Gov. Noem Legislative Press Conference 2-18-2021

Good morning, we're getting to the busy part of session. I wanted to start with an overview of some of the bills that have been moving and where they are in the process. The open fields legislation did pass through the House on Wednesday, and what this bill would do would be codifying into statute what current policy is at Game Fish and Parks and how it relates to landowners and protecting their private property rights. This is going to be an opportunity for us to continue to strengthen the relationships that our conservation officers have with landowners and to make sure that we continue to protect our wildlife and still allow sportsmen to enjoy our way of life. I hope this bill will pass the Senate quickly and that it will come to my desk for signature. Now yesterday, Senator Steinhauer's bill passed on alternative education through the Senate, and this legislation does have my support. It was interesting throughout the debate how there was some mischaracterizations of what the bill would do. And so I want to clarify some of those, because what this does is really put into statute what we've always believed, is that here in South Dakota, parents are responsible for a child's upbringing, for their education, and for their protection. We all know that a good education starts at home, and for some kids, the home is where the best environment is for them to get an individualized education that fits their needs. Now legislators heard a lot of misinformation on this bill as it moved through the process, and let me tell you what is in the bill and what is not in the bill. What is in the bill is two elements that will strengthen enforcement of our truancy statutes. This makes sure that there are some criminal processes in place for those who don't educate their children and make sure that they show up and get schooling. It also eliminates a testing mandate that in the state currently is not being utilized. If any school districts in the state do not utilize this test that costs us around $40,000 a year, then why not eliminate it and save the taxpayers those dollars. It also simplifies the notification process, which has been something we've heard is burdensome for families who would wish to participate in homeschooling. And it also allows kids to participate. My hope is that those facts would get out to the public and to the rest of the legislators that will be making a decision on this bill, and that it'll get through the process and I'll have the opportunity to sign it into law. Now there has also this week been tremendous progress on pro-life legislation. The Born Alive legislation did get through the process and it will be at my desk for my signature soon. And we also saw testimony and support on the Down Syndrome bill. This bill deals with a Down Syndrome diagnosis during pregnancy and ensures that that life is protected even though it may have an extra chromosome. We heard powerful testimony from Katie Shaw, who was a 32-year-old woman who has Down Syndrome about her life, her experiences, and the value that she brings to all the people in her world. She shared why every child just like her has just as much right to life as the next. With that, I will open it up for any questions that you may have for me. Real quick, since we're on the topic of your Down Syndrome abortion ban real quick, I was wondering if you could walk me through the process of how you envision this bill, because as I understand current law, a woman has to wait three days before getting an abortion, they have to sign paperwork acknowledging that they're getting an abortion and that there are alternatives in place. So if a woman was to bring a lawsuit against the provider who provided an abortion on their child with Down Syndrome, I guess what legal grounds would they have to stand on in bringing that lawsuit? Well, this bill specifically addresses the provider, the doctor, in saying that they are not allowed to conduct an abortion on a woman if they know it is specifically because of the sole diagnosis of Down Syndrome in that baby. We know there are tests available at 10 weeks along, also another test that's available at 15 weeks along. We do have a 20-week abortion ban in the state of South Dakota. If there's a litigation at that point beyond where a provider does refuse to do an abortion because the statute requires them to do that because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, then that certainly is a process that could move forward. It's not something that this legislation is going to touch on, though. This legislation just specifically says that a doctor won't be allowed to perform an abortion on someone strictly because that baby in the womb has been diagnosed with an extra chromosome. And one follow-up, does this send the message that babies with Down Syndrome are more worthy of life than babies without? I think it's about every single life having value and us not discriminating against people because they may be different. A term that gets used a lot in this discussion is eugenics and how that's utilized in the country and in other countries around the world. We know specifically in some European countries that babies are being aborted for this reason. We don't know what's happening here in South Dakota. We do know we do have babies that are born with Down Syndrome. We don't know how many are being aborted specifically because they are diagnosed with Down Syndrome. But what this is saying is here in South Dakota, every single life has value and every single life will be valued the same regardless of what diagnosis they have or if they have an extra chromosome. Governor Steven Grossman, thank you. We're expecting a decision on the Attorney General's cross-investigation later on. Should the Attorney General step down and resign if he is charged in the case? Well, I'm glad that today we're finally going to get a decision from the state's attorney and that the family can get some progress in this case. Beyond that, I'll wait for the press conference to really see what the decision is that has been made on charges. And following up, should he have taken at least a leave of absence while the investigation was ongoing? You know, I'll wait for the press conference to see what the discussion is there from the state's attorney and the completion of the investigation and what's moving forward. Is there any questions over the phone or online? Bob, did you have one? Just to follow up on that, how were you approached or how was your office approached about them using this room for the news conference? Well, I believe all that communication happened through my communications team asking if they could and it was because of the technology in this room. It's not affiliated with me or my office or the state of South Dakota. It was specifically because of the technology that would be available here. The bill delaying implementation