Election Contests and Ballot Measures

November 8, 2016 South Dakota General Election

South Dakota

Note: Candidate pictures are the most current we have on file. Because this is a past election, they may not show a candidate’s likeness at the time of the election. Likewise, some of the links to websites, emails, and social media may be broken.
US President & Vice President (South Dakota)
Compare the candidates
Donald Trump - R
Mike Pence - R
Gary Johnson - L
William F. "Bill" Weld - L
Hillary Clinton - D
Timothy M. Kaine - D
Darrell Castle - CON
US Senate
Compare the candidates
John R. Thune - R
Jay Williams - D
U.S. Representative
Compare the candidates
Paula Hawks - D
Kristi Noem - R
Public Utilities Commission
Compare the candidates
Chris Nelson - R
Henry Red Cloud - D
South Dakota Senate
State Senator District 1
Jason Frerichs - D
State Senator District 2
State Senator District 3
Compare the candidates
Al Novstrup - R
Cory Allen Heidelberger - D
State Senator District 4
Compare the candidates
John Wiik - R
Kathy Tyler - D
State Senator District 5
State Senator District 6
Compare the candidates
Ernie Otten, Jr. - R
Kyle C. Boese - D
State Senator District 7
Compare the candidates
Larry J. Tidemann - R
Mary J. Perpich - D
State Senator District 8
Compare the candidates
Jordan Youngberg - R
Scott Parsley - D
State Senator District 9
Compare the candidates
Deb Peters - R
John Koch - D
State Senator District 10
Compare the candidates
Jenna Haggar - R
Jim Powers - D
State Senator District 11
Compare the candidates
Jim Stalzer - R
Tom Cool - D
State Senator District 12
State Senator District 13
Compare the candidates
Jack Kolbeck - R
Denny Pierson - D
State Senator District 14
Compare the candidates
Deb Soholt - R
Tyler Swanger - I
State Senator District 15
Reynold F. Nesiba - D
State Senator District 16
Compare the candidates
Jim Bolin - R
Chad Skiles - D
State Senator District 17
Compare the candidates
Arthur L. Rusch - R
Shane Merrill - D
State Senator District 18
State Senator District 19
Compare the candidates
Stace Nelson - R
Russell Graeff - D
State Senator District 20
Compare the candidates
Joshua M. Klumb - R
Quinten L. Burg - D
State Senator District 21
State Senator District 22
Compare the candidates
Jim White - R
Eric Bliss - D
State Senator District 23
State Senator District 24
State Senator District 25
State Senator District 26
State Senator District 27
State Senator District 28
State Senator District 29
Compare the candidates
Gary L. Cammack - R
LeRoy Kindler - I
State Senator District 30
State Senator District 31
State Senator District 32
Compare the candidates
Alan D. Solano - R
David A. Hubbard - D
State Senator District 33
Compare the candidates
Phil Jensen - R
Haven Stuck - D
State Senator District 34
Compare the candidates
Jeffrey D. Partridge - R
Jay C. Shultz - D
State Senator District 35
South Dakota House
State Representative District 1
Compare the candidates
Steven D. McCleerey - D
Susan Wismer - D
State Representative District 2
Compare the candidates
Burton E. "Burt" Tulson - R
Lana Greenfield - R
John Graham - D
State Representative District 3
Compare the candidates
Drew Dennert - R
Daniel Kaiser - R
Brooks Briscoe - D
Nikki Bootz - D
State Representative District 4
Compare the candidates
John Mills - R
Jason W. Kettwig - R
Matt Rosdahl - D
Peggy Schuelke - D
State Representative District 5
Compare the candidates
Hugh M. Bartels - R
Nancy York - R
Michele Alvine - D
Charles "Chuck" Haan - I
State Representative District 6
Compare the candidates
Isaac Latterell - R
Herman Otten - R
Kyle Rogers - D
Clara Hart - D
State Representative District 7
State Representative District 8
Compare the candidates
Mathew Wollmann - R
Leslie J. Heinemann - R
Jason Unger - D
Kory Rawstern - D
State Representative District 9
Compare the candidates
Michael Clark - R
Wayne H. Steinhauer - R
Michael Saba - D
Mark G. Guthmiller - D
State Representative District 10
Compare the candidates
