How can you write several paragraphs about the rejection of a bill without mentioning the bill number? the ONLY way to do that is to DELIBERATELY OMIT the bill number so that people are unable to look up the bill themselves. this reeks of dishonost news and spin. they fail to mention the bill so that you can't study it on your own to independently verify.

Sounds like the GOP knows it has something to lose if this goes into effect. After all the GOP has run things in that state for a long time.

Sounds a lot like the "debate" on net neutrality to me.

Ideally, yes.

CNN is corrupt and should be archived in the OP. It doesn't deserve our support. Please keep this in mind for future posts.

Also, please see:

https://voat.co/v/news/comments/1315115

Yep, it's an anti-corruption bill.

Just a word of caution... I just discovered the funders list for represent.us, and it includes a Rockefeller foundation, a Soros name, and other big-money influences.

Look at the donor list for represent.us: www.represent.us/donor-list

This could all be a setup... Oh man I hate that I just found this out but I feel compelled to share

[DROOLING INTENSIFIES]

Something something shiny and colorful.

https://youtu.be/gMYNfQlf1H8

Gov Dagauurd a dead man walking

Keep it up and see what happens

You linked to CNN. Never link to CNN. NEVER.

Lot of religious crazies out here...

"But state GOP lawmakers said they didn't think voters knew what they were doing."

Just like Brexit, or Trump.

This article is trash, and OP is a fucking faggot.

I remember this being on the ballot in November, and I voted no. Do you know why? Two reasons. One, it was way too long and convoluted to be anything useful to the common man. Two, it was fucking retarded. It cut in ways that were un-necessary (state legislators under this law can not attend a charity dinner meant to raise money for kids with disease. I am not kidding.) Or just plain dumb (the state paying out "democracy credits" which was literally the state paying for anyone's political campaign..) It was cancerous, wasteful, and stupid. All it did was generate ignorant slander aimed at the GOP when it was inevitably repealed (for fun, ctrl+f "Democracy Credit" and tell me this wasn't meant to get people to vote for "free" shit).

But I'm going to keep this short and sweet. Here's the part that affects the voters the most - the part where the state has to pay out... a lot.

To start, let's read this pile of garbled text: https://sdsos.gov/elections-voting/assets/InitiatedMeasure22.pdf http://dakotafreepress.com/projects/election-2016/ballot-measures/initiated-measure-22-anti-corruption-act/initiated-measure-22-south-dakota-government-accountability-and-anti-corruption-act/

NOTE - please ignore all AG explanations on all ballots. They are always biased and retarded. Read the fucking text. Also, if you actually read it, see you in a while.

Now, let's look at this part:

Section 3. Terms used in this Act mean:

(1) “Commission,” the ethics commission established by sections 32 to 41, inclusive, of this Act;

(2) “Democracy credit,” a credit valued at fifty dollars, issued by the commission to a South Dakota resident voter under the Program established by sections 43 to 62, inclusive, of this Act, that can be, through proper assignment, used to make a contribution to a participating candidate;

(3) “Participating candidate,” a candidate for statewide or legislative office who is certified by the ethics commission as qualified to be assigned and redeem democracy credits, pursuant to sections 51 to 54, inclusive, of this Act;

(4) “Program,” the South Dakota democracy credit Program established by sections 43 to 62, inclusive, of this Act;

(5) “Qualified contribution,” a contribution made by a natural person resident of the state that is not, in the aggregate, in excess of two hundred and fifty dollars to a candidate for legislative office or in excess of five hundred dollars to a candidate for statewide office; and

(6) “Registered representative,” a volunteer who is permitted to solicit and collect democracy credits on behalf of a specific participating candidate because the volunteer has, pursuant to section 56 of this Act, properly filed with the commission to affirm understanding of the regulations and penalties associated with the Program.

We have a group of people who say "this is a good guy" and give him state money to run a campaign. This can't go wrong at all! Even with the "checks and balances" you have an inherently shit system to start with.

SD legislator and Governor were 110% justified in repealing this.

FAKE NEWS --- CLICKBAIT HEADLINE ---- CNN BS CRAP LIES

You want goats too.

🐐🐐🐐🐐🐐

Five, not two.

Lol who actually believes the government is looking out for the human race?

Mate, you're linking to CNN. Stop that shit.

Anyone got a reliable source on this? If true then every yes vote on the repeal should equal an occupied lamp-post outside the legislature.

This is when I wait for second amendment supporters to speak up

> Anti-Republican headline

> edition.cnn.com

Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and assume there's more to this story.

