For the sake of full disclosure, I was Dakota Scout's attorney in the open records lawsuit to obtain access to records of the governor's office credit card expenditures. Consequently, I had a vested interest as both lawyer and citizen—and still do. As the lawyer, I have left it to my clients to pore over the thousands of pages of records that the governor's office was so obstinately reluctant to share with the public. But in reading this article as a member of that public, it appears the second batch of records, which included post-DHS nomination spending, begs the question: Why should South Dakotans be paying a single damn dime for a state public servant to travel ANYWHERE in pursuit of a new job? And why are state staffers tagging along at our expense? I think we all deserve an answer to both questions.
In 2022, the state's Government Accountability Board considered the issue of Noem's private use of the state planes. The GAB dismissed the complaint on the ground South Dakota has no statutory definition of "state business." The term is conspicuously axiomatic and requires no detailed definition to be plainly understood and applied. And that is what is involved in the "interpretation" of SDCL §3-9-4. That statute reads, in part: "No state officer or employee shall incur any expense payable out of any appropriated funds or other agency funds for travel or other personal expense, including meals, lodging, transportation, or other miscellaneous expenses, except on official state business." Navigating her way into Trump bureaucracy is pretty clearly federal business, not state business.
If anybody can rationalize our having to pay for Noem and her entourage to fly around the country so she can secure a new position in Trump's cartoonish cabinet, please offer your defense. We'll be waiting with bated breath.
You'll have to excuse my drift into the sardonic, but when we're stuck with a dangerously deranged president who consciously lays waste to the First Amendment out of puerile pique, what choice to I have as a friend of journalism. [I do thank him, though, for taking Noem away from SD. However, her pathetically prideful CPAC interview last Friday [CSPAN] proves she hasn't yet grasped that Trump picked her, primarily, to be nothing more than the DHS calendar pin-up girl. Noem wasn't even put through the routine Q & A vetting other cabinet nominees go through. In her delusional channeling of Joan of Arc, Kristi attributed her avoidance of vetting process to her god stepping in to confirm complete confidence in her capabilities. A clue for Kristi might be Trump's insistence that she star in the bizarre DHS ad campaign long before she was even confirmed. In short, Noem was hired to be a flak, not a thinker, which is precisely how she governed South Dakota—no press conferences, but a lot of self-serving ads produced at our expense.]
I'll leave that question for other lawyers. I would note, however, that a public official using public funds for private benefit might be behavior covered by one of those "thou shalt not" rules, which ultra conservatives are so anxious to be displayed in public. Maybe next year they can propose a bill that would require the Ten Commandments to be posted in the Capitol.
Exactly! Is there any way to make Noem give back monies spent for her book tour or any other travels, expenditures or frivolous spending that had nothing to do with governing South Dakota?
Well, I'm sure she was doing all this for the good of the South Dakota people. She probably is going to donate her federal salary to the state, isn't she? Someone as humble and selfless as Noem couldn't possibly be taking advantage of everyday South Dakotans' money for her own benefit.
When spending taxpayers money, one should always pay attention to how it appears. Could I make coffee at home and fill my Stanley, stop at a convenience store, or hey spend $10 at Starbucks on my way to work? Maybe I was traveling. Ok. Fine. Keep your receipts. Not hard. Ten bucks here and ten bucks there. It adds ups. We all live on a pretty tight budget and expect people working for us to spend our money wisely. The last six years, Noem and her staff have been out of control. The
Farther the Scout digs, the deeper in doo doo she’ll be. Not shocking she didn’t care.
Not defending her or these expenses at all--but it would be interesting to see this relative to others in the same position. Is this a "let's see how bad we can make her look" reporting? I am not a fan of hers in the least. She is self-absorbed and I think has let power go to her head. But reporting needs to show both sides of the coin. How do others use our tax money? If politicians had to use their own money there's no doubt they'd spend less.
There is no "other side of the coin;" we are a one-party state. As for former Republican governors, it's already been reported that neither Rounds nor Daugaard spent like she did. And I'll guarantee you Rhoden will not be flying to TX at state expense to get his teeth veneered.
There is no "both sides" here. The 4th Estate's duty is reporting the news; not speculating on maybes, ifs. "Facts are stubborn things." - John Adams. One's entitled to ones opinions, but not to one's own facts.
I agree with Jon Arneson. Why should we pay for anything related to her pursuit of a new job? She was not on "state business" at all! Maybe "state business should be defined and limits placed on various spending categories (car rental/day, hotel/night, meals/day, fly state plane ONLY on state business). Over to be spending to reimbursed to the state.
also how do you justify not paying for her hotel room while not on official business but yet we still charge car rentals and everything else while on that unofficial Gov trip? Make it make sense.