Steven Haugaard - R
Don Haggar - R
Paul Vanderlinde - D
Dean Kurtz - D
State Representative District 11
Compare the candidates
Chris Karr - R
Mark K. Willadsen - R
Leona Wieland - D
Paul Schipper - D
State Representative District 12
State Representative District 13
Compare the candidates
G. Mark Mickelson - R
Sue K. Lucas-Peterson - R
P. James Eckhoff, Jr. - D
Ellee Spawn - D
State Representative District 14
Compare the candidates
Larry P. Zikmund - R
Tom Holmes - R
Valerie Loudenback - D
J. R. LaPlante - D
State Representative District 15
Compare the candidates
Jamie Smith - D
Karen L. Soli - D
Mike Myers - I
Eric Leggett - I
State Representative District 16
Compare the candidates
David L. Anderson - R
Kevin D. Jensen - R
Ted Curry - D
Ann Tornberg - D
State Representative District 17
Compare the candidates
Debbie Pease - R
Nancy Rasmussen - R
Mark Winegar - D
Ray Ring - D
State Representative District 18
Compare the candidates
Mike Stevens - R
Jean M. Hunhoff - R
David L. Allen - D
Peter Rossiter - D
State Representative District 19
Compare the candidates
Kent S. Peterson - R
Kyle Schoenfish - R
Melissa R. Mentele - D
State Representative District 20
State Representative District 21
Compare the candidates
Lee Qualm - R
Gary Burrus - D
Julie Bartling - D
State Representative District 22
Compare the candidates
Roger Chase - R
Bob Glanzer - R
Joan Wollschlager - D
Carmen Dannenbring - D
State Representative District 23
Compare the candidates
Spencer Gosch - R
John A. Lake - R
State Representative District 24
Compare the candidates
Mary Duvall - R
Tim Rounds - R
State Representative District 25
Compare the candidates
Tom Pischke - R
Roger Hunt - R
David Haagenson - D
Dan Ahlers - D
State Representative District 26A
State Representative District 26B
James Schaefer - R
State Representative District 27
Compare the candidates
Elizabeth May - R
Steve Livermont - R
Red Dawn Foster - D
Jim Bradford - D
Everette L. McKinley - I
State Representative District 29
Compare the candidates
Larry R. Rhoden - R
Thomas J. Brunner - R
State Representative District 30
Compare the candidates
Julie Frye-Mueller - R
Tim R. Goodwin - R
Kristine Ina Winter - D
Sandy Arseneault - D
State Representative District 31
Compare the candidates
Timothy R. Johns - R
Charles M. Turbiville - R
State Representative District 32
Compare the candidates
Kristin A. Conzet - R
Sean McPherson - R
Nik Aberle - D
Susan Kelts - D
State Representative District 33
Compare the candidates
Taffy Howard - R
David Johnson - R
Ethan Marsland - D
Jim Hadd - D
State Representative District 34
State Representative District 35
Compare the candidates
Lynne DiSanto - R
Blaine "Chip" Campbell - R
Dave Freytag - D
Michael T. Hanson - D
State Representative District 28A
State Representative District 28B
J. Sam Marty - R
Referendums and Ballot Measures
Constitutional Amendment R: postsecondary technical education institutes
Under the South Dakota Constitution, the Board of Regents is responsible for postsecondary educational institutions funded entirely or in part by the State. Constitutional Amendment R applies to postsecondary technical education institutes that receive state funding and offer career and technical associate of applied science degrees, certificates, or their equivalents. Currently, there are four such institutes: Lake Area Technical Institute, Mitchell Technical Institute, Southeast Technical Institute, and Western Dakota Technical Institute. Under the amendment, postsecondary technical institutes will be governed separately in a manner to be determined by the Legislature.The amendment also clarifies that the Board of Regents retains control over state-funded postsecondary educational institutions offering associate of arts, associate of sciences, bachelor’s, and postgraduate degrees.A vote “Yes” is for adding a provision to the Constitution regarding postsecondary technical educational institutes.A vote “No” will leave the Constitution as it is.
