Candidate questions: South Dakota Senate District 26
Candidate: Tamara Grove
Party: Republican
Office: Senate District 26
Q. Why are you running for office?
I am running for office because our current Sen. Shawn Bordeaux, stayed seated in the last legislative session when HB1257 was on the Senate floor. The bill was killed in Senate committee by Michael Rohls from Aberdeen but brought back to life on the Senate floor. HB1257 was a bill that would require age verification by websites containing material harmful to minors. This was a simple decision, but my Senator determined that protecting the predators was better than protecting our children.
I am also running because Mr. Bordeaux has been in office for a decade. Out of 19 bills he brought during the last legislative session, 17 were immediately killed in committee. One of the 19 was taken over by Republican Tyler Tordsen, and the other was a Resolution passed previously under a different Senator and was simply up for renewal. In District 26, whether Democrat, Republican, Independent, Libertarian, or Green Party, we have no representation.
Q. What are the 2-3 biggest issues facing your district?
Small town businesses - economic development, workforce development, affordable housing and local government authority. Property taxes and the assessment of land as well as education.
Q. How would you address those issues in the Legislature?
Our rural areas are very small, and some are very poor. We are losing our children to the more prominent communities. As with everyone under the current administration in DC, inflation has taken a huge toll. I will do my best to find solutions for small town economic development, workforce development, and affordable housing, and ensure limited government. We also have concerns regarding eminent domain and RL21. I believe the best government is local government. I'll fight for decisions like CO2 and land use to remain in local hands. Property taxes will be interesting this legislative session if IM 28 passes and the massive cuts that education may suffer. I aim to ensure families have options and can determine what is best for their children regarding Education.
Our SD budget this year is very tight. If IM 28 passes, spending on various services and programs will be deeply cut. A state income tax may also be considered. It's imperative that District 26 has a voice in these decisions.
Q. How do you approach working with people you disagree with while at the same time needing to work together toward a common goal?
There have been several opportunities as a conservative lobbyist in Pierre where I could find common ground with people I would normally be on opposing sides of issues. For example, in the last legislative session, Democrat Kadyn Wittman brought a bill that helped people who were homeless. The bill helped these folks get personal IDs one time at no charge. I stood with her. I've been homeless; I lived in a shelter for a short time. I fled with my children due to an abusive situation. If things didn't go as they did, I would not have been able to return home to get birth certificates, SS cards, etc.
Q. What's an issue voters might not know about you'd like to highlight?
Amendment G and IM 28 are bills written by South Dakota Democrats. Both of these bills are detrimental to South Dakotans.
Q. How do you plan to vote on the following ballot measures/questions:
a. Constitutional Amendment E - Yes. It is good to remove any potential for people to misuse our current use of Him. Voters should vote according to what they believe.
b. Constitutional Amendment F - Yes, it is only for people who are physically "ABLE" to work if they are on Medicaid. This trigger law does not go into effect until the Federal Government changes its current status.
c. Constitutional Amendment G - NO. This is not Roe v Wade. This Amendment is horribly written and will allow predators to pressure their young victims to have an abortion. It will also remove ALL safety precautions for women. It allows for an abortion after the time a baby can survive outside of the womb.
d. Constitutional Amendment H - NO. This Amendment will ensure that grassroots individuals cannot run for office. Currently, we could have a Republican, Democrat, and Independent running in the General election. Under Amendment H, that will never happen again.
e. Initiated Measure 28 - NO. This bill is defined as Anything Human Consumption. There is no legal definition of anything human consumption in SD codified law. It is a horrible Amendment that will take $3.5 million from Tribes and up to $646 million from the State, according to the South Dakota Retailers Association. The two most significant branches that will immediately be impacted are medical and education.
Initiated Measure 29 - No. This measure will make marijuana legal but purchasing it illegal. This is not practical. We have already experienced recreational marijuana in our state. After the passing of the 2018 Farm Bill, bad actors immediately took advantage of a loophole that made way for recreational marijuana. The THC levels in these highly manufactured products were far above the legal limits. And we had no idea who the manufacturers even were. The brains of children are not fully formed. The damage that these products cause is proven to cause psychosis and many other issues.
The cost is estimated to be $4.50 spent for every $1.00 earned in services, according to Protecting South Dakota Kids and Concerned Citizens of South Dakota. We simply cannot afford recreational marijuana.
g. Referred Law 21 - NO. This removes local control from our local government, municipalities, and counties. It is a "must grant" law, which means our PUC merely approves companies not here to provide services to South Dakotans, which the SD Supreme Court found unconstitutional. It also should be known that these companies, like Summit Carbon Solutions, will not educate our local fire departments, police, or any other emergency personnel on managing a break in the pipes.
Stay up-to-date on the latest in local and national government and political topics with our newsletter.