of the medical marijuana program passed out of House State Affairs. There has been some talk here and there about whether or not medical marijuana should be taxed. I've asked the people who sponsored the legislation, they said that was not their intention and it's not in the bill. Do you think medical marijuana should be taxed? Well, we are moving forward with proceeding to implement medical marijuana. We're asking for some flexibility so that we can do it correctly. The idea or decision on taxation has not been made and is not included in that bill at this time. Governor, we're reaching the point of session when the budget becomes very important and is the forefront. I'm wondering about one budget request you made, the $5 million for the state airplane. How did you settle on $5 million being needed for a new plane? Well I didn't. All of the decisions regarding the state airplane on what it would cost or what it would be or what it would look like is made by the Department of Transportation and I believe that throughout that process they've been visiting with brokers who specifically have expertise in that area. And again, the decision so far and what I would like to see is us to become much more efficient when it comes to our state airplanes. I'd like to sell two aircraft, purchase one that is newer, that isn't going to need the major repairs that ours will here in the very near future and make the entire process and transportation much more efficient and accountable to taxpayers. Governor Austin Goss, Dakota News Now, you know you put out a statement earlier this week in regards to the power outages that were going on in South Dakota and across the country. I was wondering if you could talk about maybe some legislation or approaches you might have to prevent that from happening in the future. You know I don't have any specific pieces of legislation that would address a diversified energy portfolio, but I've been saying for years that it's critically important that we prioritize American energy and that it is diversified so that we don't see a situation where we get all of our eggs in one basket and end up with supply shortages. We in South Dakota are blessed with having a diversified portfolio that generates our electricity and it's been fairly stable for us. I've always supported wind and solar and hydro, but also coal and oil and specifically just hope that we continue to rely on ourselves for our own energy supply. Here in South Dakota, we're heavily dependent on energy. It's a long ways to drive anywhere in this state. We get very hot in the summer, very cold in the winter, and so we need to have an energy supply that's dependable, but also affordable for families. Our families work hard every day. They need to be able to put food on the table, keep their children fed, but also make sure they pay their bills and keep their houses warm. Going off of what you said about making transportation by the state plan more efficient and accountable, there was a bill in Senate State Affairs yesterday intended to make those costs and flight logs and the reason for travel known. It was shut down, but do you have any ... Do you think, going along with the other bill about disclosing security costs, do you think that disclosing that information poses a significant similar risk or what are your thoughts on ... Well, we have disclosed flight logs. We have given those to reporters that have asked them. That has been extremely transparent. Whenever the state airplane is used, it has always been used according to the law. It's always been used for official business. It's never been used for campaign business. In fact, my flights have averaged much less than the previous governor's flights did per year, so I have utilized the state airplane less than he has. A lot of the political attacks we're seeing from Democrats on this issue are wrong, and I would hope that you would print the facts on how it has been utilized in the past and will continue to be utilized in the future. Is there a question on the ... Senator Noem, Kelo.com News. Sure, go ahead. Thank you, Governor. Some of us in that room and on this call have covered governors and attorney generals dating back at least to Governor Janklow's first term. One of the things that's, I think, been a hallmark of the people that have held your position and the attorney general's position is that they have very seldom hid from us in the media, and like yourself today, taking difficult questions that maybe you'd rather not answer, but you're giving us answers. The attorney general's office released a statement today that said regardless of whether Hyde County brings charges against the attorney general or not, he will not hold any press availabilities or say anything. I mean, that's rather unprecedented in our state. What do you think that says about the character of our attorney general? Well, I did not see his statement, and I will wait to see how the press conference goes this afternoon and the state's attorney before I'll make any public statements as well. Don't you find that unusual? I mean, you're not adverse to taking the heat on controversial things, and certainly Governor Janklow and others weren't adverse. I mean, why would you think one of your fellow office holders would not want to face the media and the public, even if it's, for him, good news? Well, I haven't spoken to the attorney general, and I cannot speak to why he's making that decision. Great. Thank you. You've been resistant to implement mask mandates. You're skeptical of their efficacy at times. I never said that, Joe. Don't put words in my mouth. Well, humor me here a little bit. What I've said is the appropriate mask at the appropriate time, utilized correctly and kept sanitary, can make a difference. But I also don't believe it's my role to mandate that people wear a mask. I've left for the entire year, it up to personal responsibility to make the best decisions for them and their families, and I'll continue to do that. So now that the CDC is recommending two masks, would you type in it? Well, the CDC has changed their recommendations many, many times. In fact, we've seen the CDC change their recommendations based on political pressure in the past. I choose to rely on science and data and facts, and masks can work in certain situations if you're wearing the right kind and you're doing it appropriately, but I'm not going to mandate it. It's not an argument over whether masks work or if they don't work. I've never argued that. What I argue is the mandate. I think the mandate is inappropriate for government to come in and mandate that somebody wear a mask. And I think it's inappropriate for us to shame people who choose not to wear a mask. That's not what America is about, and it's not what South Dakota is about. So no double mask mandate coming? Not coming in South Dakota. So I will not be doing that. That's for sure. Other questions? Okay. Thank you.