25th District Representative Randy Gross
The legislative pace picked up this week. I have received many messages from you regarding a variety of bills working their way through committees and on to the House or Senate for action. Your input is appreciated, and I apologize in advance if I can’t respond to everyone. Please know that even though I may not be able to respond, I read all constituent communications.
The hot topic in Pierre early this past week was housing infrastructure. Senate Bill 41 (SB41) was on an unusually fast-track that one legislator referred to as the “41 Express”. The $200 Million in the bill is three fourths state tax money and one fourth federal and would be used to set up a grant and loan program for housing developments.
I had several concerns with this idea. For starters, the new program grows government and violates our long-held principle that “we only use one-time dollars for onetime expenses”. That principle has served South Dakota well, keeping us financially stable and keeping the brakes on government expansion. Ignoring the principle, even for a program with merit is dangerous. Many ideas have merit. Principles guide decisions, restrain bad ones and keep us on course. We ignore them at a price.
Additionally, I objected to SB41 because it would use dollars collected from every person to benefit a few people, in a few places. That is why I supported an amendment when the bill reached the House floor. The amendment would have distributed the money equitably to every county in South Dakota and given them flexibility on how to use it. County budgets are tight. A spreadsheet showed what each county would receive under the amendment.
For district 25, the distribution would have been Moody County $1.6 million and Minnehaha County $19.7 million. It would have allowed the money to be used for infrastructure (roads and bridges), housing infrastructure, incarceration, rehabilitation or “other facilities the board determines are vital to county residents.” It even allowed counties to make direct payments to residents if they wanted to. Getting the money spread to every county in South Dakota and allowing for true local control over how the money is spent, seemed like a better idea to me. After a lengthy debate, the amendment was defeated, and the bill was passed.
$200 million is a lot of money. It is very likely the largest dollar amount in any spending bill legislators will deal with this session. We owed it to you to take time to debate its use. I will continue to engage and hold to our principles, so that whatever the final version of any bill, it will do the best for the most people.
Please remember, this is your government, and all citizens are welcome to visit your Capital and testify on bills or simply observe the process. Information on the content and status of bills is available on the state web site https://sdlegislature.gov. I can be contacted at .
Senator Tom Pischke
The third week of the 2023 legislative session has come and gone. Thursday, January 26th was the cutoff day for unlimited bill introduction for this session. At this time, I am the prime sponsor of 14 different bills split between the House and the Senate, some of which have already been presented to their respective committees.
One highlight of this week was the passing of Senate Concurrent Resolution 602 to affirm our support of the Supreme Court’s decision last year regarding abortion. The Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision overturned the famous Roe v. Wade decision and stated that the constitution does not offer any rights or protections toward abortions and that the decision whether to allow the practice falls to the discretion of the states. As a Pro-Life Catholic, I enthusiastically supported this resolution and voted YES in favor of it.
Unfortunately, this week we saw a first for the state of South Dakota. A fellow Senator and my current seatmate, Julie Frye-Mueller, Dist. 30 has her voting privileges suspended and was removed from the Senate. All of this was done before any proper investigation into the claims levied against this senator were conducted or without telling Senator Frye-Mueller what she was accused of doing. I believe measure was grossly unconstitutional and extraordinarily damaging against a duly-elected representative of the people. The good people of District 30 elected Julie Frye-Mueller to be their voice in the South Dakota State Senate and without any due-process and in one swift motion, 27 members in the Senate voted to deprive those people of their representation. I’m deeply disturbed by this unprecedented action and will continue to be a voice of reason in the Senate.
As always, if you are interested in following along with any of our committees or chambers this session, there are two great ways to do that. First, visit www.sdlegislature.gov as this is the Legislature's home page where you can find any information about session that you are looking for. On the front page you will find a schedule of committees and when the House and Senate will be meeting and what's on the agenda for each meeting. You can also find listings of all the bills that we will be working on this session. Additionally, if you want to listen into a committee or chamber you can click on the South Dakota Public Broadcasting icon next to that scheduled meeting to listen live. The Second way to listen and watch is to visit www.SD.Net where you can find all the live audio from the committees and the live audio and video streams from the House and Senate Chambers.
Finally, if you have any questions about how to find information about a bill or committee, or any questions at all about session please contact me. I can be reached most anytime by phone at 605-999-2948 and by email at . If you do call and I’m unable to answer, try sending me a text and I will call you back later. Additionally, if you email please include that you are from District 25 and what town you're from. We get 100s of emails a day and I cannot reply back to them all, but if I know that you are from our district, I will get back to you! Lastly, if you are planning a trip up to the Capitol for a visit during session please let me know so that we can find a time to meet up while you are here! Have a great week and God Bless!
Representative Jon Hansen
The annual “Hour of Reflection” took place in Pierre this past weekend. The event is a gathering of pro-life South Dakotans from all across the state who are committed to the protection of unborn life. This year, I was invited to be a guest speaker, and I spoke about the current effort by others to amend the South Dakota Constitution with an extreme amendment that would legalize abortion all the way up to birth.
As part of a national effort, petitions are currently being circulated to amend the South Dakota Constitution to legalize abortion from conception all the way up to and including at birth. This means that the amendment would legalize abortions that are performed at the stages in pregnancy when the unborn child is viable outside of the womb, or even just before or during labor. For most South Dakotans, that’s too extreme. It’s just not us.
Those pushing the abortion amendment petition claim that it would simply “put Roe vs. Wade on the ballot.” However, even this central assertion of theirs is deceitful. In reality, the amendment would have far more extreme consequences than Roe vs. Wade itself.
With Roe vs. Wade, South Dakota was able to prohibit gruesome late-term abortions, but the abortion amendment would legalize abortion up to birth in the South Dakota Constitution.
Moreover, under Roe vs. Wade, South Dakota was able to enact numerous common-sense, bi-partisan abortion regulations, but almost all of those regulations would be overridden and prohibited by the abortion amendment. For example, most people agree that taxpayer money shouldn’t be used to fund abortions, but prohibitions on taxpayer funded abortions are overridden by the abortion amendment. Laws to protect a mother from being coerced or forced into having an abortion against her will are overridden by the abortion amendment. Alarmingly, all regulations to protect the physical health of the mother undergoing an abortion in her first trimester of pregnancy are overridden by the abortion amendment. The list goes on in staggering ways.
So, even for those who support legal abortion in some cases, this abortion amendment—which allows for abortions to be performed at any point during pregnancy—goes too far.
If you are approached by one of their petition circulators—decline to sign. It’s too extreme. It’s just not South Dakota.
