It’s bad enough that Governor Kristi Noem is wasting $1,375,000 on an ad campaign so bad that the entire Executive Branch is now having to defend and explain the campaign in the media. (Usually for $1,375,000, you get ads that speak for themselves.) What’s even worse is that, where a simple discussion of the facts is enough to justify a major state initiative to tackle meth addiction, Governor Noem is now making stuff up.
The Governor spun this dubious anecdote on Fox News yesterday:
“I was in a restaurant a couple of weeks ago, and a woman walks into this restaurant,” Noem said. “She was high on meth, she had a couple little kiddos with her that obviously weren’t being taken care of, and everyone in that restaurant pretended not to see her” [Todd Epp, “Gov. Noem Takes to ‘Fox and Friends’ to Defend ‘Meth. We’re On It’,” KELO Radio, 2019.11.20].
First of all, unless the Governor saw a smoking pipe or made a friend and whipped out her Walgreen’s pocket meth test kit, she doesn’t know the woman in question was high on anything. There are plenty of people in this state who just look like hell, even on their good days. There are South Dakotans working three jobs for crap wages, moms struggling to get their kids away from abusive fathers, people who’ve been bankrupted by hospital bills and can’t afford further health care. There are any number of circumstances that can explain why Martha and the kiddos slump into the café looking somewhat less airburshed and bangly-earringed than our Governor that don’t involve meth.
But let’s suppose this anecdote is more than Kristi’s unnecessary fabrication of an obvious social problem into a quick TV fiction. Let’s suppose she really did see a drug addict and her suffering children in that restaurant. If Governor Noem really is On Meth™, what is she supposed to do when she sees someone who really is on meth?
The point of an ad campaign can’t be just to provoke a conversation. The real point is to provoke action, not just talk about a problem but solve it. When Kristi accuses everyone in the restaurant of pretending not to see the woman and her at least neglected, if not abused, children, what action is she suggesting she expected them to take? What action should Kristi herself have taken? Should she have walked up to the woman and handed her a card with the number for Keystone? Should she have left $50 at the counter to pay for the poor family’s food? Should she have called the police to report drug and child abuse? Should she have gotten the waitress to distract the woman with pie while Kristi bundled the children into her Suburban and hauled them to safety and a hot meal at the Governor’s mansion?
Maybe Kristi’s anecdote was just a throwaway line, a cheap fiction meant to rouse some pathos to deflect criticism from the Governor’s poor choice of expensive words. But this brief incident illustrates the profound emptiness and falsehood of the whole ad campaign. If we all really were “on it,” doing something about meth addiction, then everyone in that restaurant, Kristi included, would have gone, “Oh no! More neighbors suffering from meth!” and done something about it. They’d have rendered aid and comfort to the mother and children on the spot. But according to Kristi’s own story, none of us, Kristi included, did anything.
Without action, “We’re On It™” is a lie.
Oh dear, Kristi is knee deep in her horse 🐴 doo. Now she’s targeting tired single moms.
As Cory says, who isn’t going to be haggard in S.D. after working your second measly job to make ends meet?
Quit judging your fellow South Dakotan ,Gov Noem. Living in The Land of Low Wage is hard! She just does not have empathy for the working poor. Not really anyone but herself and her nepotistic family.
I thought the same thing when I saw that interview. I actually yelled at my computer screen asking Kristi “so what did you do?!” (I realize that this was about as effective as this ad campaign.)
I think people are just supposed to check the website… You know, the more clicks on the website, the more effective the ad campaign was. This logic is also baffling to me.
I also assume all the meth addicts in the state were just waiting for this website to go live so they could get help – because it’s just that easy.
“And everyone in that restaurant
pretended not to see her”
That would include you Kristi.
And, just for clarification, where
we’re you when this happened,
and what restaurant was it?
Because , I don’t believe your
story.
You Fluffed it for effect.
Notice no one on your interview asked you about your dopey stance on
Hemp , or how you and you alone
have our infamous Injestion law on
the books.
