While serving as the governor of South Dakota, Kristi Noem would often tell lawmakers during budget discussions that the funds they were considering did not belong to them personally.
In an address to the Legislature from 2019, they stated, “My pledge is to uphold the financial responsibility that defines our state. We will refrain from spending funds we do not possess. Additionally, tax hikes are off the table.”
In 2022: “I acknowledge that public funds do not belong to us personally—they belong to the citizens of South Dakota. It’s important for everyone to keep in mind during our budget talks that these resources are meant for the diligent residents of South Dakota.”
Starting from 2025: “Throughout my tenure as governor, I’ve ensured that my budget plans were centered around supporting our community rather than funding governmental initiatives. Ultimately, these funds belong to the public. We receive them with their trust and must use them prudently and accountably.”
Those are good reminders that legislators should take to heart. However, it seems that Noem was just reading from the teleprompter rather than paying attention to her own advice. Recently Noem’s actions with taxpayer dollars were the topic of discussion on a couple of fronts.
A
South Dakota Searchlight story
It was noted that the Government Operations and Audit Committee in Pierre sought explanations regarding how Noem managed to charge $750,000 on her state-issued credit card throughout her tenure as governor. While urging legislators to monitor how public funds were utilized, particularly when she accumulated travel costs for activities like a book promotion tour, a hunting trip to Canada, and multiple out-of-state excursions supporting Republican nominees such as Donald Trump, Noem herself faced scrutiny over these expenditures.
Who can tell if South Dakota will produce another governor like Noem, who became the favorite of the Republican Party due to her?
reaction
due to the pandemic. While travelling extensively, she readily applauded South Dakota’s approach of not mandating masks during the pandemic and swiftly dismissed as false information anyone who mentioned that the state was
leading the league
in terms of COVID-19 deaths per person.
The lawmakers serving on the committee discovered that according to present legislation, state bookkeepers have limited options when they’re asked to manage a governor’s credit card expenditures. While they may challenge a credit card transaction, should the elected official not address this issue voluntarily, the responsibility falls back onto the state to settle the payment.
Essentially, the present laws regard elected officials as mature individuals. These officials ought to understand when public funds should be used and when they must personally bear the cost of expenses unrelated to their official duties. Following Governor Noem’s lead, legislators who followed her guidance on financial responsibility would now need to consider drafting bills that establish an oversight body or supervisor for government-issued credit cards. This step becomes necessary because Noem’s approach to using her credit card lacked statesmanship, appearing more reckless—akin to behavior one might expect from someone let loose during shore leave rather than exhibiting restraint expected of leaders.
Another
Searchlight story
Published on the same day was an account of Noem’s testimony before the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security. During the hearing, it was highlighted that her newly established department faces financial difficulties.
Your division has gotten out of hand,” stated Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat representing Connecticut. “Funds are running low.
Given that Noem has been given responsibility for Trump’s signature issue — immigration control — it would certainly be a bad look for the president if the department charged with rounding up illegal immigrants ran out of funds before the end of the fiscal year. Fiscal restraint may be the order of the day as Noem works for a man who changes Cabinet secretaries the way other presidents changed their socks.
On her end, Noem appears quite generous with her expenditures, allocating $100 million for television ads that laud Trump’s policies and caution against illegal immigration into the United States.
She has also
unveiled
a plan to offer $1,000 in “travel assistance” to illegal immigrants who self-deport. The cost of that could be as much as $1 billion if Trump reaches his goal of deporting 1 million people. Those hardly seem like the actions of someone who has been entrusted by taxpayers to spend their funds “wisely and responsibly.”
Every piece of Noem’s budget guidance for South Dakota legislators should ideally be accompanied by this additional counsel: Follow my recommendations, but take into account that my actions might differ.
SUBSCRIBE
South Dakota Searchlight
Is part of States Newsroom, a non-profit news network funded through grants and contributions from a group of supporters as a 501(c)(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight upholds editorial autonomy. For inquiries, reach out to Editor Seth Tupper.
info@southdakotasearchlight.com
.
