South Dakota Decreased Youth Minimum Wage Veto Referendum, Referred Law 20 (2016)

South Dakota Referred Law 20

Election date
November 8, 2016
Topic
Minimum wage
Status
d Defeated
Type
Referendum| Origin
Citizens

* * *

2016 measures |

November 8
Constitutional Amendment R a
Constitutional Amendment S a
Constitutional Amendment T d
Constitutional Amendment U d
Constitutional Amendment V d
Referred Law 19 d
Referred Law 20 d
Initiated Measure 21 a
Initiated Measure 22 a
Initiated Measure 23 d
Polls
Voter guides
Campaign finance
Signature costs

The South Dakota Youth Minimum Wage Veto Referendum, also known as Referred Law 20, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in South Dakota as a veto referendum. It was defeated.

|  A "yes" vote supported Senate Bill 177 (SB 177), a law decreasing the minimum wage for workers under age 18 from $8.50 to $7.50.

|

|  A "no" vote opposed SB 177.

|

SB 177 also would have provided that the youth minimum wage is not pegged to inflation.[1]

Opponents of Senate Bill 177 collected signatures to put this measure before voters, giving them a chance to overturn the law. Thus, those responsible for putting this measure on the ballot advocated for a "no" vote on election day.

## Contents

* 1 Election results
* 2 Background
* 3 Text of measure
* 3.1 Attorney General explanation
* 3.2 Full text
* 4 Support for "yes" vote
* 4.1 Official argument for "yes" vote
* 5 Opposition to "yes" vote
* 5.1 Opponents to "yes" vote
* 5.1.1 Official argument against "yes" vote
* 6 Campaign finance
* 6.1 Support for "yes" vote
* 6.1.1 Cash donations
* 6.2 Methodology
* 7 Path to the ballot
* 8 State profile
* 8.1 Presidential voting pattern
* 8.1.1 Pivot Counties (2016)
* 8.1.2 Pivot Counties (2020)
* 9 Related measures
* 10 Recent news
* 11 See also
* 12 External links
* 13 Sponsor contact information
* 14 Footnotes

## Election results[edit]

Referred Law 20

Result| Votes| Percentage
d No| 256,686| 71.13%
Yes|  104,185|  28.87%

Election results from South Dakota Secretary of State

## Background[edit]

See also: South Dakota Increased Minimum Wage, Initiated Measure 18 (2014)

In November 2014, South Dakotans approved Measure 18, which increased the minimum wage from $7.25 per hour to $8.50 per hour beginning January 1, 2015, and it guaranteed an increase in the minimum wage each year after to account for inflation. Measure 18 was backed by the South Dakota Democratic Party.[2]

Republicans in the South Dakota Legislature responded to voter approval of Measure 18 by introducing Senate Bill 177, which was designed to exempt workers under age 18 from receiving the initiative's required minimum wage of $8.50. Gov. Dennis Daugaard (R) signed SB 177 on March 30, 2015.[3]

## Text of measure[edit]

### Attorney General explanation[edit]

The Attorney General's ballot explanation was as follows:[4]

“  | State law requires employers to pay all non-tipped employees a minimum wage, with limited exceptions. Currently, that amount is $8.55 per hour. State law also requires that the minimum wage be adjusted, effective on January 1 of each year, by any increase in the cost of living as measured by the U. S. Department of Labor's Consumer Price Index.

Referred Law 20, if approved, would lower the existing State minimum wage to $7.50 per hour for non-tipped employees under age 18. In addition, no annual cost-of-living wage adjustment would be required for the youth minimum wage.

The referred law would also prohibit employers from taking any action to displace an employee or reduce an employee's hours, wages, or benefits, in order to hire someone at the youth minimum wage.

A vote "Yes" is for lowering the minimum wage to $7.50 per hour for non-tipped employees under age 18.

A vote "No" is against the referred law.[5]

|  ”

|
|

### Full text[edit]

The full text of the bill was as follows:[6]

“  | AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to establish a youth minimum wage.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:

Section 1. That § 60-11-3 be amended to read as follows:

60-11-3. Every employer shall pay to each employee wages at a rate of not less than eight dollars and fifty cents an hour. Violation of this section is a Class 2 misdemeanor. The provisions of this section do not apply to certain employees being paid an opportunity wage pursuant to § 60-11-4.1, babysitters, employees under age eighteen, or outside salespersons. The provisions of this section also do not apply to employees employed by an amusement or recreational establishment, an organized camp, or a religious or nonprofit educational conference center if one of the following apply:

(1) The establishment, camp, or center does not operate for more than seven months in any calendar year; or

(2) During the preceding calendar year, the average receipts of the establishment, camp, or center for any six months of the calendar year were not more than thirty-three and onethird percent of its average receipts for the other six months of the year.

