Senator Mike Rounds’ WEEKLY ROUND[S] UP: March 16-22, 2026
Welcome back to another Weekly Round[s] Up.
We had a long week here in DC. During this past week, I met with several South Dakotans, attended multiple briefings, voted eight times, introduced two pieces of legislation and participated in several interviews.
Normally on the weekends I travel back to South Dakota to visit with folks from around the state. However, votes on the SAVE America Act and Senator Mullin’s confirmation kept us in D.C. this weekend. On Saturday, I spoke on the Senate floor in support of the SAVE America Act which I have cosponsored. During my remarks, I discussed the double standards when it comes to showing identification in everyday life in America. For example, you need a photo ID when you open a bank account, rent a car or board a plane. This winter you even had to show two forms of identification to shovel snow in New York. American elections should be for American citizens only and the SAVE America Act takes steps to secure our elections. You can watch my full floor speech here.
Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) remains unfunded. Despite Democrats having 14 opportunities to fund the department, they continue to play politics with the safety and security of the American people. Now more than ever we need a fully funded DHS; airports are in chaos, families are going without pay and the potential for terrorist attacks goes up each day the department is unfunded. Funding DHS is not optional.
More on this and the rest of my week in the Weekly Round[s] Up:
South Dakota groups I visited with: South Dakotans with Breakthrough T1D; Impact Schools of South Dakota; Rapid City Youth City Council; Carrie Heberlee, National Association of Postal Supervisors; South Dakotans with American Coalition for Ethanol; Dr. Brian Tande, President and Ralph Davis, Vice President for Research at South Dakota School of Mines and Technology; American Council of Engineering Companies of South Dakota; Sheila Gestring, President of University of South Dakota and Chris Kassin, Senior Executive University of South Dakota Foundation; and Lee Strubinger, Research & Reporting Director, John T. Vucurevich Foundation.
Met with South Dakotans from: Baltic, Brookings, Dell Rapids, Garretson, Pierre, Rapid City, Sioux Falls, Vermillion and Wentworth.
Other meetings: Rwanda DNSC; Patrick Collison, CEO of Stripe; Darren Guccione, CEO and Co-Founder of Keeper Security; Steve Vintz, CEO of Tenable; General Frank Donovan, Commander, U.S. Southern Command; Kristen Davies, Chief Information Officer, Department of War; and General Anderson, Commander, U.S. Africa Command.
I also attended our weekly Senate Bible Study on Tuesday. On Wednesday, Senator Mullin (soon to be Secretary Mullin) spoke at our weekly Senate Prayer Breakfast.
Legislation Introduced: This past week, I introduced the Investments in Rural Transit Act, legislation that would help rural transit providers improve their services. You can read the press release on this piece here. I also introduced the Small Business Investor Capital Access Act which would increase access to capital for small businesses and entrepreneurs by modernizing outdated securities regulations. You can read about that here.
Hearings: This past week, I attended a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing and a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing titled Worldwide Threats. This one one of our only Intelligence hearings that is not classified! You can watch my questions to CIA Director Ratcliffe here.
Briefings: I attended one classified briefing with the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Airland.
Votes taken: 8 – As noted earlier, we spent much of this past week debating and voting on the SAVE America Act. As a cosponsor of this legislation, I fully support this bill. Additionally, I voted in support of an amendment to this legislation that protects women and girls in athletics by banning biological men from women’s sports.
I also voted on a procedural motion related to Senator Mullin’s nomination to serve as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. We hope to confirm him this week.
This past week, I voted to fund DHS once again, and once again it failed due to opposition from Senate Democrats. There have now been 14 opportunities to fully fund DHS, but Senate Democrats continue to block fully funding this department.
There was also a vote to remove United States Armed Forces from Iran via a War Powers Resolution, which I voted against. Iran has been rebuilding their offensive capabilities in order to harm the United States and our allies. We take any military actions seriously, especially boots on the ground in the Middle East. However, this threat from Iran is not going away and we must make certain that we’re in a position to defend our nation from those who wish us harm.
Lastly, I voted to confirm Anna St. John as United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
Steps taken: 61,438 steps or 29.61 miles.
Video of the Week: On Wednesday I joined Fox Business to talk about the conflict in Iran, click here to watch.
Tell Thune he needs to bite the bullet and get rid of the filibuster. There’s no other way to do this. The Democrats can’t vote for this, OR the SAVE act. You’re on your own WITH A MAJORITY. So do your duty and get rid of the filibuster.
Trump needs cramdown certainty on his bills NOW from THIS majority, so he won’t have to worry about any party change in the future. Get it done.
Pray tell oh wise one, how can they get rid of the filibuster when only a vocal minority want to scrap it?
