SOUTH DAKOTA DEMOCRATS ANNOUNCE TOWN HALL MEETINGS AS PUBLIC FRUSTRATION GROWS
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight) – A lack of in-person town hall meetings by South Dakota’s members of Congress has Democrats upset, and also some Republicans.
The South Dakota Democratic Party announced on Monday that it will conduct public town halls in four South Dakota cities “in the absence of South Dakota’s Republican senators and congressman.”
Afterward, state Republican Party Chairman Jim Eschenbaum told South Dakota Searchlight by phone that he’s also heard complaints about the congressional delegation’s accessibility.
“Even some Republicans have been saying that,” Eschenbaum said.
Democrats held a press conference to announce their town halls, which will be led by Nikki Gronli, former state rural development director for the U.S. Department of Agriculture during the Biden administration. Julian Beaudion, a Sioux Falls businessman and former state trooper turned community activist, will also participate in the town halls.
The press conference came two days after thousands of people took to the streets in Sioux Falls, and crowds also gathered in other cities, to join in national protests against the Trump administration.
Democrats at the Monday press conference alleged that the congressional delegation has been “silent” and ignored calls and emails from constituents who are upset about the Trump administration’s mass firings of federal employees, dismantling of federal departments and programs, freezes or cancellations of federal grants and spending, and tariffs.
“A chainsaw has been taken to the pocketbooks and retirement plans of hardworking South Dakotans, all while safety net programs are being dismantled,” Gronli said.
Beaudion added, “We are about putting the people first.”
The announcement follows public criticisms of U.S. Senators John Thune and Mike Rounds, along with Rep. Dusty Johnson, who are all Republicans, for not holding in-person town halls. None of the three offices responded immediately Monday to South Dakota Searchlight’s request for a response to those criticisms.
Last month, media outlets including Politico reported that U.S. House Republican leaders advised their members to avoid in-person town hall meetings due to increasing confrontations with constituents over policies carried out by President Donald Trump and his Department of Government Efficiency, led by billionaire Elon Musk.
The reports said House Speaker Mike Johnson and National Republican Congressional Committee Chair Richard Hudson recommended shifting to virtual formats like tele-town halls to mitigate disruptions from protesters.
Town hall schedule
The South Dakota Democratic Party on Monday released the following schedule of public town hall meetings:
Rapid City, Monday, April 14
7-8 p.m. MDT at the Dahl Arts Center
Sioux Falls, Tuesday, April 15
7-8 p.m. CDT at Hamre Hall at Augustana University
Vermillion, Thursday, April 24
7-8 p.m. CDT at Farber Hall at the University of South Dakota
Aberdeen, Monday, April 28
6:30-7:30 p.m. CDT at the Aberdeen Public Library
FEDERAL FOOD CUTS HIT SOUTH DAKOTA PANTRIES, SCHOOLS, AND FARMERS
BOX ELDER, S.D.(South Dakota News Watch) – Montana Roem is worried that a proposed $1 billion cut to federal food programs that aid schools and charities will hurt her family on two fronts.
As she waited in a line of cars at a Feeding South Dakota mobile food bank in Box Elder on March 27, Roem said she was well aware of the U.S. Department of Agriculture move to eliminate two programs that paid for locally grown foods to be provided to food banks and for school meals across the U.S.
Taken together, she said, the proposals will make it harder for her to get food staples for her family and make it more difficult for her son to get healthy meals at school.
“It seems like cutting food banks is just the tip of the iceberg because now it’s lunches at schools being cut,” said Roem, 54, who lives on a low income while raising an 11-year-old boy with special needs. “I wonder what kind of country we live in because a lot of us are going to end up homeless on the streets.”
The outcomes of the proposed cuts could be far reaching in South Dakota, with less food being provided to charities and schools. Eliminating the programs will also reduce federal spending at roughly 55 farms in the state, many of them smaller operations that shipped fresh foods to schools, food banks and tribal charities.
“Those dollars went directly to the producers, and the food went directly to people facing hunger,” said Stacey Andernacht, vice president of public affairs at Feeding South Dakota, the state’s leading charitable food provider.
In mid-March, the USDA said it was eliminating 2025 funding of two pandemic-era initiatives: the Local Food Purchase Assistance (LFPA) and Local Food for Schools (LFS) programs, which operated in 40 states, including South Dakota.
Taken together, the initiatives approved under former President Joe Biden would have paid U.S. farmers more than $1 billion to supply fresh, locally grown foods to food banks, pantries and schools.
In a statement sent to News Watch, a USDA spokesperson said the agency will fund the LFPA through the end of the current funding period, adding that it is making “a return to long-term, fiscally responsible initiatives.”
The spokesperson said that 16 other USDA food programs remain in place, noting that “USDA is prioritizing stable, proven solutions that deliver lasting impact. The COVID era is over — USDA’s approach to nutrition programs will reflect that reality moving forward.”
The cuts are part of a widespread effort by the Trump administration and its Office of Government Efficiency to reduce federal spending and identify and eliminate waste.
