Also on deck for Senate State Affairs Wednesday morning is Senate Bill 139, rookie Senator Randy Deibert‘s (R-31/Spearfish) swing at the RV-voter piñata.
Deibert proposes two changes that would make it harder to vote in South Dakota. First, Deibert proposes to change South Dakota’s devilishly vague definition of voting residence from “the place in which a person has fixed his or her habitation” to “the place in which a person is domiciled as shown by an actual fixed permanent dwelling, establishment, or any other abode….”
Define voting residence around an actual habitable domicile, and tens of thousands of RVers registered to vote at various mail-forwarding offices in South Dakota, including the South Dakota Residency Center operating at the KOA in Senator Deibert’s own town of Spearfish, go poof! from South Dakota’s voting rolls.
Deibert’s second significant change would require new voters satisfy his domicilized definition of residency for 30 consecutive days before being able to register to vote. Add the fact that South Dakota does not allow same-day registration and instead allows voters to cast ballots only if they are registered 15 days before an election, and SB 139 would prevent anyone who moves to South Dakota within 45 days of an election from voting in that election. That restriction on newcomers’ participation in South Dakota democracy seems to contradict Deibert’s party’s enthusiasm for getting people to move to South Dakota for the Freedom™, and we all know that freedom delayed is freedom denied….
The nationwide RV community is getting heated up about two other bills, HB 1232 and SB 124, that would disenfranchise full-time travelers who claim residency at South Dakota’s mailbox services. But SB 139 is the first attack on RV-voter rights to get a committee hearing. Expect lots of out-of-state testimony from “South Dakota” voters.
Republicans keep openly admitting no one likes them. They basically have to win elections by default since they won’t let people vote.
These “RV’ers” may and should be required to (as all of us stationary citizens are), to pay more than an RV license fee, and a little sales tax and fuel tax on their way thru enjoying their lifestyle-before being able to vote in our elections. They have no other ties to our state’s presence other than this convenience and they can easily with their app. 45000 votes sway how the rest of us 800,000 people have to live as they gallivant into the sunset after screwing up our state.
I am all in favor of tightening restrictions on these nomad voters and hope these proposed laws are sign by our governess.
His bill also seems to deny the franchise to those who live in mobile homes or certain types of manufactured homes (they have wheels) as they are not “a fixed permanent dwelling.” That many of these are never moved or are unable to move does not change their mobile nature at manufacture
Homeless South Dakotans have no “actual fixed permanent dwelling, establishment, or any other abode….” So is this proposal designed to disenfranchise the State’s homeless population?
And why wouldn’t “any other abode” cover RVs and other mobile living quarters that one calls home, even temporarily as long as it was at least for “30 consecutive days?” According Merriam Webster the term “abode” is defined as:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abode#:~:text=%3A%20the%20place%20where%20one%20lives%20%3A%20home
Just to clarify, it appears that reasonable interpretations of the phrase: “domiciled as shown by an actual fixed permanent dwelling, establishment, or any other abode” would include:
Another reasonable interpretation could be:
Either of these interpretations would address Michael Card’s legitimate concern.
This part of the last section has me a bit concerned:
(3) Has maintained residence at the address provided on the registration form for at least the thirty days immediately prior to submitting the registration form;
NO. The important part of this is maintaining a residency before VOTING, not REGISTERING to vote. This will disenfranchise people, unless the state will register people at the polls at every election.
SB139 is ridiculous. First, it’s on ongoing lie that full time military and federal officers stationed out of state “plan to return to” their Mom’s basement. Yet, most deployed young folks depart the state leaving a home of record as their parents address. It’s a place order – for the morons in Pierre.
Second, SB139 fails considering the potential lose of revenue from disenfranchised RVers who will take their registrations, licensing to other states.
Third, SB139 fails considering the lose of “tourism” revenue from disenfranchising RVers who suddenly have less motivation to spend time in South Dakota.
The rookie ought give his constituents more substance than erecting voting restrictions.
John, military and foreign-based nationals are handled through federal law. Whatever the state decides on this will not apply to them. My kid has voted in South Dakota for the nearly two decades she’s lived overseas
https://www.justice.gov/crt/uniformed-and-overseas-citizens-absentee-voting-act
This is an idea worth some consideration. South Dakota has a LOT of RINOs – Residents in Name Only. They pass through for a couple days, get a mail forwarding address, change their driver’s license and voter registration, then take off for greener pastures. They do so primarily to benefit from the lack of a state income tax and cheap vehicle licensing, and those are the only things they really care about when they vote. Property tax, sales tax, education, crime, roads, and pretty much every other government function don’t affect them and are off their radar. We have a whole industry built around this practice, and it can significantly skew the voting population of a legislative district (e.g. District 35) where these businesses are located. https://americasmailbox.com/sd_residency
He obviously didn’t like the movie. Deibert is mad at Nomadland. He doesn’t like gypsies either, or Democrats, or LGBTQ’s, or Native American’s , Black’s, Hispanic’s. The last sentence is just speculation but he just wants mirror images to vote. Spearfish is dependant on all those tourists so he loves their money but otherwise, not so much.
These folks are likely Republican voters or Democrat in the same percentage as South Dakota as a whole. I’m not sure what percentage of the Nomads actually vote, probably just a few in state elections and more in federal..I guess we have no way of knowing . It is hard to discern what the Republicans are upset about other than they have a new found proclivity to reduce the voters roles…friend or foe.
Republicans erecting More voting restrictions!
Maybe this is the only Erection they are capable of?