Press "Enter" to skip to content

Noem Plays 319 Questions to Stop Hemp; Qualm Ignores Governor’s Ploy

Governor Kristi Noem continues her irrational opposition to industrial hemp in South Dakota. In an amazing attempt to obfuscate the issue, the Governor dumped this list of 319 questions on the Legislative Interim committee studying the potential benefits and harms of planting that new cash crop in South Dakota fields:

Industrial Hemp Considerations

Agricultural and Processing Issues

  1. What will USDA requirements be for testing protocols?
  2. Would South Dakota have additional requirements for testing?
  3. What will USDA requirements be for sampling?
  4. Would South Dakota have additional requirements for sampling?
  5. Will USDA require any processing regulation?
  6. Would South Dakota require processing regulation?
  7. How much information will need to be submitted back to USDA?
  8. How often will state plans need to be reviewed by USDA?
  9. How will USDA ensure states have the ‘resources and personnel’ to run a hemp program?
  10. What will initial program set-up cost?
  11. What have other states’ true set-up costs been?
  12. How will initial program set-up be funded—license fees, general funds, other?
  13. What states are running solvent programs?
  14. How are those states’ programs funded?
  15. How long have other states provided general funds if licensing fees have not covered the program cost?
  16. What is the ratio of personnel to program size (e.g. number of participants) adequate to run a hemp regulatory program?
  17. How many additional inspectors will a hemp regulatory program need?
  18. How many additional support resources (e.g., legal, fiscal, secretarial, law enforcement, testing, other) will a hemp regulatory program need?
  19. What is the range of FTE devoted to hemp programs in other states?
  20. How are those staff broken out (i.e. inspectors, lawyers, support staff, program managers, etc.)?
  21. How have other states estimated program costs in order to set fees appropriately?
  22. How have other states estimated program participants in order to estimate costs?
  23. How will South Dakota estimate program costs and program participants in order to run a solvent program?
  24. Who runs the background checks on program participants?
  25. What additional resources will be needed to run those background checks?
  26. Will only applicants need to submit to a background check?
  27. Will any farm worker that comes into contact with the crop need a background check?
  28. Will a truck driver/hauler need a background check?
  29. How often will people need to submit to a background check?
  30. If a renter is growing hemp on rented land will the landowner need a background check?
  31. Will the state require that growers renting ground have the approval of landowners to participate?
  32. What rights or obligations does a landowner have in the event that a renter is growing hemp on their land?
  33. If a crop needs to be destroyed, what entity (landowner, renter, etc.) needs to be notified?
  34. Will agricultural lab personnel running THC tests need have specialized training or be certified?
  35. Will the agricultural lab be a state lab or private?
  36. How will training or certification be paid for?
  37. Will the lab running THC samples from SDDA need additional equipment?
  38. Can a private agricultural lab in South Dakota run THC samples legally?
  39. How much does agricultural lab equipment cost?
  40. How will new agricultural lab equipment be paid for?
  41. Will samples gathered by SDDA inspectors be able to be mailed to the lab?
  42. If not, how will samples be delivered and chain of custody be maintained on field samples should the crop need to be destroyed?
  43. What methods do other states use to destroy hemp that is above the THC threshold?
  44. What process will growers have before the state destroys a crop?
  45. Will samples that come back above the threshold need to be automatically retested?
  46. Who pays for additional testing?
  47. How soon will crops need to be destroyed when there is confirmation that a grower is in violation?
  48. Who takes custody of the field or growth area once a test comes back above the threshold?
  49. Does a landowner receive compensation for a destroyed crop?
  50. Will crop insurance cover destruction of a crop?
  51. Who will be eligible to grow hemp in South Dakota?
  52. What kind of additional requirements (other than background check) will applicants need to meet?
  53. What role, if any, will the SDDA play in seed variety selection?
  54. How does a grower know that the seed variety purchased is a low-THC producing variety?
  55. What protection or recourse does a producer have if they are sold seed that is a high-THC producing variety?
  56. How are other states regulating the growth of different varieties?
  57. If South Dakota were to also regulate varieties, do we have the expertise to do so?
  58. If we do not have the expertise, how is that expertise developed and what is the cost?
  59. Who is that resource?
  60. How is it paid for?
  61. What is the impact of saline soils on THC levels?
  62. What is the impact of soil PH on THC levels
  63. What is the impact of heat on THC levels?
  64. What is the impact of moisture on THC levels?
  65. What is the impact of humidity on THC levels?
  66. What does regulation of hemp products once they leave the farm look like?
  67. Should there be minimum number of acres per applicant?
  68. Should there be maximum number of acres per applicant?
  69. What are other states doing to manage acres?
  70. How quickly would the agricultural lab be able to process SDDA samples?
  71. What would happen if all samples come in at the same time, but samples must be analyzed in a timely manner?
  72. Would it be acceptable to prioritize sampling and/or testing (e.g., not sample/test all fields)?
  73. Should CBD processing be allowed in South Dakota?
  74. What type of licensing will be required?
  75. Who will do inspections, if anyone?
  76. What do companies do with the pure THC that is a byproduct of CBD production?
  77. Should some type of additional license be required in such a situation?
  78. Who takes custody of the THC processed out of CBD?
  79. How is it properly destroyed?
