March 6, 2025
Care and Feeding of a Beautiful Old Building, by Rep. Will Mortenson (R-Fort Pierre)
In 1908, Governor Coe Crawford and state leaders of yore laid the cornerstone of the South Dakota capitol. Construction on the grand structure continued for another two years. In 1910, the building was complete and South Dakota’s state government has operated out of the big stone building ever since.
The structure itself is magnificent. I have admired the architecture since I was a kid. I always figured our Capitol must be the most stark, impressive structure of any state capitol. In states where their capitol buildings are in large cities, with other massive skyscrapers or substantial buildings, I imagine they get lost in the shuffle. Not here. Our Capitol dome is visible from most places in Pierre (and Fort Pierre). The view from the top of Hilger’s Gulch is among the most beautiful vistas in the state – a stone-and-copper colossus, framed by groves of South Dakota trees, with the Missouri River bluffs in the background.
Our forefathers built this Capitol. They clearly had great taste and took a lot of pride in the structure. Let’s also be honest – they spent way more on the Capitol than we ever would today. If we built the Capitol today, we would never have authorized paying for the beautiful architecture, quality materials, or hand-crafted detailing. We’re just too cheap.
But, today, we get to benefit from their opulence. We would never have built such a structure, but it is now our obligation to maintain it for decades and centuries to come. To that end, I sponsored a bill and led the effort to help the restoration and maintenance of the Capitol building. We passed a bill allocating funds to ensuring it remains well-preserved for generations to come. I am excited to see the good that the measure does in restoring and preserving our Capitol. I hope South Dakotans for generations can look at our State House with the same wonder and awe as I did as a child, and as I continue to look at it each time I walk inside.
February 28, 2025
Losing Our Focus on the Future, by Rep. Will Mortenson (R-Fort Pierre)
This week, we heard a bill to repeal the Future Fund. That fund was created by Gov. George S. Mickelson. Gov. Mickelson, who many of you remember, was laser-focused on the future of South Dakota. He knew, in his heart, that we could be better and more prosperous. Gov. Mickelson believed in South Dakota and refused to let our small size keep us from pursuing big things. The Future Fund was one of many projects he created that were focused on our future.
Since its inception, the Future Fund has been used by every Governor since to help our state in dozens of ways: scholarships for technical college students, establishment of the world-class research lab at the Homestake Mine, recruitment of business, and preserving the Ellsworth Airforce Base when it was under threat. The Future Fund is a tool that our Governors have used to meet different needs in South Dakota as they arise. Those needs don’t always look the same, as the prior list reflects, but the Future Fund has been a useful tool to help our state move into a better future.
The proposal to do away with the Future Fund was defeated, narrowly, but it was a good reflection of this year in the Legislature: an effort to repeal one of our best-proven tools to build a better future in South Dakota. This year, we haven’t passed many bills that really help South Dakota. Usually, when a year wraps up, it is easy to identify the ways we made out state safer, stronger, freer, or more prosperous. This year, very few come to mind. Instead, most of the focus was on jailing librarians, muzzling school boards, blocking economic development, and hurting public safety by preventing the construction of a much-needed prison. The Legislature this year has not been focused on the future, and the attempt to repeal the Future Fund was a perfect encapsulation.
The Not-In-My-Back-Yard movement has gained steam in recent years to block construction everything from agricultural projects to prisons to housing to infrastructure. The “NIMBY” effort seeks to use government to block any construction they don’t like, and we are beginning to see the fruits of their labor in South Dakota. Overregulation by townships, counties, the Legislature, and the federal government made South Dakota 50th out of 50 states in economic growth in 2024. Our declining revenues this year reflect a similar trend. The NIMBY crowd is beginning to achieve strangulation by regulation in South Dakota, and too few are focused on our future to stop it. Instead, this year’s Legislature has fed into and bolstered the NIMBY cause by passing more regulations and blocking efforts to reduce government overreach. Our economic policy this year looks more like California or Europe than South Dakota.