Mark refences the State’s unique felony equating ingestion of meth with possession of meth. Obviously, Noem could have either done her Gomer Pyle impression with a “citizen’s arrest” or called law enforcement to report her observations. Talk about public prevarication becoming the norm – the President and the State’s Governor now publicly model this unfortunate behavior for future generations.
I really don’t think our esteemed governor would be caught dead in the type of restaurant frequented by a family as she described. No minglin’ with the common folk.
Must have been a sleazy, greasy spoon. No serious restaurant would allow obvious drug addicts with dirty kids on the premises and I can’t imagine Noem being in any restaurant that would serve the multitudes. Sounds like a different version of selling the farm to pay inheritance tax windy.
I once saw Kristi, the beauty pageant competitor in a café in Castlewood, so high on diet pills (same thing as meth, folks) that I went up to her and said, “Excuse me, Miss. Speed … Are you on it?”
I think this story is exactly the point of ALL of us as in “WE” (including citizen Noem which she clearly admitted) are part of the problem:
1) We somehow think it wrong to pass judgment on this woman’s (and her children) condition/situation. It’s so much easier to just “assume” she is having a bad day and not in the throes of a deadly addiction which places her children in harm because of the risk of “second-hand ingestion” instead of making an informed judgment. Without judgment, we will never do anything.
2) We don’t know what to do when we make a judgment. Do we ask the mother if she needs help? Do we do it in front of her kids? Do we get her name and pass it onto the authorities? Which authority? And do we know what they will do with information? Will she be arrested and children put into foster care? If we don’t know her, do we at least take the time to ask someone in the restaurant who knows her situation? All of these questions make it almost certain we will do absolutely NOTHING.
3) Meth and meth users have always been a hard case for law enforcement and other agencies (counselling and treatment) because of subculture in which it is mostly used and the corresponding circumstances from living in that subculture.
Do I think this campaign is the panacea solution? Absolutely not. What I do know is nobody anywhere in the country has figured out how to make real progress on it (unlike other addictions like alcohol, pain killers, or opioids). So, what this campaign has done is put ALL of us ON IT and maybe in little ways we might find big ways to make progress.
So, if you want to be part of the solution (even if you have never been on meth, know nobody who has, and maybe even never seen a person on meth), now that we are talking about it, start reading up on meth, review the resources which are going to be rolled out in the campaign, and maybe, just maybe, you might get an opportunity to do something. What it is, who knows?
But, if you stay in your current informed condition, you will never be part of the solution. And you can go back to your world pretending these people don’t exist and it is someone else’s problem.
If Republicans put as much time and effort into actually solving problems as they do into circling the wagons and making excuses, a few problems might actually get solved.
As it is, the Black Hills could be on fire, and Kristi could launch a campaign with the slogan “We’re On Fire!” to raise awareness about forest fires, and the party faithful would praise it as great leadership.
At some point you’d think people would get tired of living that way, but apparently not.
But Troy, this campaign is insulting particularly because so many people are informed, are ready to support real public policy action, but the Governor chooses to spend money on just another ad campaign, and one that only makes us look like dopes to boot.
We know there’s a problem. Noem herself campaigned on doing something to address the problem. What is she waiting for? What is she going to do? Why is she ignoring obvious policy solutions (expand Medicaid, hire more drug addiction counselors) that she could make happen with the stroke of a pen?
CAH, your response shows you conflate meth with other addictions. Ask anybody actively involved in meth irradication. More treatment and programs might work with others. It is an animal of a different species where the effort requires communities committed to stopping the first ingestion and exposing the subculture in which it exists. It is all our problem and we have to be directly part of the solution and not relying on the government.
“There are plenty of people in this state who just look like hell, even on their good days.”
I laughed at that. New state motto? Shorten it for license plates: “We look like hell.”
NoMa’am will go for it.
We? Hell. Noem is allegedly the guv and she sees a potential criminal wandering around with kids that aren’t getting care, she should have done something like contact law enforcement. She probably has a state trooper escort.
She is now a potential accessory to child abuse (if the story is true and I have my doubts).
Maybe she didn’t want to be bothered with peasants.
