Require that the director of the Legislative Research Council and the secretary of state review an initiated measure and determine if the measure embraces more than one subject.
This legislation modifies existing statutes governing the procedures for initiated measures, introducing specific requirements for review and certification aimed at preventing multi-subject measures. By defining a clear review process, the bill can potentially facilitate greater compliance among sponsors of initiated measures with state law. Consequently, this could result in a more orderly system for submitting and approving such measures, thus influencing how citizens engage with the legislative process and could impact local governance by ensuring that a single topic is adequately addressed in each proposal.
Senate Bill 92 aims to establish a process for reviewing initiated measures in South Dakota, specifically to ensure that these proposals embrace only a single subject as required by the state constitution. The bill mandates the Secretary of State and the director of the Legislative Research Council to evaluate proposed measures, providing written certification or notice if a measure violates the single subject rule. This process is intended to streamline the initiation of citizen-led legislative proposals and uphold constitutional requirements, therefore enhancing the integrity of the state's legislative process.
The sentiment surrounding SB92 is largely constructive, as proponents argue that it enhances governmental accountability and legislative clarity. Legislators supporting the bill believe that the tightened compliance measures will prevent confusion and potential legal issues arising from poorly structured measures. However, there may also be critiques regarding the how heightened scrutiny might deter citizen participation in the legislative process, especially if sponsors perceive the review process as cumbersome.
Notably, the contentious aspects of the bill center around the implications of government scrutiny over citizen-initiated proposals. Some critics may argue that while the intention is to uphold the single subject requirement, the added layer of review could stifle grassroots efforts to propose changes in legislation. Additionally, the appeals process outlined in the bill allows for challenges to certification decisions, which could lead to further legal disputes that delay or complicate the initiation of measures.