Highlights:
After Biden Was Declared The Winner Of The 2020 Election, Noem Said The Results Were “Premature” And Expressed Concerns Over Voter Fraud. According to the Daily Mail, “South Dakota Gov Kristi Noem told ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos that the presidential elections results are ‘premature’ before expressing her concerns over possible voter fraud during an interview about working with President-elect Joe Biden. […] Throughout the week, and as results from key swing states slowly trickled in, Trump's campaign team voiced claims of voter fraud. Gov Noem echoed that same sentiment while speaking with Stephanopoulos who had asked her about working with Biden to combat the surge of coronavirus cases in South Dakota, a state that overwhelmingly voted for Trump. ‘This is a premature conversation because we have not finished counting votes,’ Noem told the anchor.” [Daily Mail, 11/8/20]
Noem Said It Was Important To Address Concerns About Election Fraud. According to the Daily Mail, “‘Election Day needs to be fair, honest and transparent, and we need to be sure that we had an honest election before we decide who gets to be in the White House the next four years,’ Noem continued. Stephanopoulos then challenged Noem, asking the governor: ‘Do you have any evidence at all of widespread fraud?’ ‘People have signed legal documents, affidavits, stating that they saw illegal activities,’ Noem added. ‘I don't know how widespread it is. I don't know if it will change the outcome of the election. But why is everybody so scared just to have a fair election and find out?’” [Daily Mail, 11/8/20]
Noem Alleged That Computer Glitches, Dead People Voting, And Illegal Activity In Pennsylvania And Nevada Contributed To Trump’s Election Loss. According to the Capital Journal, “Long a staunch ally of President Donald Trump, Gov. Kristi Noem alleges all of the following contributed to what at this point appears to be the president's failed re-election bid: ‘-Signed affidavits attesting to illegal activity in Pennsylvania and Nevada; -Computer glitches flipping Republican votes to Democrats in Michigan; -Dead people voting in Pennsylvania; -And more.’ Noem made these claims via Twitter on Sunday, a few hours after her national network TV interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC's ‘This Week.’” [Capital Journal, 11/9/20]
Noem Used The Phrase “Rigged Election Systems” To Describe The 2020 Election. According to the Capital Journal, “On Thursday, Noem made this tweet: ‘@realDonaldTrump has been fighting the establishment, the mainstream media, and now rigged election systems on behalf of the American people and our way of life.’ This led Stephanopoulos to ask Noem about her comments. ‘All I'm asking for, George, is that we don't break this country. When you break the process on which we elect our leaders, you will break America forever. This isn't just about this election; this is about every election in the future, and the fact that the American people – the everyday people who get up and work hard, that are suffering through this pandemic, that have tragically lost family members – they need to know that, at least, America still functions, and we care about doing things right,’ Noem responded.” [Capital Journal, 11/9/20]
December 2020: Noem Spoke At D.C. Rally In Support Of Trump Highlighting Unfounded Allegations Of Voter Fraud In 2020 Election Alongside Conspiracy Theorists. According to the Argus Leader, “A crowd waving American flags and wearing ‘Make America Great Again’ hats gathered Saturday in Freedom Plaza in support of President Donald Trump and his unfounded allegations of voter fraud in the presidential election. Within hours, the scene became unruly. Videos posted to social media showed confrontations between Trump supporters and opponents, and people wearing pro-Trump attire attacking bystanders. In one incident, a bystander pulled out a knife after arguing with Trump supporters. In another, police pepper-sprayed people involved in a scuffle. […] The mood in Freedom Plaza was celebratory as speakers including Sebastian Gorka falsely claimed Trump had won the election and urged demonstrators to keep the pressure on state legislatures. Other speakers included South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell, and former Trump administration national security adviser Mike Flynn.” [Argus Leader, 12/13/20]
Noem Refused To Acknowledge Biden Defeated Trump In A Free And Fair Election. According to the Associated Press, “South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem refused to acknowledge Thursday that Democrat Joe Biden defeated her close Republican ally Donald Trump in a free and fair election, instead using the opportunity to criticize Biden's actions since taking office. In her first public comments specifically addressing the election results since Congress certified Biden's victory hours after a mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol, Noem refused to say whether she erred by saying in November that election systems were ‘rigged’ and casting doubt on the fairness of the election. Instead, she said at a news conference, ‘I think that we deserve fair and transparent elections. I think there's a lot of people who have doubts about that.’ Noem has condemned the violence at the Capitol, but last week she declined to hold Trump accountable for having a role in it.” [Associated Press, 1/28/21]
