This interview originally aired on "In the Moment" on SDPB Radio.
Two South Dakota legislators join "In the Moment" as Dakota Political Junkies.
Linda Duba is a Democratic representative in the South Dakota House. Jean Hunhoff is a Republican senator in the state Legislature. Their terms end this January.
Both women have served on the Joint Appropriations Committee. They share their unique perspective into the challenges lawmakers face going into an extremely tight budget year.
____________________________________________________________
The following transcript was edited for clarity.
Lori Walsh:
Representative Duba is joining us in the SDPB Kirby Family studio. And Senator Hunhoff is joining us via Zoom.
Senator Hunhoff, welcome back to "In the Moment." Thanks for being here.
Jean Hunhoff:
Thank you for providing the opportunity and have a very Merry Christmas for everyone.
Lori Walsh:
Wonderful. Representative Duba, welcome as well.
Linda Duba:
Yes, thank you. It's always good to be back. And I echo Jean's thoughts. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year to all.
Lori Walsh:
And you just came back from a Christmas party at the White House. Tell us a little bit about that.
Linda Duba:
I did. I was thrilled to check my email last Tuesday, a week ago today, and see an invitation to the holiday Christmas party on Saturday night. So I found my way there, and it was a beautiful event. There were about eight of us from South Dakota that got invited and went.
There were several state senators and representatives there. There were mayors there. There were governors there. There were some of the White House staff, but not many. And it was just, the White House is decorated so beautifully. I mean, it hits you how beautiful. I mean, when you go to the White House, and I've been there before, taking a tour, it's impressive.
But when you see it at Christmas time, it's absolutely stunning. And then I had the fortune to actually meet our president, shake his hand and take a selfie with him. So that was kind of fun.
Lori Walsh:
Senator Hunhoff, have you been to the White House? I have not ever been.
Jean Hunhoff:
Yes, I have been, but that was on a tour. But I've not ever met a president.
Lori Walsh:
Wow. Representative Duba shaking hands with the outgoing President Joe Biden.
Let's talk about the incoming state legislature because this session is coming up here in January. And of course, Senator Hunhoff, we know you were the longest serving female representative in state government and not too many men have served longer than you had served either.
What was it like kind of getting the flowers at the end there and having people say thank you?
Jean Hunhoff:
It's very humbling. My colleagues were just very wonderful, and the bouquet was wonderful. I joked and I said, "This is almost like a funeral, and I get to see the floral arrangement."
So I thought that was really good. But I am so appreciative for everyone that I have met along my 24 years, and I have learned from so many people, and I can't say thank you enough. And especially to the people of my district for giving me the opportunity to serve them, and I'm now going to be looking in from the outside looking in, rather than looking from the inside out.
Lori Walsh:
Well, we are very grateful to have the both of you looking from the outside in for a little analysis on our Dakota Political Junkies segment this week, especially paired together.
You work together a lot, Representative Duba, right?
Linda Duba:
Yeah, we did. And you know, Jean is so humble. She is an icon in state government. From the moment I entered the legislature, I've watched her, I listened to her, I learned from her, and then serving with her on Appropriations was such an honor. And we had some pretty spirited conversations, some good debates, but in the end, we found ways to make state government work for the people, and that's the most important. And Jean really steered the ship very well in my terms there.
Lori Walsh:
Senator Hunhoff, we are entering a tight budget year. We've been through Governor Kristi Noem's budget address. But also we're at the stage where many lawmakers are coming out and legislative leaders are saying, "Hey, there's going to be some tough decisions to be made."
What in your opinion is the impact of the end of a lot of that COVID-era funding going to be on the state budget? Help us kind of figure out how we should be looking at this budget year as we observe it from the outside.
Jean Hunhoff:
I think the first thing is that, and we said that when we got the funding for the COVID dollars and all the dollars that have flowed from 2020, that they're one-time dollars. And when you have one-time dollars, you have to really look at where you're putting those dollars because you're not going to have ongoing funding to sustain if you start any new programs. If you do buildings, how are you going to do the maintenance on that?