Constitutional Amendment S: expand rights for crime victims
Currently, state statutes provide certain rights to crime victims. This measure expands these rights and places them in the State Constitution.Under the amendment, the rights provided to a victim generally include: protection from harassment or abuse; the right to privacy; timely notice of all trial, sentence, and post-judgment proceedings including pardon or parole; the right to confer with the attorney for the government; and the opportunity to provide input during all phases of the criminal justice process. Victims will be given written notification of their rights.The rights may be enforced by the victim, the victim’s attorney or representative, or the attorney for the government. They may be enforced in any trial court, appeals court, or other proceeding affecting the victim’s rights.The definition of “victim” includes a person who suffers direct or threatened harm as the result of any crime, attempted crime, or act of juvenile delinquency. It also includes that person’s spouse, children, extended family members, guardians, and others with a substantially similar relationship.If a victim’s rights provided by this amendment conflict with a criminal defendant’s rights under the South Dakota and United States Constitutions, a court may determine that the defendant’s rights take priority.A vote “Yes” is for expanding statutory rights of victims and placing the rights in the Constitution.A vote “No” will leave the Constitution as it is.
Constitutional Amendment T: provide for state legislative redistricting by a commission
State senators and representatives are elected from within legislative districts. The South Dakota Constitution currently requires the Legislature to establish these legislative districts every ten years. This measure removes that authority from the Legislature and grants it to a redistricting commission.The commission is made up of nine registered voters selected each redistricting year by the State Board of Elections from a pool of up to 30 applicants. This pool consists of applicants registered with South Dakota’s two largest political parties (ten from each), and ten not registered with either of those parties. A commission member must have the same party registration, or be registered as unaffiliated with a party, for three continuous years immediately prior to appointment.No more than three commission members may belong to the same political party. For three years immediately prior to and three years immediately after appointment, commission members may not hold office in certain state or local public offices, or in a political party organization.The commission will redistrict in 2017, in 2021, and every ten years thereafter. The commission must produce a draft map and allow for public comment. The districts must be drawn in compliance with state and federal law.A vote “Yes” is for changing the Constitution to provide for state legislative redistricting by a commission.A vote “No” will leave the Constitution as it is.
Constitutional Amendment U: limiting the ability to set statutory interest rates for loans
Under this constitutional amendment, there is no limit on the amount of interest a lender may charge for a loan of money if the interest rate is agreed to in writing by the borrower. If there is no written agreement, however, a lender may not charge more than 18% interest per year. A law setting an interest rate for loans is not valid unless the law gives the lender and borrower the ability to agree to a different rate. If an interest rate for loans is established by law, it must apply to every type of lender.The amendment eliminates the ability to set statutory interest rates that are inconsistent with this amendment.A vote “Yes” is for adding provisions to the Constitution that limit the ability to set statutory interest rates for loans.A vote “No” will leave the Constitution as it is
Constitutional Amendment V: establishing nonpartisan elections
Currently, most general election candidates for federal, state, and county offices are selected through a partisan primary or at a state party convention. This Constitutional amendment eliminates those methods by establishing a nonpartisan primary to select candidates for all federal, state, and county elected offices. This amendment does not apply to elections for United States President and Vice President.Under the amendment, candidates are not identified by party affiliation on the primary or general election ballot. All qualified voters, regardless of party affiliation, may vote for any candidate of their choice.The two candidates with the most votes advance to the general election. For certain offices where more than one candidate is elected at the general election, the number of candidates advancing to the general election will be double the number of seats to be filled.If the amendment is approved, a substantial re-write of state election laws will be necessary.A vote “Yes” is for adding provisions to the Constitution to establish nonpartisan elections.A vote “No” will leave the Constitution as it is.
Initiated Measure 21: set a maximum finance charge for certain licensed money lenders
The initiated measure prohibits certain State-licensed money lenders from making a loan that imposes total interest, fees and charges at an annual percentage rate greater than 36%. The measure also prohibits these money lenders from evading this rate limitation by indirect means. A violation of this measure is a misdemeanor crime. In addition, a loan made in violation of this measure is void, and any principal, fee, interest, or charge is uncollectable.The measure’s prohibitions apply to all money lenders licensed under South Dakota Codified Laws chapter 54-4. These licensed lenders make commercial and personal loans, including installment, automobile, short-term consumer, payday, and title loans. The measure does not apply to state and national banks, bank holding companies, other federally insured financial institutions, and state chartered trust companies. The measure also does not apply to businesses that provide financing for goods and services they sell.A vote “Yes” is for prohibiting certain money lenders from charging more than 36% interest on loans.A vote “No” is against the measure.
