South Dakota Constitutional Amendment N: Travel Reimbursement

Full text of the amendment is as follows:

Title: An Amendment to the South Dakota Constitution repealing certain reimbursement restrictions for travel by legislators to and from a legislative session.

Explanation: The Constitution fixes the mileage reimbursement rate for legislators at five cents per mile for their travel to and from a legislative session.
Constitutional Amendment N repeals this constitutional limitation and allows legislator travel reimbursement to be set by the Legislature.

Yes” will eliminate the fixed travel reimbursement rate.
No” will leave the Constitution as it is.

The reimbursement is firmly fixed in the 19th century. It is time to remove this from the constitution and let it be set at some reasonable level to ensure that legislators are not impoverished by reason of their travels to the place of congress.

Constant Conservative recommends a “Yes” vote on Amendment N.

9 thoughts on “South Dakota Constitutional Amendment N: Travel Reimbursement

  1. Do you think allowing the legislature to set their own rates is wise, or is that something that should be voted on by the people? That was the thing I was unsure of with that amendment…

    1. Rachel,

      You can be sure that much public scrutiny will be applied to the rates. Since reimbursement rates are already established by the federal government (and many/most states follow those guidelines) I think it will work out fine.

  2. I’m voting NO. Every time they’ve brought this up, the detailed explanation that I’ve read has said the ‘ancient rate’ only applies to the initial trip to Pierre and the final trip home. Any other travel is reimbursed at current rates. Since they all say they want to ‘serve’ us, I figure they can get reimbursed at the old 5 cent rate for a single round trip as a reminder of state history. Basically, if you really want to serve your district, you can pay for one round trip to Pierre. 🙂

    1. jd,

      You make a fair point regarding a reminder of state history. The last time this came up for discussion, I was closer to where you are. Now, in the interest of keeping reimbursement rules simple, I think it wise to standardize across the board.

Comments are closed.