PIERRE, S.D. (KELO) — This story has been updated on March 22
There have been a total of 16 bills filed that concern the topic of marijuana in South Dakota.
These include 10 bills out of the South Dakota House, and six out of the Senate.
HB 1053: An Act to prohibit the issuance of a written certification to a pregnant woman or breastfeeding mother for purposes of medical cannabis use.
This bill, introduced by Republican Rep. Fred Deutsch, seeks to add language to SDCL 34-20G-1, which blocks medical practitioners from recommending that a women receive a medical cards if they are pregnant or breastfeeding.
This is done by changing the definition of a “qualifying patient” from ‘a person who has been diagnosed by a practitioner as having a debilitating medical condition’ to ‘a person other than a woman who is pregnant or breastfeeding who has been diagnosed by a practitioner as having a debilitating medical condition.
This bill received its first reading in the House on January 11, 2023, and was referred to the House Health and Human Services committee.
On Jan. 25, the bill was amended in the House after passing the House Health and Human Services Committee, adding a clarification at the end of the bill.
The bill was read in the Senate and assigned to Senate Health and Human Services. Here, it passes 6-0 on March 1, 2023. I was certified uncontested, and placed on the consent calendar.
Bills are placed on the consent calendar when they face no opposition in committees. Once they reach the floor, they can then be voted upon as a package of bills, with members voting yes or no on the collection of bills as a whole. Members can also request a bill be removed from consent and debated on its own.
The bill passes in consent in the Senate on March 2, on 31-0 vote.
It was signed by the Speaker on March 6, by the President of the Senate on March 7, and delivered to Governor Noem the same day.
On March 23, Noem signed the bill into law.
In some states, governors must sign each bill for it to become law. They may also veto bills in order to kill them, and bills not signed after a certain amount of time are automatically vetoed. In South Dakota, the opposite is true. Bills transferred to the governor within the session that are not signed or vetoed within 5-days (excluding weekends and holidays) automatically pass into law without the need of signature. If the bill is sent to the governor within 5-days of the end of the session, the governor has 15 days (excluding holidays and weekends) following adjournment of the session to act on a bill before it becomes law without signature.
HB 1097: An Act to revise the definition of an abused or neglected child.
Introduced by Deutsch, this bill would amend existing law to state that any parent, guardian or custodian who “negligently or intentionally” allows a child to inhale, ingest, contact or access marijuana without a medical certification will have committed neglect or abuse.
Referred to House Judiciary on January 19, the bill was tabled on Jan. 25 in a 13-0 vote.
HB 1102: An Act to clarify and modify requirements related to the medical cannabis program.
This bill, adds extensive certification of a patient’s history, condition and treatment, which practitioners would be required to submit to the DOH prior to recommending the use of medical marijuana.
The bill was introduced in the House on January 20, 2023, and has not yet been assigned to a committee.
On Jan. 25, this bill was withdrawn by its sponsor, Rep. Deutsch.
HB 1129: An Act to modify and establish provisions related to medical cannabis.
Another bill by Deutsch, this bill would add the same certifications to state law as in HB 1102.
This bill was read in the House on Jan. 25, and referred to House Health and Human Services.
On Feb. 7, the House HHS committee heard the bill, passing it 9-4 vote.
The next day the bill was heard on the House floor, where it faced strong resistance and criticism from fellow republicans on the grounds that it was redundant, over-regulates the industry and would limit access to patients. The bill passed on a narrow margin; 37-30.
Moving over to the Senate, the bill was assigned to Senate Health and Human Services, where it received a hearing on Feb. 22.
A ‘do pass’ motion was made, but nobody was willing to provide a second, causing the motion to fail. A motion to defer the bill to the 41st day was made, and passed 4-2, killing the bill.
Following the deferment of the bill, a motion to reconsider was passes in the committee on Feb. 27. On March 1, the committee opted to table the bill.
HB 1132: An Act to revise provisions regarding the duties of the medical marijuana oversight committee.
