Latest news with #RebeccaReimer
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
26-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Senate panel approves expanding hunting safety zones
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) — A bill seeking to expand the safety zone for hunting and trapping around private property passed through committee on Tuesday morning. In a vote of 4-3, the bill passed through the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources and now heads to the Senate floor, the Senate will be the bill's final stop in the legislature, if passed there the bill would then go to the Governor's desk for approval. House panel says no to McCook Lake fund House Bill 1236 would seek to expand the safety zone within which hunting and trapping are restricted. The bill would increase the safety zone from 660 feet to 1320 feet or a quarter mile from an occupied dwelling. The bill states that only the owner of an occupied dwelling, church, or schoolhouse or a person who has written permission from the owner of the occupied dwelling may use such highways or rights-of-way for the purposes of discharging any firearm or for the purposes of hunting within a one-quarter mile safety zone surrounding an occupied dwelling. Speaking in favor of the bill was prime sponsor of the bill, Republican Rep. Rebecca Reimer said the bill attempts to calm and ease and friction between hunters and landowners all while still honoring still honoring those hunting traditions that we pass from one generation to the next. 'Hunters must ensure not only their safety but that of their surroundings, whether it's other hunters, motorists, dwellings, neighbors, your children, livestock,' Reimer said. 'Land orders should Have a say of how far or how close a firearm is discharged from your home and this is an attempt to ease the tension between hunters and landowners while keeping a South Dakota tradition alive.' Meade County Sheriff Pat West said this bill is a necessary and responsible public safety measure. 'When the original 660 foot safety zone was established, it was based on the capabilities of firearms and ammunition of that time,' West said. 'However, advancements in weaponry and ammunition have far surpassed those early standards, increasing both range and accuracy. The current safety zone does not adequately account for the extended reach and power of modern firearms.' Speaking in opposition of the bill was the South Dakota Wildlife Federation and South Dakota Waterfowl Association. George Vandel said he is opposing the principles of physics and ballistics. 'Shotshell pellets can't do any damage beyond the 660 feet or at the 660 feet,' Vandel said. 'The current law is adequate in providing the safety of people and the proof I have in that is there's never been a documented case where it hasn't.' Also speaking in opposition was the Executive Director of the South Dakota Wildlife Federation, Dana Rogers, who said the issue isn't with the size of the zones it's a prosecution and enforcement issue. He added this bill only hurts those who follow the rules and does nothing to stop those who hunt illegally. 'Over the last 5 years, there were only 19 to 20 tickets on average issued annually statewide for illegal shooting inside an unmarked safety zone,' Rogers said. 'When signs were put up, well, it was marked specifically, the safety zones only had an average of 4 tickets a year statewide.' Republican Sen. Kevin D. Jensen said he thought the bill was just a little too far. 'You would effectively kill almost any road hunting in Minnehaha County and any road hunting in my entire district,' Jensen said.' I just think that 1,320 feet is way too far in because it is arbitrary, it has nothing to do with the shot fall range.' Republican Sen. Sydney Davis responded saying they need to balance the concerns of landowners, law enforcement, and livestock owners. 'To the concerns about hunting and availability, there are 1,400 landowners that have voluntarily allowed and enrolled their ground, 1.2 million private land acres into the Game, Fish, and Parks walk in access program,' Davis said. 'I think that's a sign that landowners want this hunting tradition should be preserved and they want to do it safely and with respect to their property.' Republican Senator Curt Voight said he thinks they need to extend those rights to protect those properties. 'We have 6 million acres of access for hunting, we have 6 county sheriff officers indicating that there is a problem,' Voight said.' Signage is a joke they tear it down or shoot at it repletely, the reason it's gone is because they are violating the intent of what that signage says.' Republican Sen. Tom Pischke said the bill was just very excessive 'I've hunted many times, I've had pellets fall on me. This is about balancing our privilege to hunt and fish and trap and public safety, but think of all of the other times we have that balance, we have it if we are driving in our car and yet look at how fast we can go,' Pischke said. 'I just have a hard time with this, I think it goes too far.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