  80. What is the timeline for destroying the THC?
  81. What does chain of custody look like?
  82. Are there permits required for possessing THC as a byproduct of CBD production?
  83. How do you ensure that the state takes possession of all the THC a facility has?
  84. Should companies have reporting requirements so the state knows the type of processing happening and the amount of CBD and THC produced?
  85. What would those requirements look like and who administers them?
  86. What kind of expertise will state employees enforcing these regulations need to have?
  87. Is there training available for employees?
  88. How is all of this THC regulation and destruction paid for?
  89. What are other states doing with THC byproduct?
  90. Would we allow only certain types of CBD processing?
  91. If so, how do we decide what’s ok and what’s not?
  92. Would we prohibit growth and processing in residential areas/areas zoned residential?
  93. How would that be enforced?
  94. What entity would be responsible for checking addresses against zoning areas?
  95. How would residential restrictions work in areas of the state without zoning?
  96. How is enforcement of residential processing restrictions paid for?
  97. Will SDDA provide timely information to all law enforcement in the state on growing and processing locations?
  98. If so, how will that information be provided?
  99. How are other states providing information to law enforcement?
  100. What kind of education or training would law enforcement need on hemp regulations?
  101. How will that be funded?
  102. What is the right entity to conduct law enforcement training?
  103. What kind of documentation do haulers/transporters need to have with them?
  104. How do we ensure documentation is not forged?
  105. Will processors need to apply to the SDDA for a license?
  106. Will processors be inspected?
  107. Which agency, if any, would inspect processors?
  108. What regulations would processors have to follow, other than hemp-specific ones?
  109. For producers growing grain hemp for human consumption, what other regulations do they need to meet?
  110. Who enforces those additional regulations?
  111. Would there be impacts to other regulatory programs based on hemp?
  112. How are those additional costs paid for?
  113. How will tribes communicate with law enforcement on movement of hemp, should tribal plans be approved?
  114. What should be done with the meal byproduct of both CBD processing and hemp oil processing, as it is not an approved feed?
  115. Who provides advice/instruction to individuals on how to properly dispose of meal byproduct?
  116. How is that resource paid for?
  117. Is there a risk the meal contains CBD and/or THC?
  118. If so, is testing needed on the meal before it leaves a processing facility?
  119. Who conducts those tests?
  120. How are they paid for?
  121. If dairy cattle consume hemp or hemp byproducts, does the milk need to be dumped due to contamination?
  122. If beef cattle, sheep, goats, etc. consume hemp or hemp byproducts, is there a quarantine period before they could go to slaughter?
  123. If so, who is ensuring that happens?
  124. What resources would that entity need to make sure that happens?
  125. If livestock consumes hemp and there is a loss of product (dumped milk or slaughter delays), who, if anyone, is liable for the livestock producers’ lost revenue?
  126. What is the impact from wildlife consuming hemp?
  127. Would a hemp field that is impacted by wildlife (e.g., deer) be eligible for animal depredation money?
  128. Would we restrict growth of hemp solely to open-air operations?
  129. What kind of restrictions have other states put in place?
  130. How do restrictions on growth change the economics of planting hemp, such as input costs?
  131. Have growers in other states been able to access credit?
  132. Has growing hemp impacted growers’ access to credit for other parts of their operation?
  133. What policies have bankers, Farm Credit, etc. put out on lending to hemp growers and/or processors?
  134. Have growers had issues in other states with purchasing seeds or plants from a banking perspective?
  135. What kind of impact has the growth of hemp had on other states’ pesticide regulatory programs?
  136. How would increased costs to South Dakota’s pesticide regulatory program due to additional hemp-related activities be covered?
  137. What third party auditors exist to do THC testing and verifications for labeling of final products?
  138. Are there any criteria to judge credibility among auditors?
  139. How many labs in the state have the capability to do THC testing if producers and/or processors wanted to do their own testing?
  140. Are there standards for running THC tests?
  141. If yes, who has developed those?
  142. If yes, are those standards acceptable for South Dakota?
  143. If no, what are other states doing? Are they establishing their own standards?
  144. If so, what do those look like?
  145. How many times per year will fields and processing facilities need to be inspected?
  146. How long will it take to properly inspect a field and a processing facility?
  147. What sort of specialties will be needed by inspectors?
  148. What sort of training would be needed?
  149. How many inspectors will be needed per field?
  150. How many inspectors will be needed per processing facility?
  151. Will inspectors need to partner with law enforcement to conduct inspections?
  152. Will there be a limit on the number of growers and processing facilities?
  153. Should fees will be assessed to the growers and processing facilities through licensure, renewal, and inspection? Per product produced?
  154. How much would the fees be? How will this be determined?
  155. What assumptions should be used when setting fees?
  156. How often would the fees need to be reevaluated and changed?
  157. Will there be any other revenue streams besides fees?
  158. Will hemp crops be taxed differently?
  159. How will the inspection and licensure information be stored?
  160. Will it require the development of a new database?
  161. Will all agencies involved use the same database or will a different database be developed for each depending on use and need?
  162. What type of operational costs would be involved?Laboratory Testing

