PIERRE, S.D. (Dakota News Now) – The 2026 general election is less than a year away, and it will be one of South Dakota’s biggest election years. Sponsors of potential ballot measures are in the midst of collecting signatures.
The South Dakota Retailers Association is calling one of these potential ballot measures bad policy.
Executive Director Nathan Sanderson says Rick Weiland’s proposed measure is tying the hands of the legislature to be able to make proper administrative changes.
“Having a constitutional amendment, which means it can only be changed by a vote of the people every two years. Having that constitutional amendment say we can’t change a statute for seven years is a really bad idea,” Sanderson said.
If approved, Weiland’s measure would allow the legislature to avoid the seven-year limit if a 3/4th vote is achieved in both chambers, and then the change would have to get approved by the people at the next general election.
“Rick Weiland, who is the sponsor of IM-28, admitted that legislative clarification would be needed, and now, in the 2026 election, he is seeking to bring a constitutional amendment that would prevent that. That’s just hypocritical,” Sanderson said.
In the last session, the legislature approved ballot measures requiring a higher threshold to pass a constitutional amendment and another to change the state’s requirement to provide expanded Medicaid. Lawmakers also passed a bill that shortened the deadline to submit signatures.
“The legislature and the political establishment in Pierre are going out of their way to stop voters from using direct democracy in the initiative process to pass public policy and change the constitution,” Weiland said.
Weiland says the high threshold is set for a reason.
“The problem shouldn’t be that the legislature just doesn’t approve of the measure, so they go searching for a problem. It should be something technical, a word or two could’ve been used more appropriately, that’s what it is there for,” Weiland said.
Weiland’s organization, Dakotans for Health, is currently in the midst of a lawsuit regarding the date to turn in signatures. As of now, it has been moved from May to February, but a district court sided with the group, and the legislation is being reviewed by the 8th circuit court.
