The South DaCola Voter Guide, kind of

I won’t touch on every race or issue, but on the ones I think are important. Let’s Go!

Re-Elect Pam Nelson for County Treasurer. To tell you the truth, I don’t even know who is running against Pam, doesn’t matter. Nelson has proved she is a strong advocate for citizens and tax payers.

Bonilla and Feinstein for County Commission. That is who I voted for, but I also don’t have an issue with Jean Bender. She has actually surprised me on commission and has been a great legal voice for the commission. Just don’t vote for Karsky. This insurance salesman has more conflicts of interest then you can shake a stick at. Time to retire Dean from local government so he has more time to dig holes at ground breaking ceremonies with the Chamber, his true love and boss.

Mike Saba and Jeff Barth for state legislature.

Yes on Amendment R. This is extremely past due. Technical schools should have had their own board 20 years ago.

No on Amendment S. Also referred to as Marsy’s Law. It is unneeded. Laws are already in place to protect victims.

Yes on Amendment T. There has been too much gerrymandering going on in our state and it is time to make the board that decides redistricting more fair.

No on Amendment U. This is a fake interest rate cap created by the payday lenders.

Yes on Amendment V. This is the most important Amendment on the ballot this year. By passing the non-partisan election amendment we will change the face of the legislature over the next 5 years, and hopefully we will have less amendments and initiatives in the future once we get better representative officials in Pierre.

NO on Ref 20. This will eliminate the youth minimum wage.

Yes on Measure 21. It will cap payday lending at 36%, and hopefully put them out of business.

Yes on Measure 22. I have said an ethics commission and publicly funded campaigns in SD is way past due.

I have no opinion on Ref 19 & 23.

I highly suggest you vote early, because the lines are going to be very, very, very long.



14 comments ↓

#1 moses on 10.10.16 at 7:51 pm

I think if your for labor you would have. people who in the work place should pay their dues and quit sucking off the other workers,Where are you on this I would think you would support the working man.O rdon’t you.

#2 moses on 10.10.16 at 11:15 pm

That would be item 23
.

#3 Warren_Phear on 10.11.16 at 6:23 am

I will spend very little time filling out my ballot. My opinion pretty much echoes yours. With the exception of 23. How can you advocate for higher wages in SF and the rest of the state, and at the same time have no opinion on 23? Stronger unions mean a stronger workforce, with rights to collectively bargain for FAIR wages.

#4 l3wis on 10.11.16 at 8:58 am

Here is my opinion, while I support it’s passage, my fear is if it does pass, it will go through litigation. Why? Because our AG with all of his wisdom and respect for the working class (LOL) will get some poor schlump to fight it because we are a right to work state. In the end it will just end up costing us and getting us nowhere.

#5 The D@ily Spin on 10.11.16 at 12:28 pm

There’s room for right to work and unions. Right to work is good for small business. Unions are needed where large corporations take advantage of employees. What’s important is get out and vote your conscience. Yes, the state will obstruct but your vote gains a little something such that there’s eventually reform.

#6 moses on 10.11.16 at 4:46 pm

My choice is union so I dont have to work till 85 in this state for peanuts.If some one is leaching off the workers, who are fighting for better working conditions he should be ashamed of himself.He is leaching off the brothers and sisters who helped make it better,SO BLOG LEADER WHERE DOYOU STAND.

#7 moses on 10.11.16 at 4:46 pm

on 23

#8 moses on 10.11.16 at 4:48 pm

Yes Karsky can you name a few more from the city council to not vote for next time.

#9 l3wis on 10.11.16 at 5:58 pm

Moses, I agree with the premise of 23, and I get it. Like I said, I think it would get legal challenges if passed. Maybe that isn’t such a bad thing.

#10 be part of the solution on 10.12.16 at 2:49 pm

Yes on V, Yes on V, Yes on V!

#11 Seth on 10.12.16 at 2:56 pm

So, I’ll be voting opposite on all of these I guess. Just for fun.

#12 John on 10.13.16 at 6:45 am

NO on V! Are you crazy…V is the worst oneon the ballot. why on earth do we want to limit choice for voters in the general election?! This seems like the most UNDEMOCRATIC measure of all time. Then add in it hides party labels, is being written and paid for by out of state parties and when they burned the American flag in one of their videos i not only became a No I became a HELL NO!

#13 Bob on 11.02.16 at 11:20 am

If Pam Nelson is the incumbent County Treasurer, why is she listed second on the ballot? It’s interesting to me that for every single election race on the ballot, the Republican candidate is listed first with disregard to incumbency or alphebetization. What’s the deal?

#14 l3wis on 11.02.16 at 11:37 am

Bob, I believe they draw for the lineup, in other words when Pam and Chris drew, Chris drew 1st placement.

Leave a Comment