This is a production of SDPB.

Hello and welcome to the South Dakota Republican gubernatorial runoff candidate conversations.

This program is a partnership between SDPB and South Dakota Newswatch.

I'm SDPB's Jackie Hendry and we're in the Leo P. Flynn Gallery of SDPB's Sioux Falls Studio.

This is the state's first runoff election for the Republican candidate for governor.

And we're starting today with the candidate who received the most votes in June's primary election.

That's of course, Aberdeen businessman Toby Doeden.

Mr.

Doeden, thank you for joining us today.

Thanks for having me.

It's my pleasure to be here.

I like being in the studio.

For the folks that don't know where it's at.

It's right down by the steel district.

I get to watch people walking their cute puppies out on the sidewalk as we're doing this discussion.

So, if it looks like I'm gazing off into the distance It because I'm a big fan of puppies.

So when the puppies are walking by, I can actually see the playground over here.

I bring my grandson Banks there.

We spend a lot of time in Sioux Falls, and so we've got to know this area very well.

Our time is going to be short, so let's just launch right into, of course, the main issue, or a main issue of this primary, and that's of course, property taxes.

You've made eliminating property taxes a pillar of your campaign.

I'm not telling you anything new here, but just so we're starting on the same page, that's where local governments get a whole lot of their money.

A Dakota Institute report says 75% comes from property taxes.

That, of course, you know, pays for schools, police and roads.

How do we pay for those infrastructure issues, especially in rural areas without property taxes?

First and foremost, what I've talked about at great lengths for 13 months is affordability, right under the umbrella of affordability, of course, is property taxes, grocery taxes, and many other taxes.

Right.

Property taxes have doubled in six years.

In some cases, it's way more than doubled.

Right?

And every year they're continuing to raise the assessments.

So if we're going to bring back fairness and and and make South Dakota affordable, not just for lower income folks, fixed income seniors, even even people in the middle class and even some in the upper middle class are struggling to pay their bills today.

The affordability issue includes property taxes.

And what I've said is we have to phase out property taxes, starting with owner occupied housing that is owned by South Dakota residents.

Right.

I have met hundreds of fixed income seniors on my bus stop tour that have already sold their homes, that are now renting.

Jackie, 40% of South Dakota residents today, it's an all time high are renting rather than owning.

I think part of the American dream, part of the South Dakota dream, is that every hardworking resident of this state should be able to buy a home, and should be able to afford to keep that home for as long as they want.

And that's not happening today.

Right.

And property values drive those property tax rates.

We saw a huge demand of people moving into South Dakota because we stayed open for business during Covid.

Really a success story compared to a lot of the nation.

If we look at it in that respect.

Do we anticipate that leveling out in solving the property tax problem as we even things out post-Covid, or is it really a matter of phasing out that revenue stream and restructuring the tax structure?

There's plenty of other ways to get revenue.

And part of your first question, I think it was the last part is how are we going to fund the schools, how are we going to fund the townships and the place?

Right.

When our state government becomes fiscally responsible to the taxpayers again, which they will under my administration, we're going to have more money, more resources to provide for EMS, schools, teachers.

I want to raise our teacher pay.

I think it's very sad that in 2026, we have almost the lowest paid teachers in the country, right?

So simply like a lot of people think this is radical.

And by a lot of people, I mean, Larry Rhoden and his rich supporters.

All I'm saying is, rather than focusing all of our time, energy and money on the wealthiest 1% of South Dakotans, why shouldn't we put a plan together that helps all of the homeowners?

Right.

And so all I'm simply saying is this as governor on day one, Im going to start finding new revenue.

Yes, it's going to come from growing the economy.

Our economy is stagnant.

That's a fact.

We'll get into that in a moment.

I'm sure there is external revenue we can go get, and we are going to find ways to cut state spending, which has really, really increased rapidly in the last 7 or 8 years.

So what I'm simply saying, Jackie, is we're going to find new revenue to replace the property tax revenue as we phase it out.

Right.

We find new revenue.

We phase out a little property tax, we find more revenue, we phase out more property tax.

And we have to start with the people that are struggling the most.

For instance, fixed income seniors, veterans who decided Jackie and when was it decided that it is okay in this state to tax people out of their homes?

It's the least American thing that I have ever seen done in this state, and it is my top priority to reverse it.

Let's talk about some of those potential alternative revenues.

You have a lot of interesting ideas there.

I've heard you reference a potential tax or fees on the trust industry.

I've heard you reference taxing developers who buy up Airbnbs and the housing stock, driving up those issues, things like this, a few other ideas.

What are some of those other revenue sources that you would prioritize as we look to phase out property taxes under your administration?

Actually, what I've said is, number one, we have to look at targeted visitor consumption tax.

Most of the resources that are swallowed up in the state aren't by residents.

It's visitors.

Two thirds of the taxable receipts in this state are transacted by visitors, and they pay virtually nothing to help build our infrastructure or maintain our roads, our bridges, our EMS, etc.. Right.

So that's number one.

But the biggest revenue shortfall we have today is our lackluster, lagging behind life support economy.

People don't know this.

Grab your phone and just do a simple Google search.

Sales tax revenue South Dakota 2023 2024 2025.

You know what you're going to find three straight years where we had zero sales tax increase.

That's insane.

Can you imagine with super inflation, Larry Rhoden and our state government, Tony Venhuizen is probably the architect behind it, have increased state spending 38% in three years, the same time frame, 2023, 2024, 2025.

So you tell me your personal budget.

If you're a business owner out there and your expenses have gone up 38% in three years, but your revenue is flat, you have a big financial problem.

That's the situation our South Dakota state government is in right now.

Right?

I'm going to grow the economy.

The only way we're going to get out of this financial mess that we are in and actually prosper the next ten years, 20 years and the next generation, our grandchildren, is to grow our economy.

We can talk about external revenue.

We can talk about cutting state spending.

But if we don't have a strong, robust economy, none of it's going to work.

Right.

And so I'm going to bring 30 years of real world, private sector experience as a CEO into the governor's office.

And I am going to start very quickly growing and expanding our economy.

So what happens when the economy expands?

I'm sure there's people at home, right, working 8 to 5 that go, okay, well, great.

The economy is growing.

What does that do for me as a resident?

When the economy grows, our tax base grows.

Under my leadership, our state will take in massively more sales tax revenue every year.

Well, what can we do with that revenue?

All kinds of fun things.

Pay our teachers more.

Phase out property taxes.

Invest in our rural infrastructure, which has not been happening in decades.

How about we assist our brand new attorney general elect Lance Russell, who's going to be the next attorney general in January, who endorsed me today.

By the way, Lance wants a strong law and order governor, which is why he endorsed me.

How about we get Lance more funding so he can hire more people?

We can go after the thugs and criminals selling drugs to our citizens on and off the reservations.

Right.

Without money, Jackie, none of these things can happen.

Larry believes in inevitable decline.

The government's just going to get bigger.

Our budgets are going to get fatter.

We're just not going to have the money to do any of these things.

I don't buy into that.

Inevitable decline is what bad business owners do, and then they go out of business, right?