I’ll admit it – I’m concerned that we have lost focus on our future. For my part, I am going to re-double my focus on ideas that make South Dakota a place that is attractive to hardworking young people. To do that, we need to bring more kids to our technical schools and universities. We need strong, supported schools. We need a low, stable tax base. We need safe, family-friendly communities. We need less regulation, more jobs, and better wages. These are topics that will power our future in South Dakota. These are the topics that I will spend the next ten months working on. We are starting to see the economic effects of laws that block growth and stifle prosperity. We cannot afford another year like this year. We need to remember Governor Mickelson’s example and focus on our future. We need to do better.
February 22, 2025
Common Sense Under the Capitol Dome, by Rep. Will Mortenson (R-Fort Pierre)
Common sense just isn’t so common anymore. With the rise of internet angst and the descent of participation community groups from church to Kiwanis to PTA, the common bonds that tie us together as South Dakotans seem to be strained. A lot of my colleagues will defer to an online news source from Tennessee about criminal justice rather than their local Sheriff. Many have no trust in their fellow South Dakotans, whether they be bankers, teachers, county officials, or nurses. They have lost faith in their communities and the common sense that those communities create.
For my part, I give South Dakotans the benefit of the doubt. I still trust South Dakotans. I am not paranoid that people who run for the school board (many of whom I know) are trying to do anything other than create a strong school for my kids and theirs. I am not so proud as to think I know financial topics better than a banker who has spent decades of their life helping folks borrow money to build houses or businesses. I have faith in the folks in our communities who are actually providing law enforcement, actually educating kids, and actually building businesses. I certainly trust those folks more than rock throwers on the internet. Legislating comes down to trust – and I choose to trust South Dakotans.
This week, common sense was in especially short supply. We had a bill that would have imposed criminal liability on librarians if a child sneaks into the wrong section of the library and accesses a book meant for older kids or adults. It didn’t matter if the librarian did anything wrong or not. If the child saw the material in the library, that librarian would spend up to 1 year in jail. The law change didn’t protect any kid or help shield them from any of the nastiness that they shouldn’t be accessing. The only effect was to make librarians criminals. Here is the worst part: the bill passed the House.
At the end of this week, we voted on a bill to set aside money for building a men’s prison. Every single person who has looked at our prison system, from legislative study committees to law enforcement to NIMBY opponents of the Lincoln County prison project to Governors Noem and Rhoden have all come up with one conclusion: South Dakota needs a new men’s prison. We heard from prosecutors and law enforcement across the state who told us that our citizens will be safer with a new facility. We heard from corrections officials that our prison guards and the inmates will be safer with a new facility. We heard from architects that our 100+ Year Old Prison is in bad shape and should be decommissioned. We are in the unusual and fortunate position of having the funds to set aside. Despite all that, the House didn’t trust South Dakotans, common sense lost, and Governor Rhoden’s bill to set aside money for the project was defeated.
Common sense isn’t so common in the State Capitol anymore. We need your help. Our citizen legislature needs to hear from citizens to function, so I hope you reach out to us. Maybe together we can restore some common sense to this year’s Legislature.
February 14, 2025
Sweating the Small Stuff, by Rep. Will Mortenson (R-Fort Pierre)
In politics, it is generally good advice not to sweat the small stuff. Insults and rude comments via email and online are a part of the job. It is important to focus on the work and not on comments from people who don’t know me and have usually been misled by some activist group on the internet. On the political side, not sweating the small stuff is important.
When it comes to policy, though, sweating the small stuff is absolutely critical. Bills may have good intention, but if they are poorly drafted and cause problems, they need to be defeated. Bills may sound good, but if they don’t carry out their intent and don’t do anything but add words to the law, they need to be defeated. As an attorney, I know that each word in a statute matters and, ultimately, governs the lives of the people of South Dakota. I am sure it irritates some of my colleagues, but when working on bills, I sweat the small stuff.