And I think what I'm thinking here in response to your question is that we're going to go back to pre-COVID. And there aren't that many people that are pre-COVID. When you look at the turnover that we had this year, and the amount and numbers of new legislators coming in, they have no experience of what it was like before. They only have the experience of COVID and going forward and flush with dollars.
And now those dollars aren't going to be there. And so what's their experience in highlighting what are the priorities and what are we going to sustain that's going to sustain our state, help us to grow, help us to protect our citizens, help us to take care of our citizens? That's a whole new realm in the sense that there aren't more dollars there. So how are you going to prioritize, and what's your process going to be?
Lori Walsh:
Representative Duba, what would you add to that?
Linda Duba:
Well, I would say too, as we talk specifically about some of the things that the governor outlined, she talked about lowering the M&R, maintenance and repair. Jean knows this. We worked so hard to get that up. It's at 1.75% right now. We were trying to push it to two, and now she's wanting to cut it back to 1.25.
That's going to be very difficult for Board of Regents trying to maintain. It's not so much the programs, but the facilities that support the programs that are currently being taught at the universities in particular. It's going to be a tough piece, and some of the work for other state buildings around the state. I look at that.
I look at the 1.25% that the governor said, "This is the raise that you're going to get." We already know what the cost of living is. That's not keeping up.
Yes, we did a phenomenal job in the last four years of catching up state employees, community service providers, our nursing homes, education, the big three, our teachers. To see this take a slide, I'm concerned.
Jean talked about taking care of South Dakotans, and we've got some pretty vulnerable folks that need our support. So what we're going to see is we're going to see where the governor's suggesting cuts. And then what we have to take a look at and say, "These have been ongoing programs. Now these are not new, these are ongoing. How do we treat them? How do we carry that message? And are there some things that we haven't even looked at that she didn't suggest that we can do?" So it's going to be a quite an interesting discussion as the actual budgets are presented to the Appropriations Committee.
Lori Walsh:
Jean Hunhoff, what stood out for you in the governor's budget address? Or what would you like to add to what Linda Duba just said there?
Jean Hunhoff:
What I was going to say is what wasn't there? You look at our low unemployment rate, and you look at the workforce in South Dakota, and you look at teachers, you look at health care providers, and you look at small business. We're all struggling to find people to come and work, and to provide the services. And there wasn't anything about economic growth or where we might be looking in that arena. And I think that was a piece that sort of was a flag for me.
I understand we have to make reductions, but you've got to still have a workforce. And if you have to look where that workforce comes from, we're trying to grow our own. We're doing more with our technical colleges, certainly putting out those kind of individuals that are needed in the service sector. Health care, we need more workers.
And so that's where I'm trying to figure out how this is all going to roll. If you're going to make reductions, then you have reduction of services, and you have reduction of people because you don't need to provide the services. But at the end of the day, you've got to grow South Dakota's economy. And I'm not sure where this direction is going to go in this next session.
Lori Walsh:
That seemed like a departure for this governor in some ways.
Jean Hunhoff:
She has always been very positive about economic development and certainly looking ahead. And again, she had to prioritize and put her focus on looking at those dollars. But I'm still wondering if we make reductions, where's this workforce going to come from that we continually need in our challenge?
And small business, I'm a small business owner, and it's very challenging. And in talking to people, they're having the same concerns that I am. Where are they going to come from? How are we going to get them? And go back to what Representative Duba said about the compensation. I mean, that's one of the biggest factors out there, how you get your workforce, especially when you're talking about professionals. And I'm a nurse, I know what nurses are making nowadays. And other health care providers are certainly being challenged. How do you retain that workforce? And I think that that's going to be something that's going to be somewhere along the way, there's got to be some discussion about that.
Lori Walsh:
Yeah. So maybe we'll start with taxes. Because we've heard property tax plans. We heard the governor call for making the temporary tax cut that has a sunset on that. She would like to make that permanent. So we are talking, again, this legislative session, heavily about taxes one more time. Senator Hunhoff, you've been through how many conversations about taxes, and where do you think this one should begin?
