Dana Hess writes for South Dakota Searchlight, an online news organization.

Whether he knows it or not, Chris Larson is channeling Nancy Reagan. Mrs. Reagan asked us to “just say no to drugs.” Larson is asking us to say no to four issues that will be on South Dakota’s November ballot.

Larson, described in a story from The Dakota Scout as a conservative Republican activist and entrepreneur from Minnehaha County, has set up a website to point out why those four issues aren’t worth your vote. The website, votenosd.com, casts a negative light on Amendment H, a call to change the state’s primary election system; Referred Law 21, which would repeal a law that regulates carbon capture pipelines; Amendment G, legalizing abortion; and Initiated Measure 29, which would legalize recreational marijuana.

The home page of Larson’s site admonishes visitors with this message: “Don’t California Our South Dakota.” It’s as if a yes vote on any of these issues would turn us all into a bunch of San Francisco hippies.

In addition to a raft of candidates on the November ballot, South Dakota voters will also have to decide on a total of seven ballot issues. Larson has something bad to say about four of them but remains mute on the other three.

Those three are Initiated Measure 28, which is intended to eliminate the state sales tax on groceries; Amendment E, on the ballot courtesy of the state Legislature, which would edit male pronouns from the language in the state constitution; and Amendment F, also on the ballot courtesy of the Legislature, which would allow the state to impose work requirement for Medicaid recipients. Instead of being completely negative, it would be refreshing if Larson had something positive to say about these ballot issues that he seems to be endorsing with his silence.

Larson created the website to counter the influence of political action committees and wealthy donors. “With 30 years of starting and running my own business, I recognize slick marketing and sales pitches being put on consumers,” Larson stated on his website.

Larson’s response to those outside influences was to create a website that’s rather, well, slick. But voters are smart enough to know what they’re getting into when they visit a site like Larson’s.

Larson’s one-stop-shop for learning how to vote no is an insult to the intelligence of the state’s voters. Those voters are completely capable of seeing through slick marketing and sales pitches to form an opinion about what’s best for their state. Ballot issues deserve a citizen’s patient consideration, not a one-size-fits-all lesson in how to vote no.

There has to be a better way to educate yourself on the ballot issues. Fox News worked overtime to turn the phrase “fair and balanced” into a punchline, but that’s just the kind of coverage of the issues that is needed for voters to make an informed choice at the ballot box.

Fortunately for South Dakota voters, even with the election just more than two months away, there are sources for the kind of reporting that voters need.

South Dakota Searchlight’s website, at southdakotasearchlight.com, has a place on its homepage called “South Dakota Election 2024.”

There readers will find plenty of news and commentary about the election as well as a Voter Guide and links to the secretary of state’s website for information on registering to vote, voting early and finding your polling place. It also offers a weekly newsletter from States Newsroom with national and state stories about candidates, the campaigns and the issues.

The homepage for the South Dakota News Watch website, sdnewswatch.org, offers some of the same links to the secretary of state’s website in its “South Dakota Voter Guide.”

Its explanations of the seven ballot issues are taken from the reporting that News Watch has done, offering both sides of the issues without taking sides. Some would call it fair and balanced, but that phrase has been ruined.

For those voters who distrust the media in any form, check the Secretary of State’s homepage, sdsos.gov, for the “2024 General Election Ballot Question Information Pamphlet.”

This printable document includes an explanation of each ballot issue by the state’s attorney general as well as pro statements from backers of the ballot issue and con statements from those who would like you to vote no.

Any of those three options is a better way to decide how to mark your ballot than relying on something like Larson’s all-negative, all-the-time website.