Debbo, that slogan is only a shade worse than “Better Than Mars!”
Mike, another correspondent mused over the possibility of charging Noem for not reporting suspected child abuse. I don’t think we have a case there, as the Governor is not a teacher, doctor, law enforcement officer, or other “mandatory reporter” as identified by SDCL 26-8A-3.
However, Mark and BCB mention our felony ingestion law. If Governor Noem really had knowledge of the commission of felony ingestion of meth and failed to report that felony to law enforcement, that’s misprision of felony, a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Sure, fine, Troy, whatever. I may underestimate the difficulty of treating meth, but surely there are more practical actions to be taken right now than running a counterproductive ad campaign.
If it’s all our problem, then we have an obligation to take public action. The current campaign does nothing to explain, educate, or advocate for specific action [or] move us closer to taking action. The ad campaign isn’t even taking your first step of stopping the first ingestion and exposing the subculture in which it exists.
She may have seen someone who looked like she imagines a crankhead would look. I see people every day I think might be using illegal psychotropics. I also see people I think probably aren’t.
From a lifetime of opposing the policy putting people in jail for trying to feel better, I can tell you that I (and you, if you bother to make assumptions about folks’ private lives) am often wrong. Often enough that I know you simply can’t make these assumptions intelligently most of the time.
Further, I think she was just bulls***ting us. She has discovered that we have given her a wide lane in which to drive, and she violates the lines even on that.
Bob, you’re right again. To you, I tip that old hat you gave me.
I see people with dental problems and can vouch they are NOT on meth. They can’t afford dental care. So to judge by looks, hell we will all be stereotyped and fit the bill. We are dog tired around here trying to get crops in. Running 2-3 am until it warms because of mud and grease. Googled the interview, how easy it is to target mothers. As mentioned in this article, probably working 3 jobs and still can’t afford anything. A friend said it’s cheaper to pull teeth than to fix them. So let’s not stereotype by looks
New governor.
We’re on it…
Studies show that public health communications that present a problem are only effective when the solution is also presented. Perhaps she should have hired a firm that specializes in public health messaging vs. food and agribusiness.
P.S. I think “don’t” should be “doesn’t” in the article.
I think this whole story is bunk.
(C., which “don’t”?)
Point well taken! You are so right. “We’re on it” absolutely needs to be about individual and community action or this very expensive and controversial ad campaign will just be a huge fail!
My friends’ third grader saw the ad and said it was really sad that everyone was on meth but it didn’t explain how to help. More idiocracy on Noem’s part. Money sent out of state that just states that there is a problem. Even a third-grader saw sat the campaign it not about helping!
Good point about dental care, T. There are all sorts of people suffering in this state not because of drug abuse but because of the abuse committed by Noem’s oblivious policy-making, South Dakota’s crony-capitalist redistribution of wealth up the ladder, and the general failure of the free market to meet basic needs.
CAH: “The current campaign does nothing to explain, educate, or advocate for specific action [or] move us closer to taking action. The ad campaign isn’t even taking your first step of stopping the first ingestion and exposing the subculture in which it exists.”
You are exactly right and for you to think any ad campaign can do any or all those means you have an unrealistic expectation of what advertising campaigns can do. People with unrealistic expectations are guaranteed to have disappointing results.
While general population has a general awareness of the meth problem, it significantly pales compared to awareness of alcohol, opioids, or other forms of addiction. Further, while the general population has known people with alcohol, opioids etc. addiction, they have had little direct contact with meth users because of the vagaries of the meth subculture. As it has been described to me, meth users are the invisible among us. We see them but we don’t really. This even applies to the student users.
Because of such little direct experience, it really isn’t on anybody’s radar screen. Yes it gets lip service but real attention? Not so much.
I could go on about differences regarding the meth problem but it doesn’t fit in a single ad campaign. So, in short, I’ll just state the meth problem requires a different solution than other addictions. Further, your statement it should be about “practical actions to be taken right now.” The problem is there is little data on what those should be. Meth has been with us for 20 years, both the feds and various states have thrown a multitude of dollars and other efforts, and none have been really effective.