     

  163. Will hemp-derived CBD products be routinely tested by the State to verify they have less than 0.3% THC?
  164. What laboratories will perform testing on hemp and hemp-derived products?
  165. Will private laboratories be allowed to conduct testing?
  166. If private laboratories conduct testing, who will regulate these laboratories that perform testing on hemp and hemp-derived products?
  167. Will we require certification or accreditation for laboratories to perform testing on hemp and/or hemp-derived products?
  168. How are hemp and hemp-derived products submitted for laboratory testing?
  169. Will there be a sampling protocol for pre-harvest THC testing?
  170. What will the sampling protocol be?
  171. What testing is performed on hemp and hemp-derived products?
  172. What testing is performed specifically on those products intended for human use or consumption?
  173. Will testing of hemp-derived products not intended for human use or consumption differ from that intended for human use?
  174. If a distinction is made in the testing of hemp-derived products for human use, how do we ensure the distinction is not abused by sellers claiming a product is not for human use?
  175. Will the State perform quantitative THC testing to ensure hemp and hemp-derived products comply with state and federal laws?
  176. If hemp or a hemp-derived product is found to possess more than
  177. 3% THC, is testing repeated, or is independent confirmation testing performed?
  178. Will we require hemp and/or hemp-derived products to be tested for heavy metals?
  179. Will we require hemp and/or hemp-derived products to be tested for infectious disease agents such as pathogenic mold and bacteria?
  180. What instrument(s) and method(s) will be used to perform testing on hemp and hemp-derived products?
  181. Who receives test results, and how are those results communicated?
  182. Will we have labeling requirements for hemp and hemp-derived products intended for human use or consumption?
  183. Will we have a reporting process for adverse events attributed to the use of hemp or hemp-derived products?
  184. How many additional lab technicians would be needed?
  185. How will the additional lab technician positions be funded?
  186. If with fees, what fees will be charged?
  187. Will the fees be charged to another state agency or will they be part of the inspection fees?
  188. What will the process be for determining the amount for the fees?
  189. How often will the fees be reassessed and changed?
  190. Will the fees fund all of the additional services needed in DOH?
  191. What additional drug locker storage is needed?
  192. What have other states done with drug locker storage?
  193. How will the amount needed for drug locker space be calculated?
  194. What is extraction and gas chromatography equipment?Pharmacy / Pharmacology

     

  195. Should the State act to regulate CBD or hemp products in advance of FDA regulations?
  196. How will the State sunset rules and/or statutes if the FDA implements widespread regulations?
  197. How will the State resolve discrepancies between state and federal laws?
  198. Will the State be given wide rule-making authority to have some flexibility to adapt to this ever-changing market?
  199. How broad or narrow does the State’s rule-making authority need to be to ensure effective regulation?
  200. How will the State fund the enforcement, monitoring, drafting of rules, updating regulations, software and hardware needs, staffing, registering, and other miscellaneous expenses relating to hemp, CBD, and THC ingredients in medications and food products?
  201. What infection control quality control measures and testing will be put in place for hemp-based products?
  202. What happens if hemp or hemp-based products are found to contain salmonella, other infectious agents, adulterants, misbranding, or other poor quality control?
  203. Which entity is charged with responsibility for that testing and follow-up?
  204. Who will be responsible for updating the definition of marijuana and stratifying all derivatives?
  205. Will the State determine specific registration requirements for growers, manufacturers, distributors, transporters, patients, prescribers, and waste haulers?
  206. Will the State determined specific qualifications for growers, manufacturers, distributors, transporters, patients, prescribers, and waste haulers?
  207. Who maintains and continually updates regulations as new products become available, and/or potentially abused?
  208. How will the State assess the citizens of SD for determining the ongoing appropriate usage of hemp/THC/CBD or combinations of products?
  209. What are the penalties for selling, distributing, or possessing the various products if they are found to be out of compliance?
  210. How do we measure and determine the impact to public health of using hemp and hemp-based products?
  211. How do we fund the appropriate registration and tracking of sales of hemp-based products?
  212. How do we regulate the sale of over-the-counter drugs versus approval as a legend drug, versus a legend scheduled drug?
  213. Regarding the controlled substances schedules, how do we determine the scheduling language to separate CBD, CBD with THC, when it is in its natural state, or when a product is in its altered state?
  214. How to we distinguish between a hemp-based product obtained from a prescription versus a similar illicit product?
  215. Will we distinguish between Cannabis Indica and Cannabis Sativa, and the products thereof?
  216. How will we distinguish them?
  217. What authority will we use to mirror our scheduling of these substances?
  218. Will we allow pharmacies to dispense CBD oil?
  219. If so, will the products need to be FDA approved?
  220. Will we allow prescriptions of hemp-based products that are not recognized at a federal level?
  221. Will we allow seeds or hemp derivatives from Canada or another foreign country to be used by the citizens of SD?
  222. Will we allow hemp-based products to be sold in nutraceutical products?
  223. What products will be authorized or prohibited for use in the nursing home, assisted living, and hospital settings?
  224. Will we regulate cannabidiol medications which are prescribed by a physician practicing at a university-affiliated hospital or clinic?Controlled Substances Laws
  225. Will both definitions of marijuana (SDCL 34-20B and SDCL 22-42) be amended to match?
  226. If the definition of marijuana is amended to match in both the controlled substances and criminal code, what language will be used?
  227. How will changing the definition of marijuana affect prosecutions of actual drug users and dealers?
  228. How does industrial hemp legislation affect our possession by ingestion statute?
  229. How does the federal government’s statutory language defining marijuana fit into our controlled substances and criminal code?
  230. Will dry weight be defined such as amount of allowed moisture in a percentage? Or will there be a different procedure used to determine percentages of different substances in a sample?
  231. Will the definition of hash and hash oil be adjusted in SDCL 34-20B to further clarify its distinction from other hemp-based products? If so, will it use the term “dry weight”?
  232. Will the definition of THC be adjusted in SDCL 34-20B? If so, will it use the term“dry weight”?
  233. Will 0.3% by dry weight be defined as total THC or just THC (not to include THC acid)? Will it depend on whether it’s a product or a plant?
  234. Will seeds be only available through select companies?
  235. How will those companies be selected?
  236. Will a hemp grower have to show a license or other credential to purchase seeds?
  237. How long will plants be allowed to be stored?Law Enforcement

