From KELOLAND news comes a report that the Speaker of the House is at loggerheads with Governor Noem on her recommended style and form changes to HB 1217, and will be telling the House to reject them:
Noem’s changes aim to drop college athletes from those potentially impacted by the bill. She also seeks to drop a requirement that a student’s biological sex is verified every school year.
In a statement, Gosch said “I will be recommending that the House of Representatives rejects Governor Noem’s proposal as unconstitutional.”
I, a SoDak mother, stand with Rep. Gosch. My husband, a SoDak father, stands with Rep. Gosch. My mother, a SoDak grandmother, stands with Rep Gosh. My father, a SoDak grandfather, stands with Rep. Gosh. There are many, many South Dakotans that will stand for truth. The battles are over, we are ready for the war.
Stand firm Rep. Gosh. It’s time we stand for truth. God is on the side of truth.
Good job Mr. Speaker….
stand firm…don’t be like Noem though…she was for it before she was against it also….
She was in Texas last night…..at a fundraiser…..
All about the donors….
Interesting how her supporters aren’t in SD
All she does is run for the next election, when is she going to govern? She such a typical politician.
Good to know Gosch either wants to be the one ultimately responsible for the blowback to this asinine bill or is to dense to figure out how this will play out.
What’s really asinine is a biological boy playing on a girl’s sports team. Student-athletes know it, parents know it, coaches know it, people across the world know it.
Governor Noem may very well loose this “knife fight in a ditch”.
What’s really asinine in this bill is Section 2.
How are the schools going to verify that none of the kids are using drugs without drug tests? And who is going to pay for that? Sounds like an unfunded mandate to me, no matter how many legislators say “drug testing won’t be required.” Really?
And if one student is suspected of being on performance-enhancing drugs, (including caffeine, depending on how the law is interpreted) and asked to have a drug test, cue the trial lawyers’ complaint that “the only reason this student was under suspicion is because he’s (insert protected minority group here.)”
They’ll have to test everybody, just to make it look good.
Dan Swartos testified that a 2013 policy states – before a trans player’s waiver can be submitted there must be a written statement from parents confirming the student has been living this way for some time, so we know it’s not for an unfair advantage. Family, friends, teachers, school personnel must also confirm the trans athlete is making a legitimate request. And, there must be a number of health care professionals: physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists who submit statements ensuring the trans student-athlete is genuine. There are many meetings before a lawsuit would come to fruition.
You don’t think the same would take place if a student-athlete is accused of taking steroids? Works both ways, Anne. Women are worth the fight. I thought you’d come at me with some way-back-when story about how you spoke with Susan B. Anthony or Elizabeth Stanton; your history stories are much better.
After a week of fierce pushback, Governor Kristi Noem’s (R-S.D.) controversial position on girls’ sports just got even lonelier. The South Dakota governor, who’s been hoping for cover on her veto from other state leaders, continues to stand alone now that Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson (R) has inked his name to a law very similar to the one Noem rejected. Thanks to the hard work of the state legislature, the Land of Opportunity State is exactly that for female athletes. Family Research Council.
I just read the Arkansas bill and it is quite different from the mess dropped on Governor Noem’s desk.
There’s nothing in the Arkansas bill about the schools having to verify that the kids aren’t on any performance-enhancing drugs, like caffeine. (how much caffeine is too much, anyway?)
I am wondering if any of the other states’ supposedly similar bills have it.
Let’s at least stay factual.
Governor Noem has always supported fair competition for girls sports and not allowing biological boys from distorting that competition.
What she opposes that atrocity HB1217 which is the type of big government and central control I would expect from a big government progressive.
If there is a portion of the bill that could cause a problem, the law can be changed next year to remedy that problem. This does happen occasionally with legislation. This is needed protection for our young ladies, don’t throw out the whole bill.
Or we could change it now before we pass it. Doesn’t that make more sense especially since the only reason this bill exists is in case the High School Athletic Association were to change their policy. And, remember our HSAA is run and governed by our school boards.
Are we really so against local control that we will start passing laws before they even indicate they might change their policies?
Troy, there are many legislators who want the bill as is, also there are many who want the changes, and many that don’t want it at all. There are many that don’t want the college protection taken away from young women. In lieu of all the possibilities, that is why the bill should be passed as is, and then take out the grievously objectional parts next year.
Don’t kid yourself about the school boards governing the HSAA. Most boards that I know of follow the direction of the superintendent, who are educated by the mostly liberal professors. And the issue of local control is only used when one finds that it supports their views.
HSAA association has had years to change their policy and have not done so, consequently the legislation.
What is wrong with the current policy? Be specific.
Also, has as the HSAA approved a single example where a biological boy was able to compete in a sport where it created a competitive disadvantage to girls because of biology?
