That's what the people get for imposing a tax, I guess.

Senate Joint Resolution 15 has just been introduced by several legislators - I suspect in response to this last years' tobacco tax - to force the citizenry to mave to meet a 2/3rds threshold of support to pass a new tax, just like the legislature is required to.
A JOINT RESOLUTION, Proposing and submitting to the electors at the next general election amendments to Article XI of the Constitution of the State of South Dakota, relating to the vote required to impose or increase taxes.
Section 1. That at the next general election held in the state, the following amendment to Article XI, section 14 of the Constitution of the State of South Dakota, as set forth in section 2 of this Joint Resolution, which is hereby agreed to, shall be submitted to the electors of the state for approval.
Section 2. That Article XI, section 14 of the Constitution of the State of South Dakota, be amended to read as follows:
§ 14. The rate of taxation imposed by the State of South Dakota in regard to any tax may not be increased and no new tax may be imposed by the State of South Dakota unless by consent of the people by exercise of their right of a two-thirds vote of the voters voting on an initiative or by a two-thirds vote of all the members elect of each branch of the Legislature.
You can read it here.

I'm a little tossed on it, as I darn well vote against every tax that's put to a vote (especially any involving income taxes). But the measure skates precariously close to infringing on the right of the people to make a decision of the whole.

I mean, doesn't the majority rule? Legislators are as fallible as the rest of us, but if 51% of the people themselves say tax us (and god only knows why they would) shouldn't that be sufficient?

I'm going to noodle on this one..


Anonymous said…
Shouldn't this measure require a 2/3rds majority to pass?
Anonymous said…
good buy democracy,,,super majority means--MINORITY RULE--

Requireing two thirds means one third plus one vote stops anything.

33.35% can rule 66.65%
34 rule 66 and so forth

very bad bill !!!!
Anonymous said…
I don't think Garry Moore really cares what the voters in his district think. He introduces a bill to remove the tobacco tax even though it received over 61% in his district and 61% statewide. People in Yankton have got to be getting tired of this guy only looking out for his personal interests (tobacco wholesaler.)
Anonymous said…
Wouldn't the bill work both ways if it passes? Take the cell phone tax initiative, wouldn't that then need 2/3rds to repeal a tax the same way the legislature works?
Anonymous said…
The sponsors are lackies of the liqour/tobacco interests. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the product of the lobbists representing the two merchants of death in South Dakota, alcohol and tobacco.

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: Frederick not in SDGOP Chair Race

A strategic move by Sutton. Good for him, bad for Dems.