     

  238. How will law enforcement deal with testing of CBD?
  239. Is CBD testing paid for by the State, local jurisdictions, or other mechanism?
  240. Where does the money come from to pay for the testing?
  241. Can individuals be detained if law enforcement seizes CBD for testing?
  242. If so, for how long?
  243. If law enforcement seizes CBD for testing and it tests at THC levels exceeding limits,who pays for extradition of individuals back to our state when charges arise but the individual was released before testing?
  244. Is it possible to be impaired through use of CBD?
  245. If so, what are the ramifications of driving while impaired under CBD and how is this charged?
  246. How will hemp legalization affect the flow of illegal marijuana into our communities?
  247. How does law enforcement decide whether an individual is growing hemp for fiber purposes or an illegal marijuana THC plant operation?
  248. How will law enforcement identify legal hemp from marijuana?
  249. If complaints are filed on the legitimacy of hemp operations, who investigates those complaints at the onset?
  250. If they are determined to be credible complaints, who pays for the personnel and operational costs to conduct further investigation?
  251. What impact does investigating hemp-related complaints or issues have on other investigations we prioritize (e.g., meth)?
  252. What constitutes reasonable suspicion and probable cause if a law enforcement officer sees a substance 1) outside an authorized field,; 2) that looks like marijuana; but 3) the possessor says is hemp?
  253. If the processor or transporter has paperwork, how is it determined to be legitimate?
  254. Will our police service dogs still be able to be relied upon during a sniff of a vehicle if hemp or CBD products are now legal?
  255. If law enforcement needs to replace our police service dogs that indicate to hemp,who will pay for that?
  256. Who will pay for training of the dog handler, in addition?
  257. Will South Dakota pay for experimental THC field tests to determine levels of THC?
  258. Who will pay for the testing of THC levels following a drug arrest?
  259. Do we have the manpower and resources to test for THC levels following a drugarrest?
  260. Are field tests sufficient to establish probable cause for an arrest in other states?
  261. How will South Dakota establish experimental field tests as legally reliable?
  262. What permits should regulators require for hemp and hemp products traveling through South Dakota as part of interstate commerce?
  263. Who will develop those permits?
  264. Who will train the approximately 1,800 law enforcement officers in the state on those new permits?
  265. Will law enforcement be allowed to require special routes for hemp and hemp products traveling through South Dakota as part of interstate commerce?
  266. What does regulation of hemp products once they leave the farm look like?
  267. Who will train law enforcement on the details about hemp transportation and the regulations set up by the Department of Agriculture or the Federal Government?
  268. How will that training on Department of Ag or federal regulations be paid for?
  269. Will there be a distinction between hemp-derived products for human consumption and those which are not (in dog food for example)?
  270. Who would regulate that?
  271. What would the cost be for the FTE?
  272. Would we have labeling requirements for hemp and hemp-derived products intended for human use or consumption?
  273. Would the State routinely test hemp and CBD products sold at retailers to verify they have less than 0.3% THC?
  274. If so, what agencies would conduct the testing?
  275. Where will samples be analyzed?
  276. Where will the sample be kept after testing?
  277. If hemp or a CBD product is found to contain more than 0.3% THC, will the test be repeated or is independent confirmation testing performed?
  278. What happens to samples containing more than .3% THC after they are tested?
  279. Where is the evidence stored?
  280. Who pays for the storage?
  281. What are the additional costs to law enforcement and how is that revenue collected?
  282. If the product is damaged during storage, who will pay for the damaged product if in fact it’s determined to be legitimate?
  283. Who is paying for the testing of the samples?
  284. Would we allow samples testing at some margin greater than
  285. 3% THCto pass due to variability/unreliability of tests?
  286. If law enforcement allows for a variability in the hemp testing, how does that impact our approach to variability in other drug or substance testing?
  287. Would we have a threshold that triggers an automatic retest? If so, what would that threshold be?
  288. How does law enforcement enforce this if we are allowing more than .3% THC products to pass?
  289. What is the limit with THC amounts over .3%?
  290. Are there techniques to estimate THC byproduct yield based on their crop size?
  291. What type of seed labeling will be in place?
  292. Who regulates how CBD products get delivered to the customers?
  293. Who pays for replacement of plants that may be destroyed in error?
  294. Could law enforcement reliably utilize aircraft to identify hemp fields?
  295. If so, who would pay that cost?
  296. If not, why not?
  297. What happens when a person tests positive for THC on a drug test while using CBDoil and other products?
  298. How will officers determine roadside whether it’s legitimate hemp or marijuana since industrial hemp and marijuana cannot be distinguished by appearance and odor?
  299. How many roadside testing kits would be needed to accommodate the needs for 1,800law enforcement officers in the state?
  300. While officers are detaining people roadside to determine legitimacy, how does that impact lawful detention times?
  301. If someone is held based on the officers discretion and investigation and it’s determined to be a legitimate load, who defends the officer and the agency when a lawsuit is filed?
  302. Will this create unfavorable case law for other roadside investigations into criminal activity?
  303. If so, what is the potential impact and negative consequences of that case law?
  304. When law enforcement is sued for seizing an industrial product that is above the .3% THC, but has the proper documentation, who will defend the state of South Dakota,our law enforcement officers, and where will those funds come from?
  305. What if someone is jailed for the wrong thing?
  306. Who will defend the state of South Dakota and the law enforcement agency who makes an honest mistake?
  307. How do we prevent marijuana dealers from taking advantage of the huge loopholes created by the legalization of industrial hemp prior to the proper safeguards?
  308. What safeguards will be put in place to ensure this doesn’t lead to more legalization of marijuana efforts?
  309. How will we prevent people using a CBD farm for a front/cover for their illegal marijuana THC plant production?
  310. What happens if the state invests millions of dollars to handle the issues associated with all these issues burden and the industry never materializes?
  311. How many FTE for additional highway patrol troopers would be needed?
  312. How many additional service dogs would be needed?
  313. How often do the portable test kits need to be replaced?
  314. Can the portable test kits be used multiple times?
  315. Can the test kits be used year-round?
  316. Can the test kits be stored within the HP vehicle?
  317. Are there other supplies needed for testing? If yes, what are these supplies?
  318. What is the process of testing the evidence?
  319. Do troopers process the tests or are other staff required to complete the process? [document distributed by Office of the Governor, posted by KOTA-TV, 2019.08.19]