I've started dozens of companies.

I've grown almost every single one of them.

I have done an amazing job in the private sector, and I'm looking forward to bringing those skills to peer.

I'm not a businessman and I'm not an economist.

I'm hoping you can help me understand, because I'm hearing we need to grow the economy and the state is broke because we're spending too much.

I'm also hearing you say the sales tax rate hasn't increased.

I'm not sure if you said rate or rather, rate the revenue.

The revenue thank you for sales tax rate is increasing next year because Larry Rhoden raised it three times, right, 4.2 to 4.5%.

Then he's giving the counties, which they're all going to take the, the, the choice to raise their sales tax by 0.5%.

And then he's given the cities an opportunity to raise their tax by 1%.

Add all those up peoples.

There are people in South Dakota next year, Jackie, that are going to be paying over 9% in sales tax.

Can you imagine?

So that's my question.

When we're talking about the revenue is stagnant, but we also don't want the rates to increase.

Help me understand what it means to grow the economy.

When those rates are grow the economy, more money gets transferred.

What does that mean?

Adding jobs?

Adding all of it.

So okay, let me explain this to you.

Let's say I own a company and I do $1 million worth of sales.

Right?

If I do 1,000,005 in sales next year, I have more money to spend on investing back into my company, my facilities, my people.

When more money is funneled through South Dakota companies, that's more money that's getting taxed through the sales tax system.

So that's more money the state collects.

So when the economy grows, so too does the amount of sales tax that our state collects, right.

Every time a dollar is turned over, if I buy something from you, A gets taxed, you go buy something from Costco, it gets taxed.

The employee from Costco goes and buy something at Ace Hardware.

It gets taxed every time the dollar transfers to somebody else, it gets taxed the sales tax appropriately.

Well, Larry's economy is stagnant.

Means these dollars are getting turned over less and less, right?

Look at the states around us Kansas, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, Colorado, even Minnesota.

Their economies are growing over the last two and three years, ever since Kristi Noem left, this economy has just completely hit the skids.

It was already slowing down before she left.

Sadly, Larry has just put the finishing touches on it, right, so it takes energy to run an $8 billion state.

Do you know how much energy it takes to run a coffee shop, a hardware store, a lumber yard, a gas station, a car dealership?

Imagine running a thousand of those at the same time.

It takes an enormous amount of energy.

Focus, forward thinking, vision, boldness.

Larry Rhoden just doesn't have any of those qualities anymore.

He just doesn't.

I'm sorry.

I've met Larry's a nice guy.

Had lunch with him a month or so ago in Rapid City.

He and his wife, we had a great time, but I left that meeting knowing I had to win this race because if South Dakota is going to move forward, we need a governor that has energy and foresight to grow the economy.

That's number one, sadly, and a capitalistic world, the only thing that matters is generating more revenue because nothing else matters if you don't have money.

I thank you for that explanation.

Let's talk about looking for the wasted spending in state government.

Where do you expect to find that?

Well, I've got a few ideas.

I'll circle back to that.

The the nature of it audit is such that you don't know where you're going to find it.

That's why you do an audit, right?

Sometimes in my companies, I have a pretty good idea where the waste is at.

So we'll just do small targeted like mini audits, right?

In a state government with 14,000 employees, hundreds of layers, $8 billion a year in expenses, we're going to find things in places we never expected.

That's number one, okay?

That's why it's important that we systematically, in perpetuity, as a state government, are doing audits.

This isn't a one time audit where we bring a bunch of big shots in and we do an audit.

Audits should be done in perpetuity forever, right?

If you work at a company or you work for the government, you should show up every day.

Thinking is today the day I get audited?

That's how you keep people on the straight and narrow, right?

Makes sense.

When I was a kid, my mom made me clean my room.

If I didn't, I got a. But I didn't know what day she was going to check my room.

Monday, Wednesday, Friday, Saturday.

She never told me.

So I kept it clean every day.

Right.

That's what I'm talking about with these audits.

But we do need to look at Medicaid.

Medicaid has increased 90% in South Dakota since 2020, well beyond the expansion that was, you know, passed by the voters.

And historically, if you look again, a simple Google search, I wish more voters would get off of Facebook, perhaps, and do some independent research.

Almost every Medicaid audit that's ever happened in this, in this country, excuse me, has found at least 10% fraud.

So we're talking about tens of millions of dollars in Medicaid fraud in South Dakota.

That's where we're start.

And we're going to go find it.

The next two largest expenditures on the state budget are K through 12 education and higher education.

And so I suppose we'll do audits there too.

But the whole point is I'm not targeting anybody are for you.

Universities are amazing.

We have great teachers at our K through 12 education.

We've got some really good administrators I've met some of them.

We have great people that work in this state.

This isn't an indictment on the people that are running the state.

It's an indictment on the taxpayers.

We should be able to prove to the hard working people that go to work every day and fund this state, that we're using their money wisely.

That's what audits are.

It's not a target.

The people at my companies don't take anything personal when I do it.

Audit.

They're like, Toby has a responsibility to make sure we're operating as efficiently as possible.

People hear the word audit.

They think it's a negative.

That's a positive.

We're trying to find wasteful money that we can use to give you a pay raise and invest in our amazing facilities, right.

Maybe do more marketing to get new customers.

Right.

So audits are a great thing.

Audits are very it's a very play, a very big role in successful companies.

And sadly, I don't know why you'd have to call Larry.

You'd have to call Dennis Daugaard, you'd have to call some of these past governors and say, why didn't you focus on audits while you were governor, to make sure that we were using the taxpayer's money as efficiently as possible?

And I think we can come to our own conclusions why some of those don't happen.

But as somebody who's not going to peer as a politician who's funding my own campaign, my motives are to serve the people, not the big donors and lobbyists.

Would you expect to use existing auditors within state government, or some kind of contract with an outside third party to find those issues?

I mean, that's something we're going to have to talk about.

You know, I haven't been given a lot of access, as you might be not surprised to hear, at the state government level, we have certainly tried to dig in and request more detailed information about the budget and other things, and we've been stonewalled.

And so I look forward to getting into office so I can start meeting with all all of these folks.

See, you know, what direction we want to go.

I don't think who does.

It is as important as the fact that it actually happens.

And it doesn't just happen to say, okay, there's a check mark for Toby's campaign promise.

I'm going to be very, very closely involved in these audits.

I'm going to be requesting weekly, thorough updates from our auditors.

And again, this isn't a one week, a one month or a one year audit.

We are putting together processes to audit our state government in perpetuity.

And I should also tell you, I'm going to put a lot of, let's say, positive leverage on our counties to do the same.

Our counties are also bloated.

And again, if you're a county employee, don't get defensive.

I'm not coming for you or your job.

I'm coming to save money so I can pay you more to do your job.

I've met so many amazing county workers that feel underpaid teachers.

Last year, Larry Rhoden tried to shut out all pay increases.

There were some good conservative legislators that tried to get our teachers a 4 or 5 6% pay increase last year.

Larry Road and Brow beat them behind the scenes.

So did Tony Venhuizen.

