A 2022 view looking up into the South Dakota Capitol dome in Pierre. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight)
PIERRE, S.D. (South Dakota Searchlight) – South Dakota lawmakers failed Monday to reach the two-thirds majority needed to override Gov. Larry Rhoden’s vetoes of a lab-grown meat ban and regulations on non-medical home care providers.
The lab-grown meat bill would have classified the products as adulterated food, effectively banning their sale in the state. Rhoden argued in his veto message last month that South Dakota should not ban products simply because some people dislike them. He also warned of legal concerns raised by lawsuits against similar bans in other states.
Rhoden instead supported a compromise bill that imposed a five-year moratorium on lab-grown meat in South Dakota. He signed that bill into law on March 11.
On Monday, which was the day set aside to consider the governor’s vetoes at the Capitol in Pierre, the lab-grown meat ban died in the House of Representatives. The override vote was 32-32 with six members absent, which fell short of the 47-vote threshold and made Senate consideration unnecessary.
Lesterville Republican Rep. Julie Auch sponsored the vetoed bill. She told House colleagues that livestock production is a way of life in South Dakota.
“It’s wholesome meat raised the way God intended,” Auch said. She described lab-grown meat as a threat to replace the cattle industry.
The other bill Rhoden vetoed would have required licenses for non-medical home care agencies and created penalties for violations.
Rhoden explained his veto in a letter last week, saying the regulations in the bill are too broad and create a false sense of consumer protection because the state Department of Health doesn’t have the authority to examine or verify the background checks required in the bill. A representative with the state Department of Health opposed the bill during legislative committee hearings.
Rhoden also said he directed the department to work with stakeholders on a better framework “that provides meaningful protections without placing unnecessary burdens on those who provide essential services.”
Brookings Republican Rep. Mellissa Heermann, the bill’s sponsor, argued Monday that Rhoden’s veto overstated the bill’s reach and ignored how much the bill had already been narrowed through talks with stakeholders and the Department of Health.
She and others said the measure was a basic consumer-protection bill for elderly and other vulnerable people receiving non-medical care at home, requiring things like liability insurance and a background check.
Heermann said the Department of Health could work out implementation details through the rulemaking process.
“They have within their ability, right now, to correct any problems that they perceive,” she said.
The House’s override vote was 36-27 with seven members absent, falling short of the required 47 votes and ending the bill’s journey without the need for Senate consideration of the veto.
The Legislature finished the rest of its work earlier this month. The conclusion of Veto Day brings the 2026 legislative session to an end.
Comments