South Dakota Republicans spent the last year looking for something.

I’m just not entirely sure they found it.

After four debates, millions of dollars in advertising, enough campaign mail to heat a garage through January and approximately 17 million text messages informing us that democracy itself was hanging by a thread unless we immediately voted for somebody, voters finally got their chance to render a verdict.

And the verdict was:

“Maybe.”

Read more

Read The Dakota Scout article that inspired this cartoon:

On June 23, we are having a municipal runoff election to choose a mayor and City Council members. Our community deserves people who will diligently represent the common good for every citizen in Sioux Falls. Please mark your calendars and get out to vote.

The Sioux Falls city fathers specifically created our system of governing to be unencumbered by party affiliation, creed, race or economic status. This was a safe wall to ensure that all people are treated equally and that the elected officials (our servants) work for the common good. Campaigns are for showcasing Ideas, leadership and serving people.

Read more

Facts do not arrive before us in a neutral pile. They emerge inside stories, desires and fears, illuminated by who we are and what we value most.

As Jonathan Pageau has shown, we do not perceive raw data; we perceive reality through symbolic patterns and hierarchies of meaning. Walk into a longtime South Dakotan’s family home or farmstead and you see generations of stewardship: land worked with calloused hands, community sustained through quiet sacrifice, the slow rhythms of prairie life that shape a people. For many, the sharp rise in property taxes feels like a gradual displacement from the very place their families helped create.

A newcomer, drawn by our stability, no state income tax or open horizons, sees the same soil and structures through different eyes: opportunity, investment, a fresh start. The physical reality has not changed. Only the story through which it is viewed has.

Read more

Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly attributed authorship to Jodi Schwan. The Dakota Scout strives for accuracy and fitness and deeply regrets the error.

On June 2, South Dakota taxpayers got to foot the bill for “members-only” votes for two private clubs. Their names are the South Dakota Republican Party (SDRP) and the South Dakota Democratic Party (SDDP). In the end, the true winners were not regular voters on Team Doeden or Rhoden or Johnson or Hansen but rather the political party machines and Big Money donors.

Closed primaries enable and incentivize the hyper-partisanship that has created the divisive, dysfunctional political gridlock. Candidates need only appeal to a narrow, dogmatic slice of voters instead of the broader public. This system largely shuts out principled moderates, independents and political newcomers. Candidates who want to work across party lines or challenge entrenched Big Money interests also struggle. The result of closed primaries is growing polarization and fewer elected officials either willing or able to effectively represent all South Dakotans.

Read more

Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly attributed authorship to Jodi Schwan. The Dakota Scout strives for accuracy and fitness and deeply regrets the error.

On June 2, South Dakota taxpayers got to foot the bill for “members-only” votes for two private clubs. Their names are the South Dakota Republican Party (SDRP) and the South Dakota Democratic Party (SDDP). In the end, the true winners were not regular voters on Team Doeden or Rhoden or Johnson or Hansen but rather the political party machines and Big Money donors.

Closed primaries enable and incentivize the hyper-partisanship that has created the divisive, dysfunctional political gridlock. Candidates need only appeal to a narrow, dogmatic slice of voters instead of the broader public. This system largely shuts out principled moderates, independents and political newcomers. Candidates who want to work across party lines or challenge entrenched Big Money interests also struggle. The result of closed primaries is growing polarization and fewer elected officials either willing or able to effectively represent all South Dakotans.

Read more

Buried underneath a week’s worth of state and local election news, you’ll find an important headline: Sioux Falls and Rapid City now share the nation’s lowest unemployment rate.

Both metro areas clocked in at a 1.7 percent jobless rate in April, according to the most recent data available from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Read more

Read The Dakota Scout article that inspired this cartoon:

Many equate pain with injury and thus assume that pain should be a straight line when recovering. So if pain flares up a bit, they worry that something is wrong. Maybe the injury is getting worse, or they “overdid it” the day before. In reality, pain often rises and falls during normal recovery, and these ups and downs do not automatically mean you’re injuring yourself. Pain is more complex than a simple measure of tissue damage.

Healing tissues and a sensitive alarm system

Pain is best thought of as your body’s alarm system. Early after an injury or surgery, that alarm is turned up on purpose to protect healing tissues. Even as the tissues recover normally, the alarm may remain slightly sensitive for a while. This means everyday movements, increased activity or changes in routine can trigger pain, even when the tissues themselves are safe.

