Lawmakers will challenge Noem’s three vetoes

PIERRE, SD (KELO) — Their sponsors plan to challenge vetoes Governor Kristi Noem issued last week in her attempt to prevent the three pieces of legislation from becoming law.

South Dakota’s 105 lawmakers return to the state Capitol on Monday for the last day of their 2022 session.

To override a governor’s veto requires a two-thirds majority in each house – at least 47 in the House of Representatives and at least 24 in the Senate.

Only one of the three – HB 1281 – cleared both chambers with enough support to potentially survive. “Absoutely!” Rep. Chris Karr, R-Sioux Falls, replied when asked Saturday if there would be an attempt to override the veto.

Karr and Sen. Jean Hunhoff, R-Yankton, co-chair the Legislature’s Joint Appropriations Committee that oversees the state government’s budget. The final version of 1281 would require, for the budget year beginning July 1, that any coronavirus-related federal aid that eight state government agencies receive be placed in special accounts. The governor would need prior approval from the joint committee to use that money on any new programs.

The legislation defines a new program as “a single activity, function, or service proposed to be performed or administered by a budget unit that is not part of the base budget, has not been given appropriation by law, and is not is not currently running”. executed by a department or agency. This would affect the governor’s Office of Economic Development and the state departments of transportation, public safety, agriculture and natural resources, human services, health, education and tourism.

Ultimately, 1281 passed 52-16 in the House and 32-2 in the Senate. He was seen as key to bringing the two chambers together on final drafts of the new $5.7 billion budget bill for the state government and 12 pages of changes to the current budget.

The governor released a three-page letter on Friday afternoon outlining the reasons for his veto. Noem pledged to develop “a new protocol” for communication between its Office of Finance and Management and owners that would not require new state law.

His other two vetoes affect bills that have not received enough support from lawmakers to suggest waivers are possible.

HB 1223 would allow pregnant minors to consent to health care procedures in certain cases. The main sponsor was Rep. Erin Healy, D-Sioux Falls.

The Noem administration did not take a position during the two hearings of the bill. The governor vetoed Friday because the bill fails to recognize that parents might have a reasonable objection, such as wanting a second opinion.

Noem also argued that it was unnecessary due to an existing law that grants legal immunity to doctors. Among those testifying in favor were lobbyists for the state medical association, the state dental association and several major health care providers.

1223 went through the House 37-33 and the Senate 30-5. Healy said she still plans to challenge the veto. “I don’t know if I can win 10 more votes to cancel, but I plan to speak to the body about the veto,” Healy said on Saturday.

The governor’s third veto on Friday came against SB 151 which would allow certain marijuana violations to be automatically removed from a person’s criminal record after five years if they were not felonies and the person had no not been charged again.

The main sponsor was Senator Michael Rohl, R-Aberdeen. Senators voted 19 to 16 for it, and the House agreed 38 to 31.

The governor in her veto letter said it would create a special exception for Class 1 marijuana offenses and could claim recreational marijuana, which has not been legalized in South Dakota, or for violating the new South Dakota Medical Marijuana Laws. She said there are already ways for people to request their records be deleted.

Noem led the effort that saw the South Dakota Supreme Court last year overturn the 2020 vote in favor of Amendment A that legalized the use of marijuana for everyone age 21 or older. years.

“I plan to have the discussion,” Rohl said. “It affects too many South Dakotans not to.”

Comments are closed.