FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to enhance South Dakota.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:
Section 1. That the code be amended by adding a NEW SECTION to read:The Legislature shall pursue opportunities to enhance the state.
Was read the second time.
And the roll being called:
Yeas 22, Nays 13, Excused 0, Absent 0
Bolin; Cammack; Cronin; Curd; Ewing; Haverly; Langer; Maher; Monroe; Netherton; Novstrup; Otten (Ernie); Partridge; Peters; Rusch; Soholt; Solano; Sutton; Tidemann; White; Wiik; Youngberg
Frerichs; Greenfield (Brock); Heinert; Jensen (Phil); Kennedy; Killer; Klumb; Kolbeck; Nelson; Nesiba; Russell; Stalzer; Tapio
So the bill having received an affirmative vote of a majority of the members-elect, the President declared the bill passed and the title was agreed to.
The body of SB 106 simply states: "The Legislature shall pursue opportunities to enhance the state." The bill as it passed the Senate has no substantive effect except that it circumvents Chapter 17 of the Joint Rules relating to the deadline for the introduction of bills and Senate Rule 5-1 and Joint Rule 11-1 relating to the suspension of rules, which would have allowed the introduction of a bill after the deadline. Consideration and passage of the bill in this form relinquishes the legislative power and authority of the Senate and cedes such power and authority to the House of Representatives and deprives the people an opportunity to address the actual intent of the bill in a Senate committee hearing.
SB 106 is duly in contravention of South Dakotans' rights under South Dakota Constitutional Article III Section 15 providing for an open legislative process for the people of South Dakota. By hiding the intent of these empty "vehicle bills" and passing them to the House, it denies South Dakotans the open government they are entitled to as a right in South Dakota.
In addition, Article III, Section 21 of the South Dakota Constitution states: "No law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title." Since the intended effect of SB 106 is not clearly stated and is unknown, the title does not accurately express the purpose or effect of the bill. We believe that the passage of SB 106 does not meet the requirements of Article III, Section 21 of the South Dakota Constitution and contradicts the substantive provisions of Senate Rule 5-1, Joint Rule 11-1, and Chapter 17 of the Joint Rules. For these reasons we believe that the passage of the bill is in contravention of South Dakota's Constitution, is injurious to the rights of the people of South Dakota, besmirches the reputation of the South Dakota Senate, and is therefore null and void.
We respectfully request that this dissent be printed in the Senate Journal as required by Joint Rule 1-10.
Respectfully submitted, Respectfully submitted,
Stace Nelson Lance Russell