It's very sad how some of the legislators were treated and they said, no, we're not giving our teachers any pay raise zero.

And so their final budget, their second to final budget, had zero increase for teacher pay.

Well, thankfully, leaders around the state, like me and many others, many of the teachers fought back and said, how are we supposed to keep up with inflation?

Inflation is low here compared to a lot of liberal states, but it's more than 0%, right?

So inflation is 3 or 4%.

In South Dakota you get a 0% pay raise.

As a teacher you effectively take a 3 or 4% pay cut.

Well, that's not fair, right?

That's not fair.

Everybody agrees that's not fair.

Well, Larry finally did relent.

And dug 1.4% out of the lobbyists couch cushions and got them a modest pay increase.

I can tell you what I'm going to be.

I'm taking our teachers from 47th in the country to the top half within my first four years.

That is a big, big goal of mine, is to get our teachers more money, to get more educational opportunities for our children.

Jackie, just just like if you and I are just going going to go over to the beautiful steel district, I'd take you to Ironwood.

I'd get a six ounce filet with their steak sauce on the side, which is amazing.

We'd have a glass of wine and we would just talk common sense.

Just common sense.

I don't it doesn't matter your political affiliation.

Let's just elect somebody to go to pier.

That just looks at the data, looks at the facts and makes a non emotional decision to move the state forward in a positive manner.

Right.

We haven't had that in 50 years sadly.

On the subject of affordability in the subject of South Dakota families, you've highlighted, as we've said, affordability as an issue, particularly as it relates to families and the economy in general.

Of course, a top issue for you.

So my question doesn't directly connect with affordability, but I bet you'll be able to make this connection.

Last year, the South Dakota Child Care Task Force showed 70% of young children in this state have all available parents working outside of the home as an economic necessity for those families.

That same report shows that the current child care gap in this state costs South Dakota $329 million a year in economic impact as governor.

What role does childcare play in your approach to supporting families in the economy?

There's nothing more important than childcare, and I'll take it a step further.

I think that also includes education, right?

When we talk about education and the budget and childcare, sometimes we almost like people, almost talk about it like it's an abstract subject or something like this is the next generation of South Dakota leaders.

Is our young children right?

You said, what was it?

70% have dual working homes?

Sadly, I'm not going to be able to fix that in four years, but I think we can start making a meaningful improvement when we bring affordability back into focus in South Dakota systematically over time, I hope and I believe will be able to have an economy here and an affordability here in South Dakota, where more families can get by with one working parent, which I think would be amazing.

I grew up in a household not by choice, but by necessity.

My father became disabled when I was very young, but my mother, God rest her soul, a great woman with no college education, with no formal training whatsoever, was able to be the sole breadwinner in my home in the 70s and the 80s.

And we owned a home, very modest home, an old piece of crap car, and for children on one person's income.

My mom couldn't do that today.

That's very sad.

And so as we start talking about child care education, it all ties back to affordability.

We have to make South Dakota more affordable so that if a if if a husband or a wife wants to stay home and be the caregiver for their children, that the other spouse can afford to go work there, but make enough money to live a modest life, right?

It is virtually impossible in South Dakota today.

And I'll tell you what.

Until we can figure out a way to make South Dakota more affordable, we are going to continue to see issues pop up.

Not just financial issues, social issues, educational issues, childcare issues.

I said it a few minutes ago.

Every negative thing that happens in a governmental society starts from one a lack of transparency and accountability at the government level.

Number two, a government that over spends and a number three stagnant economy.

You have to have transparent government and you have to have money.

Like it's just I know people will probably some people will hear this message and go, it's all about money.

It's all mine.

Yeah, it is, because all of the systemic issues that we're struggling with today public safety, public education, right, infrastructure, rural health care, housing, all of those things take massive amounts of money to fix and correct.

And so wouldn't it be great today, Jackie, if we had a a program where we could afford to assist young mothers and help pay for child care?

So they wanted to go to work and get off of some of the government subsidies.

I've met some really terrific single mothers that literally cannot afford to go to work because they can't afford daycare.

It takes a lot of money, and it just trust me when I tell you with every fiber of my soul, my only objective is to raise revenue in this state and start systematically making life better and easier for all of the residents that live here.

You plan to be the most pro-business governor in this state's history.

It's my understanding that you've expressed some opposition to sales tax incentives for data center developers in South Dakota.

Those developers have said they won't come without competitive tax policy.

Many local economic development voices fear we're missing out or missing the boat if we don't jump on this new industry.

Do you see that as a concern, as a balance?

Bring us up to speed on where data centers fit in to your economic policy.

Let me preface this by saying this.

When people have a vested interest in something, they interpret the information they hear a certain way, right?

That's human nature, right?

If I'm on one side of the issue and you're on the other side and I and somebody gives an answer, we're going to hear that answer two different ways.

So let me be very, very clear what disappoints me about our leaders in the state, especially Tony Venhuizen, especially Larry Rhoden and their whole regime is that they can't use the word economic development without following it up with a multi-billion dollar subsidized project.

So they're trying to just beat it into the taxpayer's head that the only way we can grow the economy is by doing business with some of these massive multi-billion dollar companies.

That's just fundamentally not true.

We have 70,000 small businesses in South Dakota.

Sadly, we had 80,005 years ago.

10,000 under Rhoden Watch have closed permanently.

Right.

I'm going to reinvigorate our existing 70,000 small businesses.

The ones out there that are struggling to get an SBA loan takes months and months and months.

Yet they see the Governor's Office of Economic Development doling out millions of dollars like TikTok's Tic Toks.

Excuse me, I'm a big TikTok fan.

Yeah, my TikTok accounts Growing people love me on TikTok.

So we have a governor that's taking all of this money, and he's just handing it out, which.

And then we have small businesses who are trying to borrow 25 grand to expand their paint shop.

Can't get any money.

We can reinvigorate our economy through a plethora of industries right when it comes to data centers, because I don't avoid any questions, but I want to point out there's 100 different ways to skin a cat.

There's 100 different ways to grow our economy.

It doesn't have to just be billion dollar projects, right?

So let's just get that out of there right away.

Here's the thing of data centers.

My leadership style is very clear, and I've been consistent for 30 years.

If you're going to run a company, you're going to run an $8 billion state with 14,000 employees, 940,000 residents.

You have to mirror the will of the people.

Nobody has traveled the state more than I have.

The last two years, 200 bus stop events have done all 66 counties at least once, if not twice.

Most of them.

There's very little, if any, appetite all across the state for projects like subsidized data centers.

Right?

So if you're going to mirror the will of the people and the people don't want something, then you shouldn't be fighting to do that.

Something that seems very clear to me.

Right.

The people in Sioux Falls want a new water park, build a new water park.

If the people in Sioux Falls don't want a new water park, don't build a new water park.

Seems very simple to me, right?

But the problem in this state has been since I was a kid.

I remember my mom complaining about it.

She loved Ronald Reagan that somebody would get elected to office, and then they would say, I have more information than the regular voter does.

I have more information than the general population.

So we're going to do this even though it's not popular.