Wow—did Kristi Noem ask that many questions about the permitless concealed carry bill she raced to sign at the beginning of February? Did she ever ask that many questions at a committee hearing in the Legislature or in Congress, when she bothered to show up and pay attention?

House Majority Leader Lee Qualm thinks Noem’s questions aren’t worth reading or publicly discussing:

After the meeting, Qualm told KELOLAND why he didn’t pass them along.

“I didn’t see the questions until the day of the meeting. I hadn’t been on my email and I didn’t have the opportunity to look at them. I think it had been sent out only a day or so before that,” Qualm, a rancher, said.

He took a long breath and continued.

“I saw no useful purpose in sending those questions out. There was a lot of duplication in the questions. I knew that a lot of things were going to be answered.

“Some of them we can’t answer until USDA comes up with some of their findings. FDA has to come up some of their stuff before they can be answered.

“So it wasn’t questions that were really relevant to where we are at, I didn’t feel at the time, so that’s why I didn’t put them out,” Qualm said [Bob Mercer, “South Dakota Lawmakers Press for Industrial Hemp,” KELO-TV, 2019.08.19].

As the interim hemp committee heard again yesterday, other states haven’t found the concerns embedded in those 319 questions snarling their efforts to allow their farmers to add hemp to their rotations:

Legislators asked questions concerning whether growers have attempted to grow marijuana or hide marijuana growth within their hemp fields, and how fields that test positive for marijuana are taken care of. In North Dakota, fields that test positive for a certain amount of THC are destroyed, but both North Dakota and Montana’s representatives said they haven’t run into many problems with growers using hemp fields as covers for marijuana.

Legislators also asked whether the department heads have run into trouble working with Native American tribes interested in growing hemp. Both the Montana and North Dakota Department of Agriculture representatives said they had been working with tribes and haven’t had any issues [Danielle Ferguson, “Why Lawmakers Are Frustrated with S.D. Officials’ Lack of Hemp Research,” that Sioux Falls paper, 2019.08.19].

As curious as Governor Noem wants to sound with her hundreds of questions, she apparently hasn’t dispatched her Secretary of Agriculture Kim Vanneman or policy advisor Dani Hanson to actively seek out answers:

Vanneman eventually acknowledged she hadn’t telephoned or spoken face to face to any other state’s head of agriculture about hemp. She said policy adviser Dani Hanson was her department’s most-knowledgeable person.

