{"id":37201,"date":"2024-06-13T20:14:42","date_gmt":"2024-06-14T01:14:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/poll-majority-of-south-dakotans-want-new-system-for-primary-elections\/"},"modified":"2024-06-13T20:14:51","modified_gmt":"2024-06-14T01:14:51","slug":"poll-majority-of-south-dakotans-want-new-system-for-primary-elections","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/poll-majority-of-south-dakotans-want-new-system-for-primary-elections\/","title":{"rendered":"Poll: Majority of South Dakotans want new system for primary elections"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/span><\/div>
\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Signs point voters to their precincts at the Instructional Planning Center in Sioux Falls, S.D., on Tuesday, June 4, 2024. South Dakota\u2019s June 4 elections featured 44 Republican legislative primaries and one Democratic primary. (Photo: Stu Whitney \/ South Dakota News Watch)<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

South Dakotans by a wide margin support a constitutional amendment that would change the way the state conducts primary elections, according to a scientific poll of 500 registered voters co-sponsored by South Dakota News Watch.<\/p>\n

The statewide survey, also sponsored by the Chiesman Center for Democracy at the University of South Dakota, showed that 55% of respondents favored the plan to change the state\u2019s election format, with 33% opposed and 12% undecided.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s a jump in support from a similarly structured November 2023 poll, which showed 49% supporting the measure, 34% opposed and 17% undecided.<\/p>\n

If passed, Amendment H would establish \u201ctop-two\u201d primaries for governor, Congress and state legislative and county races rather than political parties conducting separate primary contests.<\/p>\n

All registered voters would be eligible to weigh in on which two candidates advance to the general election. Currently in South Dakota, a voter registered with a political party can only vote in that party\u2019s primary. Those registered as non-affiliated can participate in Democratic primaries but not Republican contests.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe main argument for this amendment is fairness,\u201d said South Dakota Open Primaries chairman Joe Kirby, a Sioux Falls businessman and government reform advocate. \u201cAll voters should have an equal voice in electing their representatives and leaders.\u201d<\/p>\n

Could open primaries hurt Democrats?<\/p>\n

The issue has gained prominence in the wake of historically low voter turnout in South Dakota\u2019s June 4 primary elections, which featured 44 Republican legislative primaries in addition to county contests but a lack of statewide engagement. There was one Democratic legislative primary in the state.<\/p>\n

Just 17% of registered voters in South Dakota cast ballots in the election, including 10% in the state\u2019s largest county, Minnehaha.<\/p>\n

Julia Hellwege, an associate political science professor at USD and director of the Chiesman Center, said Democrats and non-affiliated voters feeling shut out of the process could lead to more willingness to explore alternatives, such as open primaries.<\/p>\n

The News Watch poll showed that Amendment H is supported by 82% of Democrats and 59% of independent voters. Republicans aren\u2019t as convinced that a change is needed, with 40% in favor of open primaries, compared to 43% against and 18% undecided.<\/p>\n

Female voters support the measure by a margin of 62% to 28%, compared to men, who support it by a margin of 47% to 38%.<\/p>\n

The Legislative Research Council estimated that if Amendment H passes, an average of more than 50,000 additional ballots every two years would be needed to meet voter demand for primary elections.<\/p>\n

More robust opposition expected<\/p>\n

Mason-Dixon Polling and Strategy conducted the survey May 10-13. Those interviewed were selected randomly from a telephone-matched state voter registration list that included both landline and cellphone numbers. Quotas were assigned to reflect voter registration by county. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.<\/p>\n

With a proposed South Dakota abortion amendment drawing most of the controversy and media attention, open primaries mostly flew under the radar during the signature-gathering and certification process.<\/p>\n

One of the detractors was South Dakota Freedom Caucus chairman Aaron Aylward, a state representative from Harrisburg, who told News Watch that the proposal would essentially create \u201ctwo general elections in South Dakota.\u201d<\/p>\n

Early opposition also came from South Dakota Republican Party chair John Wiik and U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds, who told News Watch that \u201cour current primary system has served us well.\u201d<\/p>\n

