RHODEN SELECTS VENHUIZEN AS LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
PIERRE, S.D. (Todd Epp / SDBA) – The South Dakota Senate Select Committee on the Nomination for Lt. Governor moved Tony Venhuizen’s lieutenant governor nomination to the full Senate today (Wednesday) with a 5-0 vote.
Gov. Larry Rhoden told the committee he chose Venhuizen for his experience and shared values.
“I selected a man who will help me address the challenges and opportunities in front of our state,” Rhoden said. “He must share my commitment to keep South Dakota strong, safe, and free.”
Venhuizen pledged to support Rhoden’s plan to strengthen tribal relations.
“That has to come from the top,” Venhuizen said. “The relationship between the states and the tribes is not one relationship, it’s nine and it is very relationship based. It relies on going to the tribes, meeting their leaders, sitting down and talking.”
Venhuizen, a Sioux Falls House member, served as chief of staff under former Gov. Dennis Daugaard and now former Gov. Kristi Noem.
“I’m looking forward to serving with him (Rhoden),” Venhuizen told the committee. “We’ve known each other for more than 20 years.”
Daugaard, Venhuizen’s father-in-law, backed the choice.
“You want someone that can communicate with others because it is a job that involves a lot of communication,” Daugaard said.
Under the South Dakota state constitution and statute, the governor appoints someone to fill the position when the lieutenant governor’s office becomes vacant. The appointment requires confirmation by a majority vote in both legislative chambers—the House of Representatives and the Senate.
The Senate votes on confirmation tomorrow (Thursday). If approved, Venhuizen replaces Rhoden, who became governor after Kristi Noem’s appointment as U.S. Homeland Security Secretary.
VOTER REGISTRATION LAW PASSES OUT OF SOUTH DAKOTA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
PIERRE, S.D. (SDBA) – The South Dakota House voted 37-31 today (Wednesday) to make voter registration files available free online, following debate over privacy and transparency.
House Bill 1062 requires the Secretary of State to post weekly voter file updates online and maintain a five-year archive of registration records.
“Our state has already spent $4.5 million to upgrade to a modernized system. All it takes is a competent person with five minutes to combine the Excel sheets,” said bill sponsor Rep. Heather Baxter, R-Rapid City.
Currently, voter files cost $2,500, with additional fees for updates and absentee data.
Some legislators raised privacy concerns about making birth years public.
“We’re going to provide free to the public a list of all the 80 and 90-year-old people in South Dakota that are voters… I think that is problematic,” said Rep. Tim Reisch, D-Howard.
Rep. Erin Healy, D-Sioux Falls, warned the bill could endanger abuse survivors who’ve “kept a low profile for safety reasons, and now suddenly their address is accessible.”
But supporters said most information is already available.
“Right now, we have something called the Voter Information Portal, where we can find out any individual person’s party affiliation, and it has their personal information right there for free,” said Rep. Logan Manhart, R-Aberdeen.
The House also passed another voter information bill, HB 1073.
This measure would prevent public access to voters’ phone numbers and email addresses in South Dakota voter registration files. It adds these items to the list of protected information that already includes Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, and dates of birth.
The bill lets voters designate their contact information as private when registering. While voter registration files would remain open for public inspection during business hours at county auditors’ offices, contact information would be redacted along with other protected data.
HB 1073 passed 40 to 28. Both bills now move to the Senate for consideration.
COMMITTEE DEFEATS REPEAL OF SECONDARY SEATBELT LAW
PIERRE, S.D. (SDBA) – Death, trauma, and money dominated the debate today (Tuesday) as South Dakota lawmakers rejected a bill to end mandatory seat belt use for adults.
The House Transportation Committee voted 10-2 to kill the measure after over an hour of emotional testimony from crash survivors, medical workers, and insurance executives.
Rep. Dylan Jordan, R-Clear Lake, told lawmakers he survived a rollover crash last year because he was wearing a seat belt. However, his personal experience didn’t change his view that the government shouldn’t mandate their use.
“This bill is simply about freedom and personal responsibility,” Jordan said. “I encourage everyone to wear their seat belt. This bill is about the proper role of government.”
Gretchen Weible said she drove from Elkton to support ending the mandate. She argued that crash statistics show seat belts don’t guarantee survival.
“According to injuryfacts.org, in 2022, 50.24 percent of occupants who died while wearing restraints were using a seat belt, while 49.76 percent were unrestrained. Just about equal,” Weible said.
Rep. Taylor Rehfeldt, R-Sioux Falls, a nurse anesthetist, vividly portrayed the crash victims she’s treated.
“When a vehicle stops suddenly, and there’s a person inside without a seat belt, that person’s head can go through the windshield,” Rehfeldt said. “I have not forgotten the faces of people who have died, and I won’t ever forget their faces.”
Money also factored heavily in the debate. Highway Patrol Assistant Superintendent Robert Whisler said the change would cost South Dakota millions in federal highway dollars.
“If passed, this bill would divert over six million dollars of federal aid dedicated to highway construction to our state highway safety programs,” Whisler said.
Insurance representatives warned that medical costs for unbelted crash victims run 50 times higher than those for people wearing seat belts, which would drive up insurance rates for everyone.
South Dakota has required seat belt use since 1995. According to state data, about 91 percent of South Dakotans buckle up regularly. The law remains a secondary offense, meaning police can only write violation tickets after stopping vehicles for other infractions.
SCHOOL CHOICE BILL DRAWS A CROWD AT HOUSE COMMITTEE HEARING
PIERRE, S.D. (Dakota News Now) – Educational Savings Accounts have been a big talking point leading up to the start of the legislative session in Pierre.
On Wednesday, a House Committee heard testimony for a bill that would establish Educational Savings Accounts in front of a packed house.
These accounts would be established and administered by the Department of Education.
Both sides presented their ideas for why they have what’s best for all families in South Dakota.
Proponents of the bill insisted that the bill allowed for more flexibility for parents who want an alternative option for their children, opponents said it takes opportunities away from certain students.
“When a student is identified as having a disability, the public school is required to provide a free appropriate public education, private schools do not have that requirement,” Sioux Falls resident Brenda Smith said.
One proponent of the bill said this wouldn’t come from the same “pot” of money that public schools draw from and that public schools will be fine as they’re paid to educate the students they have.
The bill’s fiscal note laid out that the accounts would have been funded at forty percent of the per-student equivalent (PSE), equal to $3,000 in FY2026 based on the Governor’s recommended state aid index factor.
“I’m sure you’re thinking about all you’ve heard about how this program could grow exponentially, effectively defunding public schools, as an aside, are public schools really that concerned about students leaving?” Sarah Hitchcock, the Governor’s Office Policy Advisor asked.
Sandra Waltman with the South Dakota Educators Association said that is the concern, especially when the services public schools can provide, relies on the legislature.
The cost of ESAs for FY2026 would have varied from $0 to over $63 million.
“If you’re truly going to make sure that all kids have that opportunity, we believe in the end, lawmakers would have to make some tough choices including cutting public education,” Waltman said.
The Committee killed the bill with a 9 to 6 vote, closing this chapter of a very long fight.
Waltman said she is happy that today’s House Education Committee prioritized public education and that moving forward, public education should always be their number one focus.