Hanson said she knew about some things mostly from listening to conversations among officials from other states, such as at a recent multi-state conference on hemp [Mercer, 2019.08.19].

But hey, let’s take a political lesson from our incurious Governor. Next Session, citizens, if you oppose a bill, compose a list of 319 questions about the bill. E-mail that list to your legislators and your Governor. Tell them that if they can’t answer all 319 of those questions, they must not approve that bill.

Democrats, if we put our minds and pens to it, we should be able to use Kristi’s 319-question standard to stop pretty much any legislation.

39 Comments

  1. Kathy Tyler 2019-08-20

    Too bad she didn’t ask similar question about CAFO’s before funding….bribing…them.

  2. mike from iowa 2019-08-20

    Noem neglected the most obvious question which would pertain to the size of federal grant monies available for her grifter friends to grift, imho.

  3. Certain Inflatable Recreational Devices 2019-08-20

    Here’s one she didn’t think of: Why is it green?

  4. jerry 2019-08-20

    The trump recession is here so NOem better figure it out that we need hemp production. Beans and corn are gone thanks to trumpian stupidity so we need another market that is is dependable and profitable.

    ““”During a discussion on bad economic reports indicating that the U.S. may be heading for a recession, “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough first mocked President Donald Trump’s business acumen before predicting that he will cobble together a bad deal with China in hopes of slowing down the economic slide before the 2020 election.

    “I actually heard this on Fox News last week. somebody expressing real concern that the Chinese already know that, for Donald Trump, the only sort of economic trick he has left in his bag is to come to a resolution on the trade war with China to get the economy going,” Scarborough recalled. “Well, if we all know that, then the Chinese leaders know that. Xi [Jinping] knows that.”

    “And so Xi will drive a harder bargain with Donald Trump,” he continued. “And at the end of the day, the man who wrote a book on ‘The Art of the Deal’ while he was losing more money than any American alive will have to strike another bad deal with the Chinese because they know he’s timing all this for his re-election.”

    “He’s going to push the trade war as long as he can and then, as he gets into the end of 2019 or the beginning of 2020, ‘Okay, let’s do a trade deal with China and try to amp the economy up,’” the MSNBC host added. “The Chinese know that, so obviously Donald Trump’s position at the table is going to significantly weakened and American consumers and farmers will continue to be hurt.””https://www.rawstory.com/2019/08/morning-joe-uses-fox-news-report-to-ridicule-trumps-business-skills-in-coming-trade-deal-with-china/

    Trade wars are easy to win, just ask China how they have brought us to our knees.

  5. David Newquist 2019-08-20

    The governor and her Agriculture appointees did not bother to check with the officials in other states, but they put time and energy in this list of silly questions which could be answered in a paragraph or two. Instead we get this inane attempt at obfuscation with irrelevant and redundant distractions. Of course, what is missing is the obvious question: Will growing industrial hemp benefit the state?

    Instead, we get 319 pieces of evidence that the Governor and her Department of Agriculture lack intelligence and integrity.

  6. Loren 2019-08-20

    With Trump and Noem in charge, we better start growing the REAL DEAL!! We’ll need it!

  7. Certain Inflatable Recreational Devices 2019-08-20

    NOBODY makes a list like Kristi. BEST LIST EVER.

    I laughed at Newquist’s observation: “Instead, we get 319 pieces of evidence that the Governor and her Department of Agriculture lack intelligence and integrity.”

  8. Donald Pay 2019-08-20

    I think the questions are fine. I think any state should take a good look at this and get as many answers as they can before they begin a full-blown hemp industry. I don’t think it’s totally up to the Legislature, though. A good administrator, which Noem apears not to be, would direct most of those questions to her own Departments and get some academic research assistance. It might have helped if the beef project had that sort of scrutiny before it ended up crashing and burning.

    Some of the questions are already being answered in other states, and can transfer pretty easily over to South Dakota. Wisconsin is in its second year of hemp production. I think South Dakota could start out like Wisconsin with a pilot project. Some of the questions are agronomic, and probably will require a few years of research to establish good answers.

  9. jerry 2019-08-20

    I think the tribes should handle this as it is too complicated for white folks and especially legislators to grasp.

  10. Donald Pay 2019-08-20

    I talked to my daughter about hemp in China, which I thought would be on par with. She says the plant was originally domesticated in what is now extreme western China and surrounding areas, and it’s an established industry there. She said China exports CBD oil to the US, so efforts to develop that industry here would probably affect the Chinese export of CBD oil. Apparently, THC content is controlled by a simple genetic mechanism, so it’s not hard to control with proper testing and regulation of seed sources.

  11. mike from iowa 2019-08-20

    Donald Pay, I seriously doubt any answers to these questions coming from people who know about this would be acceptable to this crowd of rummies. They will only accept the ones that match their agendas.

  12. Certain Inflatable Recreational Devices 2019-08-20

    Don, you mystify me. The answers to all these questions are obvious to anyone who’s watched life in these United States for the past 70 years.

    For 500 years, all of the sailing ships in the world used hemp for sails. It was cheap, grew everywhere, and was resistant to salt and mildew.

