Require the secretary of state to determine if a legislatively proposed constitutional amendment complies with the single subject requirement and is not a constitutional revision.
If enacted, HB 1140 would alter existing statutory processes, requiring the secretary of state to take an active role in assessing the compliance of proposed amendments with the legal standards set out in the South Dakota Constitution. In cases where a proposal is deemed to cover more than one subject or is designated as a revision, the bill outlines a clear procedure for notification to the sponsors and allows them to amend their proposals accordingly. This legislative shift is anticipated to foster a more orderly and transparent approach to constitutional amendments, which could improve public understanding and engagement with these significant modifications to state law.
House Bill 1140 is a legislative proposal aimed at enhancing the process by which constitutional amendments are evaluated in South Dakota. Specifically, the bill requires the secretary of state to ascertain whether proposed amendments conform to the single subject rule and whether they represent a revision of the Constitution. This procedural change is intended to streamline how amendments are proposed and certified, ensuring that each proposal focuses on a singular issue, thus preventing voter confusion and legislative overreach.
The sentiment surrounding HB 1140 has been largely favorable, particularly among legislators who argue that the bill provides necessary clarity and accountability in the amendment process. Supporters contend that by reinforcing the single subject requirement, the bill will protect the integrity of the Constitution and enhance voters' ability to make informed decisions. However, there are concerns expressed by some advocacy groups that this could inadvertently restrict citizens’ ability to propose multiple related amendments, potentially stifling democratic input and limiting legislative creativity.
Notable points of contention include the fear among opponents that this bill may unduly empower the secretary of state and restrict the legislative powers of sponsors wishing to address interconnected issues. Critics argue that requiring a single subject may not always reflect the realities of legislative matters, where multiple related issues often need to be addressed simultaneously. This tension highlights a broader debate about balancing efficiency and thoroughness in the legislative process, making HB 1140 a focal point for discussions around constitutional governance in South Dakota.