That's not leadership, right?

Mirror the will of the people.

And so I tell you what, when we have school teachers, welders, mechanics, state employees that are struggling to pay their mortgages or their rent because of super inflation and high property taxes, it's pretty hard justifying taking more of their money to subsidize some of the richest, wealthiest people in the world.

Right?

So first of all, we got to fix our affordability issues, right?

We got to get South Dakota affordable, grow the economy.

I am going to be the most pro-business.

I'm going to reinvigorate our existing small businesses.

And then, you know, something else where our state's really falling behind.

Jackie, Larry wants to talk about bringing in 4 or 5 different companies.

They're all huge multi billion dollars, 10,000 small and medium sized companies have fled liberal leftist states in the last 15 years.

It's just a fact.

They left Illinois, New York, California, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota.

Hardly any of them have come here.

Why is that?

We're talking small, medium.

So 100 employees, 500 employees.

Some are expanding, some have just straight up completely relocated their whole operation.

Right.

Why wouldn't you come here?

We have no state income tax, which is awesome.

I would fight against a state income tax right to the death.

I promise you that.

We have low traffic pretty much everywhere except for 41st on Saturdays in Sioux Falls.

Like, this is a perfect business climate.

Yet they're not coming here.

Well, it's because we have governors like Larry Rhoden, and they just don't have the expertise or the energy to go find these companies, to recruit these companies and ultimately bring them here.

And so part of my affordability plan and to grow the economy is not only just reinvigorating our existing small businesses, but it's to bring in new entrepreneurs like Toby Doeden from other states that want to come here in this very, very tax friendly, no state income tax state.

Right.

And so we've got a lot of ideas there.

We've already been working with some outside groups that have lists of these companies that are looking to relocate.

And on day one I'm going to start robo colonies companies and saying, we're going to make it right for you to come here.

We're going to find you some land.

We're going to help you with the research.

We're going to we're going to make so many new jobs in the state.

We're going to our economy is just going to skyrocket.

I really do believe that we're going to be able to put a team together, that in ten years, people are going to look back and go, I wish we could have grown our economy like that in the 90s, in the 2010s, we really are going to become, I believe, the richest rural state in the country.

I really believe that.

So you're looking at a higher a higher quantity of smaller businesses, I imagine, spread across these smaller communities rather than one big project here, one big project.

They're largely in these urban areas.

Absolutely.

And when I say pro-business, it's every single business development project gets looked at on its own merit.

Right?

Which again, it sounds like way too much common sense.

Right.

But there are people.

And listen, for the folks that are watching this interview, please, if you only take this one thing from me today, there are people in this state.

Larry Rhoden is one of them.

Tony Venhuizen is one of them.

People that don't know Tony Venhuizen.

And he's like the de facto governor, right?

He's the one kind of steering Larry ship.

They believe fundamentally that anything that generates revenue for the state is a great economic project, even if it has a massive negative impact on the majority of its citizens.

That scares me that it really does.

Can you share an example?

Any one, Like if if, if a big company comes into the state and we use hundreds of millions of dollars to subsidize them, where's that money coming from?

The grandmother who's struggling to keep up on her taxes on her hobby farm.

The third grade teacher in bison, South Dakota.

Right.

The welder in Spearfish.

We have to make decisions on economic development that work for the entire state, right?

It can't just help the richest one tenth of 1%.

And again, the richest one tenth of 1% are not voting for Toby Doeden, I promise you, because they're part of this group.

That's just money, money, money, money.

You have to be able to show the people here is the value to the state.

If you're a taxpayer and you live in Buffalo, South Dakota, and we do this project, here's how you're going to benefit.

If you're a schoolteacher in Aberdeen and we do this project, here's how you and your family are going to benefit.

If you can show the taxpayer the benefit to them, then they will agree with that project.

Does that make sense?

But if you simply just build the project cash in, take all the money and it has no benefit to the residents, we shouldn't do those projects.

So let's find projects to do that benefit the developer, their shareholders, the state, and the 940,000 people that live here.

That's all I'm saying.

And yeah, there there are a few thousand people in this state that think that's a radical position.

I don't think that's radical at all.

I think that's fair.

I think it's just I think that's why I won the primary by a massive margin over Larry Rhoden.

You know, my opponents collectively spent more than $10 million in a race, which I didn't do any fundraising, I didn't fundraise, and we want to race against $10 million.

So that should tell you, the overwhelming majority of people in this state believe in my message, and they believe that I'm actually going to go to pier and actually fight for them.

And that is exactly what I'm going to do.

So many things we didn't get to I'm going to ask two more.

I'm going to go rogue on my director.

I want to make sure we cover Law and Order.

We're recording this a couple of days after your speech at the South Dakota Republican Party convention, your opponent also spoke.

It sounds like from the coverage I've seen, you both agree the state's prison recidivism rate is too high.

There is, of course, that ongoing legislative task force looking into recidivism might also lead to changes in the parole system.

What are the solutions you're hoping to bring to the table as governor, I, like Larry Rhoden, has been lieutenant governor or governor for eight years.

And because I brought it up at the Dakota Scout debate, Larry now talks about recidivism.

Larry's also talking about all these other things.

It's funny how Larry starts talking about solutions when his political life is on the line.

Where are those solutions?

Two years ago, a year ago, three years ago, recidivism rate will drop significantly when I become governor.

And here's why Attorney General Marty Jackley went to federal court, sued the big pharmaceutical companies, and he beat him in their own backyard $100 million.

What an amazing job Marty did.

Marty and I believe that money should go to rehabilitation treatment and prevention services, starting in our two biggest cities and working through all the other 64 counties.

Mayor Ted TenHaken believes that Mayor Jason Salamun of Rapid City believes that Mayor TenHaken and Salamun have been working together, fighting against Larry Rhoden to get access to those funds.

Larry put it in a government slush fund and hidden Tony, but Tony Venhuizen is handing it out for favors.

And I think that's very sad.

Day one I'm praying that $100 million back away from the state government, and I'm going to start giving it to the communities that need it to our state penitentiary.

We are going to immediately have a significant drop in recidivism, because we're going to take money away from incarcerating nonviolent offenders, and we're actually going to go to the core of the issue, which is rehabilitation support family.

That is how we reverse the recidivism rate.

Larry Rhoden is building a $1 billion prison to lock up drug offenders, and he took the $100 million that was there, called Marty Jackles office and ask him he will confirm Marty wants that money spent on rehabilitation.

I'll bet you the new incoming attorney general, Lance Russell.

I haven't talked to him about this, but I'll bet you he agrees to.

I bet you he's going to want to get really strong on rehabilitation, putting nonviolent mothers, sisters and grandmothers in prison for drug offenses rather than rehabilitating them is very sad.

Very, very sad.

That will end under my administration, I promise.

I'm going to need to follow up on your accusation about Tony Venhuizen using state funds for favors.

Do you have any proof of that allegation?

Larry's made it very clear that that money is not going to the.

Drug users that need it.

So where is it going?

Where is it going?

Where you you guys should follow up and call Mayor Paul.