    Since hemp Prohibition in 1938, ANYONE who wanted to ingest cannabis could and did. The silly partition Noem is trying to draw with her stupid list simply does not exist.

    Any problems she attempts to imply have already been dealt with, both historically and in current time in other states.

  13. Porter Lansing 2019-08-20

    Negativity Bias exposed. If you don’t want to do something, there’s an endless supply of questions you can ask that have no quantitative answers.
    Colorado is the worldwide paradigm for how to set up a legalized, recreational, marijuana market. We answered 99% of the questions in a year and a half. State’s who’ve followed our lead are doing well. States like California, who didn’t, are having unnecessary problems.
    Legalizing hemp for ag would be even easier, should Gov. Noem want to.
    Here’s a list (three times as long) of the questions that were answered before our market opened. (The Cannabist is a section in the Denver Post devoted to the industry)
    https://www.thecannabist.co/2014/07/02/six-months-legal-marijuana-sales-100-marijuana-questions-answered/14639/

  14. Porter Lansing 2019-08-20

    ps … I say “three times as long” because of the triplication of questions on Gov. Noem’s list. :0)

  15. Porter Lansing 2019-08-20

    Have you noticed how Pat Powers is changing? It’s true. He has a guru, now and it’s me. I advise him a couple times a week and he’s showing great promise toward moving to the center.
    Today I advised him about the problem of cops not being able to tell hemp from weed.
    ~ Cops arrest both and let the owner of hemp provide the testing to the court. There are pocket testing devices that can tell the difference.

  16. Timothy Even 2019-08-20

    Recreational marijuana is routinely used with thc percentages of 12 to 20 percent. No seeds as only female plants are used. We worry about a plant with .3 percent? Testing kits are a waste of time and money I could help if these people really need to know how to tell the difference. I think that they are really just trying to put up roadblocks as I am sure that our law enforcement people are smart enough to figure this out also. I’d like to ask Noem how South Dakota is supposed to lead by waiting and following other states? I always thought of leading as being first?

  17. jerry 2019-08-20

    #320, How much could the state of South Dakota make with Medicaid Expansion and the growth of Hemp and it’s by products?

    #321, How could small farming operations thrive with the growth of Hemp to help pay tax into the state’s coffers?

    #322, Is a nod as good as a wink to a blind horse?

  18. Certain Inflatable Recreational Devices 2019-08-20

    Q305: “What if someone is jailed for the wrong thing?”

    Q306: “Who will defend the state of South Dakota and the law enforcement agency who makes an honest mistake?”

    How about when the governor makes a dishonest distraction?

  19. Porter Lansing 2019-08-20

    You’re so right, Timothy. She’s the final word and she says NO! These questions are just put together excuses to keep Queen No from appearing to be a Dictator. If the cops can’t tell the difference there’s no doubt anywhere that a judge can. Saddle judges with inconsequential duties and see how fast questions get answered and problems resolved.

  20. mike from iowa 2019-08-20

    Be funny if Minnesota and Drumpf’s DOJ collaborated in a federal lawsuit against Noem and the footdraggers for interrupting legal interstate shipping of Hemp.

  21. Scott Coyne 2019-08-20

    Bill Maher for President !! What a breath of fresh air to know there a still some good democrats in South Dakota. It was a great Show. !

  22. Donald Pay 2019-08-20

    If these questions are easy to answer, then it should be done, and people shouldn’t make a big deal about it. It wouldn’t hurt to put in an open records request to Noem’s Departments to see what information they have on this. Then provide that information to her. If you’re really interested in winning, you have to be in the game.

  23. Debbo 2019-08-20

    What is her angle in this? What is going on behind the scene?

  24. Donald Pay 2019-08-20

    The game has changed. Big ag is getting behind hemp and CBD oil production. Entrepreneurs are seeing an opportunity. Thank Trump and his failed policies for creating a farm recession.

    In Wisconsin, where small dairies have been hit hard and corn and soybean farmers are feeling the pinch, farm bankruptcies are up considerably. Hemp/CBD oil is seen as a new crop that could save the farm. Soy exports won’t come back, so farmers are willing to try to learn a new crop that takes more work than corn and soy. They are also looking at solar, too.

    Noem is likely getting pressure from the ag sector to allow some sort of program on hemp/CBD oil, getting some pressure from law enforcement to stay the course. That’s what happened in Wisconsin. Other states, as usual, are out ahead of South Dakota. They’ve had the discussions over those 319 questions a couple years ago. As with wind and solar, South Dakota is behind and letting this industry go to other states. My thought is she is trying to set the stage for allowing some sort of pilot project. She wants people to give her some cover and I don’t mean from the CIRDs in SD.

    I think the questions are reasonable, and need to be addressed. Other states have found a way to answer those questions, cut through whatever bs there is in them and get a new industry under way,

  25. Mark 2019-08-20

    Dear God.
    The rides in Kristyland are off the rails again.
    The Minnesota truck driver was charged with possession of Marijuana
    WITH the intent to distribute.
    Our Highway Patrol and certainly
    our paranoid Governor are the laughing
    stock of the country.
    Don’t forget to check out question
    #228.
    Yep , South Dakota is the ONLY state
    With that little tidbit. Un Fricking believeable.