I also sweat the small stuff in the legislation I propose. I have worked on a few high-profile issues, but the vast majority of my written-and-sponsored bills are pretty boring. They are areas that improve the lives of our citizens in small, important ways. They make the common interactions of South Dakotans with their government easier and less burdensome. They don’t draw headlines, but I think if we spent as much time trying to find small improvements as we did big headlines, our state would be in much better shape.
In prior years, I brought bills that helped thousands of South Dakotans avoid probate by increasing the small estate affidavit threshold and helped people gift their farms to charitable entities. This year, I’ve introduced a bill to make it easier for people transfer vehicles to their heirs directly, through a transfer-on-death designation on their title. Another bill removes the requirement of obtaining a bond for people who serve as notaries and executors. These are actual, bona fide regulation and cost reductions on our citizens. With hundreds of bills that add regulations or requirements introduced this year, I am proud of these small wins for a leaner, easier-to-navigate government in South Dakota.
So, while it is not smart to sweat the small stuff when it comes to internet trolls, I can say for sure we need to sweat the small stuff when it comes to legislation, and I’ll continue to do so as long as you send me to the Capitol.
February 8, 2025
Parents First When It Comes to Religion, by Rep. Will Mortenson (R-Fort Pierre)
Raising kids in 2025 is a scary job. As soon as a kid has access to the internet, the influences are infinite. The internet, and social media in particular, influences kids in ways that parents cannot know, let alone approve. Shuree and I are planning to hold out on getting our kids smart phones as long as we can. That probably makes us lame and over-protective, but we want to have the lead role in raising our kids and we want them to have a childhood that prioritizes lived experience over screen stimulation.
While I am working to protect my kids and raise them on my terms, a slew of legislation has been introduced this year that is aimed at having the government dictate and direct my children’s religious upbringing.
Just like deep blue state politicians pushing woke ideology, a few big government politicians here in South Dakota are trying to push their religion on our kids. On the House floor this week, we defeated a bill to require clergy to come into the schools to minister to your children (without your consent). Next week, we will hear a bill mandating that the Ten Commandments be posted in every single classroom AND require that teachers teach the Ten Commandments to every single kid in the school. There are other bills attempting to do the same – overstepping parents, overstepping school boards, and placing mandates on schools to push certain religious beliefs.
Promoting a particular religious establishment or mode of worship on children is not the job of government. That is the job of parents. Parents should guide the faith journey of their children – not politicians in the Capitol. Parents should choose which religious leader interprets religious text – not politicians in the Capitol. Parents should choose which religious documents are presented to their kids (and how) – not politicians in the Capitol.
The founders of our nation were Christians. They were influenced by Judeo-Christian texts. Thomas Jefferson even wrote his own version of the bible. But, in their great wisdom and restraint, they did not try to mandate their religion to the public as had been done in the England they fled. Instead, they protected the people from government-mandated religion. That is contained in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Fortunately, for us in South Dakota, we have an additional Bill of Rights in the South Dakota Constitution that is even stronger, prohibiting preference to be given to any religious establishment or mode of worship. The Ten Commandments bill clearly violates our South Dakota Bill of Rights, and likely the US Constitution as well.
Being a parent in 2025 is hard. There are influences on our kids each day. We work hard to let them learn and experience on their own, but in some areas, parents should have special protection and deference. Religious upbringing is chief among them. On behalf of parents across our state, I’ll be voting No on these measures.
January 31, 2025
The Vital Importance of “No” by Rep. Will Mortenson (R-Fort Pierre)
As your Representative, I’ve got to admit that it’s a lot more fun to be “for” bills than “against” them. I like talking to my neighbors about things I’m “for”: agriculture, education, hunting, and preserving South Dakota values. Those are the reasons I ran for the Legislature and the issues that I’m passionate about.
Lately, though, I have spent more time working against bills and voting “No” than supporting bills and voting “Yes.” Instead of championing dozens of changes to our state laws, I find myself regularly pumping the brakes on new regulations or opposing new government spending programs.