All of those less than effective efforts were inorganic (programs, dollars, efforts like most addiction efforts). What is unique about this campaign is it is an initial attempt to try something organic where success will be start with actions from the grass roots, neighbors caring about neighbors, instead of thinking it is “someone else’s obligation.”
Maybe it won’t be successful but nothing yet has been successful anywhere in the country. Anywhere.
The first step for you and most of us is to be curious enough to actually learn why the meth problem is different and traditional solutions haven’t been efficacious. And, after some thoughtful study and contemplation, the next step might be to just try to support this effort in case it is the right type of effort.
Or you can just keep thinking we should do more of what hasn’t worked anywhere and expect it to be different.
Or, you can just maintain your current level of awareness.
Troy, or SD can become the laughingstock of the USA.
I don’t think anyone is saying that meth is not a problem or that awareness is not important. We are saying this ad campaign is very poorly conceived.
You need not get so defensive about it. I’ve had at least 2 cousins in Iowa become addicted to meth. They’ve survived and overcome it, but I’m well aware of the harm meth does, so I am not speaking from ignorance.
Debbo,
I’m so sorry your family has had to face this directly and I’m so glad they have recovered. I suspect part of their success is they are blessed with a functional family who was willing to intervene proactively. Too many meth users don’t have such a support structure.
You have direct experience and given some thought about meth. You are not the target market of this campaign. Nor your family. It is mostly to stimulate curiosity about meth with those who have given it little thought or do not think they have a role in the solution.
I’m more concerned about making progress against meth than what a single person outside SD thinks.
While I think many say they think meth is a problem, the lack of direct action or ownership by citizens indicates most think either its not really a problem or they have no role in the solution.
I’m not being defensive but I am being assertive because I think the attention and awareness has greatly increased. We’ve tried the “conventional” like every other state in the last 10 years and the awareness has barely moved (if at all). In fact, some of our efforts piggy-backed on the federal programs. Now, if it leads to greater curiousity among the average population and at minimal amount of personal action, it will have been very successful. We’ll see.
Maybe it will be for naught. If so, we’ll just have to try something else. We can’t keep doing what we’ve been doing.
Troy, “I suspect part of their success is they are blessed with a functional family who was willing to intervene proactively.”
Nope.
I agree. We can’t keep doing what we’re doing.
Debbo,
Your cousins are certainly the exception then. Their very lives may depend on your watchful eye as I’ve heard it said, the long-term prognosis of a meth user is worse than a person with stage 4 cancer. Whether accurate or not, it does illustrate the long-haul once a person crosses into meth use.
This has got to be the dumbest thing anyone much less a govener could have done. Meth has been in cities and states all across America for years and they are fully aware of the problem. Maybe instead of wasting money making these ridiculous ads with farmers and families saying meth “we’re on it” that money could have been used to put some people through a treatment program. Now the whole state of SD is a laughing stock. I can only imagine what all the tourists that were planning on coming there on vacation must be thinking because I was even confused. Pretty sure they will be finding somewhere else for vacation rather than to go be around a place where everyone is on meth. Tourism is your livelihood stupid and this is the campaign slogan you thought of. Wow not very intelligent at all. In pretty sure right now SD is the laughing stock. Way to go. Not for sure how u got to be govener but someone made a bad call. Good luck living this one down.
Troy, if an ad campaign can’t do the things I listed, then why do an ad campaign? I don’t think I advocated for an unrealistic solution; I advocated for an expenditure that would meaningful results.
I could make a $0.4-million ad campaign that would “explain, educate, or advocate for specific action [or] [sorry, typo!] move us closer to taking action.”
No slogan, no slick marketing, just me using the power and prestige of my office to get South Dakotans to come talk with me and with each other about how much money we’re willing to spend to deal with drug abuse.
Is that a better plan than spending $1.4 million to make the world laugh at us?
The anti-meth campaign claims a relatively ubiquitous use of meth among South Dakotans. It also claims that meth is one of the most dangerous and destructive drugs, such that even one use imperils the user to addiction, health and dental problems, and engaging in dangerous and self destructive behavior.
