Require that all recorded votes of a legislator be displayed on the Legislative Research Council website.
Summary
SB 108 requires the Legislative Research Council to create and maintain a public voting-record page for each legislator on its website. The page must show every recorded vote a legislator casts on bills and resolutions in the legislator’s chamber and in committees to which the legislator is appointed, for each regular and special session after July 1, 2026. If a legislator is absent or excused from a vote, that status must also be shown.
The bill is aimed at increasing transparency and public access to lawmakers’ voting histories by making the information prominently available as a tab on each legislator’s profile page. It does not change how votes are taken or counted; instead, it changes how the state documents and publishes legislative voting records for public review.
Impact
SB 108 would add a new section to chapter 2-7 of South Dakota law and place a new administrative duty on the Legislative Research Council to publish individualized voting records online. The affected parties are the LRC, legislators, and the public, with the practical effect of making chamber and committee votes easier to track and compare across sessions. The requirement applies prospectively to sessions and special sessions convened after July 1, 2026.
Sentiment
The available vote history suggests generally favorable support for the bill, with the measure deferred to the 41st legislative day by an 8-1 vote. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded debate to indicate broader support or opposition arguments. Based on the bill’s content and the vote tally, the proposal appears to have been viewed as a transparency measure with substantial backing.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is legislative transparency versus administrative burden or privacy concerns. Supporters would likely favor the bill because it makes lawmakers’ votes more visible and searchable for constituents, while any opponents may worry about the workload of maintaining detailed public records or about how absences and excusals are presented. Because no committee discussion is provided, the specific objections or sponsors’ responses are not documented in the available record.