Latest news with #HB1169
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Some South Dakota lawmakers want to subject ballot questions to a tyranny of the minority
State Rep. Rebecca Reimer, R-Chamberlain, speaks on the South Dakota House floor on March 6, 2025. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight) Getting an initiated constitutional amendment on the ballot in South Dakota is plenty tough for citizens. House Bill 1169 would have made it almost impossible. HB 1169 required that signatures representing 5% of the votes cast for governor in the most recent election be collected from each of the state's 35 Senate districts to get an initiated constitutional amendment on the ballot. Current law calls for collecting signatures totaling 10% of the votes cast for governor in the last election. Those signatures can come from anywhere in the state. HB 1169 would have been something of a jobs program for accountants. Not only would petition carriers have needed to figure out 5% of the votes cast for governor in each Senate district, but they would also have had to make sure that their overall total of signatures equaled 10% of the vote total for governor. The good news about HB 1169 is that it was vetoed by Gov. Larry Rhoden. In his veto message to the Legislature, Rhoden said he feared that the geographic requirement for the collection of signatures would be workable only for big-money groups that have the resources to canvass the entire state. Legislature sustains veto of geographic signature requirement for constitutional amendment petitions To override a veto, a two-thirds vote is needed in both chambers in the Legislature. That's 24 votes in the 35-member Senate and 47 votes in the 70-member House. Fortunately, the Senate vote of 16-16 was not enough to override the veto. The governor's veto stands, and that's the good news. However, there's plenty of bad news to go around. Part of the bad news is the wide-ranging support that such an onerous change had in the Legislature. Bills with such success are usually destined to become law. HB 1169 flew through the House State Affairs Committee on a vote of 10-1 and through the House on a vote of 60-9. In the Senate State Affairs Committee, it fared just as well, earning passage on a 7-1 vote. It was only in the Senate where the bill met some resistance, but still passed, 19-15. There was more bad news on the last day of the legislative session as the House voted 50-18 to override the veto. Fortunately, both chambers need to override the veto for the bill to become law. Clearly, HB 1169 has plenty of backers in the Legislature. The bill's main sponsor, Rep. Rebecca Reimer, a Chamberlain Republican, recognizes that and said in a South Dakota Searchlight story that she would work on the language in the legislation and bring it back next year. In her testimony to the House State Affairs Committee, Reimer said passage of HB 1169 would ensure that rural voices are heard rather than letting petitioners set up shop in only Rapid City or Sioux Falls to collect signatures. She said the bill 'ensures fairness, strengthens voter representation, protects the integrity of our constitutional amendment process.' Maybe that's one way to describe the bill. Another would be to say that it's a cynical, bordering on sinister, attempt to cut citizens out of the initiated amendment process. This isn't the Legislature's only accomplishment when it came to making it tougher for citizens to get their measures on the ballot. Already the subject of a lawsuit, legislators endorsed a bill that would cut the amount of time for gathering signatures by three months. Another measure they placed on the 2026 ballot would raise the threshold for approving a constitutional amendment to 60% rather than relying on a simple majority of voters. It's easier for lawmakers to get something on the ballot. They only have to convince a majority of their colleagues. If you're not lucky enough to be in the Legislature, you have to collect 17,508 signatures for an initiated measure or referred law, or 35,017 signatures for an initiated constitutional amendment. The bill that was so popular with lawmakers didn't take into consideration the eccentric nature of legislative districts, the borders of which can veer off in odd directions. It would take a cavalry scout and a GPS for petitioners to figure out if they're collecting their signatures in the right Senate district. If one legislative district is stingy with its signatures, the entire effort fails. The state Supreme Court in Idaho struck down a similar law, saying it amounted to giving each legislative district veto power and calling it 'tyranny of the minority.' If Reimer has her way, that tyranny will make its way back to the Legislature in the next legislative session. Here's hoping the governor has his veto pen ready. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Washington state Democrats want to tax online dating apps
Finding love in Washington state could come with a price. A bill proposed by two state Democratic lawmakers would impose a tax on dating apps. Under the terms of House Bill 2071, dating app companies would be required to pay $1 per Washington-based user each month, regardless of whether the user pays for the service. Users with inactive accounts for at least 24 months would be excluded. The money would be used to fund domestic violence programs. How To Not Fall In Love With Ai-powered Romance Scammers The money would be put into the newly created state Domestic Violence Services Account, which funds programs and support services for victims. Read On The Fox News App Fox News Digital reached out to the offices of state representatives Lauren Davis and Shaun Scott, both Democrats, who are behind the legislation. Fox News Digital also reached out to several dating app companies for reaction. "Online dating companies can determine how to absorb the cost," Davis told Fox News Digital. "They could simply cut it out of their profits, or increase the fees for paid users by $1/month or possibly begin charging for free users (though the latter is probably less likely)." The bill targets dating apps like Hinge, Bumble and Tinder. The legislation had its first reading Tuesday and has been referred to the state House Finance Committee. Stop These V-day Scams Before They Break Your Heart And Your Bank Account Funding for domestic violence programs is necessary after lawmakers in 2023 passed HB 1169, which removed the Crime Victim Penalty, which was paid for by those