Keeley Meier, Brandon Valley Journal
Last week’s forum for state legislative candidates of Districts 10 and 25 on Oct. 20 saw plenty of friendly discourse and camaraderie. It also saw disagreement between candidates on some fundamental ballot measures.
The forum, which was held via Zoom to ensure the safety of the candidates and the public, featured six sets of questions including opening introductions. It was jointly sponsored by the Brandon Valley Area Chamber of Commerce and the Brandon Valley Journal.
The most contention occurred when candidates were asked about Constitutional Amendment A—an amendment to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, along with hemp and medical marijuana laws—and Initiated Measure (IM) 26, which would legalize marijuana for medical use.
District 25 candidates respond
Challenger Marsha Symens said she is against Amendment A.
“I’m not for changing the South Dakota Constitution to include the use of marijuana,” the Dell Rapids resident said.
Symens also said she is against IM 26 because she cannot speak to the medical benefits, or lack thereof, of medical marijuana.
Representative Tom Pischke said he’s not necessarily opposed to marijuana but does not believe “it’s proper to go in the Constitution” because of the difficulty of amending the Constitution in the future if parts of the law were to not function as they should.
Due to this, Pischke said he will not vote in favor of Amendment A.
“I’m probably going to support IM 26,” said Pischke, who resides in Dell Rapids. “I think medical marijuana should be a viable option for others that are struggling with medical issues, especially our veterans who suffer from PTSD.”
Candidate Rick Knobe said there is enough medical and anecdotal evidence available to support IM 26 and will vote yes.
Knobe, who lives in Baltic, also showed support of Constitutional Amendment A because of his concerns about the law enforcement side of marijuana.
“I do know that the way we’re doing marijuana now is clogging up our court system, our jails,” Knobe said. “It’s turning regular people into criminals, and it doesn’t need to do that.”
Challenger Jared Nieuwenhuis expressed support for both measures.
“I would agree with Marsha and Tom that I don’t know that we would necessarily need to use it as a constitutional amendment, but I think they took that track because of what happened with Initiated Measure 22,” Nieuwenhuis said, referencing the 2016 election’s IM 22 which aimed to revise state campaign finance and lobbying laws and create a publicly-funded campaign finance program and ethics commission.
“I think a lot of people saw what happened and lost faith in the legislature to honor the votes that people take on initiated measures, so for Amendment A, I did vote yes on it, and I do support it. Same thing with Initiated Measure 26,” Nieuwenhuis continued. He, too, is a Dell Rapids resident.
Candidate Jeff Barth said he will vote in support of both ballot measures.
“Jared is exactly right,” Barth said. “We can’t trust the legislature to honor the wishes of the citizens. They have shown over and over again that they do what they want. If the legislature had more respect for the people, we wouldn’t need an amendment.”
Representative Jon Hansen said he would not support the amendment.
“In a way, Constitutional Amendment A really offends the whole idea of the constitution,” Hansen said. “We don’t often get laws right the first time we pass them; that’s why you look at any law in the books, and it’s been amended once or twice.”
Hansen said if marijuana would be placed into law, that it should be in the statutes and not the Constitution.
He also said the way the measure was circulated was “dishonest” because the circulators of the measure only mentioned the passing of hemp for farmers and that they did not mention the use of recreational marijuana.
“I don’t have a lot of tolerance for that kind of dishonesty for the people of this state,” said Hansen, who lives in Dell Rapids.
Hansen also brought the conversation back to IM 22, saying that one of the other candidates falsely accused him of supporting the repeal of the measure despite not being in the legislature at that time.
“There might have been some good reasons that measure was repealed,” Hansen said. “I think a circuit court found it to be unconstitutional. I don’t think people much like their taxpayer dollars going to fund political campaigns. I certainly wouldn’t want my taxpayer dollars going to fund the political campaign of someone who’s pro-choice and anti-Second Amendment.”
In regards to IM 26, Hansen said he is not passionate about the issue either way and said he hopes the doctors would prescribe marijuana in the same way they do for other drugs.
Candidate forum recordings are posted on the Brandon Valley Journal Facebook page.
