top of page

Don't Be Fooled When Voting on the 2024 Ballot Questions

Good afternoon District 27. On Thursday of this week, I dropped by the Bennett County courthouse to pick up an example general election ballot but the office was closed. Instead, I found this 5-page document (printed on the front and back) lying on the counter for voters to freely take of the 2024 ballot questions. I highly recommend voters educate themselves before going to the polling center by obtaining this document at the county auditor's office or going to the Secretary of State website and download the PDF version of this document at: https://sdsos.gov/.../2024GeneralBQPamphlet.FINALdocx.pdf.


The seven ballot initiative measures, proposed Constitutional Amendments and referred law are written purposely to confuse the voter.  Savvy attorneys and paid lobbyists have employed the old "bait and switch" tactic to get the average voter to vote yes or no on any one of the ballot questions. Do not be deceived or get discouraged by the language. Take your time in learning about the issues. Don't simply read the pros and cons. Do your own research. Talk to a friend or neighbor and see if they also understand and interpret what you have read. I also encourage you to get involved by going to a public forum where the issues are openly discussed and debated.


The privilege of voting requires one to inform their conscience. This pamphlet is a good start to learning about the issues before going to the poll center. Once you have educated yourself on the various issues, write down how you plan to vote in advance, and then take the document with your written notes on it to the poll center. This way you won't have to spend much time reading the lengthy text, perhaps getting more confused and not making an informed decision. Take your time when voting and do not rush through it because this is what the savvy attorneys and paid lobbyists want you to do.  For example, when you read about Referred Law 21, and read "Landowner Bill of Rights," don't immediately think this must be a good thing; I should vote "yes" on this. This type of language is used to confuse the voter so that the voter does not read the rest of the text. It's no different when one uses the words: shall vs will, or women's reproductive health vs. abortion, or Pro-Life vs. Anti-Abortion. Any word(s) can be used to misinterpret, skew, and twist the voter's intent. Also, pay close attention to words such as "physician." This language is ambiguous and intentionally put in Amendment G to make the voter determine what the word physician means. Does it mean Obstetrician-Gynecologist (OB-GYN) specialist? Does it mean a nurse practitioner? Does it mean social worker? Does it mean mental health specialist or therapist? Does it mean primary care provider? Does it mean pharmacist? Does it mean a medicine man or spiritual healer? The same thing could apply to the word "consumable." You the voter will have to decide on IM-28 what this definition means in the broadest sense when weighing in on the proposed initiated measure. Obviously, food is a consumable, but is a cigarette or e-cigarette a consumable? What about gas? Don't humans consume gas in their vehicles as they drive? What about fireworks? Don't we "consume" fireworks once they are lit up?  As one can see, words matter. Therefore, I strongly encourage you to read the fine print and if in doubt, vote "NO." As the old saying goes, "If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, it probably is a duck." Enjoy your weekend. God bless.



12 views

Comments

Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet

Add a rating
bottom of page