Jean Hunhoff:
You know, if I had the answer, we would've discovered it this summer with the summer study that we did. But again, the focus was more on the processes for the counties, and how they process and how they do the assessments from the property. My question again is challenged out. I don't know if you can do it in a session, to be honest with you. I know there are bills out there. I know that there are suggestions that are being made. But if you reduce property taxes in our current formula, then somebody else is going to have to pick up another group. And you know we have Ag, we have property owners, and we have commercial.
And so if you take something and reduce it for one group, the other two groups are going to have to look at it. And of course the answer is going to be, "Well, we'll reduce." But then I go back to the counties, where are they going to reduce? I mean, if property taxes go down, you still need roads, you still need services to be provided. I don't think it can be accomplished in a session. I think they're going to have to look at another study, and maybe really go in-depth on what that formula should be and how do you make it so that it's balanced so that everyone is paying their fair share?
Lori Walsh:
Yeah. Representative Duba, taxes. Where would you begin? Yeah.
Linda Duba:
What's really interesting in this whole tax discussion is, and Senator Hunhoff knows this, we're a low tax state, and that's fine. But where the governor wants to sunset or eliminate the sunset, which rolls it back to 4.2 permanently. Right now, the only people that really realize a boon on that are people who are buying combines in large, large, large purchases. So are we really getting the bang for our buck there? But the bigger question is, what are we exempting out of sales tax? Now that has been the, don't ask, don't tell scenario since I've been in the legislature. And I know a lot of the things that we do that are tax-exempt are Ag-related. I understand that. I get it.
And I agree with Senator Hunhoff. To really take a look at this whole tax process, we not only need to look at how we figure out who's being assessed what, but we need to understand our whole sales tax structure and what we're exempting and why are we exempting it, and what really makes sense? And how is it most equitable for everyone? We know that food sales tax, the initiative that came forward wasn't the right initiative. But when you think about how do you affect the most people, a food sales tax very simply on not-prepared food would have been the simpler solution, wasn't popular. So this whole thing needs to have, as Jean says, a much broader discussion. And people have got to be willing to make hard decisions, hard, hard, hard decisions.
Lori Walsh:
So Senator Venhuizen said recently on air, that food tax is a dead deal because of the number of people who voted against it. And we pressed and said, "Well, was it the right legislation?" And he felt strongly that that was a mandate to not discuss that. I remember Senator Hunhoff talking to former Governor Daugaard when he was in office, about those exemptions. And he felt — I don't know if I should say frustrated because I don't know what he was feeling — but he sounded to me frustrated, with how many there were. But then I do remember him saying, "Everyone that you cut has a constituency, and they will all feel like you are raising their taxes."
Linda Duba:
Yes.
Lori Walsh:
So Senator Hunhoff, in the realm of exemptions and what we need to look at next, I feel like maybe you've already said it. You're not going to be able to do that in one session, to look at every exemption that's on the books and start really asking some of those in-depth questions. But do you think that the exemptions have gotten, out of control maybe is not the right word, but they need a second look or a comprehensive look? What comes up for you there?
Jean Hunhoff:
Well, over 24 years, I think there's been three summer studies, if not more, on looking at exemptions. And we never got anything done. And I think Linda mentioned it because if you go after somebody, that constituency will come. In fact, this last session or the session before, and I'm at a loss right now, we allowed a tax exemption. And it was like, I argued on the Senate floor, I said, "Why would you want to do this? We're just doing that." Well, it was a select group of people. But I think back to what Linda was saying about the group, it's not only the Ag group, but it's health care.
Linda Duba:
Yeah.
Jean Hunhoff:
If you look at that, they are exempted. And so that's a big focus in South Dakota. And I know that's been raised and in other states. And in fact, I don't know, within the last five years, somebody had brought a bill because in some other states they do tax health care, but then turns around and it goes back to health care. But at the same time, you get your services, you're taxed on it, you pay the taxes, but then it turns around and filters back into the system and goes back to health care. So if it's going there already, why would you exempt them again?