Yet another of Deutsch’s marijuana focused bills, HB 1132 would require the Medical Marijuana Oversight Committee (MMOC) to evaluate and make recommendations on medical and clinical aspects of the medical cannabis program.
It was heard in House Health and Human Services on Feb. 2, where it passed 13-0 and was placed on consent. It passed the House the next day with only Republican Rep. Tina Mulally opposing.
Following this bill’s passage in the House, it was heard by Senate Health and Human Services on Feb. 22, where it was passed 5-0 and placed on the consent calendar. On February 23, it was passed unanimously by the Senate.
The bill was signed by the Speaker on Feb. 24, and by the President on Feb. 27. It was sent to Noem on Feb. 28, and she signed the bill into law on March 6.
HB 1150: An Act to provide a medical cannabis patient a registry identification card fee waiver in certain circumstances.
HB 1150, also introduced by Deutsch, seeks to waive the state’s application fee for a medical card in the event that a practitioner conducts a follow-up assessment with a patient, within sixty days of the of the initial certification. This would prevent the patient from paying double fees.
This bill was passed unanimously by House Health and Human Services on Feb. 2. It was passed next by the House at large on Feb. 3, with only Rep. Mulally opposing.
This bill followed the same path as HB 1132 in the Senate, landing in Senate Health and Human Services, where it was passed 5-0 on Feb. 22 and placed on the consent calendar. It was passed unanimously by the Senate the next day.
Following signatures by the Speaker and President on Feb. 24 and 27, respectively, the bill was sent to Noem on Feb. 28, and signed into law on March 6.
HB 1154: An Act to modify acceptable conduct for practitioners related to medical cannabis.
This bill, brought by Republican Reps. Jess Olson and Greg Jamison, would charge practitioners with a Class 2 misdemeanor for offering discounts or deals for making appointments to be certified for the use of medical marijuana, conduct an appointment in a space licensed for alcohol sales, or charges a patient based on the term of a written certification issued to the patient.
This bill was referred to House Health and Human Services on Jan. 26, and on Feb. 9, it passed the the committee 11-2. Four days later, it was passed by the House at large on a 61-6 vote.
It was referred to Senate Health and Human Services, and was passed by the committee 5-0 on Feb. 27. It reached the Senate, but on Feb. 28, it was deferred to another day.
On March 1, the Senate amended the bill, clarifying language without substantively changing the bill. The Senate then passed the amended version of the bill 32-2.
On March 6, the House concurred with the Senate’s amendment of the bill, passing it again, this time 65-3.
The bill was signed by the Speaker and President on March 7 and 8, and was delivered to Noem on March 8. It was signed into law on March 23.
HB 1172: An Act to require a practitioner’s medical assessment of a patient to occur in a licensed health care facility for purposes of medical cannabis use.
A seventh marijuana bill introduced by Deutsch, this one would require practitioners recommending the use of medical marijuana to provide the name and address of the facility where the assessment took place.
The bill also includes an addition requiring these assessments to take place in a health care facility licensed under chapter 34-12.
Under this chapter, a health care facility is defined as:
…any institution, birth center, ambulatory surgery center, chemical dependency treatment facility, hospital, nursing facility, assisted living center, rural primary care hospital, adult foster care home, inpatient hospice, residential hospice, freestanding emergency care facility, community living home, rural emergency hospital, place, building, or agency in which any accommodation is maintained, furnished, or offered for the hospitalization, nursing care, or supervised care of the sick or injured.
34-12-1.1 (4)
This bill was referred to House Health and Human Services on Jan. 26, and received its first hearing on Feb. 7, where it was amended to add specific types of healthcare facilities which would qualify.
The bill passed the committee on a 10-2 vote, then the House on a 47-21 vote. It landed in Senate Health and Humans Services, where it was amended again, removing dental and optometry facilities from those allowed, and adding a section to allow for the home assessment of those confined to their homes.
