Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight
Paying ballot-question petition circulators would be prohibited in South Dakota by a bill the House State Affairs Committee approved Monday at the Capitol in Pierre.
Rep. Travis Ismay, R-Newell, introduced House Bill 1087 in response to several questions that appeared on the 2024 general election ballot with help from paid petition circulators.
“This bill that I am bringing honors the will of the people and not out-of-state interests,” Ismay said.
Petitioners in South Dakota need 17,508 signatures from registered voters to propose a law, which is known as an initiative, and the same number of signatures to put a bill passed by legislators on hold for consideration by voters, which is known as a referendum. The number of signatures required to propose a state constitutional amendment is 35,017.
Under Ismay’s bill, if a court determines a campaign compensated a petition circulator — with money or gifts — the petition would be declared invalid.
The bill passed with a 9-4 vote, which means it will go to the full House of Representatives.
Opponents said the bill would trigger a legal challenge if enacted and cost thousands of taxpayer dollars to defend. Opponents included the American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, South Dakota Advocacy Network for Women, and the South Dakota Education Association.
Rep. Tim Reisch, R-Howard, echoed their concerns.
“We’re not going to give our teachers a pay raise, we’re out of money, and we’re going to pass a bill that we know is going to cost the taxpayers millions of dollars,” Reisch said. “I’m going to be a ‘no’ on this.”
Rep. Spencer Gosch, R-Glenham, said the cost of potential legal battles would be worth the attempt to level the playing field, rather than allowing the ballot measure process to be a “money game.”
“I am limiting one person’s ability to have more speech over mine just because they have more money,” Gosch said. “That one individual could hire multiple entities because they can afford to do so. I could not. Therefore, my vote is less important than their vote.”
The committee also approved Senate Bill 5, which would require the state attorney general’s official ballot-question explanations to include whether a ballot question was placed on the ballot by legislators or by citizen petitioners.