I'd be interested to see the breakout of what is hers and what is staff. All seems literally outrageous to me. I do know what Tom's Diner runs or used to run the Capital Cafe, so I'd presume that would be most of those charges...but maybe not?!?!!?!?
Self-interest isn’t a feature of only one party; however, it’s impossible to argue that the entirety of the party currently in power isn’t motivated by self-interest. This isn’t government focused on doing what promotes the general welfare—it’s entirely self-interested, focused on making as much money as possible. This is a president who pardoned Rod Blagojevich, a Democrat sentenced to 14 years in prison on a wide array of corruption charges, including extortion related to state funds for a children's hospital, and for trying to sell Barack Obama's vacated US Senate seat in 2008.
It doesn’t matter your party—if you’re a criminal, this president will pardon you. Everything is for sale. The purpose of government is personal enrichment for the very richest among us. Noem’s reign as governor of SD is simply another example—any notion of service to all or of transparency is just like her teeth, a fake veneer with which to sneer at integrity and any notion of government serving the common good.
He’s not going to need to pardon Noem. She’s not now, and won’t be, convicted of any crime in SD. Her use of the state plane is case in point. Republicans control SD.
For the sake of full disclosure, I was Dakota Scout's attorney in the open records lawsuit to obtain access to records of the governor's office credit card expenditures. Consequently, I had a vested interest as both lawyer and citizen—and still do. As the lawyer, I have left it to my clients to pore over the thousands of pages of records that the governor's office was so obstinately reluctant to share with the public. But in reading this article as a member of that public, it appears the second batch of records, which included post-DHS nomination spending, begs the question: Why should South Dakotans be paying a single damn dime for a state public servant to travel ANYWHERE in pursuit of a new job? And why are state staffers tagging along at our expense? I think we all deserve an answer to both questions.
In 2022, the state's Government Accountability Board considered the issue of Noem's private use of the state planes. The GAB dismissed the complaint on the ground South Dakota has no statutory definition of "state business." The term is conspicuously axiomatic and requires no detailed definition to be plainly understood and applied. And that is what is involved in the "interpretation" of SDCL §3-9-4. That statute reads, in part: "No state officer or employee shall incur any expense payable out of any appropriated funds or other agency funds for travel or other personal expense, including meals, lodging, transportation, or other miscellaneous expenses, except on official state business." Navigating her way into Trump bureaucracy is pretty clearly federal business, not state business.
If anybody can rationalize our having to pay for Noem and her entourage to fly around the country so she can secure a new position in Trump's cartoonish cabinet, please offer your defense. We'll be waiting with bated breath.
Is there anything we private citizens can do to recover the funds spent?
You'll have to excuse my drift into the sardonic, but when we're stuck with a dangerously deranged president who consciously lays waste to the First Amendment out of puerile pique, what choice to I have as a friend of journalism. [I do thank him, though, for taking Noem away from SD. However, her pathetically prideful CPAC interview last Friday [CSPAN] proves she hasn't yet grasped that Trump picked her, primarily, to be nothing more than the DHS calendar pin-up girl. Noem wasn't even put through the routine Q & A vetting other cabinet nominees go through. In her delusional channeling of Joan of Arc, Kristi attributed her avoidance of vetting process to her god stepping in to confirm complete confidence in her capabilities. A clue for Kristi might be Trump's insistence that she star in the bizarre DHS ad campaign long before she was even confirmed. In short, Noem was hired to be a flak, not a thinker, which is precisely how she governed South Dakota—no press conferences, but a lot of self-serving ads produced at our expense.]
I'll leave that question for other lawyers. I would note, however, that a public official using public funds for private benefit might be behavior covered by one of those "thou shalt not" rules, which ultra conservatives are so anxious to be displayed in public. Maybe next year they can propose a bill that would require the Ten Commandments to be posted in the Capitol.
Exactly! Is there any way to make Noem give back monies spent for her book tour or any other travels, expenditures or frivolous spending that had nothing to do with governing South Dakota?
Well, I'm sure she was doing all this for the good of the South Dakota people. She probably is going to donate her federal salary to the state, isn't she? Someone as humble and selfless as Noem couldn't possibly be taking advantage of everyday South Dakotans' money for her own benefit.
Regardless of how she spent our money she was will always be Corey’s dog killing skank
The cost of renting a luxury car in Miami, Florida per day can range from $30–$1,154, depending on the model and rental company. What did she rent?