But I think that's the biggest issue is that over the course of time, the groups that are being exempted, once they hear that that could go away, they get very assertive and communicating their concerns. What's that going to do to them? But it's going to take a hard push if that's going to get done. And when it comes to it, legislators don't always like to vote what's their conscience, but how do I get re-elected again? And if I'm going to take somebody's and put them on the tax rolls, I'm not going to be very popular.
Lori Walsh:
Yeah.
Linda Duba:
It's $1.4 billion worth of sales tax exemptions right now. 1.4 billion. Think about that.
Lori Walsh:
Wow. I'll ask Representative Duba first and then Senator Hunhoff. Adding a program like the Education Savings Accounts or adding any program where there's a dollar figure attached to it, that has to come from somewhere else. And maybe this year, there's nowhere else for it to come from. So what were your thoughts on the Education Savings Accounts, and from a policy standpoint, how that would be implemented? Because I know, Linda, we've already talked a little bit with you before the budget address about the challenge of it from a budgetary standpoint.
Linda Duba:
Well, from a policy standpoint, what we're saying is, "Oh, we're going to give you choice." We're going to say, "If you want to sign up for this new program." That's the key, new program. "We'll give you a choice as to how you want to use those allocated dollars." We haven't seen the guts of the program, but here's the kicker. Students already and families already have a choice. You can open enroll and go wherever you want in this state. You can always choose to go to private school, you can homeschool.
But now what this program does is it says, "Oh, if you choose to go to private school or you choose to homeschool, we're going to take those public dollars and give them to you."
And the governor herself said, "We're starting here and we're going to grow this program." That is going to decimate. And no matter what she says, that is going to decimate small rural schools across this state. That isn't what the public wants or doesn't know that that's an intended or unintended consequence. All we need to do is look across the border to Iowa to see what it's done there, and how many school closings are occurring. Fundamentally, we're supporting public education. Yes, we need to be judicious and smart about how we spend those public dollars, agreed. But to say that our schools are failing, and here's another alternative.
The other thing I can tell you, and Senator Hunhoff knows this, because I asked these questions this last session when they came in for the insurance tax credits.
Show me the evidence. Show me your evidence-based data that shows me that students who are in homeschool or private school scenarios do better, characteristically score higher, do this, do this. They do not have any data. Therefore, let's go focus on how we improve our public schools.
Lori Walsh:
Senator Hunhoff, Governor Kristi Noem said and was very clear that she didn't think that program would take anything away from public school districts. What's your take on this?
Jean Hunhoff:
I think it does. First of all, by choice, they can also by choice, accept or not accept students that apply to private schools. They have that opportunity to do that. Wherein the public school system, that choice does not exist. We take all students because our responsibility is to provide them a quality education K-12. So that's one of the factors that I consider that there is differential.
With homeschooling, we don't know anything. The data is not there. We know the number of students. We don't know necessarily the outcomes. We do hear about the outcomes. We'll hear about homeschoolers that have gotten the scholarships and things like that. And they do well, I'm not discrediting them. But they are selective, those that homeschool and the majority of them. But again, I'm just basing this on speculation because we don't have data, that they work very intensely with their students and do that.
But again, is that the state? To me, it's more of a policy issue that we do not differentiate, that we believe K-12 public, and that's where our state and public dollars need to go. If you want to send your child to a private school, that's fine, you have that choice, you take care of it. Or if you want to homeschool, you want to do that. And we have no comparisons of data, as Linda has said, that data is missing. So it's purely on what they're saying versus what I perceive, and no data. And people that I know, anecdotal notes of, "Oh, I know this child was homeschooled and has gone to the university, is doing very well." All of that. I think that's part of it. But I'm more concerned also with what Linda had said about the rural schools, but also on spec ed.
