Senator Liz Larson (D-10/Sioux Falls) leads the Democratic minority in the South Dakota Senate.
Last week, Senate Bill 213 — a proposal to expand out-of-school care across South Dakota — passed out of committee but ultimately failed in Joint Appropriations.
That failure deserves attention.
SB 213 would have expanded access to after-school and summer programming for school-aged children across our state. We already have proven, successful models in place — the Boys & Girls Clubs, the YMCA, EMBE, and many other community organizations delivering high-quality programming every day. This bill would have strengthened and scaled what is already working.
At its core, SB 213 was about something straightforward: helping working families stay employed while keeping kids safe, engaged, and on a positive path. In years past, access to affordable childcare and after-school programming has consistently ranked among my constituents’ top concerns. Yet despite that, little progress has been made — and the issue has barely surfaced in legislative debate this year.
Out-of-school programs provide structured, supervised environments during the hours when parents are still at work — the very hours research consistently identifies as the most vulnerable time of day for youth. These evidence-based programs improve academic performance, build collaboration and life skills, reduce risky behavior, provide exposure to career pathways, and disrupt long-term cycles that can lead to incarceration. They are both an education strategy and a workforce strategy.
The need in South Dakota is significant and growing. For every child enrolled in an after-school program, two more are waiting. More than 22,000 children are alone and unsupervised after school. Over the past decade, the number of children without access has increased by more than 5,000.
This is not a lack of interest from parents. It is a capacity and affordability gap.
Parents overwhelmingly support these programs because they make employment possible. For many families, after-school care is not optional — it is a prerequisite to getting or keeping employment. In a state that frequently discusses workforce shortages, expanding out-of-school programming is one of the most practical investments we could make.
And yet, the bill failed.
Unfortunately, SB 213 reflects a broader pattern we are seeing this session: a reluctance to address affordability in meaningful ways. Our colleagues across the aisle campaign consistently on tax relief. But when it comes to lowering everyday costs in ways families actually feel — at the grocery store, in childcare bills, or in property taxes — we have not seen action. The Democratic caucus has introduced repeal of the grocery tax three separate times this year because we know families feel that cost every time they check out. We have also pushed for serious conversations around property taxes. At the same time, we are watching proposals advance that restrict personal freedoms and expand government involvement in private decisions.
That contrast is difficult to ignore.
Our caucus continues to bring forward practical, common-sense solutions focused on affordability, education, and health care — the kitchen-table issues families talk about every day. Too often, those proposals are voted down. Supporting families and keeping kids on a positive path should never be controversial.
South Dakota families deserve better than a pattern where affordability measures stall while other priorities move quickly.
SB 213 would not have solved every challenge facing working parents. But it would have been a responsible step — an investment in kids, families, and our future workforce.
Snooker at the pool hall did wonders for my after school life. The cost was 25 cents a game.
Rack’em up.