Section 2. That chapter 60-11 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:

An employer shall pay an employee under the age of eighteen at least seven dollars and fifty cents an hour. This wage is not subject to the annual minimum wage adjustment pursuant to § 60-11-

3.2. No employer may take any action to displace an employee, including a partial displacement through a reduction in hours, wages, or employment benefits, in order to hire an employee at the wage authorized in this Act.[5]

|  ”

|
|

## Support for "yes" vote[edit]

Those who support/supported a "yes" vote on this measure and opposed the veto referendum petition effort targeting Senate Bill 177 are referred to as supporters in this article.

SD Voice filed to support the "yes" vote.[7]

### Official argument for "yes" vote[edit]

The official argument for a "yes" vote on this measure as listed in the "South Dakota 2016 Ballot Question Pamphlet" was as follows:[8]

“  |

Young people in South Dakota deserve a fair shot at a first job. That’s why South Dakota residents should vote YES on Referred Law 20 – SB 177, an Act that establishes a youth training wage while respecting the will of voters to raise the minimum wage for adults.

When South Dakota approved a minimum wage increase last November, voters might not have realized that the policy could unintentionally price the state’s youngest jobseekers out of the workforce. Sadly, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office confirms that this is what happens when the minimum wage goes up.

That’s the problem; SB 177 is the solution.

A study published by Cornell University found that the creation of a youth training wage can help alleviate the negative effects of a minimum wage increase on young employees. It makes intuitive sense: If the state’s small businesses can pay a training wage to young adults who don’t have extensive workplace experience, they’re less likely to “downsize” that job.

That means young people will continue to receive all benefits associated with a first job, like higher pay and greater job security in the future.

Economists have shown that just 20 hours of part-time work per week during the senior year of high school results in annual earnings that are 20 percent higher after graduation, relative to young adults who don’t work. Another study shows that young adults who are unemployed today are missing out on more than a paycheck
they’re also at a greater risk of future unemployment.

You can’t start climbing the career ladder without a first rung. A youth training wage provision would ensure that, even as the minimum wage in South Dakota rises, this first rung still exists.

Michael Saltsman

Research Director

Employment Policies Institute

Saltsman@EPIOnline.org [5]

|  ”

|
|

## Opposition to "yes" vote[edit]

Those who oppose/opposed a "yes" vote on this measure and supported the veto referendum petition effort targeting Senate Bill 177 are referred to as opponents in this article.

### Opponents to "yes" vote[edit]

* South Dakota Democratic Party[2]
* Teamsters Local 120
* Our Revolution[9]

#### Official argument against "yes" vote[edit]

The official argument against a "yes" vote on this measure as listed in the "South Dakota 2016 Ballot Question Pamphlet" was as follows:[8]

“  |

Voting NO on Referred Law 20 keeps the current minimum wage for all workers. Voting NO on 20 prevents the creation of an unnecessary and undemocratic sub-minimum wage for teenagers. The state legislature attempted to create this “youth minimum wage” in 2015, but thousands of South Dakota voters prevented that pay cut from taking effect by signing a petition to refer it to a statewide vote. Voting NO on 20 stops that pay cut for good.

There are two reasons to vote NO on 20.

First, Referred Law 20 attacks South Dakota voters. In November 2014, we passed Initiated Measure 18 by a 55% to 45% margin. This statewide vote raised the state minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $8.50 an hour with an annual inflation adjustment. Thanks to that measure, the state minimum wage is now $8.55 an hour. The state legislature attempted to undermine this measure by creating a lower subminimum wage of $7.50 an hour for workers under age 18. This youth minimum wage tries to overturn our majority vote in the 2014 election. Thus, voters who respect South Dakota’s long history of direct democracy should vote NO on Referred Law 20.

Second, Referred Law 20 is also entirely unnecessary. Despite dire warnings from legislators backing the youth minimum wage, South Dakota’s labor market has continued to expand and unemployment has decreased. Paying young workers the same minimum wage as adults helps younger workers earn more to support their families and go to college without harming South Dakota’s strong economy.

Please, vote NO on Referred Law 20. This legislation attacks the will of South Dakota voters and serves no good purpose in our robust labor market.