What in the fuck? I didn't read the bill. maybe it's shit...I don't know. But the people voted it in you swamp dwelling politicians!

if only you had used a credible news source besides CNN, any local south dakota news sources pick this up?

The establishment will do what it will to protect it's interests. The American system of government is broken. All the entrenched interests care about is too keep the party rolling while spitting on the interests of the people.

How the are they allowed to repeal a public referendum?

the title of the thread and the upvotes the posts in the thread are getting don't match voat's usual way of things. Something about all of this seems really fishy..

Some more detailed arguments against the measure:

"An individual running for office would not be able to self fund their campaign." Campbell said, "That besides being unconstitutional, is absolutely insane. Along with that, IM 22 asks you and us to allow state government out of the general fund to fund campaigns, also insane."

http://www.kotatv.com/content/news/Campbell-calls-IM-22-unconstitutional-and-insane-411445755.html

IM22, an extraordinarily lengthy document, was challenged in the Sixth Judicial Circuit Court, and Judge Mark Barnett placed a preliminary injunction, finding IM22 likely unconstitutional “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

it would basically set up a fourth branch of government made up of unelected commissioners who would have authority to repeal any law passed by the South Dakota Legislature.

Legislators take an oath not to accept bribes. The punishment for accepting a bribe is a Class 4 felony (1939 law). IM22 makes bribery a Class 1 misdemeanor – a lesser sentence.

https://concernedwomen.org/urgent-support-the-repeal-of-south-dakotas-initiated-measure-22/

This is armed rebellion shit right here.

This could be a Trojan horse. When money leaves politics, the only instrument of influence will be corporate-censored social media and MSM.

Take a look at the donor list pushing the reforms. www.represent.us/donor-list

Rockerfellers, rothschilds, and Soros groups all major donors.

The measure, which passed with more than 51% backing in November,

That's pretty narrow.

would have created an independent ethics commission,

"Independent" and "government body" are oxymorons. That sounds like a whole heap of BS disguised by the reasonable measures.

limited lobbyist gifts to lawmakers, banned officials from joining lobbying firms for two years after leaving office

All sound fine to me

and created so-called "Democracy vouchers" for registered voters to steer toward their preferred candidates.

What in the name of hell does any of that mean?

All in all, I think there's more to it than is in the article. First off, it's CNN, who I wouldn't trust to tell the truth about a pickup basketball game. Second of all, they're screaming about the koch brothers again whilst carefully ignoring Soros.

The only way that this is going to get fixed is if these bastards start suiciding themselves.

Anyone have a non-CNN link?

I need to study this more, but between this story being from CNN and the groups it mentions as involved for and against, I am leaning towards this being the correct outcome as bad as it looks. That said, they clearly need to do something to make their electorate trust that the system is controlled by the people, though. This looks horrible on its face.

To all of us deplorables, we now know who our "representatives" really represent: not us. In a clear move of blatant disregard, our kleptocrats said "fuck you!" In very clear fashion. This is war!

You should never try to take the gibs from your government officials. They can't live on their salaries alone. /s

If enough people kick up a ruckus, they'll probably send in the National Guard to put down the people.

Is there another source besides CNN, like a local paper?

They just kicked a beehive of epic proportions.

Fake News.

CNN used as source.

Repubs most likely didn't say anything like that.

Fuck CNN, use a better source.

The sad thing is they'll probably send these same corrupt criminals back into office next election. People just need to make it a consistent policy to vote against all incumbents. Forever.

https://archive.is/RnkvU | https://vgy.me/mpistz.png :

South Dakota GOP repeals voter-approved anti-corruption law - CNNPolitics.com

'Curd, his colleagues and a lobbying group filed suit against the law last year in a South Dakota circuit court. '

'"It was an attempt to fundamentally transform the South Dakota citizen legislature," he said. '

'"The state motto in South Dakota is 'Under God, The People Rule.' The fight against corruption will not end until elected leaders abide by that principle."'

'On Tuesday night, less than 24 hours before the vote, demonstrators from Represent South Dakota projected the words "Respect Our Vote" onto the state capitol. ', "State Republicans' decision to effectively overturn the referendum results also comes on the heels of a controversial attempt by House Republicans in Washington to gut an independent ethics watchdog."

This has been an automated message.

The law that was passed by the public and undercut by the state government was the respresent.us legislation talked about here:

"Corruption is Legal in America"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig

"How to fix America's Corrupt political system"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhe286ky-9A

They finally got it through in this one state, and then the government pulls the rug out from under the people. This is simply unacceptable in what is supposedly a democracy or a representative republic.