“I’m not going to kid you,
There’s a lot to do
Little can I promise,
It’s really up to you.”
“Vote For Me” — Chicago

Coming off the band’s Grammy Award-winning “Chicago X” album, Chicago released “Chicago XI” in September 1977.

The album had one major hit, “Baby, What a Big Surprise,” which would reach No. 4 on the Billboard Hot 100. It would also be the final album from the group to reach the top 10 in album sales until “Chicago 16” was released in 1982.

A rarity in rock music, Chicago featured a full band behind upbeat, rock and pop tunes. Originally known as Chicago Transit Authority (after the city’s mass transit supervising agency) and nicknamed CTA, the group shortened the name to Chicago in 1969.

Over the years, the lineups have changed for the band, and many very successful solo careers and other bands have been spun off by former Chicago members, but the group continues to record and tour, now more than 50 years into their career!

“Vote For Me” was not a single on the “Chicago XI” album, but it caught quite a bit of attention all the same as many connected with the message in the lyrics of a politician promising whatever he could to garner a vote.

Voting is something so basic and so expected in our American society that we often don’t give enough thought to the power that our vote carries - until it’s threatened or taken away.

Right now, there are two states who have illegally culled hundreds of thousands of legally registered voters from the voting rolls in a misguided attempt to remove those who may be registered and not a legal resident.

The Brennan Center for Justice has done extensive research and follow-up research on the issue of voter fraud in the United States and found that surveys of random registered voters find expected rates of 1-3% voter fraud in a given election.

The fact is that in every study that’s been done, the actual number is significantly below that, with the center concluding that being struck by lightning is more common than a person being impersonated at the polls. All elements of voter fraud constitute less than 0.5% of all ballots cast in local, statewide, and national elections, according to the research done by Brennan.

So, if our vote isn’t being compromised, we should all cast it with confidence, knowing how powerful each and every vote can be, correct?

Not exactly.

This past April, Huron had an election for mayor. Three excellent candidates ran, all three of whom would have made an excellent mayor for the city.

Perhaps it was apathy that any of the three would be a good choice, but I would estimate that more than that was involved with less than 25% of eligible Huron voters turning out to elect the mayor.

In the end, Mayor Mark Robish had the most ballots cast for him, but his overall total of 44% of the votes cast in the election meant that votes of roughly 10% of the entire registered voters eligible to vote in Huron’s mayoral election had made the decision who the city’s next mayor would be.

However, all registered voters in the city of Huron had the opportunity to vote for their representation in the Mayor’s office. That isn’t the case in many elections, whether for local, statewide, or national offices.

That brings us to the next in our series examining the ballot measures on South Dakota’s ballot in 2024. The first two were done on Initiated Measure 28 and Constitutional Amendment E. Today, we’ll examine proposed Constitutional Amendment H, regarding primary elections.
Amendment H would create an open primary system for county, state, and congressional races, putting the top two finishers through to the November election.

For instance, in District 22, two House seats were open. However, the Democrat Party did not have a candidate running, meaning that June’s primary election filled the two House seats and decided representation for all of District 22, despite only 53% of the 14,432 registered voters within the district having the ability to even cast a ballot, meaning for the next two years, nearly 6,800 voters in the district did not have a voice in who represents them in Pierre!

What Amendment H is attempting to put in place is called a “top-two” primary, where the top two finishers in the primary, regardless of party affiliation, advance to the November election.

In the case of District 22 and having two open seats, four candidates could advance. Instead, if every party in the state advanced one candidate each for the District 22 seats, we could see up to 10 candidates for those two spots on a November ballot if each registered party in the state and independents all ran two candidates.

Currently, California, Nebraska, and Washington have top-two primary systems. Nebraska’s is different as their state legislature is non-partisan, so all voting for state offices are done without party affiliation being part of the equation. Multiple states use other ranked-choice and similar primary styles other than straight-party primaries to decide general election candidates.

Interestingly, both the Democrat and Republican parties in South Dakota have come out against this measure at a state level with comments feeling that the system would hurt their particular party’s candidates in elections.

One of the statements from state Senator and S.D. Republican Party Chairman John Wilk caught my eye as he said, “I want Republicans to be able to choose the Republican candidate, and Democrats to choose the Democrat candidate. If you want to be an independent, then you’re independent of the decisions that affect your lives.”

It’s that last line that goes over like sandpaper over freshly-showered skin to me.

To have the leader of any of the registered parties, let alone the registered party with 50.7% of all active registered voters in the state, dismiss those who actively choose to register as Independent as being forced into accepting others’ decisions on their lives is a bold and, honestly, a scary statement about how much the parties truly value all voices in the state.

While Republicans have the majority of the state, with 50.7% of the voters, voters considered independent/no party affiliation/other within the state make up 25.2% of all South Dakotans, the second-largest voting “party” in the state. Disenfranchising one-quarter of the entire state seems like something that no party head should want to encourage, let alone talk down to those within that party.

As Chicago says in the song, it really is up to us. Do we want all voices heard, or only the ones that put the same letter behind them as we do?

It’s time for the state to stand up to ensure every voice is given equal weight and adopt Amendment H.

Heck, you might even see more people care enough to actually vote in primaries if their vote meant something!