Press "Enter" to skip to content

More South Dakota Blogs Urge Veto of Senate Bill 69

So far the South Dakota Blogosphere votes 4–1 against Senate Bill 69, the petition reform bill that mutated into an attack on voting rights. Joining me in calling on Governor Dennis Daugaard to veto this bad piece of legislation are Libertarian Ken Santema:

…the SD Board of Elections should ask for the bill to be vetoed. Their name is on this bill. The bill was mutilated so badly during the legislative process that I cannot believe the board would still want to be associated with such a piece of legislation. It would be best at this time to ask for the Governor to veto the bill and come into the 2015 legislative session with a new set of bills ready to truly look at reforming the nominating petition process without inadvertently trying to restrict ballot access [link added; Ken Santema, “The SD Board of Elections Should Ask for SB 69 to Be Vetoed,” SoDakLiberty, 2015.03.17].

…Republican gadfly and 2014 Independent U.S. Senate candidate Gordon Howie:

Making it more difficult for Independent candidate serves the purpose of maintaining the Republican strangle-hold on South Dakota politics. SB 69 isn’t good for South Dakota. If you agree, contact the Governors office an urge him to veto this bad bill.

Eliminating Independent candidates is not good for South Dakota [Gordon Howie, “Eliminating Independent Candidates,” The Right Side, 2015.03.17].

…and (gulp!) Steve Sibson:

The SDGOP Establishment see a real threat when their liberal candidates win primaries and conservatives decide they want another option by going to an Independent candidate. I am sure Cory could care less about that reason for opposing SB 69. But I give him credit for being right on this issue.

…SB69 is designed to add more power to that “super majority”. But perhaps that huge road tax bill went too far and conservatives across South Dakota will wake up and see the true SDGOP [Steve Sibson, “SDGOP Establishment Passed SB69 in Order to Reduce Election Year Competition and Maintain Their Taxandspendican Party’s Tyranny,” Sibby Online, 2015.03.17].

The only blogospheric cheering for SB 69 so far has come from the online tool of that SDGOP Establishment, Pat Powers, whose support is based on an incorrect reading of the bill.

The South Dakota Blogosphere represents folks who pay extra attention to voting rights and ballot access. If such attentive observers are 4–1 against Senate Bill 69, and that opposition is coming from such diverse ideological corners, perhaps there really is something vetoably wrong with Senate Bill 69.


  1. Steve Hickey 2015-03-17 10:33

    My opinion only… this session was a cheat and change the rules to win session. Our congressional delegates are my friends but these bills are thunk up in the inner circles of those who plan our next congressional races. There isn’t a chance the governor will veto this bill. Certainly there is a way for a supermajority to steward the privilege of power granted them by voters without cutting off the participation of other sectors of the electorate.

  2. Lynn 2015-03-17 11:02

    Rep. Hickey,

    I sent you an e-mail to your legislative e-mail address and it may have reached you too late since it was that last Thursday of Friday of this years session but would like to thank you for your votes and stances during this past legislative session.

  3. caheidelberger Post author | 2015-03-17 11:31

    Rep. Hickey, the way to win elections is to offer superior ideas and service and campaign harder and smarter than anyone else. Anything else (like incumbents rigging the law in their favor) is a cheat.

  4. Les 2015-03-17 12:15

    Without money, you will not win any competitive legis race in SD, Cory. Steve is right, however I feel the way will come as a backlash if DD signs this bill. I for one will work to unseat all who’ve supported this bill regardless of party.

  5. Ken Santema 2015-03-17 14:08

    I was very disappointed that it passed after the motion to reconsider. It is hard not to agree with Rep Hickey’s assessment of the session.

  6. leslie 2015-03-17 16:07

    les-“regardless of party”??? come on, are there dems that supported this bad litany of voter restriction-type SDGOP bills? “Without money….” Sounds like you support SCOTUS’ Citizens United ect.