What's going to happen to those kids? Do you think the private schools are going to take those? Because I believe now they're not, and they enroll them then into the public school system. And so at the end of the day, who's the public school system going to have? It's those students that private schools do not accept, and it's those students that have learning challenges that make it challenging for teachers and the teaching, and in an environment, take more time. They're not going to take those students. So what's going to be left in the K-12? A very expensive education because we don't have the numbers to balance that out. And how can we do that, and how can the rural schools continue out there if more of their students are leaving?
I know Linda talked about the insurance and that. When that program went into place, it was like 500,000, and I believe it was Senator Heineman that had brought that forth as a proposal and it was for low-income kids, so they had an opportunity. Well, over the course of time, that has gone from 500,000 up to 5 million now. We're supposed to get an annual report. I did not see an annual report this year. We have had some in the past. Schools can participate, all private schools. And that's the other issue. So far, the private schools have been — I guess, what do I want to say? — the traditional private schools. But you could have another private school that's not traditional that comes in and certainly be eligible for that program.
And again, we have no oversight over those kids. We have nothing over there. All we're giving them is the insurance companies are getting a tax break, and then those individuals are getting dollars to follow them so they can have some type of private education. Again, as Linda said, we don't know the guts of the bill. We've been trying to figure that out. Who's going to get it? How much are they going to get? Some of your private schools are not accredited. So you're giving it to a student. You're paying that school for a non-accredited student. Does that make any difference? I don't know because there's nothing out there to say that we can do some kind of comparisons because data is private. It's their data, it's not our data. So now when we start paying for that, does that mean we're going to have access to that?
Lori Walsh:
We're also having a really interesting conversation about the role, and I'm hearing both of you address it in certain ways. But I want to get right at it. And that is the role of state government. Mayor Paul TenHaken from the city of Sioux Falls recently said, "What I need from the state legislature is for them to stay away from..." he called them, "culture war issues."
I'm going to call them social issues. And Representative Bethany Soye said, "This is exactly the role of state government is to protect families." And so they've had kind of a media back and forth.
I don't want to add fuel to that, but I have found it interesting because we get to decide what we want our state government to do. There are things laid out in the Constitution, but the state legislators and the people who send them to Pierre, get to address what issues matter, and how we discuss them, and what is worthy of a very short abbreviated legislative session.
So this time I want to start with Senator Hunhoff and then ask Representative Duba. Basically, Senator, when those social issues, which are often contentious and maybe don't have a lot of data behind them, but are heavy on the feelings side of things, how do you think the state legislature should respond to some of those topics?
Jean Hunhoff:
I think the state legislature needs to stay out of some of those social issues and leave it to the local level. It's always interesting over the course of time, it's a local issue, so governments stay out. But then at the same time, oh, it's not a local issue, it's a statewide issue, it's in the eyes of the beholder. And we're moving that pendulum is swinging further to the right now, and parental engagement more so. Didn't say that, but that's what a lot of these social issues are.
Is the sense that, well, where do the parents fit in? Should they be making those decisions? Well, I think they should be, but I don't think they should be deferring to the government to make them forward. Because you've got different individuals out there that see the world differently. And because you see it one way, that does not necessarily mean that's the right way that's out there. It's more how can we work together?
But government was never intended to get, I believe in my philosophy, into the private lives of individuals. That should stay out of there. And how I deal with my children, how I deal with the social situations that are out there, that should be left up to me. It should not be the government that's mandating this is right and this is wrong, and so you need to change.
Lori Walsh:
Representative Duba, what would you add to that?
Linda Duba:
I couldn't say it any better myself. I've been reading a little bit about this back and forth with Mayor TenHaken and Representative Soye. In her eyes, it's about pornography, and obscenity and library books. We have school boards. And as Senator Hunhoff has pointed out, we have school boards. They're elected officials. We have administrations in our local school districts. That is their job. It is local control. Parents certainly have the right to ask questions, to challenge the status quo, come up with a different solution.
But then again, they've got to be willing to take their case to those local control groups, and then live with that challenge if it doesn't go their way. The book banning, it's a scary, slippery slope. Many of the books that are being referenced are newer, but many of them are not. I read those books when I was in school.