Reynold F. Nesiba

201 S. Menlo Ave

Sioux Falls, SD, 57104 [5]

|  ”

|
|

## Campaign finance[edit]

Total campaign contributions:

Support: |  $456.82
Opposition: |  $0.00

As of February 8, 2017, the support campaign for this measure featured one ballot question committee, SD Voice, that received a total of $456.82 in contributions, all of which were cash donations. The support campaign spent $456.82.[7]

No ballot question committees registered to oppose the ballot measure.[7]

### Support for "yes" vote[edit]

#### Cash donations[edit]

The following ballot question committee was registered to support this initiative. The chart below shows cash donations and expenditures current as of February 8, 2017.[7]

Committee  |  Amount raised[10] |  Amount spent

|
|

SD Voice  |  $456.82  |  $456.82
Total |  $456.82 | $456.82

### Methodology[edit]

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

## Path to the ballot[edit]

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in South Dakota

Opponents of Senate Bill 177 were required to collect a minimum of 13,870 valid signatures by June 29, 2015, for the veto referendum to appear on the November 8, 2016, ballot.[2]

On June 29, 2015, petitioners reported collecting thousands of signatures in excess of the 13,870 requirement.[11] The initiative was certified on June 30. A total of 17,077 signatures were valid.[12]

Cost of signature collection:
Ballotpedia found no petition companies that received payment from the sponsors of this measure, which means signatures were likely gathered largely by volunteers. A total of $0 was spent to collect the 13,870 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $0.[13]

## State profile[edit]

Demographic data for South Dakota

| South Dakota| U.S.
Total population:| 857,919| 316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):| 75,811| 3,531,905
Race and ethnicity**
White:| 85%| 73.6%
Black/African American:| 1.6%| 12.6%
Asian:| 1.2%| 5.1%
Native American:| 8.6%| 0.8%
Pacific Islander:| 0%| 0.2%
Two or more:| 2.6%| 3%
Hispanic/Latino:| 3.3%| 17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:| 90.9%| 86.7%
College graduation rate:| 27%| 29.8%
Income
Median household income:| $50,957| $53,889
Persons below poverty level:| 15.3%| 11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015)
Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in South Dakota.

* * *

**Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

### Presidential voting pattern[edit]

See also: Presidential voting trends in South Dakota

South Dakota voted Republican in all five presidential elections between 2000 and 2016.

#### Pivot Counties (2016)

Ballotpedia identified 206 counties that voted for Donald Trump (R) in 2016 after voting for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012. Collectively, Trump won these Pivot Counties by more than 580,000 votes. Of these 206 counties, five are located in South Dakota, accounting for 2.43 percent of the total pivot counties.[14]

#### Pivot Counties (2020)

In 2020, Ballotpedia re-examined the 206 Pivot Counties to view their voting patterns following that year's presidential election. Ballotpedia defined those won by Trump won as Retained Pivot Counties and those won by Joe Biden (D) as Boomerang Pivot Counties. Nationwide, there were 181 Retained Pivot Counties and 25 Boomerang Pivot Counties. South Dakota had four Retained Pivot Counties and one Boomerang Pivot County, accounting for 2.21 and 4.00 percent of all Retained and Boomerang Pivot Counties, respectively.

More South Dakota coverage on Ballotpedia

* Elections in South Dakota
* United States congressional delegations from South Dakota
* Public policy in South Dakota
* Influencers in South Dakota
* South Dakota fact checks
* More...

## Related measures[edit]

Minimum wage measures on the ballot in 2016

State| Measures
Arizona| Arizona Minimum Wage and Paid Time Off, Proposition 206 a
Colorado| Colorado $12 Minimum Wage, Amendment 70 a
Maine| Maine Minimum Wage Increase, Question 4 a
Washington| Washington Minimum Wage Increase, Initiative 1433 a

## Recent news[edit]

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms South Dakota Youth Minimum Wage. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

South Dakota Decreased Youth Minimum Wage Veto Referendum, Referred Law 20 (2016) - Google News

## See also[edit]

|  Suggest a link

|

* 2016 ballot measures
* South Dakota 2016 ballot measures
* Laws governing the initiative process in South Dakota
* Minimum wage reports and analyses