Remember – every bill changes South Dakota. I love South Dakota. It’s my home and the place I care most about. Legislation that seeks to change our state needs to pass a high hurdle. As a common sense conservative, change comes hard for me. If four parts of a bill are good for South Dakota, but one part is bad, I’m bound to vote against the entire bill. It isn’t enough that a bill sounds good on the surface or makes for a good slogan. I’m interested in what does good, not what looks good.
While voting No is a critically important part of the job, it isn’t a fun one. Often, saying “No” is painful.
Telling my colleagues that I don’t support their bill isn’t enjoyable, nor is it something I do lightly. Each proposal comes from a legislator that truly believes in the idea and was elected by thousands of South Dakotans. However, I owe my colleagues a duty of uprightness and honesty, the same that I owe the voters. So, I spend a lot of my day delivering bad news to my friends.
“No” isn’t fun, but it is necessary in government. If I were voting on emotion or trying to make sure the legislator sponsoring the bill liked me, I’d vote yes on every bill. Instead, I think, read, listen, and ask questions on each bill. I test the bill against my values, the constitution, and the impact on South Dakota (and central South Dakota, in particular). No matter my emotional reaction, I run each bill through the same critical, analytical, and careful process.
So, I’ll probably continue to vote “No” more than most. It causes my colleagues to be sore with me. It means there might be headlines or scorecards saying I’m against A, B, or C. That’s okay. I may lose my next election, but I would rather preserve our state and its laws than preserve my seat in the Legislature. In government, voting “No” isn’t fun, but it is vitally important
January 25, 2025
Happy Trails, Governor Noem!, by Rep. Will Mortenson (R-Fort Pierre)
This weekend marks a bittersweet moment as we say farewell to Governor Kristi Noem as she ascends to become South Dakota’s first presidential cabinet secretary. No matter your thoughts on her style or policies, one thing cannot be denied: Our state has never seen a Governor quite like Kristi Noem.
Governor Noem’s departure is as unique as her tenure in the office. Of course, she was our first female Governor. That fact was, of course, a significant milestone, but not one that Governor Noem mentioned very often. Her tenure was historic, but on her own terms.
Governor Noem’s response to the COVID pandemic is well-known and looks better day-by-day in hindsight. I would like to share one other area policy that I give Governor Noem particular credit as she departs: Banning Foreign Ownership of Agricultural Land.
In 2023, Governor Noem cut through the static in proposing a new system to ensure foreign persons and entities, particularly those from hostile nations, do not own our farm and ranch land. Her first proposal drew a lot of resistance, but in her signature fashion, Governor Noem doubled-down the next year and brought a cleaner, stronger foreign ag land bill. I made it a priority to get passed and worked hard with her Administration to ensure the Legislature got it done. It took grit and persistence – two of Governor Noem’s most famous traits – to get our ag land protected for years to come.
I have truly enjoyed my relationship with Governor Noem. While I publicly disagreed with her decision to move the Governor’s Hunt from Pierre to Sioux Falls (and a number of other topics), we had a strong and friendly partnership while I was the Majority Leader of the Republican caucus in the last couple years. She is tenacious and sharp, but also funny and down-home. I’m not sure I expected to be saying this several years ago, but I count her as a friend today. I will be rooting for her as she heads to Washington, where I’m sure she will keep making history – on her own terms.
Courtesy photo.
January 18, 2025
It’s Time to Replace the Prison, by Rep. Will Mortenson (R – Fort Pierre)
Going to prison is an unimaginable fate for most of us. Prisons are among the most unpleasant places in our world. They deprive inmates of virtually all freedoms. They are incredibly costly – requiring the state to fund lodging, security, meals, and medical care for inmates. We should not send people to prison lightly – it means that person cannot work, cannot take care of their kids, cannot see their friends, and cannot do, say, or dress how they wish. Prison should not be used for retribution and evidence is well-established that longer sentences don’t deter crime. Prison should be reserved only for those who need to be separated from society to protect law abiding citizens from harm.
