2025 SD Legislative Scorecard

HB1152 prohibits South Dakota officials and employees from enforcing or implementing any mandates, regulations, fees, or taxes from intergovernmental organizations such as the United Nations, World Economic Forum, or World Health Organization. It declares that such organizations have no authority within the state.

The South Dakota State House of Representatives rejected HB1152 on February 18, 2025 by a vote of 32 to 37. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because international organizations such as the United Nations, World Economic Forum, and World Health Organization possess no constitutional authority over the American people or the states. Furthermore, the federal government’s involvement in these bodies extends beyond its constitutional limits and aligns with globalist agendas that undermine national sovereignty and self-governance. States must nullify unconstitutional acts of the federal government.

HB1173 removes the previous cap of $2 per front foot per year on property assessments for road improvements.

The South Dakota State House of Representatives passed HB1173 on February 13, 2025 by a vote of 61 to 7. We have assigned pluses to the nays because property taxes are antithetical to property rights, and removing the cap opens the door for excessive and potentially abusive local taxation. Without limits, local governments could potentially raise assessments to the point of displacing residents—functionally forcing them out without using eminent domain. Eliminating the $2 per front foot cap will likely lead to significantly higher costs for property owners, with no meaningful safeguards. This bill represents increased government overreach and imposes a heavier financial burden on taxpayers, especially those in areas targeted for frequent or large-scale road projects.

SJR502 applies to Congress to call an Article V convention to propose amendments that would impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit its power and jurisdiction, and establish term limits for Congress and other federal officials.

The South Dakota State House of Representatives rejected SJR502 on February 4, 2025 by a vote of 29 to 38. We have assigned pluses to the nays because a so-called “Convention of the States” would not be of “limited” purpose. The vague and contradictory text contained in this joint resolution dangerously permits what Article V of the U.S. Constitution describes as a “Convention for proposing Amendments” or second constitutional convention. Article V was designed to correct structural deficiencies in the federal government, not the behavior of its elected officials. SJR502 should be opposed in favor of less risky, more precise, and immediate solutions that would restore power to the states and the people, such as clear-cut proposals in Congress to repeal bad amendments or state nullification of unconstitutional federal laws.

HB1052 provides that no one is allowed to use eminent domain—the government's unconstitutional power to take private property—to build or operate a pipeline primarily meant for transporting carbon oxide.

The South Dakota State House of Representatives passed HB1052 on January 27, 2025 by a vote of 49 to 19. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because eminent domain for the benefit of private corporations violates the U.S. Constitution, particularly the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Fifth Amendment states, “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation,” and the Fourteenth Amendment adds that no state shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” There is no constitutional justification for government involvement in carbon storage policies anywhere in the United States, especially under the pretext of combating “climate change.” The John Birch Society covered this issue extensively in its documentary, UNearthing the CO2 Pipeline. By blocking forced takings for carbon pipelines, this bill protects property rights, pushes back against globalist environmental agendas such as the United Nations’ Agenda 2030, and reinforces state sovereignty and individual liberty.

HJR5003 proposes a change to South Dakota’s constitution that would require any future constitutional amendment to receive at least 60 percent of the vote, rather than a simple majority, to be approved.

The South Dakota State House of Representatives passed HJR5003 on January 22, 2025 by a vote of 61 to 5. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because a supermajority of the electorate—not the current threshold of only more than 50 percent of voters—should be required to approve of any legitimate changes to the South Dakota Constitution. While the United States Founders believed that government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed, they understood that a simple majority is insufficient to protecting the individual rights and liberty of the people from the “dangers of democracy,” which threaten to result in a “tyranny of the majority” or “elective despotism.” This explains why the U.S. Constitution, in Article IV, Section 4, explicitly guarantees to “every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” It provides that government be limited to the ‘rule of law,’ as opposed to mere ‘majority rule’ in a democracy.