## External links[edit]

* Senate Joint Resolution 177
* South Dakota 2016 Ballot Question Pamphlet

## Sponsor contact information[edit]

* Cory Heidelberger - 912 N 1st St., Aberdeen, SD 57401

## Footnotes[edit]

1. ↑ South Dakota Legislature, "Senate Bill 177," accessed June 30, 2015
2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 International Business Times, "South Dakota Minimum Wage Battle Heats Up: Ballot Proposal Would Raise Pay For Youth Workers," April 7, 2015
3. ↑ South Dakota Legislature, "Senate Bill 177 History," accessed June 30, 2015
4. ↑ South Dakota Secretary of State, "Attorney General 2016 ballot explanation, Referred Law 20," accessed May 2, 2016
5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
6. ↑ South Dakota Legislature, "SB 177," accessed July 1, 2016
7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 South Dakota Secretary of State, "Campaign Finance Statement," accessed October 31, 2016
8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 South Dakota Secretary of State, "South Dakota 2016 Ballot Question Pamphlet," accessed August 18, 2016
9. ↑ Our Revolution, "Ballot Initiatives," accessed October 20, 2016
10. ↑ Note: The totals listed below do not include in-kind donations, which are detailed in a separate section below.
11. ↑ Rapid City Journal, "Activists deliver papers to block election law, youth wage," June 29, 2015
12. ↑ KSFY, "Youth minimum wage now in the hands of South Dakota voters," June 30, 2015
13. ↑ South Dakota Secretary of State Campaign Finance Reporting System, "SD Voice," accessed September 22, 2016
14. ↑ The raw data for this study was provided by Dave Leip of Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections.

v • e

2016 ballot measures

I&R States|

Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Florida • Idaho • Illinois • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Mexico • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • South Dakota • Utah • Washington • Wyoming

Non I&R States|

Alabama • Georgia • Hawaii • Indiana • Kentucky • Maryland • Minnesota • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New York • North Carolina • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • Texas • Vermont • Virginia • West Virginia • Wisconsin

Political topics|

Adult entertainment • Alcohol • Assisted death • Banking • Bond issues • Business regulation • Campaign finance • Civil and criminal trials • Civil rights • Constitutional language • County and municipal governance • Death penalty • Definition of a corporation • Education • Elections and campaigns • Energy • English language • Environment • Firearms • Food and agriculture • Forests and parks • Gambling • Government accountability • Healthcare • Hunting and fishing • Labor and unions • Law enforcement • Lottery • Marijuana • Minimum wage • Prisons • Property • Redistricting • Religion • Salaries of government officials • School choice • State and local government budgets, spending and finance • State executive officials • State judiciary • State legislature • Suffrage • Taxes • Tort law • Transportation • Treatment of animals • Veterans • Wages and pay

Other|

Scorecard • Petition drive deadlines and requirements • Polls • Lawsuits • Potential measures • Ballot Measure Monthly • Changes in 2016 to laws governing the initiative process • Not on the ballot • Signature costs • Cost per required signatures analysis • Campaigns • Campaign contributions • Campaign finance • Endorsements • Voter guides

v • e

Ballotpedia

About|

Overview • What people are saying • Support Ballotpedia • Contact • Contribute • Job opportunities

* * *

Executive: Leslie Graves, President • Gwen Beattie, Chief Operating Officer • Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy

Communications: Kayla Harris • Megan Brown • Mary Dunne • Sarah Groat • Lauren Nemerovski
External Relations: Alison Prange • Sara Key • Kari Berger • Hannah Nelson
Operations: Meghann Olshefski • Lauren Dixon • Kelly Rindfleisch • Sara Horton • Elizabeth Brown
Policy: Christopher Nelson • Caitlin Styrsky • Molly Byrne • Katharine Frey • Jace Lington • Jimmy McAllister
Tech: Matt Latourelle, Tech Manager • Ryan Burch • Michael Cella • Kirsten Corrao • Margaret Kearney • Tom Reitz

Contributors: Scott Rasmussen

* * *

Editorial|

Geoff Pallay, Editor-in-Chief • Daniel Anderson, Managing Editor • Josh Altic, Managing Editor • Cory Eucalitto, Managing Editor • Mandy Gillip, Managing Editor • Jerrick Adams • Victoria Antram • Dave Beaudoin • Jaclyn Beran • Marielle Bricker • Ryan Byrne • Kate Carsella • Kelly Coyle • Megan Feeney • Tyler King • Doug Kronaizl • Amee LaTour • David Luchs • Brittony Maag • Andrew McNair • Jackie Mitchell • Elisabeth Moore • Ellen Morrissey • Mackenzie Murphy • Paul Rader • Ethan Rice • Abbey Smith • Janie Valentine • Caitlin Vanden Boom • Joel Williams • Corinne Wolyniec • Samuel Wonacott • Mercedes Yanora

v • e

State of South Dakota
Pierre (capital)

|

Elections |

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2021 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government |

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy