RV voters, your disenfrachisement radar should be tingling. Secretary of State Monae Johnson, who won her position by promising Republicans she would disenfranchise long-term RV travelers who register to vote in South Dakota, has asked the Legislature for Senate Bill 17, an emergency-claused bill that tinkers with restrictions on voter registration that she pushed last year.
Recall that last year, the Legislature passed 2023 Senate Bill 139, which imposed an unconstitutional requirement that individuals live in South Dakota for 30 days before they can exercise their right to vote. No one has challenged that law yet, perhaps because no RV voter has been denied the chance to vote in a Presidential primary or election yet. But with South Dakota’s primary coming up in June, Secretary Johnson wants Senate Bill 17 to clarify the residency requirement.
The existing requirement in SDCL 12-4-1, as rewritten by last year’s bill, just says you can’t register to vote unless you’ve “maintain[ed] residence… within the state for at least thirty days prior to submitting the registration form….” SB 17 amends that requirement to “at least thirty days in the three hundred and sixty-five days immediately prior to submitting the registration form….”
There are two ways to read this amendment. If county auditors have been interpreting the 30-day requirement to mean 30 consecutive days immediately prior to registering to vote, then SB 17 is cutting RV voters some slack, saying that as long as they can look back over the past 365 days and identify a week in April, two weeks in August, and another nine days around Thanksgiving when they camped in South Dakota, they’re good to register and vote.
However, if county auditors have not been reading any timing requirement into that statute and treating “prior” as meaning “any time in the past”, then SB 17 tightens the residency requirement, saying RVers can’t count toward voting residency the ten years they lived in a house in Piedmont until 2021, when they decided to sell the place and live on the road. RVers would have to re-establish physical residency in the state every year.
SB 17 also includes a retroactivity clause, applying this new residency standard immediately to any person who has registered to vote since July 1, 2023, when the 30-day residency requirement kicked in.
RVers, call your lawyers, and get them to tell you whether South Dakota is trying to make it easier or harder for you to exercise your freedom in our fair state.
Should 700,000 RVers from California trmporarily domicile in South Dakota to vote on South Dakota public ballot initiatives, and then jet back to warmer climates after the polls close, never to be seen again for 2 yrs?
Probably not.
The Supeme Court has already ruled that “States” cannot restrict an American’s voting rights to any # of days related to Residence. I disagreed last year, and I will disagree this year. The SUPREME COURT has said, an American has the right to freely move around, under the Right to Travel, residing in 50 States at one time. the S.D Law has not been challenged as of yet, cause it has not become an issue, mostly cause you can full register up to 30 days prior any State, County, School, or Local Election. I would recommend that we cut off registrations 30 days prior an election, rather than 10 days prior an election, this would give the Secretary of State and the 66 County Auditors ample time to vet, and assess the “Voter Registrations (rolls) checking to make sure that none of our Domiciled Citizens are on registration rolls of Foreign States, Territories, and Countries, which would keep them from voting twice.
There are other things we can do to “TIE” people to the rules of DOMICILE, and we can sue other States for not following the Constitution.
It’s important to remember the residents of North America, Central America and South America are Americans.
Careful what you wish for, Zitterich. In the Midwest the Latino community has grown 28 percent in the last decade and in the Southwest it’s grown nearly 20 percent. Venezuelans make up the largest inbound demographic. According to United Van Lines twice as many people are fleeing South Dakota for jobs than entering.
https://www.unitedvanlines.com/newsroom/movers-study-2023
Humans are a migratory species. They move around till they find a place they like, or at least can tolerate. It’s true for every human being. You might, if you’re inclined to, think that it is our God-given right to move around. To hell with borders. They are just imaginary lines drawn by the elitist who think they rule over the rest of us.
Larry,
What if Someone “Challenged” South Dakota’s 30 Day Residency Requirement imposed on people blocking them from Registering to Vote in South Dakota?
This is deemed an Unconstitutional “Rule” as per the Supreme Court. But until someone challenges the rule, it will remain in effect.
In Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330 (1972) – the court ruled against the Tennessee law that required a newly placed resident of the state to establish 1 year, 3 month residency prior to a state or local election.
“States” cannot keep anyone from registering to vote at any time.
Residency is not the same as Domicile – Domicile is where you 100% make a specific “State” the State of Public Record, placing yourself in
the Political Subdivision as a Full-Time Resident.
This means, you can have 50 State Residencies, and may never live in S.D at any point of the year, but because you ‘act’ as a S.D Domiciled Citizen – meaning:
a) All Your Vehicles are Placed inside South Dakota (plating),
b) ALL Your Gross income is held inside South Dakota at a State Bank, Credit Union, or any Savings and Loan Bank in the State;
c) “YOU” Join a Campground Association, Rent an Apartment, or Own a Home, inside South Dakota;
d) You are a full time member of a Church, Housing Association, Business Organization, Association, etc inside S.D
e) You Purchase your Health, Life, and Hold Retirement Trusts inside South Dakota,
ALL THESE THINGS ARE EXAMPLES OF MEANS OF PLACING YOUR DOMICILE 100% inside the Political Subdivision of the State.
The “State” cannot restrict voter registerations to any # of days, so long as the “person” has done the other things.
This is the minimum requirement is twenty-four hours – by means of BIRTH, or PROOF OF RESIDENCE (campground, apartment, house)
I would recommend that we instead move to cut off “voter registrations” at 30 days PRIOR any State, County, School, or City Elections …
By cutting registrations off at 30 days prior all elections, it gives the Secretary of State and County Auditors ample time to go through the voter registrations, and audit them, thus comparing them against other “States” Voter Rolls…
I would also recommend that “we” adopt a law that mandates that ALL VOTERS of the State list on public record ALL “State Residencies” making it public record to keep track of where our Domiciled Citizens are residing at any point of the 365 day calendar year.
Larry,
ALSO remember, since I am a DOMICILED CITIZEN of SOUTH DAKOTA – I do NOT owe any direct tax aka Sales Tax, Land Tax, Income Tax to any “State” but to South Dakota. Legally, and lawfully, if I stand on my rights, I can exempt myself from ALL DIRECT PROPERTY taxes from any ‘state’ I reside in, unless of course, I agree by contract, to hold Land in another State, I may then be subject to the direct tax.
This means, I can ‘earn a gross income’ in any of the 50 States, but cause I act as a S.D CITIZEN< keeping my income held in a S.D TRUST, the income is exempt from that income tax of another "State" or the District of Columbia.
AS I travel across the 50 States, I can legally exempt myself from Sales Taxes, thus remitting those transactions to South Dakota D.O.R electing to contribute to MY STATE roads, infrastructure, programs, services, etc. IT is my sovereign right to 'act' as a S.D CITIZEN.
Prove it, Zhit.
Jon Schaff helped to create the voter distrust and disgust in South Dakota and now he wants to heal it?
https://www.sdnewswatch.org/poll-south-dakota-elections-democracy-biden-trump-presidential-results/
Oh, and Zitterich? That’s Dr. Kurtz to you.
Do we really think 700,000 RVers from California care enough to vote in SD politics? Probably not. And LOL at that number. They want cheap MV taxes. They don’t care what our government does otherwise. Just think though – if there really were 700,000 of them voting – they could really make change around here.
None of the countries that have national voter registration and ranked choice have any of these (or gerrymandering) issues. You an American? You get to vote, in one election. One change, 50 fixes.
Let’s add some undue burdens, the kinds magats llike to place on pregnant and child bearing age girls/women. 30 days consecutive residency with no weekends or holidays counted. If you can’t live 30 days consecutively you have to start over.
Next magats and r-vers must listen to 72 straight hours of Noem and Lewdandlusty passionate rutting sounds backed by drumpf’s speechifyting.
That should do it.
South Dakota’s form wants proof of residency per the voter registration form. “For the purposes of this title (Title 12), the term, residence, means the place in which a person is domiciled as shown by an actual fixed permanent dwelling, establishment, or any other abode to which the person returns after a period of absence.”
“A person is considered to have gained residence in any county or municipality of this state in which the person actually lives, if the person has no present intention of leaving.”
In the winter, around mid-January, literally 99% of the people intend on leaving… :)
Our state’s maga elected officials are too smooth-brained to see how this is a blatant admission that nobody likes them and they cannot let an actual (informed) majority decide elections. They must have high school flashbacks of when they only got one vote in the popularity contest. This seems like their retribution.
NO S.D DOMICILED CITIZEN intends to leave South Dakota from October, November, January, February, March. And just cause they go don South, to Florida, Texas, Arizona, or California during those months, does NOT mean they surrender their DOMICILE. They have NO RIGHT to vote in those other states, so they must make plans to request a ABSENTEE BALLOT if they are out of the state. FACT.
Besides, I am in the process of organizing the People of the Counties, seeking 1 Precinct Person Per each of the 66 Counties to join me on my questhttps://www.siouxfallscommunitychronicle.com/we-the-people-sd
What Laughing Cow said.
Mikey Lee, we’ll see you on the other side of your failure to organize the People of the Counties, seeking 1 Precinct Person Per each of the 66 Counties to join me on my questhttps://www.siouxfallscommunitychronicle.com/we-the-people-sd. We hope this quest will not distract you from your primary job of posting stupid s**t to DFP.
bob neland,
I cannot be bothered by your silly racist arguments, you are just a loud mouth democrat name caller. there is a reason people of S.D hate democrats.
What Bob Neland said.
Mikey Lee, I am interested in your use of the term “racist.” I suggest that it’s a product of your use of Adderall.
Zit, i don’t think Bob is a Democrat, so, carry on, i suppose. I believe however, he is a REAL west river cowboy.
Ms. leslie is righter-than-right on both accounts. Mr. Zitterich, pay attention! grudznick’s good friend Bob is usually a Libertarian, has run for the General Attorney and maybe for Governor or some other slot, and he was once a REAL west river cowboy. Took some pictures to prove it.
So Mr. Zitterich, tighten up your spectrum, sir. Eat breakfast with grudznick and Bob, and we’ll sort you out right.
H.J.Res.37 – Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide that Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the number of persons in each State who are citizens of the United States.
IF RATIFIED, States like California lose 7 districts as they only be able to count LEGAL NATURAL BORN CITIZENS.
Naturalized Citizens cannot be counted in population numbers, neither can Illegal Immigrants. Minnesota and California have been inflating their numbers for years.
https://apnews.com/article/lukeville-arizona-border-crossing-reopens-d6921b6d157952036c65e38ba4aac43d
I wonder if Mike Zitterich, would also like the Constitution to be amended to exclude counting “Illegal Christians” and “Illegal Republicans?” There are a whole lot of Christians and Republicans that have been accused (and even sometimes, but not always, convicted) of violating some law or administrative rule, and these folks certainly shouldn’t be counted, as they too fit squarely within that definition of an “Illegal person” and consequently don’t deserve to be treated as human beings, right? Probably should exclude other “Illegal” humans, regardless of party affiliation, as there seem to be a whole lot of “Illegal humans” around. And how about “Illegal ex-presidents?” “Illegal Christians” and “Illegal Republicans” have been inflating population numbers of red states for years!