Finally, since it appears this is mostly driven by a “what if” scenario, are we really going to start passing laws to thwart every what if? Really? Doesn’t seem to be very respectful of local control or individual freedom.
What is wrong with the current policy? You said be specific, OK, so here is one of several.
McLaughlin HS had a boy playing on the girls BB team, set scoring records, was named to the all-conference girls BB team. Participated in track, went to the state girls track meet and placed in 7 different events. He graduated in 2020. He took away some girl’s chance to be on the basketball team, and took away the chance for many girls to place in the State Girls track meet, which denied them the honor of doing so.
Want more?
Yes. All cases you know of.
You will have to provide more specifics or proof than that in regards to some student athlete at McLaughlin. Name? Photos? Results? How many knew about this besides yourself? Coaches?
Nope. I think that is it. At least you are informed of the reality in the state.
Next question: Notwithstanding there may be some complicating factors as this occurred in Indian country where jurisdiction challenges may exist (I’m not saying there are but admitting that might be a factor because of issues I’m not aware of), does Noem’s EO not address this in the future?
Anon 6:25am there was a post by someone in Aberdeen spreading those rumors online and when asked more detailed questions this person did not answer them and has had credibility problems in the past and thought everything was just a joke. No one knew anything about this except for that person spreading this rumor.
Thank you, Troy! (and Anne above) There’s nothing “conservative” about that bill, and yet certain folks are hell-bent on trying to make it the proverbial line in the sand. Tomorrow will be interesting. To my way of thinking, it will separate the actual conservatives from the zealots.
Tennessee signed their version of the transgender-women’s sports bill on Friday.
Everyone else is wrong and Gov Noem is right, just ask her… it is a LOT bigger than just this bill. It’s her way or the highway. Look at all the staff who have left. Ask legislators and constitutional officers, I have and they all privately tell how she tells you she supports something then works against it.
Reprehensible and not what being a Christian or a conservative or a Republican is about.
The wheels are coming off the bus, Kristi.
These posts seem to alternate between the pro/con debate on the transgender bill (on topic) and the hate-the-Gov posts.
We could have a really interesting discussion about the Gov’s national profile and how that impacts the legislature. Those of us here would have some interesting insights.
But, one thing that can’t be denied (reasonably – I don’t mean it as a dare to the haters), she is a significant resource for our state. Travel anywhere outside of the state, say your from South Dakota to ten different people, and you’ll get the picture. Balancing that opportunity for South Dakota, with the challenges of governing is a Herculean task
The problem with your argument, Lee, is that she isn’t seeking a national profile for the sake of South Dakota or its citizens. She’s doing it for herself. Self interest and personal ambition is her driving force. Any benefit that comes our way as South Dakotans is merely coincidental.
So now we are judging motives and not outcomes?
We’d prefer a bad outcome with good motives (road to hell is paved with good intentions)? That is the underlying justification of every policy (“It shows we care”).
We are willing to criticize a good outcome because of the motives? That is exactly what the Dems did to Trump as they thought he was badly motivated so they are reversing everything he did with impunity because they think he had bad motives.
This is the stupidest statement ever and uses the exact argument every progressive ever uses.
Correction: “underlying justification of every PROGRESSIVE policy”
Small government conservatives understand just because you care, it doesn’t justify a governmental action.
To many young women it probably does justify the actions. And if allowed to continue as currently is, many more actual females may see the need for the action.
As an example, local vs larger government, we have the 1st and 2nd Amendments which originally only applied to the Federal government, and years later was broadened to include state and local. So much for local control, but that is a good thing.
Our state limits local governments regarding restrictions on guns.
Do you disagree with that?
This bill is a solution in search of a problem. Let it die.
67-2 style or form veto defeated soundly with legislators talking on the floor about Kristi’s unconstitutional acts.
Ouch! What a rebuke!
Senate adjourned. Rebuke denied.
Gov Noem is right, this is a poorly written bill. A little pragmatism or common sense is lacking from those who wrote this monster. It’s a litigation producing bill. The only people who win with this bill are the lawyers. Don’t buy yourself a lawsuit or don’t legislate the state into litigation. There are ways to achieve your objectives without spending potloads of money (ultimately goint to the ACLU and your lawyers). Be smart.
ADF lawyers already win. They raised $67mm last year and needed a legislative win, any kind of win, to keep the gravy train running. Google the IRS form 990’s for ADF, the ADF Foundation, etc. LOTS and LOTS of $250k to $500k salaries shown.
Getting this on the national radar with even the Governor’s veto ensures they continue to cash in on culture war fundraising while the Dems are spending trillions of our tax dollars to consolidate their power. The 30 states debating this stupid issue would do better working up stronger right to work laws to pre-empt the massive bill the Dems are working up now to make every single state union-controlled.