This amendment was approved, and then the bill was killed, a 4-1 vote sending it to the 41st day.
*HB 1226 Originally titled ‘An Act to accommodate legislation related to delta-8 and delta-10 tetrahydrocannabinol products,’ HB 1226, initially brought by Democrat Rep. Oren Lesmeister was completely restructured by Republican Rep. Rocky Blare.
Note: Prime sponsor on this bill was changed to Blare at the request of Lesmeister, who remains a co-sponsor.
In the new version pushed by Blare, the bill calls for an amendment to state law in order to “establish labeling, marketing, packaging, and testing requirements and procedures for delta-8 and delta-10 tetrahydrocannabinol products, and other hemp-derived psychoactive compounds.”
The bill also includes an emergency clause, stating that it is necessary “for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety.”
This bill was referred to House State Affairs, and received its first hearing Feb. 6, where it was amended again, changing from ‘An Act to accommodate legislation related to delta-8 and delta-10 tetrahydrocannabinol products,’ to ‘An Act to regulate industrial hemp-derived delta-8 and delta-10 tetrahydrocannabinol products, and other hemp-derived psychoactive compounds, and to declare an emergency.’
In this new form, the bill would require the DOH to make rules to ensure that hemp contains an allowable amount of THC, establish labeling requirements for industrial hemp products, as well as marketing, packaging and testing requirements for delta 8 and delta 10 products.
On Feb. 8, the HSA committee passed the amended version of the bill unanimously. It passed the House 48-22 on Feb. 21, and was assigned to Senate Health and Human Services.
The Senate committee heard the bill and voted to pass it on March 1 on a vote of 5-1.
On March 2, the bill was deferred by the Senate to another day, and on March 6, the chamber voted to table the bill 28-7.
Note: While this bill does not deal specifically with marijuana, it does deal with substances directly related to marijuana, which is why it is included. Delta 8 and 10 tetrahydrocannabinol are derived from hemp as opposed to delta 9 tetrahydrocannabinol, which is derived from the marijuana plant. Both are members of the cannabis family, and all three substances can produce similar psychoactive responses. For a more in-depth breakdown of the differences between marijuana, delta 8 and delta 10 (as well as hemp and CBD), click here.
This justification also applies to a few other bills below. These bills will be marked with an asterisk*.
HB 1236: An Act to regulate tetrahydrocannabinol for medical use.
Introduced by Republican Rep. Sue Peterson, this bill seeks to add a provision allowing a medical cannabis establishment to transfer both marijuana and hemp simultaneously.
The bill would also require industrial hemp licensees producing, selling, distributing or transporting delta 8, delta 9 or delta 10 to register with the Dept. of Health as a medical cannabis establishment.
Last of all, the bill will also require the DOH to create rules governing establishments dealing with delta 8, delta 9 and delta 10.
This bill was referred to House State Affairs on Feb. 2, and was tabled in a 10-0 vote on Feb. 8.
SB 1: An Act to modify debilitating medical conditions for medical cannabis use.
Introduced by Sen. Erin Tobin (R-Winner) and Reps. Ernie Otten (R-Tea) and Taylor Rehfeldt (R-Sioux Falls) at the request of the Medical Marijuana Oversight Committee.
This bill seeks to amend the list of debilitating medical conditions for medical cannabis use laid out in SDCL 34-20G-1, and remove the ability of the Department of Health to add conditions.
The bill would add the following qualifying conditions:
- Acquired immune deficiency syndrome
- HIV
- Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
- Multiple sclerosis
- Cancer or its treatments, if associated with severe or chronic pain, nausea or severe vomiting, or cachexia or severe wasting
- Chron’s disease
- Epilepsy or seizures
- Glaucoma
- PTSD
The bill would also remove the ability of South Dakota residents to petition the DOH to add a serious condition or treatment to the list, as the DOH would no longer have the power to do so.
By removing the ability of the DOH to add conditions to the list, a bill would need to be passed to add any further conditions.