Initiated Measure 22: revise State campaign finance and lobbying laws, create a publicly funded campaign finance program, create an ethics commission, and appropriate funds.
This measure extensively revises State campaign finance laws. It requires additional disclosures and increased reporting. It lowers contribution amounts to political action committees; political parties; and candidates for statewide, legislative, or county office. It also imposes limits on contributions from candidate campaign committees, political action committees, and political parties.The measure creates a publicly funded campaign finance program for statewide and legislative candidates who choose to participate and agree to limits on campaign contributions and expenditures. Under the program, two $50 “credits” are issued to each registered voter, who assigns them to participating candidates. The credits are redeemed from the program, which is funded by an annual State general-fund appropriation of $9 per registered voter. The program fund may not exceed $12 million at any time.The measure creates an appointed ethics commission to administer the credit program and to enforce campaign finance and lobbying laws.The measure prohibits certain State officials and high-level employees from lobbying until two years after leaving State government. It also places limitations on lobbyists’ gifts to certain state officials and staff members.If approved, the measure may be challenged in court on constitutional grounds. Legislative Research Council’s Prison/Jail Population Cost Estimate Statement: The penalties in this Act are administrative misdemeanors, with one class 5 felony. Their purpose is to enforce compliance with the provisions to which they adhere. These crimes are presently in statute, and past violations of these statutes show minimal charges and even fewer convictions. It is the opinion of the Legislative Research Council that the nature of these laws encourages regular compliance. When an offense is prosecuted, it will not likely result in a jail sentence. Hence, the impact on jail populations is likely negligible.A vote “Yes” is for revising State campaign finance and lobbying laws.A vote “No” is against the measure.
Initiated Measure 23: give certain organizations the right to charge fees
The measure gives corporate organizations and non-profit organizations the right to charge a fee for any service provided. Thismeasure takes effect on July 1, 2017.A vote “Yes” is for allowing certain organizations the right to charge fees.A vote “No” is against the measure
Referred Law 19: elections and election petitions
Currently, primary election candidates for certain offices must circulate and submit nominating petitions between January 1 and the last Tuesday in March. Referred Law 19 changes that timeframe to between December 1 and the first Tuesday in March. The referred law also changes other election-related submission deadlines, adjusting them from the last Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in March.Certain election-related documents, including nominating petitions, are currently considered timely submitted if sent by registered mail before the deadline. The referred law changes this to require that these documents be received by the submission deadline. It also changes the method for calculating the number of signatures required on nominating petitions for certain elective offices.The referred law prohibits a person registered with a recognized political party from signing an independent candidate’s nominating petition. The current law does not contain that prohibition.Under the referred law, an independent governor candidate cannot appear on the ballot if the corresponding lieutenant governor candidate withdraws and a replacement is not certified by the second Tuesday in August. It also restricts the circumstances under which a political party may replace a candidate who has withdrawn from consideration after the primary election.A vote “Yes” is for revising State laws regarding elections and election petitions.A vote “No” is against the referred law.
Referred Law 20: lowering the State minimum wage for non-tipped employees under age 18
State law requires employers to pay all non-tipped employees a minimum wage, with limited exceptions. Currently, that amount is $8.55 per hour.State law also requires that the minimum wage be adjusted, effective on January 1 of each year, by any increase in the cost of living as measured by the U. S. Department of Labor’s Consumer Price Index.Referred Law 20, if approved, would lower the existing State minimum wage to $7.50 per hour for non-tipped employees under age 18. In addition, no annual cost-of-living wage adjustment would be required for the youth minimum wage. The referred law would also prohibit employers from taking any action to displace an employee or reduce an employee’s hours, wages, or benefits, in order to hire someone at the youth minimum wage.A vote “Yes” is for lowering the minimum wage to $7.50 per hour for non-tipped employees under age 18.A vote “No” is against the referred law.
We Need Your Help