convicted of crimes. The CVP provided the primary funding for victim advocates who work in prosecutors' offices, Davis said. "When HB 1169 was passed, the state made a commitment to backfill the funding loss from the CVP with general fund state (GFS) dollars," she said. "Unfortunately, the state has not kept this commitment. Prosecutors' offices across the state have been forced to lay off victim advocates, and scores of victims are no longer receiving victim advocacy services." Davis explained that her bill is intended to replace the missing funds. She further criticized Washington's legal system, calling it "a nightmare for victims." "The system is designed for the protection of defendants, not victims," she said. "I cannot fathom how I would've ever navigated the system successfully without a victim advocate, and I am rightly horrified that similarly situated victims will no longer receive help. "The purpose of this tax proposal is to keep the state's promise to crime victims and not defund victims services," she added. "Though a nexus is not required for a tax as it is for a fee, there is a reasonable nexus between online dating apps and domestic violence."Original article source: Washington state Democrats want to tax online dating apps
Fox News
09-04-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
Washington state Democrats want to tax online dating apps
Finding love in Washington state could come with a price. A bill proposed by two state Democratic lawmakers would impose a tax on dating apps. Under the terms of House Bill 2071, dating app companies would be required to pay $1 per Washington-based user each month, regardless of whether the user pays for the service. The money would be used to fund domestic violence programs. The money would be put into the newly created state Domestic Violence Services Account, which funds intervention programs and support services for victims. The only users excluded are those with inactive accounts for at least 24 months. Fox News Digital reached out to the offices of state representatives Lauren Davis and Shaun Scott, both Democrats, who are behind the legislation. Fox News Digital also reached out to several dating app companies for reaction. "Online dating companies can determine how to absorb the cost," Davis told Fox News Digital. "They could simply cut it out of their profits, or increase the fees for paid users by $1/month or possibly begin charging for free users (though the latter is probably less likely)." The bill targets dating apps like Hinge, Bumble and Tinder. The legislation had its first reading Tuesday and has been referred to the state House Finance Committee. Funding for domestic violence programs is necessary after lawmakers in 2023 passed HB 1169, which removed the Crime Victim Penalty, which was paid for by those convicted of crimes. The CVP provided the primary funding for victim advocates who work in prosecutors' offices, Davis said. "When HB 1169 was passed, the state made a commitment to backfill the funding loss from the CVP with general fund state (GFS) dollars," she said. "Unfortunately, the state has not kept this commitment. Prosecutors' offices across the state have been forced to lay off victim advocates, and scores of victims are no longer receiving victim advocacy services." Davis explained that her bill is intended to replace the missing funds. She further criticized Washington's legal system, calling it "a nightmare for victims." "The system is designed for the protection of defendants, not victims," she said. "I cannot fathom how I would've ever navigated the system successfully without a victim advocate, and I am rightly horrified that similarly situated victims will no longer receive help. "The purpose of this tax proposal is to keep the state's promise to crime victims and not defund victims services," she added. "Though a nexus is not required for a tax as it is for a fee, there is a reasonable nexus between online dating apps and domestic violence."
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Swiping left or right on adating app could soon cost money with new tax
This story was originally published on Whether you swipe left or right as you're looking for the love of your life on your phone, one state lawmaker is introducing a new bill to tax online dating companies, and it would be up to those companies to decide whether to pass the tax onto customers. Rep. Lauren Davis, D-Shoreline, introduced House Bill 2071 on Tuesday, which would require dating app companies like Tinder, Bumble, and others to pay the $1 excise tax per every user in Washington per month. The tax would not apply to users who have accounts, but have not accessed those accounts for 24 months. Davis said she is looking for a way to fund services for domestic violence victims, intervention treatment, and perpetrator treatment. 'Domestic violence (DV) perpetrators as a group are extremely dangerous and they are responsible for an untold share of community violence, not just against their intimate partners, but more broadly,' Davis said. 'Having a DV conviction is the No. 1 predictor of recidivism, the No. 1 predictor of violent crime. These individuals are the folks who are most likely to kill a law enforcement officer.' Davis, who was a victim of domestic violence, shared her own story during a House Community Safety, Justice, and Reentry Committee meeting at the State Capitol in 2023. 'In the summer of 2021, I ended a tumultuous relationship that was defined by a pattern of severe psychological abuse and course of control,' Davis testified. 'When I had broken up with him previously, my abuser would threaten my career or threaten to kill himself in order to get me back. The day I left for good, he used his body to block my exit so I couldn't leave his house. I was able to break free and I never looked back.' Tuesday, Davis told KIRO Newsradio her bill is a response to the state's failure to make good on a promise to fund services after the House passed HB 1169 to eliminate the Crime Victims Penalty without backfilling lost funding. 'The State has massively defunded victims' services that operate out of prosecutors' offices specifically and help victims navigate our impossible legal system, which is entirely focused on the needs, wants, wishes, rights, and protections of criminal defendants and not victims,' Davis said. KIRO Newsradio reached out to several online dating services, who have yet to respond at the time of publishing. Follow Luke Duecy on X. Submit news tips here.