This bill received its first reading in the Senate on January 10, 2023, and was referred to the Senate Health and Human Services committee.
Following both proponent and opponent testimony on Jan. 18, this bill passed through the Senate Health and Human Services Committee on a 6-1 vote, with only Sen. Julie Frye-Mueller (R-Rapid City) opposing.
The next day, the bill passed the Senate on 20-15 vote. It was transferred to the House, where it was read and referred to House Health and Human Services on Jan. 20.
The bill was heard before the committee on Feb. 28, where it was amended to remove glaucoma from the list of approved conditions. Following this amendment, it was passed 8-5.
Following deferral to another day, the House passed the bill on a narrow 36-32 vote on March 6. The Senate concurred with the amendment and passed it as well on March 7, also on a narrow vote of 19-15.
The bill was signed by the President and Speaker on March 8, and sent to Noem’s desk, where it was signed on March 23.
*SB 27: An Act to place certain substances on the controlled substances schedule and to declare an emergency.
Introduced by the Committee on Health and Human Services at the request of the DOH.
This bill amends the definitions found within SDCL 34-20B-1 to remove and re-write the term ‘controlled substance analogue.”
Essentially, this eliminates a loophole in which the makeup of a controlled substance may be slightly changed to alter the chemical makeup.
The bill also amends the definition of a practitioner, and states that tetrahydrocannabinol derived from hemp must be derived either from industrial hemp, or be in a product approved by the U.S. FDA.
There is an emergency clause in this bill that would see it enacted immediately upon it being signed by the Governor if it were to pass the legislature, rather than it taking effect in July.
The bill was read in the Senate on January 10, 2023, and was referred to the Senate Health and Human Services committee.
On Jan. 18, SB 27 was heard in a meeting of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee. Proponent testimony was given by the Department of Health, and the bill received no opposition and few questions. The bill passed through the committee on a ‘do-pass’ motion with a vote of 7-0.
The Senate at large passed the bill on Jan. 19. It next passed through House Health and Human Services on Jan. 26, then cleared the House at large on Jan. 30.
Following signature by the Senate President and House Speaker, the bill was delivered to the desk of Gov. Noem on Feb. 2. It was signed on Feb. 13.
SB 134: An Act to increase law enforcement membership on the Medical Marijuana Oversight Committee.
This bill, sponsored by Republican Sen. Helene Duhamel looks to add more members of law enforcement to the MMOC.
The MMOC is currently a 14 member committee, of which four members represent law enforcement.
The remaining members comprise three government officials (members of the House, Senate and Dept. of Health), two medical professionals (a practitioner with experience in the field of medical cannabis and a nurse), a member or officer of a cannabis testing facility, a person with medical cannabis policy experience, and three qualifying patients.
Duhamel seeks to expand the committee by adding a Unified Narcotics Team agent and a school resource officer, which would make the committee nearly 40% law enforcement.
This bill was referred to Senate Judiciary on Jan. 26, and was amended. Under the changed structure, the bill would no longer add extra law enforcement members, but instead specify that the two representatives of law enforcement should be comprised of one member with drug investigation experience, and one school resource officer.
This amendment, approved by the committee, retains the current size and demographics of the MMOC.
The committee passed the bill 6-0 on Valentine’s Day, and it was passed by the Senate on the consent calendar 33-0 on Feb. 16. It was assigned to House Health and Human Services where it was amended once again. This time, the makeup of the committee was shifted to include:
- One member of the House of Representatives who is serving on the standing committee on health and human services;
- One member of the Senate who is serving on the standing committee on health and human services;
- One Division of Criminal Investigation agent;
- One staff member from the Office of the Attorney General;
- One representative of local law enforcement;
- One member with drug investigation experience;
- One school resource officer;
- One representative from the Department of Health;
- One representative from the Department of Public Safety;
- Two physicians;
- One drug counselor;
- One member of a parent organization;
- One mayor from a rural municipality with a population less than twenty thousand;
- One mayor from an urban municipality with a population greater than twenty thousand;
- One board member or principal officer of a cannabis testing facility;
- One person from a cannabis dispensary, and;
- One qualifying patient.