Now that the primaries are over and Amendment H is certified for the ballot, more sparks are expected to fly.<\/p>\n

Aberdeen businessman Toby Doeden, whose Dakota First PAC was involved in supporting more conservative Republicans against establishment foes in the primaries, said on Facebook that \u201cit\u2019s time to refocus and re-energize and start working on things like the radical ballot initiatives coming up in November.\u201d<\/p>\n

Doeden, who did not respond to an interview request from News Watch, listed the abortion and open primary amendments as his group\u2019s top two targets.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe would not be surprised to face opposition to our proposal to let all voters vote,\u201d said Kirby when asked about the Dakota First effort. \u201cSome folks like the system that lets 17% of voters decide the outcomes in South Dakota. We don\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2018We have a big job ahead of us\u2019<\/p>\n

Other responses in the News Watch\/Chiesman poll revealed serious concerns among South Dakota voters about American democracy and the integrity of election systems.<\/p>\n

More than 6 in 10 South Dakotans said they were dissatisfied with how democracy is working in the United States, including 32% who said they were \u201cvery dissatisfied.\u201d By party affiliation, 41% of Republicans, 32% of independents and 13% of Democrats said they were very dissatisfied.<\/p>\n

As for recent elections, 74% of respondents said they accept the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, with clear party distinctions. While 96% of Democrats and 88% of independents said they accepted President Joe Biden\u2019s win over Donald Trump, 58% of Republicans said they did.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s not uncommon for people of a party label to disagree more with results that don\u2019t align with their preferences,\u201d said Hellwege. \u201cBut here we\u2019re seeing that it goes beyond that to where Republicans in particular are less likely to believe not only in the accuracy of election results but in democracy itself as a system.\u201d<\/p>\n

Citizen groups such as the South Dakota Canvassing have pushed electoral activism in the state by echoing accusations from conservative media and demanding proof of secure systems, despite no evidence of substantial voter fraud in a state that Trump won in 2020 by 26 points.<\/p>\n

Asked in the poll about the most recent election in 2022, only 31% of Republicans said they were confident that the results were counted accurately, compared to 97% of Democrats and 75% of independents.<\/p>\n

\u201cThese are registered voters \u2013 that\u2019s the more engaged population,\u201d said Hellwege. \u201cElection administrators, elected officials, practitioners and academics have a big job ahead of us to restore confidence in the accuracy in elections. Rather conclusively, academic research has shown that elections are accurate and free of fraud. We can be confident in the results. And yet even the more engaged registered voters don\u2019t believe us. We need to do more.\u201d<\/p>\n

This story was produced by South Dakota News Watch, an independent, nonprofit news organization. Read more in-depth stories at sdnewswatch.org<\/a> and sign up for an email every few days to get stories as soon as they\u2019re published. Contact Stu Whitney at stu.whitney@sdnewswatch.org<\/a><\/p>\n

www.sdnewswatch.org\/poll-shows-south-dakotans-support-open-primary-voting-system\/&nbsp<\/a>;<\/p>\n

The post Poll: Majority of South Dakotans want new system for primary elections<\/a> first appeared on Native Sun News Today<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/div>

Visit Original Source<\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

<\/span><\/div>

Signs point voters to their precincts at the Instructional Planning Center in Sioux Falls, S.D., on Tuesday, June 4, 2024. South Dakota\u2019s June 4 elections featured 44 Republican legislative primaries and one Democratic primary. (Photo: Stu Whitney \/ South Dakota News Watch) South Dakotans by a wide margin support a <\/p>\n

Read More<\/a>
Shared by Native Sun News Today<\/a> June 13, 2024<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/div>","protected":false},"author":1541,"featured_media":37203,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5627],"tags":[10105,6658],"class_list":["post-37201","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-resource-directory-blog","tag-archive","tag-more-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37201","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1541"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=37201"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37201\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/37203"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=37201"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=37201"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/unitedresourceconnection.org\/cannon-ball-nd-58528\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=37201"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}