I believe in law and order. Our laws should be aimed at making the public safer. Crime is deterred by strong, consistent law enforcement presence. That is – people decide whether or not to commit a crime based on their likelihood of getting caught, not whether they’ll go to prison for 15 years or 20. I greatly prefer to focus our criminal justice resources on police officers, sheriff’s deputies, and highway patrolmen. Longer prison sentences don’t make us safer. Law enforcement makes us safer.
Still, prisons are necessary. There are some folks who would harm our society unless they are incarcerated. We need prisons to protect the public.
While prisons are a need, they are an unwanted need. No legislator wants to spend hundreds of millions of dollars building new prisons. No neighbor of the new prison location wants the prison in their neighborhood. Prisons are a prime example of a need, and not a want.
For the fourth year in a row, the Legislature will be allocating funds to replace the men’s prison around Sioux Falls. The new facility will be safer for guards and inmates and include additional opportunities for treatment and rehabilitation.
Folks in Lincoln County are protesting the prison construction. I understand the concern. We in Pierre will remember when the prison was being sited here. Similar concerns were raised and similar opposition was voiced. The same can be said for construction of correction facilities from Rapid City to Springfield, where lawsuits were filed to try to block them. In each case, the facilities were built and the communities adapted. Modern correction facilities are secure, and I have confidence that the Department of Corrections are going to build proper facilities that do not pose a significant risk to the folks in that county.
I will be a strong, vocal supporter of funding construction of the new prison facilities in our state. Now is the time to build the prison, not to equivocate or delay and wait for costs to go up. We have one-time funds available. These prisons are not a want: Legislators don’t want to have to spend the money on them and neighbors don’t want them built. While they are not wanted, the prisons are a need. They fulfill a core obligation of state government, and we need to get them built.
January 7, 2025
A Tough Budget Year, by Rep. Will Mortenson (R-Fort Pierre)
The 100th South Dakota Legislative Session kicks off next Tuesday, January 14. As usual, about 1/3 of the Legislature turned over as a result of term limits, retirement, or election results. The new faces and returners alike will face the toughest budget year our state has seen in over a decade.
After several years of excess revenues resulting from federal COVID stimulus and a growing economy, our revenues grew at a more normal rate this year. Unfortunately, we overcommitted to Medicaid spending and are facing budget shortfalls. While revenue grew over $40M this year, required expenditures for Medicaid grew by more than $60M. Those additional Medicaid expenses came from Medicaid Expansion (passed on the ballot in 2020) and a reduction in the amount the federal government is paying for Medicaid services. It is also true that the Legislature used revenue increases in the last few years to increase wages for state employees, increase funding for schools, and to provide tax cuts. We didn’t just hoard the money – we used it for public benefits or turned it back over to the taxpayers.
But, this year, we’ll be facing a tough budget year. Gov. Noem proposed increases of 1.25% for Medicaid providers, education, and state employees. That costs about $30M. In addition, the Governor (and some of my colleagues in the Legislature) are looking at creating a variety of new government programs. Given that we were already in a hole due to Medicaid, the proposed new spending and government programs means the proposed budget included tens of millions in budget cuts.
I worked for Governor Dennis Daugaard in 2011, when he led the effort to eliminate a 10% deficit by reducing spending across-the-board. It was difficult. There were real impacts to the way schools educated kids, nursing homes cared for seniors, and state government served the public. The cuts made for a hard year for many South Dakotans. But, we survived. The sky did not fall. In some cases, administrators admitted that the cuts gave them leeway to eliminate a program that was no longer necessary or find items in their budget that could be reduced without harming their mission. Budget tightening is hard, but it can be healthy.
I will approach this tough budget year prudently and conservatively. I will be hard on all new spending programs. We should stop spending before we start cutting. This is not the year for new government programs, and anyone who brings one needs to explain why we should be adding government when we’re cutting core obligations. I will seek perspective and listen to every constituent or group that is impacted from a budget cut. I will balance the interest of the taxpayers with that of the tax spenders.
This may be our 100th legislative session, but it is not our first tough budget year. Our state has been prudent, conservative, and well-managed for decades. It will be our job to maintain those virtues and deliver another balanced budget in 2025.
Comments