Argument for
By John Hughes, State Representative; Dale Bartscher, South Dakota Right to Life; Nathan Sanderson, South Dakota Retailers
no rhetorical technique found
We encourage you to VOTE YES on AMENDMENT L to Protect Our Constitution. In recent years, political activists have tried to change South Dakota’s Constitution by inserting policy changes into our state’s founding document. Currently, South Dakota’s Constitution can be changed by a simple majority of votes cast. Amendment L raises that threshold to sixty percent. By contrast, the U.S.
Constitution is much harder to amend. Changes to the U.S. Constitution require a 2/3 vote of the U.S. House and Senate, followed by ratification of 3/4 of the states. Our state Constitution provides a framework of governance, while laws passed by the Legislature or by voter initiative outline policy within the framework.
A simple majority works well for ordinary laws, but a higher threshold is needed for changing our Constitution, which is meant to protect core rights. With Amendment L, only changes with broad, strong support from South Dakotans become part of our framework of governance.
This doesn’t mean we can’t make changes; it simply means that our foundational document should not be subject to the political whims of a given election cycle. Let’s keep our Constitution secure for future generations. VOTE YES on AMENDMENT L.
From sdsos.gov, the official voter guide.
Argument against
By Chase Jensen, Dakota Rural Action; Ryan Rolfs, South Dakota Education Association
Loaded LanguageAppeal to FearTransferGlittering Generalities
At its core, Amendment L seeks to establish minority rule in South Dakota. It removes important checks and balances, making it easier for insiders in Pierre to make backroom deals and listen to out-of-state donors instead of the people who live here. Voters have already rejected this idea twice in recent years. In 2018, they defeated Amendment X, which proposed a 55% threshold.
Loaded Language · “seeks to establish minority rule”, “insiders in Pierre to make backroom deals” — 'Minority rule' is an emotionally charged characterization of the amendment's purpose, not a neutral description.
In 2022, they overwhelmingly rejected Amendment C, which would have required 60% approval for constitutional amendments with fiscal impacts. Amendment L goes even further by applying the 60% requirement to every future constitutional amendment. At some point, supporters of these proposals need to just listen to voters as they have spoken.
South Dakota was the first state to give citizens the power to propose and vote on laws directly. That tradition exists so ordinary people, not just politicians or powerful interests, can shape their government when needed. That power has been an important part of our political tradition for decades. Within that power lies a simple principle: the majority decides.
If Amendment L passes, a small minority could block our state from holding politicians accountable. Our state motto says, "Under God, the People Rule." Amendment L would make it much harder for the people to have their say, even when a clear majority agrees. Protect majority rule. Don’t give away your power. Vote NO on Amendment L.
Appeal to Fear · “a small minority could block our state from holding politicians accountable” — Warns of a dire consequence if the amendment passes, in which a minority blocks accountability.
Transfer · “Our state motto says, "Under God, the People Rule."” — Borrows religious and state-symbol authority from the motto to legitimize opposition to the amendment.
Glittering Generalities · “Protect majority rule.” — Uses a vague, noble-sounding value slogan as a rhetorical flourish.
From sdsos.gov, the official voter guide.