The spending was out of line!
When spending taxpayers money, one should always pay attention to how it appears. Could I make coffee at home and fill my Stanley, stop at a convenience store, or hey spend $10 at Starbucks on my way to work? Maybe I was traveling. Ok. Fine. Keep your receipts. Not hard. Ten bucks here and ten bucks there. It adds ups. We all live on a pretty tight budget and expect people working for us to spend our money wisely. The last six years, Noem and her staff have been out of control. The
Farther the Scout digs, the deeper in doo doo she’ll be. Not shocking she didn’t care.
When government service is carte blanche self service...
Id also be interested in a comparison of former Governors spending on the CC...
Not defending her or these expenses at all--but it would be interesting to see this relative to others in the same position. Is this a "let's see how bad we can make her look" reporting? I am not a fan of hers in the least. She is self-absorbed and I think has let power go to her head. But reporting needs to show both sides of the coin. How do others use our tax money? If politicians had to use their own money there's no doubt they'd spend less.
There is no "other side of the coin;" we are a one-party state. As for former Republican governors, it's already been reported that neither Rounds nor Daugaard spent like she did. And I'll guarantee you Rhoden will not be flying to TX at state expense to get his teeth veneered.
There is no "both sides" here. The 4th Estate's duty is reporting the news; not speculating on maybes, ifs. "Facts are stubborn things." - John Adams. One's entitled to ones opinions, but not to one's own facts.
Can South Dakota um, "CLAW BACK" any unauthorized expenses?
I agree with Jon Arneson. Why should we pay for anything related to her pursuit of a new job? She was not on "state business" at all! Maybe "state business should be defined and limits placed on various spending categories (car rental/day, hotel/night, meals/day, fly state plane ONLY on state business). Over to be spending to reimbursed to the state.
Excuse my errors... I think faster than I type and I didn't proofread it... Oops.
“Two-bedroom suite waterway view — how is a suite a state obligation?” Latham wrote, referring to a $449 room charge on Election Night.
Well, it had to be two bedrooms - Corey was along...
Well, she packed up her bags and she took off down the road
Left me here stranded with the bills she owed
She gave me a false address
Took off with my American Express
Sunspot Baby, she sure had me way out-guessed
She left me here stranded, like a dog out in the yard
Charged up a fortune on my credit card
She used my address and my name
Man, that was sure unkind
Sunspot Baby, she sure had a real good time
I looked in Miami, I looked in Negril
The closest I came was a month-old bill
I checked the Bahamas, and they said she was gone
Can't understand why she did me so wrong
But she packed up her bags, she took off down the road
She said she was going to visit sister Flo
Well, she used my address and my name
And man, that was sure unkind
Sunspot Baby, I'm gonna catch up sometime
also how do you justify not paying for her hotel room while not on official business but yet we still charge car rentals and everything else while on that unofficial Gov trip? Make it make sense.
The State is still responsible for per diems, lodging, and transportation for her security detail.
True enough. It's essentially an admission that charging the room was improper. Well then, so would be the other expenses. Good catch.
I'd be interested to see the breakout of what is hers and what is staff. All seems literally outrageous to me. I do know what Tom's Diner runs or used to run the Capital Cafe, so I'd presume that would be most of those charges...but maybe not?!?!!?!?
Pitiful. Just Pitiful. Abuse of power with no regard for the state. The kind of person we don't need in government.
Self-interest isn’t a feature of only one party; however, it’s impossible to argue that the entirety of the party currently in power isn’t motivated by self-interest. This isn’t government focused on doing what promotes the general welfare—it’s entirely self-interested, focused on making as much money as possible. This is a president who pardoned Rod Blagojevich, a Democrat sentenced to 14 years in prison on a wide array of corruption charges, including extortion related to state funds for a children's hospital, and for trying to sell Barack Obama's vacated US Senate seat in 2008.
It doesn’t matter your party—if you’re a criminal, this president will pardon you. Everything is for sale. The purpose of government is personal enrichment for the very richest among us. Noem’s reign as governor of SD is simply another example—any notion of service to all or of transparency is just like her teeth, a fake veneer with which to sneer at integrity and any notion of government serving the common good.
The President cannot pardon Noem for crimes against the state of SD; only Federal crimes.
He’s not going to need to pardon Noem. She’s not now, and won’t be, convicted of any crime in SD. Her use of the state plane is case in point. Republicans control SD.
Oh, I agree. My reply was regarding the first sentence in your second paragraph that seemed to indicate a pardon would be assured. Thanks.