent outrage to harness right now, that energy might be more usefully directed toward recruiting good candidates and building an effective campaign machine to oust Noem and the unresponsive one-party monolith in 2022. A recall initiative wouldn’t go to a vote until November 2022, and if approved, it wouldn’t go into effect until July 1, 2023, by which time Noem will be immersed in her third year of campaigning for President. I would certainly revel in a recall campaign against Noem in July 2023 (imagine the funding we could get from outside progressive groups and from her GOP primary opponents!), but we’d all be better off if we just mooted her Presidential aspirations and her rein of error over South Dakota in November 2022. Every hour Reistroffer spends campaigning for a recall initiative is an hour he could spend building his own candidacy for Governor, or building a lasting party apparatus that could field effective candidates and hold our Governor and legislators accountable at every election.

Besides, removing Governor Noem or Speaker Gosch or killer Ravnsborg requires fielding candidates to replace them. How will a recall election change the voting dynamics of a state that will elect a patently unqualified, inexperienced junior lawyer over a veteran prosecutor just because the knucklehead has an R in front of his name? What good will recall do in Legislative districts like District 23, where Speaker Gosch and his fellow right-wing radical Rep. Charlie Hoffman faced no opposition in the general election? Without active opposition candidates and a public willing to vote outside their party-branded habits, recalls don’t guarantee any better results than general elections.

I’m not against expanding recall power. As a rule, I say any expansion of our opportunity to vote on important issues and the performance of our elected officials promotes democracy and is thus inherently good. Bring a recall petition initiative forward, and I’ll sign it. Put recall of state officials on the 2022 ballot, and, depending on the details, there’s a strong chance I’ll vote for it.

I am just not immediately sold on recall as the remedy to the ills of our body politic. We won’t really be able to take advantage of recall unless we change the mindset of South Dakota voters. And we can avoid the need for recall by breaking the Republican lock on power in South Dakota, restoring a functional multi-party system, and electing responsible and responsive leaders who recognize the need to govern for all South Dakotans.

11 Comments

  1. grudznick 2021-03-06 09:05

    Any “trail-balloon [sic]” filled from breathing of Mr. Reistroffer is sure to be thick and dank with smoke of the demon weed, and as such illegal under state and federal law. However, his idea of recalling elected fellows may not be too bad, but I see a bad side too. If the masses inflicted with Noem Derangement Syndrome could recall her, the Rhoden Rhangers would still be please because her replacement would be a man we could count upon. But if Mr. Ravnsborg were recalled then the Governor gets to pick and you fellows would be as unhappy as ever. Or if, say, Mr. Barnett were recalled, then election gal would step in and it would be the same as before. I suspect in most cases you’re just trading one shoe for another but it’s not really going to be any different.

  2. Donald Pay 2021-03-06 09:30

    The recall is a blunt instrument, and very difficult to use. Generally there is a much higher signature requirement for recall. As you state, there must be a candidate to run against the recalled official. If the official is a crook, recall is appropriate, but you probably would be wasting time recalling someone over policy differences.

    In Wisconsin, the recall of Scott Walker and several Republican Senators showed real problems with using the recall over a policy difference. We didn’t have the referendum to deal with Act 10, so we had to use the tools available, protest and the recall, to try to overturn it. Needless to say, it didn’t work. In Ohio, they had the referendum to use against a similar bill put forth by Governor Kasich. They defeated Kasich’s bill, and to his credit, Kasich said that defeat made him a better Governor going forward.

    My suggestion is, as it always has been: organize at the grassroots, go to hearings and meetings and make your points, lobby for and against bills, refer and initiate, use the courts to preserve your rights, recruit and support good candidates in any party.

  3. John 2021-03-06 11:52

    Cory—do you know anything about how he is structuring it? Is it like California where there are 2 separate questions or recall and for example the Lt Gov would just move up? Thank you.

  4. Bob Newland 2021-03-06 12:43

    John, as Cory said, the structure has not yet been determined. Why don’t you look Emmett up on FB and ask him?

  5. Emmett Reistroffer 2021-03-06 14:58

    Hello,
    Feel free to email me. I’m going to circulate draft language around with anyone interested, and we’ll make sure we get the language perfect before we begin gathering signatures.
    So far, the level of support I’m hearing for this is unlike any other initiative I’ve been part of. After the Argus article was published I’ve received at least 50 calls/messages from folks around the state who want to help.

    Emmett Reistroffer
    Emmett.reistroffer@gmail.com
    303-557-8184

  6. Richard Schriever 2021-03-06 16:43

    More whack-a(one party)-mole. If this is passed you can be sure the legislature and/or governor will “fix” the will of the people more to their liking – or just dump it. There are NO safeguards against them doing so. Learn – learn – learn – damnit!

  7. o 2021-03-06 17:56

    Is the point here timing? In November voters do not associate candidates with actions; in January, February, and March voters put candidates and their actions together?

  8. P Meyer 2021-03-07 12:04

    Accountability to the people… what a concept!!!!! All elected officials should show accountability, if they are out of line: Recall or censure are necessary. The “people” can make mistakes on decisions of who should be in the seat of governance, so they need to be able to pull up the reins of the wagon of governing and correct the issue if the individual is truly out of line. It seriously looks like a malfeasance of power on a ton of the decisions being made in SD these days. Preening ourselves for higher position?? Yes, very obvious, but at the expense of the State of South Dakota! Funding our ranch? Padding the fancy planes? What else is hidden in the closets of the state house? It’s time the people have the right to change the course of the state when needed.

  9. Cory Allen Heidelberger Post author | 2021-03-07 15:22

    Emmett! Well done on the publicity! That’s the way to rally volunteers!

  10. SD is 20 per cent nonwhite 2021-03-08 02:43

    The only thing more sad than the Republicans unwillingness to feel shame, grow a spine and resign, or move along with AG impeachment, is the sad majority of South Dakotans who want to live on the plantation and vote Republican and throw democracy and higher wages down the river.

    If the voters really feel connected to the crowd that invaded the Capitol and the racism that fuels them and T and the R party, it’s our duty simply to outnumber them in every election.

    It’s a fact that the United States is a great melting pot of many cultures. A person doesn’t like that, they will be outnumbered in elections. That’s what we do.

Comments are closed.