If both of these claims are true, rather than only one or the other, then it would seem we would see a substantial portion of South Dakota’s population addicted to meth, suffering severe health and dental problems and regularly engaging in self-destructive dangerous behavior.
I haven’t seen studies or statistics, however, that show the addiction and health/dental problems to be ubiquitous, nor have I seen anecodotal evidence supporting these claims. Instead, I hear and read only about relatively unique individual cases.
The only supporting evidence for the seeming contradictory anti-meth claims – ubiquitous use + immediate and devastating harm to even first time users – seems to be in most of the State’s election results where the majority of South Dakotans have repeatedly engaged in self-destructive and dangerous behavior by regularly voting for a party that regularly acts against both the voters’ personal interests and the interests of the people in this State as a whole.
I suppose this self-destructive behavior arguably could be a result of ubiquitous meth use, as alternative explanations for such voting are hard to discover. Even is true, this still leaves the meth claim of immediate “addiction and health issues” unsupported by actual evidence if meth use is indeed ubiquitous in SD.
Where is Letterman when you need him the most?
Faster than a rolling “O”,
Stronger than silent “E”,
Able to leap capital “T” in a single bound!
It’s a word, it’s a plan…it’s Letterman!
Then we could be talking instead about “Math. We’re on it.”
That would support both STEM and STEAM opportunities in the state.
Cory, Minnesota’s AG, Keith Ellison, has been doing a very similar thing to your plan of meetings around the state. His topic has been racism and violence. The meetings have been fairly low key and widespread “listening meetings” in which people of all skin colors were urged to attend. Resulting recommendations should begin showing up in next year’s legislative session.
The CDC reports that in 2017, fentanyl led the nation in drug overdose deaths, followed by heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine.
In the western states however (which includes South Dakota), meth drug overdose rates were the leading cause of drug overdose deaths.
In fact, meth drug overdose death rates were 3 times higher in our region (CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY) in 2017 than those from fentanyl.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr68/nvsr68_12-508.pdf
CAH,
I think what you propose should be your role in the effort going forward. Everyone has to play a part if we truly want to eliminate this (I know it is aspirational and not realistic to wipe it out). Seriously, I like you are thinking about solutions outside the box of what has been tried and failed by the feds and state. Your idea is exactly what I’ve been saying is necessary-grass roots engagement vs. “its a problem for someone else.”
I know it is unorthodox (this campaign) but that is the point. And, why I think it has a chance if people would use this spike in awareness and discussion to figure out their role. A better informed, motivated, mobilized populace will make anything done by the government even more effective.
Regarding the money, we have to not look at just the expenditures on the campaigns and compare them to the current expenditures for the crime, incarceration, lost income to the families, and family benefits. My rough estimates are if we can cut meth use 10%, the NPV lifetime savings is worth literally worth tens of millions. If we are not committed to spend money on pure marketing and awareness, we may as well keep doing what we’ve always done. It takes such a commitment to keep the grass roots efforts engaged.
And speaking about priorities, we still haven’t done the collective soul-searching on how aggressive we will be regarding law enforcement. With alcohol and even opioids (if they don’t overdose), we can to some degree wait for either a family intervention or inevitable intersection with law enforcement. That patience uses more time than many meth users have (permanent diminishment of capabilities). And, if they have kids, they present a unique danger to those kids. Are we willing to have law enforcement make this a priority? Are willing to commit the resources to child protection services and foster care? Its a hard question as I facilitate on it. Right now we are making a decision because we haven’t asked the question.
PS Robert McTaggart sites the relevant statistics why our challenge is meth. When you go into the reason it is our affliction, I’ve been told it is a function of two things. First, the distribution network was formed when meth was made locally (now it comes mostly from Mexico) and meth was a “local grown” scourge. Second, its related to the culture of rural areas (everyone knows MOST everyone) where the invisible among us are an unseen subculture. (I know my second description is fuzzy as I’m quite sure I understand it).