Data from Feeding South Dakota shows that the number of charitable meals provided by the agency has risen by 6% over the past year. The agency has seen attendance at mobile food pantries jump by 17% this fiscal year. And the number of food backpacks it provides to children jumped by 11%. Meals provided to school pantries also rose by 5% this year, agency data shows.
James Lay, 67, came to the Feeding South Dakota mobile food pantry in Box Elder on March 27 with son Sam, 27, to get some extra food for the month. “I always found life to be tough enough already,” said Lay, who lives in Rapid City. “Costs are up, expenses are up and wages are down,” he said.
Andernacht said Feeding South Dakota will lose $1.2 million in funding it expected to receive from the LFPA program this year, which equates to about 1% of the agency’s annual food budget. However, she said, the USDA also has paused funding under The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), which could reduce Feeding South Dakota’s food inventory by almost 14% moving forward, she said.
Some South Dakota school districts have seen the effects of the inability of parents to pay for school meals for their children. Several districts are running deficits as they try to keep feeding students who don’t qualify for free lunches.
Meade County Schools, facing an unpaid student meal balance of about $23,000, announced this month that it would match future parent payments for school lunches due to an anonymous donation of $115,000 made through the Black Hills Area Community Foundation.
The loss of LFPA funding will place a new burden on the Mitchell Food Pantry, which used the funding to pay area farmers to provide milk to about 400 children a month, Andernacht said.
Eliminating the funding will also make it harder for the food pantry in Brookings to provide low-income families with fresh meats and vegetables raised at local farms, said Bill Alsaker, advisory committee member at Feeding Brookings.
“It’s something we’ve had for the last couple years and it was very helpful for us,” Alsaker said.
The LFPA was a boost to the bottom line of dozens of South Dakota farms, many of them small specialty producers who don’t have the benefit of operating with large economies of scale.
Peggy Martin, co-owner of Cedar Creek Gardens in Mellette County, said the federal program paid her business to provide fresh meats and vegetables to schools and local pantries, including on the Rosebud, Pine Ridge and Cheyenne River Indian reservations.
But the loss of federal funding will likely result in less fresh food being provided to low-income people throughout the central South Dakota area she serves. Martin said the LFPA funding also allowed for greater stability at her farm southeast of Belvidere and enabled some expansion.
“It was a great avenue for many of us to ramp up production a little bit because you don’t have to have acres and acres in production to help build the resiliency of the local food chain.”
POLITICAL JOCKEYING MARKS START OF SOUTH DAKOTA’S NEXT GOVERNOR’S RACE
PIERRE, S.D. (Joe Sneve / The Dakota Scout) – The 2026 GOP primary race for governor subtly kicked off last month with a letter that seemed to fly under the radar but landed with an unmistakable ripple.
Gov. Larry Rhoden made headlines when he publicly offered a slice of Black Hills land for a national heroes garden envisioned by President Donald Trump — a gesture seemingly of generosity rather than a political maneuver. But to those tuned in to the power dynamics of South Dakota’s Republican circle, it wasn’t so simple.
Rather, some saw it as political gamesmanship meant to capitalize on work to bring the national site to the Mount Rushmore area already underway by a potential challenger to Rhoden if he runs in 2026: Congressman Dusty Johnson.
Days later, Johnson went to social media to invite the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins to spend time on a South Dakota ranch. A month earlier, Rhoden posted on Facebook and X – formerly Twitter – that during a visit to Washington, D.C., he’d invited Rollins to the South Dakota Agriculture Summit.
Tit for tat?
For both men, each considering or planning runs for governor next year, the stakes are high: each is vying for Trump’s coveted endorsement, a nod that could tip the balance in what’s already shaping up to be a fierce race for the state’s top office.
While no one has formally declared a candidacy in the 2026 gubernatorial election, the field could include Rhoden, Johnson and South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley.
Johnson and Jackley have long been considered likely candidates in the 2026 gubernatorial contest. And the early departure of former Gov. Kristi Noem, who left in January to become Trump’s Homeland Security secretary, shouldered Rhoden into the race. All three are considered friendly with one another in the state GOP, but it’s also created jockeying among the potential candidates.
Others considered further to the right than that trio are also mulling runs, including Toby Doeden and House Speaker Jon Hansen. A wealthy Aberdeen businessman turned political influencer, Doeden is credited with using his financial might to swing party leadership dynamics in the state Legislature, supporting winning candidates in the 2024 GOP primary elections. Benefiting from Doeden-backed efforts in that election, Hansen is a leader in the anti-abortion activism community who comes with high prominence among social conservatives.
Neither of them have confirmed runs but are openly considering the prospect.
“I’d be lying if I told you I haven’t had a lot of people – a lot of prominent people – that want me to run for governor,” Doeden said during a recent interview with The Dakota Scout. “I’m weighing my options and praying with my family to find the best way for me to continue to help South Dakota.”