If Trump and Thune ordered it in unison, the party would fold like a wet dishrag and do it.
Trump supporters have the worst TDS. How can you still support the demented old man? We need new leadership.
Beware the draft age upped to 42 for Trump’s war mongering.
Wrong again.
Yeah, the general emergency draft default max age is 45, not 42. Good catch.
Senator, no one has a problem showing a driver’s license or state-issued ID when voting. With the SAVE Act, you are requiring a passport that probably only half the voters in SD even have let alone can afford to pay for to vote. This is simply voter. Suppression. If there is a problem with illegal voting, where is your proof?
There was a commenter here on DWC that honestly asserted that a lack of evidence of voter fraud was evidence of voter fraud. Why? Because elected prosecutors would ignore fraud that got them elected and therefore we can assume fraud took place.
These people’s brains are cooked, man. You’re arguing with crazy people.
I don’t see conservatism anywhere anymore. It is imperative for every Republican to ask themselves, do I carry water for the elephant, OR do I just carry water for the commander in thief, the bankruptcy king, that man that the hosers and aussies call “Orange McNugget Man”? Ask yourselves before you help Crony Soprano halt fair elections and slide his son in to succeed him.
Can’t you read or do you just refuse to believe anything other than what the central committee tells you to believe? The SAVE Act does not require a passport to vote:
“a passport is one valid option to meet the SAVE Act’s proposed proof-of-citizenship requirement, but it is not strictly required”
To anonymous at 6:37, I can read quite well. A voter registering to vote will either need a passport or all of the legal and other documents necessary to get a passport. There is no difference in this. Please tell me what proof exists that illegal voting is an issue anywhere in the country. Anecdotal stories told on the internet and right wing media is not proof. SAVE Act is voter suppression.
“With the SAVE Act, you are requiring a passport that probably only half the voters in SD even have let alone can afford to pay for to vote.”
So, you were just being intentionally misleading in your original statement?
After SAVE passes, can I just show up with my drivers license and go vote like I used to?
If the answer is a solid NO then stop hammering people for calling out the extra makework vote suppression this bill creates. Stop the lies.
Once you have REGISTERED to vote and proven citizenship then the answer is YES. So stop the hysterics and lies about voter suppression.
Again extra layers of new duties NOT required for the current system which has no proven mass waves of illegal voting. The extra efforts you want ARE BASED ON LIES and the current system is fine. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE SAYING. Keep making your goofy straw man.
“After SAVE passes, can I just show up with my drivers license and go vote like I used to?”
Presenting required documentation for government freebies is never a problem. But asking for some accountability to exercise your rights is the end of the world.
And again, SAVE adds unnecessary effort to a voting process about which INSANE LIES have been told regarding alleged voter fraud that nobody can prove happened. The current system works, but you want to erase already legal voters via onerous unneeded efforts. Next straw man.
Yawn.
To obtain a driver’s license in South Dakota, you will need the following documents:
-Proof of Identity: This can include a certified birth certificate, citizenship certificate, or valid passport.
-Proof of Social Security Number: Acceptable documents include your Social Security card, W-2 form, or pay stub.
-Two Documents Proving SD Residential Address: Examples include a utility bill, pay stub, or bank statement, and these documents should be less than one year old.
-Proof of Name Change: If applicable, provide documents such as a marriage certificate, divorce decree, or court order.
To apply for a U.S. passport:
-Valid or Expired U.S. Passport: If you have a previous passport, it serves as proof of citizenship.
-Birth Certificate: An original or certified copy of your birth certificate is acceptable.
-Government-Issued ID: A valid driver’s license, state ID, or military ID can be used to verify your identity. The ID must include your photo and signature.
-Passport Photo
-Name Change Documents: If your name has changed since your last passport was issued, include documents like a marriage certificate or court order to verify the name change.
To apply for SNAP benefits, you will need the following documents:
-Proof of Identity: This can include a driver’s license, state ID card, U.S. passport, military ID, school ID, birth certificate, adoption records, or naturalization certificate.
-Proof of Citizenship or Immigration Status: Documentation to verify your citizenship or immigration status is required.
-Proof of Income: This includes pay stubs, tax returns, or any other documentation that shows your income.
-Proof of Expenses: Documentation of your monthly expenses, such as rent or mortgage payments, utility bills, and childcare costs.
-Social Security Numbers: You will need to provide Social Security numbers for all household members.
Under the SAVE Act, individuals registering to vote in federal elections must provide one of the following forms of proof of citizenship:
-U.S. Passport or Passport Card – a valid passport confirms citizenship and identity.
-Birth Certificate – an original or certified copy issued by a U.S. state, local government, or tribal authority showing the applicant’s full name, date and place of birth, and parent(s) names.