This sensitivity usually settles with time, movement and confidence. A short-term increase in pain does not automatically mean damage has occurred. It often reflects a nervous system that’s still learning what is safe again.

Read more

Downtown Sioux Falls is more than a collection of storefronts, streets, restaurants, apartments, offices and events.

It is where our city and community show up as themselves. It is where visitors get their first impression of Sioux Falls and learn who we are. It is where local businesses welcome new customers, workers grab lunch, families meet for festivals and friends linger after dinner, and where public art, historic buildings, the Big Sioux River and a growing skyline remind us that Sioux Falls has a story worth sharing.

And that story belongs to everyone.

Read more

Digital diplomacy has handed world leaders an unexpected advantage: a shared post, or “collab,” with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. These engagements create a distinct digital multiplier effect. Posts featuring Modi routinely outperform a leader’s usual social media benchmarks by several multiples, turning diplomatic interactions into high-visibility digital moments. Across leaders and platforms, engagement with Prime Minister Modi consistently delivers a powerful digital uplift.

The data clearly illustrates this effect. The famous “melody chocolate” interaction posted together by PM Modi and PM Georgia Meloni of Italy on Instagram garnered 242 million views, which is nearly 64 times higher than her average of 3.8 million views across the preceding 10 posts. In terms of likes, the post received 11 million likes, around 88 times higher than her preceding 10-post average of 124.8K likes.

On X (formerly Twitter), President of EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen’s post with Prime Minister Modi wearing matching Indian ethnic wear received 8 million views, nearly seven times higher than her previous 10-post average of 1.21 million views.

When President Alexander Stubb of Finland gushed about the 4 million views he received from his joint post with Prime Minister Modi, he captured a larger trend: Every leader’s Instagram profile receives a massive boost after posting with PM Modi. The post currently has 15 million views, which is nearly three times the population of Finland.

This reflects two powerful forces working together. First is the strength of Brand Modi, a leader with one of the world’s most engaged digital followings, whose public communication is direct, frequent and deeply connected with people. Indians respond to him because they see him as a leader who understands their aspirations, emotions and India’s place in the world.

Second is the strength of Brand India, which comprises a confident, digitally active and globally aware public that participates vigorously in public issues. Indian citizens do not merely consume such content; they amplify it. When a world leader posts about Prime Minister Modi or India, Indian audiences engage at scale, converting a diplomatic interaction into a high-visibility digital moment. This is the power of India’s people as a force multiplier in global communication.

Taken together, the social media statistics underscore how seriously India treats its digital diplomacy and how effectively it converts the reach of its prime minister into global attention. For any nation or leader hoping to connect with the Indian public, the surest route increasingly runs through a post with Narendra Modi.

The primary election is still days away and already I feel like a political ATM with lower fees than First Bank & Trust.

Every statewide candidate and a good share of legislative hopefuls have made the pilgrimage to my checkbook. Texts. Calls. Fundraisers. Chicken dinners. Golf outings. I’ve set personal records on campaign giving, and we haven’t even cleared the primary. My accountant is concerned. My wife is less surprised.

But these primaries matter. In a lot of South Dakota districts, June effectively decides who goes to Pierre. The general election is sometimes just a formality with more yard signs. So if you care about who writes the laws, now is the time to write the check and pull the lever.

And judging by the spending reports, plenty of people are doing exactly that.

My contributions are basically lemonade stand money compared to what’s flowing through South Dakota politics these days. This primary has officially entered the Super PAC era.

Outside groups and independent expenditure committees have already dumped millions into the governor’s race alone. We’ve got PACs (political action committees). Super PACs. Independent expenditure committees. Political nonprofits. Consultants from out of state. Digital media firms. Opposition research shops. Mail pieces arriving so fast they barely cool off before the next one hits the mailbox.

South Dakota politics used to feel like a church fundraiser with bad coffee and bars made from melted butterscotch chips. Now it occasionally feels like a congressional race in suburban Phoenix.

Read more

Small business owners are struggling to keep up with the rising cost of health care. Nearly a third have stopped offering health benefits as premiums continue to climb.

It is critical that lawmakers understand the reasons for rising costs and begin to address them – or small businesses will continue to drop health coverage due to unsustainable costs. One of these reasons is hospitals’ exploitation of a little-known federal charity program. Without reforms, that program will continue to drive up costs for small businesses and the self-employed.

Three decades ago, Congress established the 340B Drug Pricing Program, which allows safety-net hospitals and clinics to purchase discounted drugs. In theory, that allows these providers to use the savings to provide more charity care to poor patients.

