Hess: ‘The Twilight Zone’ can wait if South Dakotans approve anti-marijuana measures – Mitchell Republic

It’s like something out of The Twilight Zone: imagine a world where marijuana is legal, but no one can sell it to you. You have come to a place where the will of the people collides with the ideals of the Legislative Assembly. You’re in… South Dakota.

This state could be in the twilight zone if Measure 29 is approved by voters. The measure allows possession of up to 2 ounces of marijuana and six marijuana plants. There are also provisions allowing the possession of marijuana edibles and cannabis concentrates.

The measure would transfer marijuana “without consideration.” This means someone has to give it to you for free. Perhaps your friend who has six marijuana plants will be kind enough to give you some. There will be no legal marijuana sales—except for the existing medical marijuana program—until the Legislature acts to allow retail sales.

Proponents of legalizing the sale of recreational marijuana learned a hard lesson in 2020 with the passage of Amendment A. This omnibus marijuana amendment contained everything you ever wanted to know about recreational marijuana and medical marijuana—how to sell it, how to tax it. and how to regulate it. (That same year, voters also approved IM 26, which legalized marijuana for medical purposes.)

The South Dakota Supreme Court found that Amendment A conflicted with state law requiring ballot questions to cover only one subject. Although voters liked the measure, the Supreme Court was right; Amendment A was chock full of items.

That’s why IM 29 is such a scaled-down version of the ballot measure approved in 2020. If voters approve it, regulation and taxation would be left to the Legislature. And it was here that the IM 29 could be quickly destroyed.

The South Dakota Legislature is heavily skewed toward the Republican Party. After the November elections, it could move even more dangerously to the right.

After the last legislative session, a group of veteran lawmakers said they would not run for office again. In the primary, a group of officials unfortunate enough to vote for a bill that would regulate but not ban carbon dioxide pipelines was defeated. Winners lean toward membership in the ultraconservative wing of the Republican Party.

It’s easy to imagine that some of these newcomers will be elected calling themselves Republicans. Others will simply slip into the Capitol unopposed because the state Democratic Party has once again failed to field enough legislative candidates.

The action or likely inaction of the 2025 Legislature on IM 29 was discussed in a recent South Dakota Searchlight article. “You have a conservative Legislature,” said Rhonda Milstead of Protecting South Dakota Kids, which opposes IM 29. “Why would they create a retail market for something they didn’t want in the first place?”

Indeed, why, if not by the will of the people.

If the will of the people is not enough to motivate them to act, perhaps legislators can be persuaded with money. The 2020 Amendment A fiscal note said licensing fees, sales taxes and a 15% excise tax would generate $29.3 million in 2024. Lawmakers face another drop in state revenue if IM 28, which would eliminate the state sales tax on groceries, is approved. by voters. South Dakota teacher salaries once again rank 49th in the nation. The new source of revenue may sound like a good idea to lawmakers who are serious about balancing the state budget.

One of the things being taken seriously in the run-up to the election is opposition to IM 29. Milstead laid it out during the debate over recreational marijuana: “This drug brings more poverty, more crime, more mental health problems, more youth at risk, more violence , more dependence.”

Make no mistake, Milstead’s comments sound familiar. They reflect what opponents of the state lottery have said since 1986. That year, state voters approved an amendment that created a lottery. Even with constant warnings about the dangers of gambling, lottery legislators have no problem funneling $178 million in lottery proceeds into the state budget each year. If they can sleep at night after helping unleash gambling addiction hell in South Dakota for the past 38 years, they should have no problem helping the state make some money selling marijuana if that’s what the people want.

Of course, legislators may not be faced with such a decision. An October South Dakota News Watch/Chiesman Center for Democracy poll found 51% of voters opposed, 44% of voters favored and 5% undecided on IM 29.

Given this polling data, it’s hard to imagine a world in which South Dakota voters approve of recreational marijuana, although it has happened before. It’s also hard to imagine that the South Dakota Legislature, filled with Republicans (some of whom consider Donald Trump too liberal), will follow the will of the people and set rules for the legal sale of marijuana.

— This column originally appeared on Southdakotasearchlight.com.