  26. bearcreekbat 2019-08-20

    A court should suppress the seized hemp based on the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

    After passage of the Farm Bill, questions arose with respect to interstate hemp transportation and who could obtain a license to produce hemp. Adding to the confusion, a number of Midwestern states seized hemp traveling through their borders and charged drivers with felonies for interstate drug trafficking.

    In response, on May 28, 2019, the Office of the General Counsel for the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) issued a memorandum with key legal opinions meant to provide guidance and direction to the industry and local governments. The USDA confirmed that . . . following publication of USDA regulations for the new hemp production provisions, states and Indian tribes are prohibited from halting interstate transportation or shipment of hemp lawfully produced (a) under a State or Tribal plan or license issued under the USDA Plan or (b) the 2014 Farm Bill; . . .

    . . .

    The memorandum helps clarify the status of interstate hemp transportation and should prevent the seizure of legally cultivated hemp transferred across state lines . . . .

    https://www.njlawblog.com/2019/06/articles/cannabis-lawyer/usda-clarifies-hemp-production-use-and-transportation/

    The memorandum apparently relies on section 10114(b) of the 2018 Farm Bill, which provides:

    (b)Transportation of hemp and hemp products

    No State or Indian Tribe shall prohibit the transportation or shipment of hemp or hemp products produced in accordance with subtitle G of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (as added by section 10113) through the State or the territory of the Indian Tribe, as applicable.

    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr2/text

    This seems to raise the question whether there was probable cause for SD law enforcement to believe that the hemp being transported was not produced and shipped in compliance with subtitle G of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (as added by section 10113), which is also in the above link.

    If probable cause was lacking the seizure is unconstitutional and a court will likely suppress the evidence, even if the hemp was not produced in compliance with the requirements of section 10113. And if the hemp was produced in compliance with section 10113 and probable cause to conclude otherwise was lacking, then a court will likmely find thast the seizure was illegal, the hemp will have to be returned, and SD could possibly be held liable for whatever damages the unlawful seizure caused due to the State’s violations of rights protected by the US Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

  27. Certain Inflatable Recreational Devices 2019-08-20

    What SoDak HiPo do you think has ever heard of “subtitle G of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (as added by section 10113).”

    I’d like to see the SoDak taxpayers have to pay damages on this arrest. They’re the same folks who elected Family-Oriented-Small-Mammal-Killer Kristi and who voted overwhelmingly for an increasingly-despicable twitterpate45.

  28. Certain Inflatable Recreational Devices 2019-08-20

    Q228: “How does industrial hemp legislation affect our possession by ingestion statute?”

    It’s true that SoDak is the only state which can prosecute a person for possession of an illegal substance if that person has traces of certain elements in common with that substance in his/her bodily fluids or hair.

    As far as I know, the issue has not been presented to SCOTUS. The argument is simple: I ingested cannabis in a state where it’s legal. I drove back to SoDak, where I was stopped because I was on a highway often used to transport illegal stuff (which narrows it down to everywhere) and the patrolman thought I might have a cracked taillight.

    The patrolman makes further assumptions and calls them “articulable suspicion of illegal behavior.” I am forced to pee in a cup. There’s THC present. I am guilty of “possession by ingestion.”

    There is no possibility that I was going to infect my neighborhood with my internal holdings of THC. I obtained and ingested it legally, but then I returned to a state that holds that if it’s illegal here, it’s illegal everywhere.

  29. Buckobear 2019-08-20

    Is the hemp acreage insurable ????
    Ah, family value$.

  30. John Dale 2019-08-20

    Noem’s treatment of this issue is sophomoric.

    Nearly all of her questions assume a false premise – that Cannabis is deserving of its Schedule 1 status. De-schedule it and all of these questions go away.

    #legalize

    https://PlainsTribune.com/cc4l

  31. grudznick 2019-08-20

    Bob, do you remember that time you and I were headed to Hermosa from Rapid kinda late and maybe with about half-a-beer too many under our belts and you had some of the demon weed stashed somewhere in your car…I know you did…and that county mounty started following us closely? You drove it white knuckled to the turn off on 40 and got us there just fine.

    Expect that scene to be played out much more often now, with the hemp trafficers rolling about smelling like weed dealers.

  32. Porter Lansing 2019-08-20

    Did I mention that CO Supreme Court ruled that pot dogs are unconstitutional? Jupiter Base grudz knows where the coolest heads make the best decisions. Move back to CO, grudzie. 💥 👈🏻

  33. Certain Inflatable Recreational Devices 2019-08-20

    I remember that grudzfecal performed a homosexual act on the HiPo.

  34. Porter Lansing 2019-08-20

    #TeamPlayer

  35. chris 2019-08-21

    Kristi could take the heat off of her highway patrol over these seizures by simply issuing letters of marque and reprisal to her most loyal subjects. I know I await mine.

  36. Mark 2019-08-21

    Question # 320

    You’re an idiot.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.