Read more

Read The Dakota Scout article that inspired this cartoon:

As frustration over property taxes grows, some candidates have reached for a politically tempting answer: taxing trusts, especially those created by people who do not live here. On the surface, that may sound like an easy way to raise revenue without burdening South Dakota families.

It is also a serious mistake. South Dakota’s trust industry is not a loophole or a free ride. It is a competitive, high-value sector that supports well-paying jobs, contributes significant economic activity and already operates within a regulated, fee-supported system. Threatening that industry with new taxes would not solve the property tax debate. It would simply encourage business, talent and investment to leave for other states.

To understand why, it helps to start with a basic fact: Trusts are portable.

Read more

Norman Woods’ recent column tries very hard to reframe the debate around child marriage in South Dakota as hysterical coastal activism versus wholesome family values. But underneath the rhetorical flourishes about Bill Gates and “East and West coast elites” is a much simpler truth: This was our third year trying to end child marriage in South Dakota, and many legislators, including a number of principled Republicans, believed the law should simply be 18, no exceptions.

The most disingenuous part of Woods’ piece is the attempt to pretend this debate was never about minors marrying in the first place. Individuals under 18 are children under the law. If the Legislature votes to preserve legal pathways for minors to marry, then yes, they are voting to continue allowing child marriage. That is not a smear or a campaign slogan. It is the literal legal reality.

During testimony, Norman Woods argued that many fathers would prefer their 16-year-old daughters marry an “established” older man. That statement reveals exactly why many South Dakotans were alarmed by opposition to this bill. Adults with significantly more financial power, life experience and social influence inherently hold power over minors. That imbalance is precisely why safeguards matter.

Read more

Are you tired of the campaign attack ads yet? It’s impossible to open social media without seeing a crazy accusation, and the latest doozy is a string of texts and mailers claiming that South Dakota state senators voted in favor of child brides. What they actually voted for was more parental involvement, judicial safeguards and telling Bill Gates to take a hike.

Here’s what really happened.

Last year, a group connected to The Gates Foundation, Feminist Majority Foundation and American Atheists, among others, introduced a piece of legislation that would prohibit anyone from getting married until they are 18. Right now in South Dakota 16- or 17-year-olds can get married if there is written consent given by their parents – a safeguard to ensure someone isn’t being forced into a marriage.

Read more

Read The Dakota Scout article that inspired this cartoon:

The Art of Giving initiative, a global movement founded by Professor Achyuta Samanta — founder of Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology (KIIT), Kalinga Institute of Social Sciences (KISS) and Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences (KIMS) — marked its thirteenth anniversary this month.

Launched in 2013, the initiative encourages individuals and communities to practice everyday acts of giving as a means of promoting peace, happiness and social connection. Over the years, it has grown from a local effort into a widely observed global movement, engaging participants across countries and communities.

This year, the theme is “Share to Shine,“ emphasizing the idea that sharing, whether through food, time, knowledge, care or effort, creates a positive impact for both the giver and the receiver. It reflects a simple principle: that even small acts of generosity can contribute to a more connected and compassionate society.

Dr. Samanta said when announcing this year’s theme that the movement has completed 13 years of inspiring people to embrace values of harmony, friendship and mutual support. He noted that unveiling the theme ahead of the annual observance allowed participants worldwide to prepare and engage meaningfully.

A growing global movement

Art of Giving is observed each year on May 17 and has expanded significantly in scale and reach. In 2025, the initiative was marked in around 120 countries and across thousands of locations in India, including cities, towns and rural communities.

Activities ranged from community gatherings and public outreach programs to simple individual actions such as sharing meals, supporting neighbors and engaging in volunteer efforts. The 2025 theme, “NeighborGood,“ focused on building stronger local relationships and fostering a sense of belonging.

The movement’s continued growth reflects its decentralized nature, allowing individuals and organizations to participate in ways that are relevant to their own communities. This flexibility has contributed to its adoption across diverse cultural and social contexts.

A key institutional anchor of the initiative is the Kalinga Institute of Social Sciences (KISS), the world’s largest Indigenous school-cum-university, where the philosophy of giving is integrated into everyday life. The institution supports tens of thousands of students from marginalized Indigenous communities and promotes values of empathy, cooperation and service.

Sharing as a way of life

This edition of the Art of Giving builds on the theme “Share to Shine“ with the idea that giving is not limited to material resources. It includes sharing time, knowledge, care and effort – acts that are accessible to individuals regardless of economic means.

