Raising the bar for constitutional change: Amendment L proposes 60% threshold for amendments

This November, South Dakota voters will decide whether to make the state constitution harder to amend.

Amendment L proposes a 60% supermajority vote to amend the constitution instead of the current simple majority. Supporters argue that altering the state’s constitution should require a broader consensus, while opponents contend it undermines direct democracy by making citizen-led amendments more difficult to pass.

The bar to amend the state constitution is already higher than for passing a state law.

Citizens can place an initiated constitutional amendment on the ballot by gathering signatures equal to 10% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election. In 2026, that number is about 35,000.

State lawmakers can also place constitutional amendments on the ballot by passing a joint resolution with a majority vote in both the House and the Senate.

Once an amendment is on the ballot, it currently requires a simple majority — 50% plus one vote — to pass. Amendment L would raise that bar to 60%.

The 60% requirement targets only constitutional proposals. Standard legislative bills and citizen-led initiated measures will continue to pass with a simple majority.

Hughes says voters need protection

State Rep. John Hughes, R-Sioux Falls, who wrote Amendment L believes it will protect the state from voters who may be misled or manipulated by confusing ballot measures.

“People are easily fooled,” Hughes said.

One of the reasons he supports the amendment is because of measures like Amendment A in 2020, which proposed the legalization of recreational marijuana.

Voters approved Amendment A with 54% of the vote, which would have fallen six percent short of Amendment L’s proposed 60% requirement.

Hughes believes cases like this show why South Dakota needs a stronger safeguard for amendments proposed to its constitution. He believes changing the state’s foundational document should be harder than changing its laws.

Although Amendment A passed, it was later struck down by the South Dakota Supreme Court because of a separate legal issue. 

Opponents see a threat to democracy

State Rep. Erin Healy, D-Sioux Falls, believes Amendment L will make it more difficult to pass citizen-led constitutional amendments, which she says would weaken grassroots political movements.

She believes it would reduce an ordinary citizen’s ability to impact on state government as well as their ability to bring issues directly to voters. South Dakota was the first state to enact citizen-led initiatives, so she believes the issue is especially important for South Dakotans.

Healy argued that a 60% threshold disproportionately hurts grassroots campaigns. Because securing a supermajority requires costly statewide advertising and paid outreach, local groups are easily outspent by wealthy special interests.

Reynold Nesiba, former state senator, said Amendment L is an attempt to impose minority rule. If it passed, 40% of the population could overrule an amendment a majority of voters approve.

“Direct democracy has been under attack from the supermajority Republican legislature for over a decade,” Nesiba said. “Legislators should show a little more respect for the will of the people.”

Similar proposals

This isn’t the first time South Dakotans have voted on proposals to raise the percentage of votes needed for constitutional amendments to pass.

Much like Amendment L, 2018’s  Amendment X would have made it harder for constitutional amendments to pass, but it proposed a lower threshold of 55%. The amendment was rejected by voters.

More recently, in 2022, Amendment C would have required a 60% supermajority to approve any ballot measure that increased taxes or required the state to appropriate $10 million or more in its first five years. South Dakotans rejected the measure with 67% voting against it.

Hughes said he believes the political landscape of South Dakota has changed significantly in the past eight years and expects Amendment L to pass.

Healy, however, is hesitant to believe South Dakotans will vote differently than they have historically.

What does Augustana think? 

Sophomore Landon Brommer, president of the Augustana Republicans, said that Amendment L is integral to South Dakota’s future success.

“Amendment L encourages more careful decision making,” Brommer said. “It protects the state constitution from frequent changes pushed by temporary political movements.”

Sophomore and co-president of the Augustana Political Science Club Ayden Calvert strictly opposes Amendment L.

“It is contradictory to rely on the public’s judgment to elect leaders while simultaneously seeking to dilute that judgment when it comes to constitutional questions,” Calvert said. 

Voters will decide Nov. 3 whether the threshold to amend South Dakota’s constitution will change.