This amendment raises the total makeup of the committee to 18 members.
This amendment was approved, and and the committee passed the bill 8-4. In the House, the bill passed on March 6 on a 46-23 vote. The Senate failed to concur with the House on the bill, and the chambers appointed a conference committee to reconcile the two versions of the bill.
On March 8, the Senate Conference Committee report was adopted, but the House Conference Committee report was not. Also on the 8th, each chamber put forth another version of the bill differing slightly in makeup of the committee.
On March 9, the chambers reconciled their versions of the bill, providing for a committee made up of:
- Two members of the Senate;
- Two members of the House of Representatives;
- One physician licensed in accordance with chapter 36-4;
- One physician assistant licensed in accordance with chapter 36-4A;
- One certified nurse practitioner licensed in accordance with chapter 36-9A;
- One chief of police for a municipality having a population in excess of fifty thousand, or a representative of the police department designated by the chief;
- One sheriff of a county or a representative of the sheriff’s office designated by the sheriff;
- One professional counselor licensed in accordance with chapter 36-32 or one addiction counselor licensed in accordance with chapter 36-34; and
- One qualifying patient.
Signed by the Speaker and President, the bill was conveyed to Governor Noem on the 9th, and signed into law on March 14.
SB 198: An Act to allow medical cannabis establishments to maintain certain cardholder data and to declare an emergency.
Under state law, medical cannabis establishments are only to identify customers by their medical registry identification number. This bill, introduced by Republican Sen. Sydney Davis, would allow cardholders to state in writing that an establishment is allowed to keep info including the cardholder’s name and other personally identifiable information.
The bill was referred to Senate Health and Human Services on Feb. 1, and passed 5-1 on Feb. 6.
On Feb. 7, the Senate amended the bill, restricting reasons a cardholder can authorize the keeping of their name and info to the purposes of communicating info about the cardholder’s medical needs or use of a specific product. The Senate then passed the bill 35-0.
On Feb. 23, the bill was heard by House Health and Human Services, where it passed 10-1, the lone opponent being Deutsch.
After a deferral to another day in the House, the bill was passed on Feb. 27 on a 69-0 vote.
It was signed by the President on Feb. 28, and by the Speaker on March 1, delivered to Noem on March 2, and signed into law on March 9.
SB 201: An Act to exclude delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol from felony ingestion charges.
Introduced by Republican Rep. Michael Rohl, this bill seeks to exempt marijuana from a law outlining felony drug ingestion charges. If passed, a person consuming marijuana illegally would not be subject to felony charges.
SB 201 was referred to Senate Health and Human Services on Feb. 1, and received its first hearing Feb 6, where it was deferred by the committee.
On Feb. 15, the bill was hoghoused by its own sponsor, changing from an act to exclude delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol from felony ingestion charges to an act to provide treatment for the ingestion of controlled substances.
This new version would maintain some of the spirit of the original bill, reducing the penalty for first-time violation (or a second violation within 10-years of a first conviction or guilty plea) of the statute to a class 1 misdemeanor, and making a 3rd or subsequent violation within 10-years a class 6 felony.
Those convicted would also have to participate in a court-ordered evaluation to determine whether they are chemically dependent.
This amendment passed the committee, but failed in the Senate on Feb. 22 by one vote.
SB 205: An Act to reduce the penalty for unlawful possession of a cannabis product and provide exceptions.
Originally titled ‘An Act to require mental health evaluations for inpatient treatment of controlled substance use,’ this bill was hog housed by its sponsor and wound up as a bill to reduce the penalty for illegally possessing cannabis in some circumstances to a class 1 misdemeanor.
The amended bill was passed by Senate Health and Human Services on Feb. 15, but failed before the full Senate on Feb. 22; 14-21.