TenHaken, call Mayor Jason Salamun, ask them if they're getting any of the $100 million for rehabilitation for their citizens.

Where's the money?

Our state budget has gone from $3.6 billion since Larry became lieutenant governor.

Now it's $7.7 billion.

Yet our state is still broke, right?

Where's all the money going right now?

All of the richest people.

Larry's having a big fundraiser in Sioux Falls.

The most powerful people in the state are all showing up at a house to write massive checks to Larry Rhoden tonight.

The rich people that have been controlling this state for decades are scattering like mice in the middle of a cornfield right now, trying to figure out a way to hang on to power.

And they're going to realize at some point that this process started a couple of years ago, and there's no stopping it.

The people of South Dakota are sick and they are tired.

They want real leadership.

They're tired of career politicians running for reelection, promising everything the voters want to hear and then never actually doing any of it.

Right.

And so we have built this massive political machine because people have have figured out Toby is just a regular person that left his amazing life in the business world to go fight all of this power that has been running this state for decades.

And I think our win in the primary was a powerful message.

Dusty fought hard.

John fought hard.

They came up a little short.

And so now it's me and Larry, and I think people are going to be equally surprised.

On July 28th at the results.

My last question for you.

Of course, we know President Donald Trump has been the key figure in the Republican Party for the better part of a decade.

Now he is midway through his second term as president.

What do you see as the future of the Republican Party?

Well, If I had a crystal ball.

It would be amazing.

I wished I did.

President Trump is a strong America First advocate.

That's why I supported him in 2015.

It's why I supported him in 2020.

It's why I still support him.

I genuinely believe he wants what's best for America, as do I. I know he wants what's best for South Dakota.

He's coming out here on July 3rd.

The man has a rigorous travel schedule, and yet he's coming out to South Dakota to celebrate our amazing 250th birthday, which is incredible.

I commend him for that.

The future of the Republican Party is strong.

I mean, when you have people like JD Vance, Marco Rubio and others, there are just some amazing, really good America first strong conservative leaders.

And so I hope we're able to continue to build momentum.

I hope we're able to keep the House and the Senate Republican in November.

And as long as we can do that and keep our momentum up, I think things look good for the Republican Party in 2028 nationally.

And so we'll continue to pray for President Trump.

We'll continue to pray for our state.

And God willing, we will start to see some meaningful improvement.

Mr.

Doeden, I want to thank you for joining us today.

Thank you.

It's my pleasure.

If you're just joining us, you're watching the South Dakota Republican gubernatorial runoff candidate conversations.

This program is brought to you by SDB and South Dakota Newswatch.

I'm Jackie Hendry.

We're continuing now with the candidate with the second most votes in June's Republican primary election.

And that is Governor Larry Rhoden.

Governor, thank you for being here with us today.

Good to be with you.

So we want to start right off the bat with the issue that has really dominated a lot of this primary cycle, and that's property taxes and state spending.

Sure.

So you said in a podcast just before the primary, the interview podcast, that a lot of the squeeze we're feeling with owner occupied properties may already be on track to writing itself, because it has to do with the increase in property values we saw after the pandemic.

How much of this problem is a waiting game?

Well, it's a great question.

And, you know, I think I think a large amount of it's a waiting game, although I'll say this when we had the vote to get that passed in the legislature, I was already getting pushed back from some of the Sioux Falls legislators that lived here in town.

And because their their tax bill had already started dropping and they thought, well, are we looking for a solution to a problem that's writing itself?

And I don't look at it that way, but it was proof positive that, you know, what I had said over a year ago was really accurate, that the ship has a way of writing itself as supply caught up with demand.

Then the price points start going back down, and especially in high problem areas like Lincoln and Minnehaha County and Pennington County.

I think the same is true.

There doesn't overshadow the fact that people still can use property tax relief, especially owner occupied, because it covers a lot wider swath than other classes of property.

And and the plan that we proposed that I brought forward was two parts with statewide relief and and targeted relief in the half cent sales tax, which is a local option county.

You can opt into that or not, but the entire state will enjoy the reduction in owner occupied brought on by the other half of the tax cuts.

And of course, you know, there's been some pushback in a sales tax increase in in these different areas.

How do you respond to that.

Well on the local option, I respond that that's we left as many options available to the local governments as possible.

They can the county commission can adopt it, or the people can initiate the measure or it is referable.

So it's totally up to individual counties, whether it's a good fit for them or not, and whether the citizenry agrees with them or not.

So you mentioned a bit about what was able to be done in this last legislative session as it relates to property tax relief.

Can you remind folks what specifically was done most recently?

Yes, certainly.

This this last year it was two parts.

Senate Bill 96 was the proposal that I'd been working on through the interim from last year, which is a local option to adopt a half cent sales tax on top of the 4.3.

And that money would go right to a property tax reduction fund, and it would reduce the county portion of the owner occupied taxes.

And that represented a significant reduction in your property tax.

The other half of the proposal was Senate Bill 245, and that was going to use the point 3%.

The sales tax is currently at 4.2%.

It's slated to go up to 4.5% this next year when it goes up that point 3%, which is $114 million, would be applied directly to owner occupied taxes in the form of reducing the general fund education mill levy.

So that represented another about on a I did the math on a 150 or 3.

It's a 1.68.

So it would be a $300,000 house valuation of 300,000 represent a $300, no, $500 decrease.

Is there anything else you'd like to see done as governor to provide additional property tax relief?

Well, certainly I think we get this up and running.

It goes a long way.

It represents statewide with both programs, about a 34% reduction in your owner occupied taxes.

So that's significant.

And I think for the time being we're going to see how that plays out.

See how many counties take advantage of the half cents side of it.

But that coupled with the fact that, like we said before, things are starting to get back on track.

I think we're in pretty good shape.

We've heard some concern about sales tax revenue being stagnant in the state, and that being a sign of a slowed economy.

How would you respond to that?

Oh, you know there again, that is my opponent.

And I don't know how to put this in a kind way in a civil way.

But he is making things up.

That's simply not the case.

And it was the latest example of how many things that he has just manufactured, as when he presents his cases.

That's not not the case at all.

In fact, we get updated numbers every month, and this year we're year to date.

We're 6.5% ahead of what our projected budget was.

And all indicators are we're having a tremendous year to date last year.

Even last year we had we had average increases.

The reason or budget was so tight last year was because we also had a federal costs that were being kicked down to the states to the tune of about 50 million bucks.

So even last year, when we had to kind of flatline increases to education, or they only got a 1.4% that didn't tell the whole story.

We had a pretty average year as far as increases, and this year we're looking much, much better.

So when when Mr.

Doeden comes up with those numbers, it just makes me shake my head.

And I think the people of South Dakota deserve a governor that will speak the truth, because that's nothing but deception.

In order to gain a little political favor.

Speaking of your opponent, your opponent is campaigning on a promise to eliminate wasteful government spending.

He's someone with business experience rather than state government experience.

Of course you have that state government experience with that experience in mind.

Are there areas where you see opportunities to cut waste and where might that be?

Well, we're constantly looking for areas and we and we have a great process to do.