VIDEO: Noem Said People Deserve “Transparent And Fair Elections,” But Would Not Say Whether The 2020 Election Was Fair. According to a Governor Noem press conference via YouTube, “NOEM: I think there's instances in states where we have questions and so people deserve what you should report is what I actually said is that the people of this country deserve to have transparent and fair elections. So we have a result. We have a president that was elected. He is in office. I am willing to work with him and I believe he is our president of the United States. And I also think there are some reforms that should be pursued in some states where we've seen some places where there wasn't potential integrity. I've said many times to all of you in the press, I wish every state had the same election system that South Dakota has where you present an ID, a driver's license, when you vote. We overwhelmingly vote on paper, you vote on or before Election Day. And that those are clear, transparent, integrity-driven processes that were not followed in every other state. I would I would hope that people would consider putting some reforms in in some of these states to make sure that the people and the public of the United States of America can trust their election system.” [Governor Noem Press Conference, 1/28/21]
AUDIO: Noem Said There Was Ballot Box Stuffing In 2020. According to KWAT via YouTube, “NOEM: There's a reason that our founders gave us the election system, the Electoral College, the way that it was. And the security and confidence it’s given us about our election system, I think, has withstood the test of time. You know, we have no doubt, we can look from state to state and see that there were things that, you know, involved ballot counting or stuffing of boxes, different things that different states deal with. I blame a lot of that on these emergency orders governors were allowed to do that allowed them to conduct their election systems in ways that they never had before. And we have to trust our elections. We have to trust that, that when people vote, that it has some integrity of being counted and that we end up at the end of the day with leadership that the people wanted. So, you know, I think that what’s going on in Congress right now and talking about completely changing our, our elections, a lot of it I disagree with because I think that a lot of people are making political statements instead of rather looking at what's for the good of this country and that we do have to go from state to state and make sure that we know we can trust our elections.” [KWAT via YouTube, 1/17/22]
Noem Blamed Inadequate Civics Education As “The Root Cause” Of Insurrection At U.S. Capitol, While Making No Mention of Trump. According to the Associated Press, “South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem on Friday blamed an inadequate education in American civics as ‘the root cause’ of the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, while making no mention of President Donald Trump’s role in the attack that sent Congress into hiding. The Republican governor is a close ally of the president, campaigned for him across the country and supported his efforts to contest the results of the presidential election. Since Trump's supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol last week, Noem has tried to deflect blame from the president while calling for an end to political violence. ‘We have an opportunity to address the root cause of this problem: we must reform young Americans’ civic education,’ Noem said in the column released Friday.” [Associated Press, 1/15/21]
Noem Deflected Blame From Trump In Her First Press Conference After January 6, Saying The Country Should “Look Forward.” According to the Associated Press, “Other Republicans have said Trump's lie that the election was stolen has tarnished his place in history. But in her first news conference since a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol two weeks ago, Noem said that Trump's policies were ‘overwhelmingly’ good for South Dakota and signaled she wanted to skip over holding anyone responsible for the attack on Congress. When asked whether Trump had any responsibility for the insurrection, she said, ‘What happened on January 6 was horrible and should never happen again in this country. What I want to do is look forward and make sure that we continue to have fair and transparent elections that people can trust.’ Amid a reckoning in the GOP over Trump's actions, Noem has deflected blame from Trump and at times struck a combative tone against Democratic politicians. In the days after the Capitol insurrection, Noem falsely called the two Democrats who won Georgia's Senate elections ‘communists.’” [Associated Press, 1/21/21]
Noem Refused To Answer If Trump Bore Any Responsibility For January 6. According to the Hill, “When asked if Trump bore any responsibility for the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, Noem declined to say but called the attack a ‘horrific day.’ ‘I think we all need to examine this country and where we’re going,’ she said after Bash repeatedly pressed her on the issue.” [The Hill, 7/3/22]
