Dear Mr. Angry,

If you look at the comments section of "Midterm Madness", you'll notice that someone claiming to be Bill Stegmeier (the amendment's chief sponsor) has offered a "clarification" on the language of Amendment E. In addition to calling me a "boy", and thus demonstrating his implicitly entitled assumptions about the workings of the world, he asks whether I have any questions. And the answer is, nope. Because, if you look at Mr. Stegmeier's comment, and at my post, you will notice that he does not address any of the concerns about Amendment E that I raised, including the troubling possibilities raised by the section of the amendment that I quoted at length. You would think that someone seeking to operate in the field of public opinion would have a better answer to the complaint that the language of his amendment, in addition to violating the basic principle of judicial autonomy, sets up an unfair trial system to review the results of that violation. But there you have it. Given that he doesn't address any of my complaints, or any of the serious reservations of those who oppose Amendment E (which includes the ENTIRETY of both houses of the South Dakota legislature), I don't see anything that prompts me to ask any questions to which I don't already have the answers.

But hey, thanks for reading!