Vote YES on Amendment L
Updated: Oct 10
Lately, voters have been asking me how to vote on Constitutional Amendment L. The title of the Amendment to the South Dakota Constitution is that a proposed constitutional amendment receives an affirmative vote of 60% of the votes cast.
Let’s look at what happened two years ago, when South Dakotans voted on Amendment G, funded by out-of-state money. Amendment G appeared on the November 5, 2024, ballot as an initiated constitutional amendment led by Rick Weiland and the Dakotans for Health Political Action Committee (PAC). It sought to add a new section to Article VI of the South Dakota Constitution establishing a right to abortion and defining how the state could regulate abortion across pregnancy trimesters. The measure was defeated, preserving South Dakota’s near‑total abortion ban.
Illinois Democratic Governor JB Pritzker’s Thinking Big America PAC donated $790,000 to Weiland’s Dakotans for Health Political Action Committee. See here: https://sdcfr.sdsos.gov/Document.aspx?DocumentID=6379&type=img
Moreover, you can see how many out-of-state people donated to the Yes on G Campaign here: https://sdcfr.sdsos.gov/Document.aspx?DocumentID=6441&type=img
Thankfully, South Dakotans voted down Amendment G. See the screenshot below of the 2024 Election Night unofficial results posted on the South Dakota Secretary of State’s website:
During the 2024 General Election, there were 625,192 registered voters in the State of South Dakota. Only 69.82% of the voters chose to participate in the 2024 election, which equates to 436,478 ballots cast. In other words, only two out of every three voters participated in the general election.
Based on the numbers identified above, for Amendment G to have passed, it would have required a simple majority (50% + 1 vote) to enshrine abortion into the South Dakota State Constitution. To be successful in their campaign, Dakotans for Health needed 213,377 YES votes to pass Amendment G. Now, if we look at the number 213,377 versus the number that would vote NO in this hypothetical: 213,376, and then add on the number of voters that chose not to participate in the general election (188,714 voters) plus those that did vote in the general election but chose not to cast a vote on this specific initiated Constitutional Amendment G (9,725 voters), then the total number is 411,815 voters (213,376 + 188,714 + 9,725).
Hence, as one can see, the 213,377 YES votes cast to enshrine abortion into our State Constitution are less than the 411,815 voters who chose to stay at home or vote NO. In other words, 34% of registered voters in South Dakota decide that abortion should be enshrined in our State Constitution under this hypothetical example. Is this what we want in South Dakota? Rule by a minority?
See summary of the simple majority hypothetical on Amendment G below, along with the corresponding pie graph:
Amendment G ( Simple Majority Hypothetical) | Votes |
Yes Votes Cast, 50% + 1 (Simple Majority) | 213,377 |
No Votes Cast | 213,376 |
Total Votes Cast | 426,753 |
Number of Voters not Casting a Vote on Amendment G | 9,725 |
Registered Voters not participating in the 2024 Election | 188,714 |
Total Number of Eligible Registered Voters Eligible to Vote in 2024 | 625,192 |
By voting YES on Proposed Amendment L, the bar is raised from 50% +1 (simple majority) to 60% of all votes cast to amend the State Constitution.
In my hypothetical example demonstrated above, the new numbers are as follows, with 60% of voters passing Amendment G to enshrine abortion in the State Constitution.
Amendment G (60% of Votes Cast Hypothetical) | Votes |
Yes Votes Cast, 60% of votes cast | 256,052 |
No Votes Cast | 170,701 |
Total Votes Cast | 426,753 |
Number of Voters not Casting a Vote on Amendment G | 9,725 |
Registered Voters not participating in the 2024 Election | 188,714 |
Total Number of Eligible Registered Voters Eligible to Vote in 2024 | 625,192 |
As one can see, under Proposed Amendment L, a higher bar is set at 60% - no longer the simple majority. Therefore, it took 41% of registered voters (256,052) to change the South Dakota Constitution, not 34% (213,377) in this hypothetical. As one can see, 41% of voters is still less than the majority of all registered voters. Because some voters will always sit out a given election cycle, the electorate as a whole must protect our State Constitution from being amended by out-of-state special interest groups. These groups, such as Dakotans for Health PAC, want nothing more than to amend our State Constitution because it is relatively easy and cheap to persuade voters in South Dakota since all that is required to change our current State Constitution is a simple majority of votes cast (50% plus 1). It is why there is so much out-of-state money pouring into the state on advertising to get you to vote "L NO" on Amendment L.
Let’s face it, many states don’t like our South Dakota values and way of life. That is why I am running for state senate – to protect our traditional values and way of life. It is also why the South Dakota Right to Life asks you to vote YES on Amendment L.
South Dakotans need to protect the State Constitution similar to how the U.S. Constitution is protected from being amended. Our U.S. Constitution has only been changed or amended 27 times. The 27th Amendment was added to the U.S. Constitution and was accepted as a validly ratified constitutional amendment on May 20, 1992. Before that, the 26th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified and signed into law in July 1971, lowering the legal voting age in the United States from 21 to 18. Changes to the U.S. Constitution require a 2/3 vote by both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate, followed by ratification by ¾ of the state legislatures (38 states) – a much higher bar than 60% of the votes cast to amend the South Dakota State Constitution.
On November 3, I will be voting YES on Constitutional Amendment L to protect and preserve our South Dakota State Constitution. I ask you to join me by voting YES on Constitutional Amendment L to protect our State Constitution from out-of-state special interest groups who want to amend it with a simple majority vote.
Comments