So when the legislature comes in, they spend 38 days with a legislator in the the Committee on Appropriations, both chambers going through line by line, every agency's budget.

So in effect, it's it's a DOGE of sort.

My opponent talks about creating a new layer of bureaucracy in the doge office.

We already do it.

We already self audit every single year.

And the fact of the matter is, if you if you look at the big picture, you know, we've heard him talk about waste, fraud and abuse every year that he and that's his only plan that he's laid out for replacing a property tax, which is kind of insane when you think about the fact that South Dakota, for the last 30 years, has always ranked either number one or number two, lowest tax state in the nation.

Currently, only Wyoming is taxed less than they are in South Dakota, and that's because of the huge amount of severance tax.

So you think about that.

You let that sink in.

How do you how do you surmise that we're fraught with waste, fraud and abuse when we've always ranked the most frugal state or thereabouts in the nation?

If if you take the surrounding states, including Wyoming, we are significantly lower $1,000 per person spent of less government spending than any of the surrounding states by $1,000.

We're almost half of what Wyoming is because, again, they have so many severance taxes.

So that all indicates that we do things right fiscally in South Dakota.

It's not to say we can't continue to look for areas to improve, but we do a lot of things very well in South Dakota.

You've dealt with property tax relief in the ag sector in your time in the legislature.

I'm wondering if there's anything from that experience you're bringing to the owner occupied, owner occupied conversation or how those issues compare?

Yeah, well, on the ag side of it, wasn't the property tax relief, it was property tax reform.

The way it played out was we couldn't could no longer continue to tax it based on sales because God quit making ag land a long time ago.

And so the sales weren't indicative of what the true value of the land was.

So that was reform.

This was a tax reduction.

Certainly every experience I had, even back to my time on the school board, gave me a better understanding of our tax system from the inside out and upside down.

You know, the education funding component of it all the way through the class of property.

So it is given to me the advantage and the opportunity as a governor to have a very keen understanding of our property tax system and to know how it works and and to tell when it's when there's something that needs to be fixed and how to fix it without completely corrupting the whole system.

I want to shift on to another topic that's impacting a lot of South Dakota families, and that's access to child care.

2025 report from the South Dakota Child Care Task Force showed 70% of young children in South Dakota have all available parents working outside of the home, and that's an economic necessity for many of those parents.

That same report shows the current child care gap costs South Dakota $329 million in economic impact a year as governor.

What role does childcare play in your policy approach to supporting families and a strong economy?

Well, I think I think it's a it's a big part.

I think there's different ways to look at it.

In South Dakota, we have a very large percentage of relative to other states of both parents working outside the home.

And that doesn't need to be that way.

And there are things that we can do and are doing, as far as you know, the best way to address that is to give parents the ability to for one of the parents to stay home with the children so they don't have the necessity of having two jobs.

The best way to do that is growing our economy and looking for ways to raise the the wages in South Dakota so they can make a living wage.

And we've moved need a little a lot in that area just with our investments in infrastructure.

One thing that I'll use, for example, is rural broadband.

Since Covid struck, we have invested somewhere between 3 and $400 million in rural broadband high speed internet across the state of South Dakota, all across border to border.

That provides a lot more opportunity for people to a second income from home and stay in the home and stay with the kiddos.

You mentioned there's some other things that state government is doing or might be involved.

Can you share some of those things?

Well, we after Covid, there was opportunity that we invested in infrastructure for daycare and and to allow them to expand and have better flexibility to, to stay in business and expand their business.

There were a number of things like that, but I don't recall exactly what each one of them were in detail.

For economic development.

More generally, you've pledged no special deals for data centers in South Dakota.

You also said or you've you have also said national security is our state's next big industry.

We've heard in the past, including an interview with your Economic Development Commissioner Bill Even in February, that getting into the data center game can be a big national security force.

Do you find a conflict in your stance, a balance?

Talk to us about these decisions.

I don't I don't see any conflict in my stance to what Bill even does.

But he makes a good point.

And I think Christine Erickson made it here in Sioux Falls.

I was watching one of her interviews, and she's absolutely right.

That and she didn't say it.

Bill even did.

I agree wholeheartedly when you think about it.

It is a matter of national security.

And we can't turn the keys over to China to it's one thing.

You know, we have taken a pretty hard stand about Chinese owned farmland in South Dakota.

How much more important is it that we not allow China to own our data?

And so, absolutely, we have a national interest in where AI is going, data storage, the data industry.

And so we're we're going to take hard looks at that moving forward.

But that's not to say we're we're offering sweetheart deals for data centers trying entice them here.

If we do it we're going to make sure it's the right decision for our state and that we do it responsibly, that it doesn't hurt our ability to protect our environment as far as resources, whether it's water or our utilities, as far as electric rates and the ability to supply a reliable source of power at a decent price for our consumers moving forward.

You've made a few bigger business deals in recent memory.

I'm thinking about Smithfield.

Yeah, that was a big one.

What can South Dakota do to attract more small and mid-sized businesses or companies to our state?

Well, there's always more we can do.

And we you know, we're looking for those kind of opportunities on a daily basis.

But I have been extremely impressed in the last 17 to 18 months since I become governor.

I went on the open for opportunities tour last year and talked to dozens and dozens of business owners across the state.

Some of them are generational.

Businesses have been here for generations, and some of them just moved here from other states in the last few years.

It was really telling to me to have this conversation with them and find out what makes them tick.

And what really tripped their trigger as far as getting them to South Dakota and where they're at now that they've been here.

Extremely encouraging to hear the enthusiasm from the people that moved here and the kind of workforce we have and the assets we have available in South Dakota.

And then also do a gut check as far as what we can do better.

The regulations.

One of the things I think we've done very well and we continue to work at, is allowing them to opportunity to come here and then keeping government out of their way and provide as few obstacles and hurdles as they can.

Some of the surrounding states.

It's it's rather insane when you hear some of the restrictions in the zoning ordinances and just the hoopla that they put their citizenry through just for a housing permit or whatever it might be.

And so we're continually looking for opportunities to to still be responsible, but yet very responsive to our citizens.

And in a bigger deal, like the Smithfield plant.

What are you looking for?

To make sure that a big major deal like that is best for South Dakota?

Well, a lot with Smithfield.

You know, you could write a book on the considerations with that kind of a that kind of a plant.

But boy, aside from just the economic benefit and, and having all that extra having Smithfield 150 year old plant out of downtown and then replacing it in an industrial park with the state of the art new technology all in one level.

It'd take a couple of days to talk about all the the benefits that come with that economically, environmentally.

Just the opportunity for economic development for the city of Sioux Falls.

I mean, when it blows your mind, when you think about the world of opportunity that's going to present to a planning committee how how best to utilize between Smithfield location and the prison.

That's also a big deal item, those two deals in one year to have that kind of space.

My goodness, it's blows your mind what that might look like in 20 years.

Speaking of the prison, you agreed with your opponent at the state Republican convention that the state's prison recidivism rate is too high.

There's an ongoing legislative task force looking into recidivism that could also lead to changes in the parole system.