Noem Said Haley Would Regret Criticizing Trump After January 6. According to Business Insider, “As former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley denounced President Donald Trump the day after the January 6 attack on the Capitol, Republican Gov. Kristi Noem of South Dakota already knew that criticizing Trump wasn't politically advisable. […] But Noem, who also spoke at the event, chose not to rebuke Trump. And according to both the book and reporting from the New York Times at the time, Noem's speech was much better received by attendees. And Noem reportedly told another attendee that Haley would come to regret her remarks. ‘I don't think that's very wise,’ she told the unnamed person. Reached for comment, a spokesman for Noem did not dispute the reporting.” [Business Insider, 4/29/22]
Cassidy Hutchinson Provided Damning Testimony Against Trump Regarding His Actions On And Before January 6. According to Axios, “Cassidy Hutchinson, a top aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, delivered the most damning testimony to date in the Jan. 6 hearings, tying former President Trump directly to the attack and providing potential evidence if criminal charges are pursued. The big picture: She described multiple incidents of Trump’s rage, including reportedly trying to seize the wheel and lunge at his former security detail when the Secret Service would not drive him to join protesters at the Capitol. She detailed Trump’s unwillingness to call off the crowds despite knowing some were armed and violence was expected. She also testified that Meadows sought a pardon after the attack on the Capitol and that then-White House Counsel Pat Cipollone warned that Trump and aides could be charged with ‘every crime imaginable’ if Trump joined protesters at the Capitol.” [Axios, 6/28/22]
Noem Said Hutchinson Was Untrustworthy. According to Breitbart, “Noem said, ‘Well, what alarms me is the way that this hearing has been conducted. This is not at all like the hearings that were conducted when I was a member of Congress. This was a one-sided conversation with one, you know, set of witnesses that are reporting hearsay in many situations that are not facts, so it’s been difficult to really believe everything she has said. She says she’s telling the truth, but much of it was hearsay, and much of it other people have refuted now.’ Bash said, ‘Governor, what – firsthand, she said she heard President Trump say that. So, it’s not hearsay.’ Noem said, ‘But her credibility was damaged when she talked about hearsay, and then other people that she referenced said it absolutely wasn’t true. That’s what’s difficult about these hearings. It feels to be more of a show and more of an agenda than an actual true, objective hearing that’s uncovering facts.’” [Breitbart, 7/3/22]
Noem Would Not Answer Whether She Would Have Certified The 2020 Election Results As Mike Pence Did. According to the South Dakota Searchlight, “Regarding the 2020 election, Bash asked Noem if she would have certified the results as then-Vice President Mike Pence did on Jan. 6, 2021, when a mob of Trump supporters violently attempted to stop the certification. Noem gave a lengthy response but never answered the question. ‘Talking in hypotheticals is not something that I do,’ Noem said, in part. ‘I deal with the reality of what I’m dealing with today and every single day. And what I’m going to do from now until we get to November is continue to go across this country and talk to people about Donald Trump.’ [South Dakota Searchlight, 4/22/24]
VIDEO: Noem Said Democratic Governors Would Write Emergency Orders To Take Control Over The Elections In 2024. According to Fox News via YouTube, “NOEM: "I think that what they do and I've been in my brain thinking they're going to figure out a way to do what they did during COVID. During COVID, there was a crisis, an emergency, and a disaster, and they issued an emergency order. And they're going to do it I think in 2024, something will happen, whether manufactured or not, that will allow these governors in all these states to write emergency orders to conduct their elections however they want to. They're going to go back to exactly what they did in 2020. And all of these liberal governors that got reelected in these swing states are going to write emergency orders to run their elections however they want to, whether it's mail-in ballots, it's collecting ballots by the unions and Wal-Mart parking lots. They will use every tool that they had then to make sure that Joe Biden gets elected again.” [Fox News via YouTube, 2/8/24]
VIDEO: Noem Said Democratic Governors Elected After 2020 Could “Conduct Elections In Ways That Ignore Law.” According to Fox News via YouTube, “NOEM: After 2020, in a lot of these swing states, those liberal Democrat governors got re-elected, they got reelected and they're still in charge. So they still may find a way to figure out a way to conduct elections in ways that ignore law.” [Fox News via YouTube, 2/20/24]