Lori Walsh:
And that conversation might be different in Sioux Falls than it might be in Murdo.
Linda Duba:
And that's why local control is so important. We are not here to govern every aspect of a person's life or their family life. That is not what we're about. We're here to ensure the public good.
Lori Walsh:
Let's do one more topic before we let you go. In the upcoming session, Representative Duba, what do you want to highlight that you think would be really important for people to pay attention to? What stands out that we haven't discussed so far?
Linda Duba:
What we haven't discussed? Hmm. Well, I think you're going to see several bills come forward on pipelines and eminent domain.
Lori Walsh:
Sure.
Linda Duba:
It'll be season number three, season three of pipelines and eminent domain. Regardless of the side that you're on, pay attention, talk to your legislature. Get the facts. Get the facts.
If you've got an opinion, make your opinion known either in writing, or by calling or going to testify. I think that's going to be important. And then I really think these cuts that are coming up, people need to pay attention. As you've said, we've had plethora of money, but now we're seeing a cutback in services.
Senator Hunhoff and I have been working together on victims of crime. We have a victims of crime. We get federal monies for that to support women's shelters and therapies, and things that people need who are experiencing some of the worst things in their lives. But those funds have been cut in half and are continuing to be reduced.
We thought we had a solution, Senator Hunhoff and I, we were going to work with next year's incoming legislature. We're not so sure now. TANF funding was our targeted, and you heard the governor specifically say, "We're going to roll back TANF funding." TANF funding is important. It really serves people who are in vulnerable positions. Temporary Assistance to Needy Families.
And so, find out what's happening with those services that maybe aren't affecting hundreds of thousands of people, but are affecting, let's say 10,000 people. And how are we going to support or roll back? And then if you've got a position on that, pay attention. Talk to your legislator. And in particular, talk to the Appropriations Committee because that's where those decisions are going to get made.
Lori Walsh:
Senator Hunhoff?
Jean Hunhoff:
I think it's going to be different. I think just the process within itself with the turnover that we've had in both the Senate and the House, with the turnover that you have on Appropriations. I mean, in Senate Appropriations, I believe there are only two. And then a House member is coming over to the Senate that was on Appropriations out of the nine members that has any experience. We are looking at an inexperienced new group of legislators. And so, go back to my what that was like in those first years, how you learned everything. You have your mentors are not there. You've got sort of a division in the Republican, the conservatives, how far right they're going. And I think you're seeing more in the leadership, that you're going to see a far right. And so that's going to make a difference. So the whole process is going to be a little different.
And I think the other thing is, Linda, with a few Democrats that we have had over the course of years, how they've been able to achieve a few of their goals. But at the same time, how do we compromise? Because it's sort of been now coming out there, there is no compromise. There's going to be one way, and we're going to make these cuts, and this is what we're going to do. And it's like, "Okay, is it wrong to compromise to find some workable solutions that does satisfy?" And I'm going to use what Linda said, "Serve the greater good."
That's what I see with all the policies and all the issues that we've talked about. It's going to have to be some compromise. Is there going to be that level? And how do you have all these new people, how do they make their decisions? How do they glean their information? How do they work with each other? Networking.
This is starting a whole new job for a whole bunch of new people that have now come to Pierre, that prior to, probably didn't have much experience other than now coming because there's a dissatisfaction with the status quo that was in Pierre, so we're going to make a change. So when you think about the change agent process and how that works, this is going to be interesting.
Linda Duba:
Yeah, I should have highlighted that. You did a great job of saying what I'm thinking. I am nervous about the newness of the Appropriations Committee and their lack of knowledge of agencies, of dollars, and how the money moves. It's not so much status quo. We worked extremely hard to ensure the greater good of this state.
Lori Walsh:
There are some hard days ahead. Well, you are invited to join us throughout the legislative session and beyond, and help highlight some of those, and provide that institutional knowledge and analysis. So thank you so much for being here with us today.
Linda Duba:
You're welcome. Thanks for having me.
Jean Hunhoff:
Yes, thank you. Appreciate the opportunity.