Potentially, it will lead to changes.

What other solutions or what solutions in general are you hoping to bring to the table in this area?

Well, that's part of the mission of that task force moving forward is what what else can we do as part of that, that mission?

Because that's not just a narrow focus mission.

That's that's statewide as far as recidivism and that task force role in all of that.

I will say this when it comes to what was the comments made there, I thought about it afterwards, how how ironic it was that he would mention that one thing in particular, because far and away, the biggest answer to that is this new prison and the opportunity that will bring forward for rehabilitation programing.

And he of all four candidates, I'd said that I said at that night that all three of the other candidates were trying to sabotage that plan.

None more so than Mr.

Doeden.

He was actively calling.

He had a group of legislators that were in his camp.

He was actively calling them the night before the special session, twisting their arms to vote against that prison deal.

It very outspokenly opposed that prison deal.

So the very problem that he's stating that we have would only be made worse if he had been able to stop that prison deal from passing.

Your opponent's been critical of the slow release of the state's opioid settlement dollars as a barrier to that rehabilitation issue.

How do you respond to folks who say those funds aren't going out fast enough, or aren't being sent to the right places?

Well, they're not.

That's just not accurate.

They're they're a faction that are wanting us to spend those opioids, send those opiate dollars out before we receive them, and that's not going to happen.

We're not going to spend money we don't have.

And so as as we've got as we've gotten those opioid funds, they went out to the local governments.

So that's a clarifying point.

That wasn't a lump sum up front right.

Yeah.

They have a they have a lump sum of what we'll get in the next five years or whatever it is.

I believe it's five years.

And so it really kind of is a head tilted for me when they're when some it's just some misinformation that's been put out and it's really not accurate at all.

Are you able to give any insight into how those dollars are being parsed out across the state?

Well, yeah, I, I don't have off the top of my head the exact numbers.

But you know, there were there were set numbers for, for many county and Pennington County were, you know, they had a set amount.

That money goes directly to those counties.

The rest of is parched out in regions across the state.

Throughout your conversations with law enforcement, the prison project, the task force now ongoing, what do you want to highlight of the things that you've learned for solutions that we might reasonably expect as things move on?

Well, it's been an interesting 18 months.

Was the legislator for 16 years where you're one of 105 legislators.

And so it was a great proving ground.

You know, kind of hone your leadership skills because it's it's pretty hard to get things done when you're one of 105.

So you learn how to be influential and how to, how to present an agenda.

Now, as governor, I've kind of put that to the test.

And and we've had a great deal of access.

I've got a great team behind me of good sound minded people, of integrity, and they've worked very closely with me as far as building the relationships, working with the legislators.

To answer their questions and find out what the concerns are, and then look, not just tell them how we're going to do it and why it's better, but look for solutions to their problem, to their issues.

And the prison deal was a classic example of that.

As we worked our way through trying to get build the support we kept.

We had town hall meetings, we had discussions, we brought people together.

And what, you know, what's your sticking point?

And one by one, they kept bringing more to bear.

And one by one we started answering those problems.

The first one was there's no guarantee that we'll there will be any rehabilitation as part of this huge expenditure.

So I created the task force.

And then then there were other issues that came forward.

One by one we addressed them.

The last one that was probably the toughest nut to crack was they wanted to guarantee maximum price of $650 million.

And we got to that.

I remember thinking, well, how do we ever overcome that?

Because there's no contractor on the planet that's going to build that kind of a project and give a guaranteed maximum price like that.

And but through the task force, they worked their way through that.

We ended up getting that guaranteed maximum price signed just a few days ahead of the special session.

So I say all that because that was a huge litmus test.

It at good process and and leadership in in bringing people together.

I'm curious, I didn't have this question prepped, but as you're explaining this to me, I'm we're hearing about the the need for rehabilitation to improve these issues.

I have to imagine workforce in the Department of Corrections or even workforce in those rehab programs could be a challenge.

Is that something that's on your radar, things that you have thoughts on?

Well, certainly, you know, workforce is a challenge in all areas.

But in a in a new facility like this, it's a lot easier.

And especially if they've got more space for rehabilitation programing, you're in a much safer environment, much cleaner environment, a more comfortable environment.

And so all of that makes it easier to get a workforce and keep a workforce.

I want to move on to agriculture.

You got a bit of pushback from ag producers for vetoing a ban on cell proteins.

But you did move forward a five year moratorium in the state.

Share with us how you came at that decision.

Yeah, well, I would correct you a little bit.

The pushback.

I actually got more input urging me to veto it than I did opposed to it.

There were ag organizations that supported it initially, but what that did the the bill that I vetoed, it just carte blanche, basically said that never mind what the FDA decided in South Dakota were going to ban that product cell cultured protein.

Well, understand, as a West River rancher, there's nothing good I have to say about something like cell cultured protein.

But what I was more concerned about was the legal precedence that sets if a state is allowed to ban a product, regardless of what it is, just because they don't like it, what does that set you up for in the future?

When California next week decides they're going to ban red meat in California?

What?

I've told a few ranchers since then, you've been selling $2,500 calves in the spring.

California does something like that.

You'll be selling $250 calves in the spring.

It would decimate our market.

And that relative to what you accomplish by by an outright, outright law of cell cultured protein cell culture protein is not going to catch on in South Dakota, nor is it even going to be viable for any time in the near future.

So it's just a matter of perspective.

And so and then I also I brought all the interested parties, including the ag organizations that supported it.

And we sit down at the table and I discussed with them what I proposed to do was veto the bill that was an outright ban and veto it.

And with a pledge to support a five year moratorium on on cell culture protein, because the more I learned about it, the more I think it really is crazy the way that that's produced.

And so it'll give us five years to to put a, put a hold on that, the sale of it and also gives us a. There's several states that have pending lawsuits and allow them to play out as well.

What do South Dakota policymakers need to do to protect family farms in ranches in South Dakota?

You know, that's a great question, one I've struggled with coming from western South Dakota when the ranches are few and far between.

You see more and more young producers not staying on the place.

And it was a problem that Kristi Noem asked me as lieutenant governor to try and address and a few things we've done.

It was really tough to imagine.

And at that time, she had made me interim secretary of AG, trying to figure out how government has can have a role in that, to have move the needle and have an effect.

And what we did do, we started we kind of formed a partnership with a program called Keep Farmers Farming, and it was started by a bank and a group of people that provide resources and counsel to young farmers for family transitions, and in helping families put together a plan for the parents to be able to pass the that ranch or or farm on to their offspring and their kids and, and do it in a way that takes a lot of pressure off them and gives them a lot of foundation on how to do it and how to make it work right.

In addition to that, one thing that I've already talked about was rural broadband, because we always talk about how to save the small family farm.

Well, in this, this day and age, everything is getting larger all the time.

Whether it's box stores, you know, the mom and pop groceries stores are out of business and the farm and ranch are kind of the same.

They keep getting bigger.

But if you want to protect and provide opportunity for small family farms, having rural access to high speed internet in these rural areas, in ag land in South Dakota, for the housewife to run a business out of the living room is a huge benefit, potentially in helping them to survive on a small family farm.