Noem Announced She Was Supporting An Appeal By The Arizona Attorney General Before The Supreme Court To Overturn A Federal Court Ruling That Found Arizona Voting Laws Disadvantaged Minority Voters. According to the Associated Press, “South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem on Thursday announced she was supporting an appeal by the Arizona Attorney General before the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a federal court's ruling that found some Arizona voting laws disadvantaged minority voters. […] The case stems from a 2016 lawsuit brought by the Democratic National Committee against Arizona, stating that two of its election laws violated the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination in the election process. A federal court eventually struck down the Arizona laws, which required election officials to throw out ballots cast at the wrong precinct and made it illegal for campaigns or community groups to collect ballots for delivery to polling places, a practice that critics call ‘ballot-harvesting.’” [Associated Press, 12/10/20]
In An Amicus Brief In Brnovich v. DNC, Noem Argued That The Voting Rights Act Does Not Prevent States From Enacting Laws Restricting Voting, Like Arizona's Ban On Ballot-Harvesting And In-Precinct Voting Requirements. According to a press release from Governor Kristi Noem, “This week, Governor Kristi Noem submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court of the United States in support of the petitioners in the case of Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee and in defense of fair, neutrally-applicable election laws that work to prevent voter fraud. This brief could not be timelier in light of the ongoing national election dispute. ‘The 2020 election has shaken the American people's faith in the integrity of the electoral process,’ said Governor Kristi Noem. ‘Fortunately, the Brnovich case presents the Supreme Court with a fantastic opportunity to restore public trust in American elections. In South Dakota, our election system is fair and transparent, and all states should be held to the same standard. Our hope is the Supreme Court will set a clear precedent that upholds the powers of states to enforce neutral, non-discriminatory voting rules that apply fairly to all by supporting the petitioners.’ The amicus brief argues that the Voting Rights Act does not prevent states from enacting neutral election laws like Arizona's ban on ballot-harvesting and in-precinct voting requirements. Arizona's laws are not identical to South Dakota's election laws, but all states should be allowed to design rules that promote the order and integrity of their elections. States should be able to enact and revise laws designed to ensure that every legal vote counts, and they shouldn't have to fear being taken to court for pursuing electoral fairness.” [Governor Kristi Noem Press Release, 12/10/20]
2019: South Dakota Groups Submitted Separate Signed Petitions For Separate Ballot Measures On Legalization Of Medical Marijuana And Medical Marijuana. According to the Associated Press, “South Dakota groups submitted separate signed petitions Monday that would allow residents to vote next year on whether to legalize medical marijuana and recreational marijuana. Monday was the deadline for submitting signatures to the South Dakota secretary of state's office for measures for the November 2020 ballot. One proposal would create a medical marijuana program for patients with serious health conditions. The other would legalize marijuana for adults 21 and older and require the state Legislature to enact a hemp cultivation law.” [Associated Press, 11/4/19]
2020: Medical And Recreational Marijuana Ballot Measures Passed In South Dakota. According to the Associated Press, “South Dakota had two marijuana proposals on the ballot — one for medical use and one for recreational — and advocates pitched them to voters as a package deal. Even so, they must have been stunned to see voters say yes to recreational marijuana, putting South Dakota among just a handful of states to take such a step. After all, the state’s voters soundly rejected medical marijuana four years ago and it was a struggle simply to legalize industrial hemp. Advocates for recreational marijuana leaned on an argument that legalization would cut arrests for marijuana possession. They had powerful opponents in the state’s Chamber of Commerce, but pot supporters raised roughly five times more money than their opponents. The measure approved Tuesday allows people over age 21 to have and distribute up to 1 ounce of pot. So what’s next? The Legislature gets until April to set up a program to tax and regulate the drug. [Associated Press, 11/4/20]
Noem Opposed Both The Medical And Recreational Marijuana Ballot Measures Ahead Of November 2020 Vote. According to the Rapid City Journal, “South Dakota voters will determine the future of both medicinal and recreational marijuana in the state on Election Day through Initiated Measure 26 and Constitutional Amendment A, respectively. Gov. Kristi Noem has said she opposes both measures because it could hurt South Dakotans in the long run.” [Rapid City Journal, 10/28/20]
