Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

* * MADD About Amendment A In South Dakota * *

Expand Messages
  • victoryusa@jail4judges.org
    J.A.I.L. News Journal ______________________________________________________ Los Angeles, California September 25, 2004
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 25, 2004
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      J.A.I.L. News Journal
      ______________________________________________________
      Los Angeles, California                                     September 25, 2004
       
      Mission Statement                  JNJ Library                     PayPal Support
      Federal J.A.I.L. 
                                FAQs                    What?MeWarden?
       
      MADD About Amendment A
      In South Dakota
       
      It is no secret that J.A.I.L. is about to embark on its campaign to get the Judicial Accountability Initiative Law on the ballot in South Dakota this coming election cycle in 2006. In the meantime on this current 2004 election, South Dakotans are faced with an Amendment A measure, sponsored by their legislature and lawyers, that would permanently take away the people's right to vote on judges.
       
      J.A.I.L. strongly opposes any measure, including Amendment A, which takes away accountability of judges to the people. This Amendment is creating a stir in South Dakota focusing on the judiciary. Opposing this measure are state's attorneys, city council members, some legislators, as well as civic organizations such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD).  
       
      The goal of defeating Amendment A is the springboard for an even more heated South Dakota J.A.I.L. campaign for the next ballot in 2006. South Dakota will become the beacon of this nation regarding accountability of judges to the people. It will be a subject debated throughout this nation, 
      and will be a model of providing "new guards for our future security" as described in the Declaration of Independence.
       
      MADD sets forth its position on Amendment A below:
      -Ron Branson-

       
      From: MADD
      Subject: MADD against Amendment A "Merit Selection of Judges"

      MADD takes a Stand against Amendment A in South Dakota

      "Merit Selection of Judges"

      FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

      September 25, 2004

      Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) is worried by Constitutional Amendment A (Merit Selection of Judges) which is on the November 2004 ballot. MADD feels this change would potentially harm the victims of drunk driving and our justice system.

      Right now, voters select their judges at the ballot box. Judges are accountable for their actions and they must convince us that they will do the best job of providing South Dakotans with justice. Judges have a lot of discretionary authority in sentencing and Amendment A would take away this check on the system.

      By allowing the Governor to appoint judges, we cannot choose from a number of candidates. We canÂ’t get to know who they are and what they stand for. Amendment A will end direct election of circuit judges and replace it with an appointment process that will be controlled by the governor and an unelected commission. There will be a retention vote three years after the appointment and then every eight years thereafter. MADD believes the retention vote is a sham because it does not allow the voters to have a say in the appointment. Essentially this means that circuit judges will be granted life terms in office.

      In addition creating lifetime tenure, Amendment A could also be abused in the hands of future governors. The Judicial Qualifications Commission and Governor could appoint judges for political reasons rather than the quality of their jurisprudence. The commission will be made up mostly of lawyers, and Amendment A is written in such a way that it prevents the legislature from even having an "advise and consent" vote in the appointment of judges. The result could be that South Dakotans could be stuck with judges for life that do not believe in victimsÂ’ rights or in taking strong measures to deter drunk drivers. Or worse, we could be stuck with someone who is not a neutral, unbiased adjudicator, but someone who is beholden to the people who appoint him/her; this is the world that Constitutional Amendment A could create.

      MADD believes that judges should be accountable to the people. The lack of accountability that would result from Amendment A would be a disaster for all South Dakotans, including victims of drunken driving.

      MADD believes that .merit. needs to be determined by the people, not a governor or an unelected commission. We urge South Dakotans to vote "NO" on Amendment A in the November 2, 2004 election.

      __________________________________

      For more information contact:

      Lila Doud, President, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD)--Pennington County Chapter,
      maddpennco@...   605-343-5066


      J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
      Contribute to J.A.I.L. at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
      See our active flash, http://www.jail4judges.org/national_001.htm
      JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
      JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
      JAIL is taking America like a wildfire! AddRemove@...
      E-Group sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
      Get involved at JAIL_SALE_USA-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
       
      "..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
      minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
       
      "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
      striking at the root."                         -- Henry David Thoreau    <><
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.