You mentioned limited regulation and a small business sense for South Dakota.

Is there a regulatory piece where we might improve a situation for smaller farms or farms in general, farms and ranches?

Well, I'd say from my experience, the small farms and ranches have been you know, the government regulation has not been a huge issue for them.

And especially, you know, when we combine the Department of AG and Natural Resources with the Department of Environment, Department of AG, with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, you know, a lot of people question that move.

But the father we went into that, the more I think it was really a wise move for a state like South Dakota for a number of reasons.

I've always said that environmentalist, the farmers and ranchers are the true environmentalists, especially in a state like South Dakota were 95% of our land is owned by family farms.

Nobody has a more vested interest in protecting our natural resources and and promoting.

Promoting sustainable agriculture than our farmers and ranchers who've owned that land and run it for generations and plan to for the next few generations.

And so that also adds incentive for common sense in the way regulations are applied when, when they're doing testing or whatever on, on site in ag operations.

They're, they're not looking for ways to ding the producer.

They're there to help educate them and help them understand why they're doing what they're doing and how that benefits them.

Different perspective.

I want to shift to a rural health care question.

The baby boom generation is aging.

Experts are saying we're approaching a scenario where the demand for long term elder care and nursing homes is going to exceed the staffing, supply and other resources like this.

And this is already true in a lot of rural areas.

Is there a way for South Dakota state government to ensure that citizens are able to age in their home communities?

Well, that's you know, it's a tough question for a governor to answer.

You know, we take it one, one day at a time as far as the problems that we're faced with and how best to address them.

I don't know a real good answer to that.

I don't know if there is a pad answer.

We just try, try and take it as it comes and prepare for those eventualities.

What I've said many times is when issues like that come forward is the one thing that I've learned, and that I take advantage of is the power to convene.

You know, I don't have the answers, but I know how to put people that do have answers and and better ideas together at a table and to talk through and come up with proposals and concepts and ideas that that will move the needle.

And I've done that a lot in my career.

We're hearing about regionalization being a potential solution in rural health care.

I think that's part of the rural health transformation program, at least as far as maternal health care goes.

Emergency services, I guess, are there.

How do you balance that or how?

Well, you know, it's a great reminder of one of the things should have been part of my answer.

That's, you know, exciting for the future of South Dakota.

It was the rural health transformation dollars that we're receiving this year.

We qualified for $189 million.

For this year.

We'll have something over half $1 billion in the next five years.

That provides a huge opportunity to to look into all a whole myriad of issues in the medical field and our elderly population and solutions for that ongoing.

In my last couple of questions.

I have the sense that many South Dakotans are frustrated with the government they feel is not serving their needs, and that can be why calling someone a career politician has become sort of an attack, and part of why identifying as a political outsider might be effective.

How can you make state government more relevant to every South Dakotans?

How can you communicate how it impacts people?

Yeah.

You know, it's interesting because I've heard that through this campaign.

I've heard Mr.

Doeden trying to make hay out of that career politician, that I haven't made a living off the ranch for 20 years.

And again, just such a warped viewpoint.

I was in the legislature, I did the math.

I was in the legislature for 16 years, so he called me a career politician.

During that time, I served 38 days a year, was my career for the year, I'd go to pier and live for 38 days and we'd pass the laws, and then we went home and lived with those laws for the other nine and a half months out of the year, and I, I, I got paid a total of $6,000 a year for being in the legislature.

So it didn't even cover my gas bill for the year, the miles that I drove for the legislature.

So in 16 years, two months, a year, that was less than three years of actual full time experience.

During that time, I was raising a family and operating a ranch and farm in western South Dakota and living with the laws that I passed.

And if we didn't get something right, then we'd go back to Pierre in the next year and we'd fix it.

And we understood better than any state in the Union what good process, what good law should look like, because we lived with them.

And that's what one of the things that South Dakota does right is a citizen's legislature.

So so to say that somehow makes him more qualified.

The guy didn't even register.

He never voted in a Republican primary until the last two years.

And somehow he thinks he's more qualified to be governor than than I am.

I think that's fairly laughable.

But for voters who don't see the relevance, if they're not a state employee or in the prison system or any number of things, is there a space to clarify that?

Well, and that's why that's why it's good to take opportunities to clarify it because it plays well.

But when you look at the reality of of people that serve, the people that serve in the legislature have served with, I don't know how many hundreds.

They really have a heart for service, and they're doing it for the right reasons.

And and so you got to commend them for it.

And if people understood that the kind of sacrifice that they make to serve in those positions, they'd have a different vantage, a different perspective, a different view of those legislators.

My last question for you, governor.

We know that President Donald Trump has really commanded the attention in the Republican Party for the last decade or so.

He's now midway through his second term as president.

Where do you see or what do you think will shape the future of the Republican Party?

Well.

The National Party or the state party?

Let's go both.

Well, the state party.

Well, I'll talk about the National party.

You know, Trump, I've supported Trump and reminded me of when he served the first term that I reminded people all the time, you know, quit listening to what he says and see what he's accomplished and what he's doing.

And so he it's it's hard to ignore some of the rhetoric, but he's done some pretty good things.

And I think the future of the party will be largely determined by who how these next the midterm elections go and then the next presidential election goes.

And I give you a lot clearer view than what I think.

But it's I wouldn't even venture to predict that in South Dakota.

We've we've went through, you know, because of some of that national undertow.

It's had a lot of influence, I think, in South Dakota, where with some of the attitudes in, in and I think that that the thing is, I think we're a lot more stable in South Dakota and we've had some kind of choppy waters.

But that's one of the reasons that I think that that I know in my heart that I'm right guy for the job because Kristi, when Kristi was governor, I thought she did a great job.

She we she was the toughest person I know, and she was the right person for the job.

When we were going through Covid and going through some tough issues and she stood strong.

She was the right person for the job then, but she did.

As she built a national profile, it created more choppy waters in South Dakota, a little more dissension division.

And I really felt by the time I took the reins, I really felt like I had the disposition and was equipped to help calm those waters.

And I think I did, and I think I was the right guy for the job when she left.

And so we've we've come a long way just in the last 17 months of getting things back on track.

And I think that will continue for the next period of time.

South Dakota I've always said we do a lot of things right in South Dakota.

And our process, our political process is one of them.

Sometimes we'll get a little off track, but the ship always has a way of writing itself, and we're in the process right now of the ship writing itself in South Dakota.

And I want to continue that.

Governor, I want to thank you for taking the time with us today.

Thank you.

You've been watching our conversations with the remaining Republican candidates for South Dakota governor.

The runoff election for registered Republicans is July 28th.

The winner faces Democratic candidate for governor Dan Ahlers, in November general election.

Stay tuned to SDPB news on Instagram and Facebook for ongoing coverage.

And for further political analysis, check out our Dakota Political Junkies podcast with Lori Walsh wherever you get your podcasts.

This program is also available online at sdpb.org For all of us here at and South Dakota Newswatch, I'm Jackie Hendry.

Thank you for watching.