Noem Said She Disagreed With Marijuana Legalization, Arguing It Would Hurt Families And Expand The Government. According to the Rapid City Journal, “More than 225,000 South Dakotans voted to legalize marijuana in South Dakota this week. Gov. Kristi Noem wasn't one of them. The first-term governor from Castlewood told the Argus Leader in an email Thursday that she believes the voters' choice to legalize the possession, sale and transport of the cannabis plant in the state will hurt families and force the expansion of government. ‘I was personally opposed to these measures and firmly believe they're the wrong choice for South Dakota's communities,’ said Noem, who appeared in campaign ads in opposition to legalizing pot ahead of the election. ‘We need to be finding ways to strengthen our families, and I think we're taking a step backward in that effort.’” [Rapid City Journal, 11/5/20]
Noem: “I Don’t Think That Anybody Gets Smarter Smoking Pot.” According to the Argus Leader, “Noem said Thursday it was no secret she opposed Amendment A. ‘I don't think that anybody gets smarter smoking pot,’ she said during her weekly press conference.” [Argus Leader, 1/31/21]
Pennington County Sheriff And Superintendent Of South Dakota Highway Patrol Colonel Filed Lawsuit Challenging Constitutionality Of Marijuana Legalization Ballot Measure In South Dakota. According to the Rapid City Journal, “The group that successfully campaigned to legalize medical and recreational marijuana in South Dakota through the ballot box will intervene in a lawsuit filed by law enforcement that challenges the constitutionality of the recreational amendment. ‘We are prepared to defend Amendment A against the lawsuit filed by Pennington County Sheriff Kevin Thom and Superintendent of the South Dakota Highway Patrol Colonel Rick Miller,’ South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws wrote in a news release. […] The pair filed a lawsuit last Friday in Hughes County that asks a judge to void the recreational marijuana amendment that was approved by 54% of voters statewide and 59% in Pennington County.” [Rapid City Journal, 11/25/20]
Noem Said She Directed Highway Patrol Superintendent To Bring Lawsuit Against Marijuana Amendment After Spokesperson Said Noem Had Not Done So. According to the Rapid City Journal, “Gov. Kristi Noem said in an executive order Friday that she directed the Highway Patrol superintendent to bring a lawsuit against the voter-approved amendment legalizing marijuana after her spokesman previously told the Journal she hadn't. ‘On Nov. 20, 2020, I directed Colonel Rick Miller to commence the Amendment A litigation on my behalf in his official capacity,’ Noem wrote in the order. ‘At all times thereafter, Colonel Rick Miller has acted as petitioner and plaintiff in the Amendment A litigation under my direction.’ Ian Fury, Noem's spokesman, said in a Nov. 23 email that this wasn't the case. ‘Gov. Noem did not ask Col. Miller or Sheriff Thom to bring the lawsuit,’ Fury wrote.” [Rapid City Journal, 1/8/21]
Noem Approved State Funds For Legal Fees In Lawsuit Challenging Constitutionality Of Marijuana Legalization In South Dakota. According to the Rapid City Journal, “Gov. Kristi Noem — who is opposed to recreational and medical marijuana — approved state funds for Miller's legal fees, according to her spokesman Ian Fury. […] ‘In South Dakota, we respect our Constitution,’ Noem said. ‘I look forward to the court addressing the serious constitutional concerns laid out in this lawsuit.’” [Rapid City Journal, 11/25/20]
Noem Argued Organizers Behind The Amendment Movement Should Pay For Attorney Fees. According to the Argus Leader, “Taxpayers are on the hook for private attorney fees that stacked up while Gov. Kristi Noem fought to keep marijuana illegal in South Dakota. But now that the bill has come in, the governor's office says organizers behind the now defunct Constitutional Amendment A - the voter approved ballot measure to make marijuana legal that was struck down in the courts last year - should cover the six-figure expense instead.” [Argus Leader, 1/16/22]
A South Dakota Judge Appointed By Noem In 2019 Overturned Voter-Approved Constitutional Amendment. According to Newsweek, “A South Dakota judge overturned a voter-approved constitutional amendment to legalize marijuana on Monday. Amendment A would have legalized marijuana for recreational use and was approved by over 54 percent of South Dakota voters last November. Republican Governor Kristi Noem, a close ally of former President Donald Trump, opposed the legalization effort and moved to reject the amendment after it passed, arguing that it should be overturned on technical grounds. Circuit Judge Christina Klinger, who was appointed by Noem in 2019, agreed with the governor and invalidated the amendment late Monday afternoon. Klinger's ruling asserted that the amendment dealt with more than one issue and was therefore a revision to the state constitution rather than an amendment.” [Newsweek, 2/8/21]
Noem Lauded The Judge’s Decision, Saying The Supreme Court Would Also Rule To Nullify. According to Newsweek, “‘Today's decision protects and safeguards our constitution,’ Noem said in a statement obtained by Newsweek. ‘I'm confident that South Dakota Supreme Court, if asked to weigh in as well, will come to the same conclusion.’” [Newsweek, 2/8/21]
