New opinion poll by No-on-E: Amendment E will be devastatingly defeated in November
The No-On-E campaign just issued a press release with their own poll results. And guess what - Amendment E is going to be massively crushed in a couple of weeks.
According to a poll commissioned by the No on E Coalition and released today, South Dakotans are overwhelmingly opposed to Amendment E. The survey found that 46 percent of voters oppose Amendment E, 42 percent are undecided and only 12 percent say they support the measure.Visit http://www.no-on-e.com for more information.
The survey simply asked: “Based on what you know or have heard, if the election were held today, would you vote yes to adopt Amendment E, or no to reject Amendment E.”
“It is clear from our polling that the more South Dakotans learn about Amendment E, the more they reject it,” said Bob Moore, president of Moore Information. “After hearing the Attorney General’s explanation, the percentage of registered voters opposing Amendment E increases to 64 percent.”
Amendment E, known as the jail for judges amendment, would allow jurors, county commissioners, city council members, school board members, judges and others to be given jail terms or fines because of their decisions. The amendment would also strip them of public insurance coverage and up to one-half of their retirement benefits, for making decisions which break rules defined by the proposed amendment’s special grand jurors.
The telephone poll of 400 registered voters was conducted Oct. 16-17 by Moore Information, a public opinion research firm with offices in Portland, Ore. and Washington, D.C. The sampling error is plus or minus five percent.
Comments
"Chapman said Stegmeier, from Tea, is becoming very popular with the patriot community.
"He's changing the world," Chapman said, "he's the big man on campus."
And the J.A.I.L. Amendment project, Stegmeier says, is inevitable.
"I actually think the opposition ought to just throw in the towel because even if it fails here the idea is not going to go away," Stegmeier said. "Now, whether or not it's South Dakota in 2008 that tries it again, I don't know, that depends on my resources."
Stegmeier also said that if he proposed the J.A.I.L. Amendment again in South Dakota, he would throw out the provisions for board and commission members.
"Next time there won't be those things on there for them to attack, so I wonder what they'll come up with in opposition to it then," Stegmeier said.
That being said, I'll be a lot less worried if they keep doing debates, because there's no way anyone can watch them and still be thinking about voting "yes."
Yesterday's "Inside Keloland" had some pretty priceless quotes from Jake Hanes:
"[South Dakota Government] is veiled in secrecy, so we can't point to any specific examples of judicial misconduct."
...and...
"Go to our website, and you can find examples of judicial misconduct in other states!"
Apparently, he thinks that changing South Dakota's constitution will magically fix misconduct in other states. Super.
www.AmendmentE.com lists examples of the JQC failure to launch; a couple of South Dakota judges who appear to be proud to violate our Constitution, on whim. Judge Rusch springs to mind, (complete with documenation) and media's ongoing failure to launch any time of responsible reporting.
I understand opponents reluctance to read it. Opponents don't want to run the risk of an informed, educated reader. Then too, some people are just more comfortable, indeed, prefer ignorance.