    I appreciate your comments here, and hope you will start mobilizing your banking friends to financially support DEM state and national candidates. I might say: “Without ethics…” SDGOP should not win any more races, competitive or not.

    support backlash of the middle class in SD. Ask Regently retired Warner if he’ll help since he prolly believes he ain’t gonna be held accountable for nuttin’ he did to slow up joop, rounds (who you voted for), daugaard (who i’m guessin’ you voted fer…) and the ever” annoyed” Jackley who, with all these unresolved investigations by FBI types, RICO – type shenanigans , … and (who I’m guessin’ meybe u voted fer too…!)

    sorry to slip into lower class banter around you. i know it “annoys” you too! :)

  7. leslie 2015-03-17 16:39

    “5 ways GOP’s Obstruction is Unprecedented”, 3.15.2015,

  8. leslie 2015-03-17 17:05

    the 5 ways are now 7:( as of july 12, 2013. I propose updating the new no. 1&7)

    1. SD SB 69-unprecedented, orchestrated nation-wide state legislators slashing voter protection

    2. mitch mcconnell’s abuse of filibuster

    3. sabotage of ACA

    4. inflicting pain on poor w/ sequestration

    5. veto of Eliz. Warren’s Consumer Financial Protection Commission under Dodds/Frank

    6. destroy National Labor Relations Board

    7. and of course today’s twice in one week, racist GOP ploy to undercut Obama’s Israel and Iran foreign relations efforts, courtesy of John Beohner, Mitch Mcconnell and stooge Cotton.

  9. mike from iowa 2015-03-17 17:51

    Wingnuts new federal budget gimmick is the same as the last one. They plan to increase military spending above what Obama wants by going off budget for OCO funding(overseas contingency operations) and ignore sequestration for defense. They pay for it by cutting social programs above and beyond sequestration levels. OCO is the program dumbass dubya set up to wage wars off budget.

  10. Les 2015-03-17 18:12

    Moon still out of phase for you, Jana?

  11. Jana 2015-03-17 19:33

    Can’t tell Les, it’s cloudy here;-}

  12. leslie 2015-03-17 20:18

    typical, les.

    mercer calls the bill a mushy mess, says SOS krebs was behind it, but the placeholder provision doesn’t hurt anybody. hmmmm

  13. caheidelberger Post author | 2015-03-18 13:33

    Make that 4.5: The Displaced Plainsman says SB 69 shows the Republicans are afraid:

    I am old enough to remember Republican leaders at a national level proclaiming their trust in the American voters. Apparently South Dakota Republicans don’t have the same trust in the South Dakota electorate. They certainly don’t seem to want to allow them any choices but those with an “R” behind their name on the ballot. I suppose if a party has no ideas and harbors a distrust of voters, it ought to be fearful [Leo Kallis, “Lessons from the 2015 Legislature: South Dakota Republicans Are Afraid,” The Displaced Plainsman, 2015.03.18].

  14. Les 2015-03-19 09:45

    The SD GOP is not scared of any Dems. It’s the Indies coming from both parties they are scared of. It ain’t you babe, no no no it ain’t you babe it ain’t you they’re looking for.

    Sorry, Bob. Jus had to twist it a bit.

  15. mike from iowa 2015-03-19 10:16

    Might not be the party so much as wanting to please their fathers-Chuck and Dave koch bros. Afterall it is korporate funds that keep them in k-power.

  16. Kim Wright 2015-03-22 11:38

    At the first RC Crackerbarrel, Brian Gosch had the audacity to wonder aloud just how much the Republicans could get done with such a majority. This is their serious attempt to completely control ALL democratic processes in the state. This unconstitutional legislation impacts ALL voters! Speak up South Dakotans…..

  17. caheidelberger Post author | 2015-03-22 13:27

    Hey, Kim! Speaking of speaking up, do you have any Independents and other neighbors out there who would like to refer SB 69 to a public vote? What’s the sentiment among your friends?

  18. Les 2015-03-22 14:03

    It’s not just Indies and other neighbors wanting 69 reefered Cory. Burn it. Any GOP I’ve spoken too, myself included want it gone.

  19. Alex 2015-03-25 16:31

    Refer both of them—

    R Party is afraid of Independents and Democrats running against them, it should be first Tuesday in June, but repealing 69 will be great!

    R wants to be the Low Wage Party. South Dakota is a State, not a Plantation! 77 should be repealed! The people spoke, the Legislature and Gov should respect whatever decisions the people make!

    Let’s get ready to sign 2 different Ref petitions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.