The South Dakota Supreme Court Upheld A Lower Court's Ruling That Nullified The Voter-Passed Amendment To State Constitution That Would Have Legalized Recreational Marijuana Use. According to the Associated Press, “Gov. Kristi Noem instigated the legal fight to strike down the amendment passed by voters in November. Though the Republican governor opposed marijuana legalization as a social ill, her administration’s arguments in court centered on technical violations to the state constitution. The high court sided with those arguments in a 4-1 decision, ruling that the measure — Amendment A — would have violated the state’s requirement that constitutional amendments deal with just one subject. ‘It is clear that Amendment A contains provisions embracing at least three separate subjects, each with distinct objects or purposes,’ Chief Justice Steven Jensen wrote in the majority opinion, which found recreational marijuana, medical marijuana and hemp each to be separate issues.” [Associated Press, 11/24/21]
Noem Praised The South Dakota Supreme Court Decision To Nullify The Voter-Passed Amendment To Legalize Recreational Marijuana. According to the Associated Press, “Noem praised the decision, and noted that it would not change how she implements a separate, voter-passed law that legalizes medical marijuana. That law has already taken effect. ‘South Dakota is a place where the rule of law and our Constitution matter, and that’s what today’s decision is about,’ she said in a statement. ‘We do things right — and how we do things — matters just as much as what we are doing.’” [Associated Press, 11/24/21]
Noem Said She Believed South Dakota Needed Another Year To Implement Medical Marijuana System. According to the Rapid City Journal, “Gov. Kristi Noem said Wednesday that she believes South Dakota needs another year to implement medical marijuana, an issue which gained 70% support in the November election. ‘We are working diligently to get IM 26 implemented safely and correctly,’ Noem said. ‘The feasibility of getting this program up and running well will take additional time. I am thankful to our legislative leaders for helping make sure that we do this right.’ Noem asked lawmakers to sign off on delayed implementation of Initiated Measure 26 days after a court effort to declare the recreational marijuana ballot measure known as Amendment A unconstitutional. Noem had pushed for the legal battle on that measure, approved by 54% of voters in November. The state expects the Supreme Court will weigh in on the constitutional matter, Noem's office said. South Dakota law states that approved ballot measures take effect July 1 the year following an election, but Noem said that won't be enough time and that some states take more than two years to successfully implement medical marijuana programs.” [Rapid City Journal, 2/10/21]
In an Op-Ed, Noem Said The State Was Committed To Launching A Medical Marijuana Program, But It Would Not Take Effect Until July 1, 2022. According to an op-ed from Governor Noem in the Rapid City Journal, “This past Fall, voters strongly supported access to medicinal marijuana in our state. We're committed to respecting that vote, and it's our role to make sure that South Dakota patients have access to safe and accessible medicinal marijuana. In doing so, we will be taking into consideration every aspect of this major cultural shift. Since starting to tackle this issue, the more that we've dug into it, the more that we've realized that there are still questions that need to be answered before this program takes effect. We know that we're not experts in this area, so we contracted with the nation's leading consultant – the folks at Cannabis Public Policy Consulting – to help us understand how to best implement this program. Our experts told us that they had never seen a safe and effective program stood up in under 8 months, the timeline set up by Initiated Measure (IM 26). In other states, it took much longer – even up to 2 or 3 years – to do this right. So this week, we announced our plan to do this right. Our plan does two things. First, it gives us additional flexibility on the implementation timeline. The medicinal marijuana program will take effect on July 1, 2022. Additionally, our plan sets up an interim committee to meet between now and next legislative session to address the wide-ranging questions that we still have and the diverse policy decisions that should be open for public input.” [Rapid City Journal, Governor Kristi Noem, 2/13/21]
South Dakota Republican Senators Defied Noem Ahead Of The Deadline With A Plan To Legalize Medical Marijuana. According to the Associated Press, “South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem's push to scale back a voter-approved measure to legalize medical marijuana was left clinging to life Wednesday after Republican senators defied her. The issue of implementing a medical marijuana program, which voters approved with 70% of the vote in November, has hung over lawmakers the entire legislative session. But with just two days left to make key decisions on the pot program, the House, Senate and governor were in a standoff. However, it appeared the senate's decision to defy the governor's plan will ensure that the state's prohibitions on marijuana will end in some form on July 1, though what the final law looks like is still in doubt. The Senate on Monday passed a proposal with key deviations from Noem's plan, which aimed to delay legalization until next year. Notably, it decriminalized possession of small amounts of pot for all adults starting July 1 and protected medical users’ ability to possess up to three ounces (85 grams). That forced a choice upon the governor and her allies in the House: Accept the senate's proposal or reject the bill, allowing the medical marijuana program to go into effect July 1.” [Associated Press, 3/10/21]