Yahoo
25-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Rhoden vetoes petition signature bill
SIOUX FALLS S.D. (KELO) — A bill changing how groups gather signatures for ballot measures has been vetoed by Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden Tuesday. State Supreme Court hears NOPE case Tuesday In a news release, Rhoden announced he signed 20 election-related bills while also vetoing one, House Bill 1169. HB1169 requires ballot measure petitions to receive at least 5% of signatures from each of the 35 senate districts based on the last gubernatorial election turnout. Last week, KELOLAND News highlighted two voter advocacy groups that said HB1169 would make South Dakota home to the most extreme geographic petition signature requirements in the country. Under current laws, to get an initiated measure on the ballot, a petition needs signatures equal to 10% of the vote cast in the last gubernatorial election for the entire state. 'We would go from having no geographic distribution requirement to the worst in the country,' Matthew Schweich, with the Voter Defense Association of South Dakota, said last week. 'Just one state senate district, if they don't like an initiative, could choose not to sign it and block it, even if the entirety of South Dakota wanted an opportunity to vote on that constitutional amendment,' Schweich noted. 'This bill has a worthy goal: placing safeguards on the process to add constitutional amendments to the ballot in South Dakota, however, I am concerned that this bill will not withstand scrutiny in the courts,' Rhoden said in his letter issuing the veto. 'This bill attempts to change the South Dakota Constitution in statute, and I believe that approach to be misguided.' 03-25-2025_HB-1169-VETO-LetterDownload There was another issue with HB1169, on how to enforce the 5% per Senate district. Currently, the South Dakota Secretary of State office doesn't report election results from the 35 districts, only by county and precinct. Because they don't release that information, people won't know how many signatures they need to collect to reach 5%. Minnehaha County Auditor: 'New territory' with new election laws Rhoden has signed 177 bills and issued two vetoes this legislative session. Here's the list of the 20 election-related bills signed into law: SB 68 requires an individual be a citizen of the United States before being eligible to vote and to provides a penalty therefor. SB 73 requires that an individual registering as a voter when applying for a driver license be a resident of this state for the purposes of voting. SB 75 requires an indication of United States citizenship status on a motor vehicle operator's license or permit, and on a nondriver identification card. SB 89 repeals the requirement that judicial officers be listed on a separate nonpolitical ballot. SB 91 revises the requirements for a petition to initiate a measure or constitutional amendment or to refer a law. SB 92 requires that the director of the Legislative Research Council and the secretary of state review an initiated measure and determine if the measure embraces more than one subject. SB 106 requires an individual be registered as a voter of this state before being eligible to be a petition sponsor for a ballot measure. SB 164 prohibits the use of a deepfake to influence an election and provides a penalty therefor. SB 173 revises the process by which a recount may be requested. SB 185 amends provisions pertaining to the process by which the qualifications of a registered voter are verified. HB 1062 amends provisions pertaining to the maintenance and publication of the statewide voter registration file. HB 1066 revises residency requirements for the purposes of voter registration. HB 1126 modifies provisions pertaining to the compensation of a recount board. HB 1127 requires that notice of a county's canvass, post-election audit, and testing of automatic tabulating equipment be posted to the secretary of state's website. HB 1130 provides permissible dates for municipal and school district elections. HB 1164 revises the process for nominating candidates for lieutenant governor. HB 1184 amends the deadline for filing a petition to initiate a measure or constitutional amendment. HB 1208 designates an individual using the address of a mail forwarding service or post office box when applying to register as a voter or vote by absentee ballot as a federal voter. HB 1256 requires the inclusion of certain information on a candidate's nominating petition or on a ballot question petition. HB 1264 requires the disclosure of an outstanding loan balance on a campaign finance disclosure report. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