More candidates could benefit populists
Political observers say it’s unlikely all five put their names on the 2026 gubernatorial ballot. That’s because if Jackley, Johnson and Rhoden decide to vie for the same primary nomination, they’ll split votes of more moderate GOP primary voters, opening the door for a populist candidate — Hansen or Doeden — to move into the Governor’s Mansion.
But should both Hansen and Doeden run, that could benefit Johnson, Jackley or Rhoden.
Doeden said the new brand of Republicans now in control of the state Legislature and the South Dakota Republican Party need to be unified behind one candidate.
“What is important is that the conservative movement has to band together and be 100 percent together. Because if there are any factions that branch off … you’re gonna see the liberals and establishment Republicans waiting in the bushes for us to kill each other,” Doeden said.
Jon Schaff, a political science professor at Northern State University in Aberdeen, said fundraising will be a detriment for Rhoden, who’s getting a late start in the fundraising game.
But should he overcome or disregard that setback and enter the race, Schaff predicts it’d be at Jackley or Johnson’s expense.
“Especially if Rhoden gets in the race, the so-called established Republicans end up being divided three different ways, and then a Hansen would be the most likely.”
“It either benefits Dusty or it benefits whoever the populist candidate is,” he added.
Allies of both Rhoden and Jackley are cognizant of the dynamics, and the most likely scenario is that Jackley and Rhoden do not run against one another.
Jackley declined to discuss a potential run or when a decision might be coming.
“I continue to receive encouragement to run for governor, from people who want a conservative in the race, but for right now I’m focused on keeping our streets safe and protecting taxpayer dollars,” he said in a statement to The Scout.
Both Rhoden and Johnson are taking similar approaches when responding to questions about their political futures, also acknowledging the possibility while hinting announcements are looming.
“I’m fully committed to my job representing South Dakota in the U.S. House,” Johnson said. “As for future plans, I’m expecting to make that decision over the summer or fall.”
A decision from the governor could come sooner.
“Since the legislative session ended, Sandy and I have been praying about this and having some key conversations with family and trusted friends,” Rhoden told The Scout. “It’s been very rewarding to serve the people of South Dakota as Governor, and truth be told, I’ve been receiving encouragement from people all across South Dakota to keep doing it.
“But for right now, I’m focused on the Open for Opportunity tour and seeing the potential of our great state,” he added. “I’m humbled by all the support, but we are not ready to make a public announcement until this tour is over.”
Hansen is riding momentum after fronting the anti-abortion group Life Defense Fund that helped block Amendment G’s passage last November and being among the Legislature’s most vocal critics of Summit Carbon Solutions’ use of eminent domain in pursuit of a carbon sequestration pipeline project. His decision could be imminent.
“I’ve been honored by many great grassroots patriots from across the state who have asked me to run and indicated their support for me for governor,” the Dell Rapids Republican told The Scout, saying an announcement about his plans will be forthcoming “in the near future.”
“From the fight for private property rights by ending eminent domain for the Green New Deal carbon pipeline boondoggle, to my pro-life leadership in doing what many thought was impossible in defeating the extreme abortion amendment G, to standing for freedom during Covid, to ending woke and restoring common sense, and a lot more, people trust me as a proven fighter who delivers for conservative values and will not back down,” he said.
IOWA SENATE PASSES SCHOOL FUNDING PACKAGE ENDING MONTHS-LONG STALEMATE
DES MOINES, IA (Gray Media Iowa Capitol Bureau) – Leaders in Iowa’s public schools will finally soon know how much money they have to educate students next year. Republicans in the Iowa Senate late Monday afternoon passed a compromise agreement to fund schools for next year.
This ends a two-month argument over funding between Republicans in the house and Republicans in the senate. By law, the school funding rate was required to be set two months ago.
Senators debated the compromise that Republican leaders worked out in private. House Republicans originally wanted a 2.25% increase per student and more than $20 million in an additional payment to help schools with the costs of inflation.
The bill passed Monday sets the school funding increase at 2%. The senate also agreed to a one-time payment of $5 per student instead of the $10 the house wanted. The senate also refused to agree to the house’s one time payment of an extra $22.6 million for other costs.
The senate floor manager says the compromise will fund schools and other priorities while a senate democrat says it underfunds Iowa’s students.
Sen. Lynn Evans (R-Aurelia) said education represents nearly 45% of the entire state’s budget.
“$4.2 billion in general funds state aid for all k-12 students out of a total of $9.4 billion projected in fiscal year 26. Republicans have increased funding to public schools and k-12 students every year since 2017 and ever year we’ve kept that promise,” he said.
Sen. Janet Petersen (D-Des Moines) said the cost of the Education Savings Account program keeps rising.
“92% of our school aged children that go to public schools are going to get a measly increase because you have invested millions and millions of dollars for a very small number of families to receive private school vouchers and corporate tax cuts.”
The increase of 2% in school funding is less than the most recent national rate of inflation, which is at 2.8%.
The Iowa House is expected to take up the compromised plan as soon as Tuesday.