The Voter-Passed Medical Marijuana Law Was Set To Go Into Effect On July 1, 2022, After Noem’s Push To Scale Back The Measure Failed. According to the Associated Press, “South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem's push to scale back a voter-approved measure to legalize medical marijuana failed Wednesday after Republican senators defied her. Noem's proposal died after the House and Senate could not agree on the bill, paving the way for a voter-passed medical marijuana law to go into effect on July 1. Noem had argued that her administration needed more time to implement the program, but senators from within her own party defied her plan, reasoning they owed it to voters to end marijuana prohibitions in some form.” [Associated Press, 3/11/21]
Noem Gave Up On Pushing Back Against Medical Marijuana Legalization. According to the Argus Leader, “About a year ago, Gov. Kristi Noem began a full-court press to bring South Dakota back from the brink of becoming one of the first-ever GOP-led states to legalize marijuana. But after a months-long crusade to walk back a voter-approved medical marijuana law and outright block a constitutional change legalizing recreational pot, the first-term Republican governor told lawmakers this week those efforts are over. With the recreational marijuana law still tied up in court, and a Legislature still divided on medical marijuana, Noem said during a tele-conference with Republican members of both the state House of Representatives and Senate on Thursday night that cannabis policy will not be a priority of her administration during the next Legislative Session.” [Argus Leader, 10/10/21]
Noem’s Campaign Website Defended Her Choice To Have Highway Patrol Challenge Recreational Marijuana Legalization In South Dakota After It Passed On Ballot Measure In 2020. According to KELO, “Governor Kristi Noem, the Republican candidate, opposed the 2020 ballot measure that sought to legalize recreational marijuana. After Amendment A passed with 54% of the vote, Noem had the head of the South Dakota Highway Patrol challenge it in state court. The South Dakota Supreme Court eventually ruled that it violated the single-subject requirement and declared it void. Her website defends that action: ‘When Governor Noem was sworn in, she took an oath to uphold the South Dakota and United States Constitutions. She reviews every piece of legislation and every ballot measure to ensure that it follows the Constitution, and she will continue to do so.’” [KELO, 10/14/22]
Noem Website Claimed She Always Supported Medical Cannabis Once The FDA Approved It. According to KELO, “Her website says, ‘Governor Noem has always supported medical cannabis, believing that it should be available for South Dakotans once it received approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).’” [KELO, 10/14/22]
After Both Recreational And Medical Cannabis Were Submitted As Potential Ballot Measures In 2019, Noem Said She Opposed Both Medical And Recreational Marijuana. According to KELO, “In 2019, after Amendment A and IM 26 were submitted as potential ballot measures, Noem said she supported some derivatives of marijuana that were legal for medical use in South Dakota, but she otherwise opposed marijuana for medical or recreational use. After the 2020 election, Noem issued a statement about both Amendment A and IM 26 that said, ‘I was personally opposed to these measures and firmly believe they’re the wrong choice for South Dakota’s communities. We need to be finding ways to strengthen our families, and I think we’re taking a step backward in that effort. I’m also very disappointed that we will be growing state government by millions of dollars in costs to public safety and to set up this new regulatory system.’” [KELO, 10/14/22]
Noem Vetoed Legislation In 2019 To Legalize Industrial Hemp In South Dakota Under Argument It Would Open The Door To Legalization Of Recreational Marijuana. According to KELO, “Noem previously fought against legalizing industrial hemp in South Dakota. She vetoed legislation in 2019, saying it would open the way for recreational marijuana. […] She issued a lengthy statement later that year that said, in part, ‘Legalizing industrial hemp weakens drug laws. It hurts law enforcement. It’s a step backward. South Dakota already faces a drug problem. Families continue to be ripped apart by substance abuse. I realize this position might not be popular, but that’s not why I’m taking it. As a governor who has said I will make every decision with the next generation in mind, I cannot sit by.’” [KELO, 10/14/22]
