SOUTH DAKOTA GOVERNOR SAYS NO PLANS HAVE BEEN MADE ABOUT A POTENTIAL 2026 RUN
PIERRE, S.D. (Austin Goss / SDBA) – Gov. Larry Rhoden responded with a firm “no” this week when asked if his pick of Tony Venhuizen as lieutenant governor signals his intentions for a 2026 gubernatorial run.
“I have no reason not to be honest with you,” Rhoden said Wednesday, adding that he hasn’t decided if he’ll run in the GOP primary.
While Venhuizen’s confirmation puts an end to months of speculation about who would be chosen to succeed Rhoden in the lieutenant governor role, it sparks new questions about how it will affect the next election cycle. Many South Dakota politicos had speculated that Venhuizen could have been in line for a role in a potential Dusty Johnson administration, with the congressman seen as gearing up for his own gubernatorial run in the next election cycle. Venhuizen has also been floated as a potential congressional candidate that same cycle.
Rhoden emphasized that Venhuizen’s loyalty was key in the decision-making process when picking his second-in-command. “I wanted someone all in for me,” he said.
Venhuizen nodded in agreement.
FAKE MEAT ON THE WAY TO LABELING REQUIREMENTS IN SOUTH DAKOTA
PIERRE, S.D. (Austin Goss / SDBA) – South Dakota lawmakers agree with the state’s Department of Agricultural and Natural Resources that “meat” not originating from animals should be labeled as such.
A committee of Senate lawmakers unanimously signed off on the measure Thursday morning, putting House Bill 1022 just a Senate floor vote away from passage after unanimous agreement in the House sent it across the Capitol.
DANR brought the legislation in response to the U.S. Department of Agriculture recently giving approval for two types of cell-based meatless products. While it doesn’t appear those two products have been made available for sale in South Dakota, the department wants to get ahead of their commercial uses.
The department’s bill requires the labeling on products that come on packaging for consumer purchase, but it doesn’t apply to restaurants.
“These cell cultured protein products are new,” said Taya Runyan, executive director of the South Dakota Cattlemen’s Association. “With this regulation in place, if and when these products are found, it is important that we can distinguish them and allow our producers to market their products as traditionally raised meat products.”
Should the measure be adopted into law, any such products would have to have a label that prominently and conspicuously displays the words “cell-cultured” or “lab grown” in a place immediately adjacent to the name of the food on the packaging.
Sen. Curt Voight, a freshman Republican from Rapid City, stressed that he would like to see grocers provide prominent signage not just on the product itself, but also within stores — similar to how organic or gluten-free food sections are denoted in supermarkets. South Dakota Retailers Association Executive Director Nathan Sanderson said that the legislation as written would not prove burdensome to impacted businesses, but that retailers have an interest in providing as much information as possible to customers about the products they are selling.
“At present, (this bill) would not relate to anything on a restaurant menu or anything like that,” said Sanderson. “We want to make sure that if there is a desire by South Dakotans to consume this, that our businesses would be able to provide that… Also, that any labeling requirements that may be there wouldn’t be exclusive to South Dakota.”
There was no opposition testimony.
Legislative proposals attempting to address problems before they exist often run into questions from skeptical lawmakers in Pierre, but in this case, senators agreed that though this issue may have to be addressed again in future sessions, a preemptive approach was best for lab meats.
“I like that we are getting out ahead of this,” said Sen. Kevin Jensen, R-Canton. “This is going to happen, and I am happy we are going to be out in front of it.”
LAWMAKERS ADVANCE BILL TO VUT TOBACCO USE PREVENTION FUND BY $2 MILLION
PIERRE, S.D. (Joshua Haiar / SD Searchlight) – A committee of South Dakota lawmakers advanced a bill 5-2 on Wednesday at the Capitol to reduce state funding for tobacco and vaping prevention efforts.
But the lawmakers softened the proposed cut following a debate over public health and budget priorities.
The bill, originally intended to slash annual funding for the state’s Tobacco Prevention and Reduction Trust Fund from $5 million to $2 million, was amended to set the new funding level at $3 million.
The bill is a priority of former Gov. Kristi Noem, and now Gov. Larry Rhoden’s administration. The Senate Health and Human Services Committee sent the amended bill to the Legislature’s budget committee with a positive recommendation.
Bureau of Finance and Management Commissioner Jim Terwilliger said the state needs to make budget cuts to help cover a $62 million increase in Medicaid costs.
Opponents of the bill, including public health advocates and medical organizations, warned that reducing tobacco prevention funding could undo years of progress in reducing smoking and vaping rates, particularly among youth.
Terwilliger said smoking rates have declined significantly in South Dakota over the past two decades.
“The $5 million that’s been spent has been successful, certainly, but you’re also looking at a smaller problem to tackle, if you will, in terms of tobacco prevention,” he said.
Terwilliger said the state receives $1 million annually in federal tobacco prevention grants, which will remain intact. The reduced state contribution would continue funding South Dakota’s QuitLine services and other prevention efforts, he said.
Public health advocates pushed back, saying the state is trading short-term savings for long-term costs in health care.
South Dakota voters approved a 2006 ballot measure to dedicate a portion of increased cigarette tax revenue to prevention efforts. Jennifer Stalley, a lobbyist for the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, helped make that happen. She warned that the bill undermines that commitment and could lead to a resurgence of youth tobacco use, particularly vaping and nicotine pouches.
Stalley said the state is spending $5 million to fight a $75 million annual problem in smoking-related health care costs, driving up the cost of Medicaid.
“Taking our foot off the gas right now, because we’re doing well, isn’t going to make sure that we are successful,” she said. “It’s going to make sure that in five years or 10 years – hopefully, not me – we’re going to be back here going through this litany of asks again to get back to a successful program.”
Kim Malsam-Rysdon is a former secretary of the state Department of Health and a current Avera Health lobbyist. Avera has a contract to manage the state’s QuitLine program. She said it is one of the most effective in the nation with a 49% long-term success rate.
“We need to continue to fund these services. We also need to continue our other prevention services so that people never have to get to the QuitLine,” she said.
Sen. Tim Reed, R-Brookings, successfully proposed the amendment to set the new funding level at $3 million instead of the originally proposed $2 million. He said the change is a compromise that acknowledges budget constraints while hopefully preserving key prevention efforts.
SOUTH DAKOTA SENATE BILL AIMS TO RAISE THE STAKES FOR NATIONAL GUARD DEPLOYMENTS
RAPID CITY, S.D. (KOTA) – South Dakota Senate Bill 82 passed the military and veterans affairs committee Wednesday with a three to one vote. If passed, the bill would require the U.S. Congress to formally declare war for South Dakota’s National Guard members to be deployed into international combat.
“We want to support the [the military] and only send them into wars that have the full, informed consent of the people of the United States,” Bring Our Troops Home Chairman & Founder Dan McKnight said. “When you have a declaration of war, every zip code in the country is behind the efforts.”
McKnight’s organization works with state lawmakers and supports bills including Senate Bill 82 and similar ones in states like Wyoming and New Hampshire. McKnight says Bring Our Troops Home has seen significant success, and South Dakota is leading the way on the issue of raising the standard for National Guard deployments despite some challenges.
“It has faced stiff opposition every time it has been put forward,” McKnight explained. “There has been a general with two stars on his collar show up to oppose it. Other states… West Virginia started the movement about ten years ago and it has never cleared a committee in West Virginia yet, but it cleared the committee in South Dakota.”
Senate Bill 82 will move forward in the legislative process.