The concept also challenges common assumptions about giving, such as the belief that it requires wealth or leads to personal loss. Instead, it highlights the role of intention and participation, suggesting that meaningful change can begin with small, consistent actions.

Drawing from his own life experiences, Dr Samanta has often emphasized that the practice of sharing can begin even in conditions of scarcity. The initiative reflects this belief, positioning giving not as an occasional act but as a way of life.

As the initiative enters its 13th year, it continues to promote a simple message: that acts of giving, however small, can create lasting impact and contribute to a more humane and connected world.

Dinesh Kumar Tudu is assistant director of the international relations office at the Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology in Bhubaneswar India.

This content is in partnership between The Dakota Scout and the Consulate General of India in Seattle intended to explore ideas, traditions and policy ties shaping the relationship between India, South Dakota and the United States.

It’s easy to reduce complex policy issues to slogans and soundbites, but real leadership is looking beyond the headlines and making principled decisions that serve the long-term good.

There were plenty of soundbites, slogans, and bad policy proposals during the 2026 South Dakota Legislative Session meant to grab the attention of constituents and voters. Some candidates and political groups now attempt to paint legislators who cast principled votes as “anti-ag” or unwilling to stand up for farmers and ranchers. The clearest example of this is the attack on legislators who voted NO on House Bill 1077, a bill that would have defined cell-cultured protein as adulterated food, effectively banning the product from being sold in the state of South Dakota.

Many cattle producers have serious concerns about cell-cultured protein products. Many consumers share those concerns. But disliking a product and banning it through bad public policy are two very different things.

The legislators who voted against HB 1077 do not oppose agriculture, instead they recognized something critically important for the future of farming and ranching: creating state-level bans on federally approved products sets a dangerous precedent that could be used against traditional agriculture.

Cell-cultured protein products are currently regulated at the federal level by both FDA and USDA. Whether people agree with that approval or not, these products are legal under federal law and subject to federal oversight and inspection. If changes need to be made to how these products are regulated, labeled, or marketed, those discussions must happen at the federal level, not through a patchwork of inconsistent state-by-state bans.

What happens when another state decides conventional beef production is undesirable? Or that cattle should be raised only under certain standards? Or that methane emissions, land practices, water use, transportation, or feed ingredients justify restricting South Dakota-raised beef from entering their markets?

For years, farmers and ranchers have pushed back against states attempting to impose their preferences and production standards beyond their own borders. California’s Proposition 12 is the clearest examples.

Passed by California voters in 2018, Prop 12 establishes minimum space requirements for livestock including breeding pigs, egg-laying hens, and veal. Prop 12 prohibits the sale of products to California that don’t meet restrictive standards. This means producers across the country must either comply with California’s rules or lose access to the nation’s largest market. Prop 12 allows voters from one state to influence ag practices nationwide.

Once states weaponize commerce against industries they dislike, agriculture will not come out ahead. Less than 1 percent of the population is directly involved in production agriculture. Yet, that small group is responsible for feeding not only the United States but much of the world.

When policy decisions are driven by populations far removed from the realities of ag, the risk of unintended consequences grows significantly. If you want to talk about an attack on rural America, start passing short-sighted policies like HB 1077 and watch how quickly other states respond in kind. The moment states begin restricting products based on political preference rather than sound policy, it opens the door for retaliatory actions that could directly target South Dakota producers and limit access to critical markets.

South Dakota ag has long depended on consistent interstate commerce and open markets. Producers cannot simultaneously argue for free and fair access to markets while supporting state-level bans that undermine those same principles.

The easy political position would have been to support a headline-grabbing ban and campaign on it later. The harder and more responsible position was to step back and consider the long-term consequences for agricultural policy nationwide. South Dakota legislators that voted no on HB 1077 deserve recognition, not political attacks.

Supporting agriculture does not mean supporting every bill with an agriculture talking point attached to it. Sometimes supporting agriculture means having the discipline to oppose bad policy, even when the headlines are easier the other way.

As you head to the polls on June 2, I encourage you to apply the same thoughtful analysis these legislators did. Resist political attacks designed to create outrage without context. Look beyond campaign mailers, social media posts, and one-line accusations. Ask whether a policy truly protects agriculture in the long term or simply creates a good talking point for an election season.

Craig Bieber, McPherson County rancher, is the president of the South Dakota Cattlemen’s Association (SDCA). SDCA is an organization that represents cattle producers across the state with policy created by cattlemen, for cattlemen. To learn more, visit sdcattlemen.org.