2016: Noem Effectively Voted Against The DISCLOSE Act, Which Would Have Created More Transparency In Campaign Spending. In May 2016, Noem voted for a motion to order the previous question that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “end[ed] debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 732) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill (HR 4909) that would authorize defense programs for fiscal 2017.” According to the House Democratic Leader, “The Democratic Previous Question requires Congress to vote on H.R. 430, the DISCLOSE Act, which would bring desperately needed transparency to the tidal wave of secret money unleashed by the Supreme Court’s wildly destructive Citizen’s United decision, requiring corporate CEOs to stand by their ads in the same way candidates do; and compelling corporations and outside groups to disclose their campaign spending to shareholders, members, and the public.” The vote was on the motion to order the previous question. The House adopted the motion, thereby defeating the Democratic alternative, by a vote of 239 to 177. [House Vote 196, 5/17/16; Congressional Quarterly, 5/17/16; Democratic Leader, Accessed 8/25/17; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4909; Congressional Actions, H.R. 430; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 732]
2012: Noem Voted Against Requiring Entities Who Sponsored Political Programming To Publicly Disclosure The Identities Of Donors Who Contributed Over $10,000 During An Election Cycle. In March 2012, Noem voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “require[d] entities sponsoring political programming to disclose the identity of any donor that [had] contributed $10,000 or more to such entity in an election reporting cycle. Broadcasters would have [had] to include the information in files available for public inspection.” The underlying legislation was the Federal Communications Commission Process Reform Act of 2012. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 179 to 239. [House Vote 135, 3/27/12; Congressional Quarterly, 3/27/12; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt 993; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3309]
2011: Noem Voted To Replacing The Election Assistance Commission With An 82-Member Board To Review Proposed Voluntary Voting System Guidelines. In June 2011, Noem voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “terminate[d] the Election Assistance Commission. It would [have] transfer[ed] certain commission functions to the Federal Election Commission and remaining operations regarding commission contracts and agreements to the Office of Management and Budget. It also would [have] create[d] an 82-member board to review proposed voluntary voting system guidelines.” The vote was on motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, which required a two-thirds majority to pass. The House rejected the bill by a vote of 235 to 187. [House Vote 466, 6/22/11; Congressional Quarterly, 6/22/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 672]
2018: Noem Voted Against Increasing Funding For The Election Assistance Commission By $380 Million. In July 2018, Kristi Noem voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “increase[d] funding for the Election Assistance Commission by $380 million, and would decrease funding for the ‘Fund for America’s Kids and Grandkids’ by the same amount.” The underlying legislation was an FY 2019 Interior, Environment and Financial Services appropriations bill. The vote was on a motion to recommit. The House rejected the motion, thereby defeating the amendment, by a vote of 182 to 232. [House Vote 364, 7/19/18; Congressional Quarterly, 7/19/18; Congressional Actions, H.R. 6147]
2018: Noem Voted Against The $1.3 Trillion FY 2018 Omnibus Spending Deal Which Raised Spending By $138 Billion Over FY 2017 Levels, Including $300 Million To The FBI To Counter Russian Election Hacking And $380 Million For The Election Assistance Commission To Help States Improve Election Security. In March 2018, Kristi Noem voted against the FY 2018 Omnibus spending bill. According to Congressional Quarterly, “Combined, the spending measures would provide about $1.3 trillion in discretionary spending, with $1.2 trillion subject to discretionary spending caps, and $78.1 billion designated as Overseas Contingency Operations funds. The measure's spending levels are consistent with the increased defense and non-defense budget caps set by the two-year budget deal agreed to last month. That agreement increased the FY 2018 defense cap by $80 billion and the non-defense cap by $63 billion. Given that the previous caps were set to reduce overall discretionary spending by $5 billion, the net increase provided by the omnibus is $138 billion over the FY 2017 level.” The vote was on the motion to concur in the Senate Amendment with an Amendment. The House agreed to the motion, thereby passing the bill, by a vote of 256 to 167. The Senate later agreed to the legislation, sending it to the president, who signed it into law. [House Vote 127, 3/22/18; Congressional Quarterly, 3/22/18; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1625]