-Real ID-Compliant State or Driver’s License – only if it explicitly indicates U.S. citizenship; standard driver’s licenses without this designation are insufficient.
-Certificate of Naturalization or Certificate of Citizenship – for naturalized citizens or those who obtained citizenship through parents.
-Consular Report of Birth Abroad – for U.S. citizens born outside the United States.
-U.S. Military ID with Service Record – showing the applicant’s place of birth in the U.S.
-Other Government-Issued IDs – federal, state, or tribal IDs that indicate the applicant’s place of birth in the U.S., sometimes combined with additional documents like a birth certificate.
-Documentation of name change.
Ya, the SAVE Act will be such a hardship. However, coming up with the required documents for a government handout doesn’t seem to be much of a problem for those participants.
Voting is a right, and as such access can only be restricted by means of strict scrutiny, as the Supreme Court affirmed during the Civil Rights era. The SAVE act isn’t even close to passing strict scrutiny.
What you’re trying to conflate it to are not rights, but rather entitlements/privileges and can have a higher burden of access. Try again bucko.
Oh, but the documentation requirements are pretty much the same in all these instances, and those individuals have no problem coming up with documentation for government handouts, but I’ll play along. You libturds are always whining about medical care and that medical care is a fundamental right. So let’s review:
To apply for Medicaid:
Required Documents
-Proof of Identity and Citizenship: U.S. Passport or Certificate of Naturalization to verify both identity and citizenship.
-Birth Certificate and Social Security Card for identity verification. For non-citizens, a Permanent Resident Card (Green Card) or other immigration documents are necessary.
-Proof of Residency: Documents such as a utility bill, rental agreement, or mortgage statement that show your current address. Mail from a government agency or a state-issued ID can also serve as proof of residency.
-Financial Documentation: Income Verification: Recent pay stubs, W-2 forms, and tax returns for the past few years to demonstrate your income level. Bank Statements: Copies of bank statements for the past five years to show your financial resources.
-Property Documents: Deeds for any property owned, along with the most recent property tax bill.
-Retirement Accounts: Statements for any retirement accounts, such as IRAs or 401(k)s.
-Insurance Policies: Copies of any health, life, or long-term care insurance policies.
-Additional Documents: If applicable, provide a Durable Power of Attorney and any related documents. Divorce Decree if relevant, and documentation for any living trusts.
No problem coming up with these documents for a “fundamental right” now is there? Keep trying bucko.
Medical care has never been ruled to be a fundamental right in the United States. Voting is. Stop making shit up.
Never said it was ruled to be a fundamental right. I stated you libs claim it’s a fundamental right. Again, there’s never a problem gathering up documents for freebies but ask a citizen to show a hint of responsibility and accountability to exercise their rights responsibly and the world is coming to an end.
1. Not a liberal
2. You think policies should be developed around what libs want and not what the actual law is? Totally sane viewpoint. Not sure why I didnt see this already.
The record of the Trump era clearly shows that the party which halts enforcement and lawful compliance with existing law IS THE GOP. Just so you can make new idiotic enforcement nightmares happen. We do actually see you pull this crap over and over.
You’re missing my point. He’s arguing that the President should be able to ram laws through congress based on liberals wanting healthcare to be a fundamental right. That makes zero sense. The law is very clear about the protections the Constitution provides clearly-articulated fundamental rights like voting, and his argument about “what liberals want” is just a bullshit red herring to distract from the fact that all that matters to him is winning. He doesn’t care at all about how his perceived “team” wins, so long as they win.
The southern border, 12M+ illegals, that was mumblin-stumblin joe.
Oh it’s the libturd guy. You’d call Scalia a liberal if he disagreed with one your inane comments, wouldn’t you?
Scalia assumed room temperature many years ago. I thought everyone knew.
Of course someone who can only use turd-based insults has the reading comprehension of one, so I’ll rephrase it so you can understand.
You are a bitter, warped ideologue who thinks themselves arbiter of what is right and wrong. In cases where Scalia wrote and spoke (past tense for you) opinions and decisions that go against your beliefs, you would have called Scalia a libturd.
Spelled out enough for you?
Yawn
My goodness someone is a mister grumpy head today. SAVE act support must be crashing. May your perp walk be eventful.
I keep hearing the non sequitur argument that “100 percent of Republicans and 80 percent of Democrats want Voter ID.”
Logically then all lawmakers should vote for SAVE.
The poll response is worded for a general approval of having some form of ID at the polls, and YAY we have this already. The quoted polling IN NO WAY demands a vote for SAVE.
Besides, how did the wording cause 20 percent of Democrats to say NO to showing ID at the polls? I call shenanigans.