Summary
South Dakota Measure 29 proposes a statutory initiative that would protect the right of adults aged 21 and older to possess up to two ounces of marijuana and up to 16 grams of marijuana concentrates without civil or criminal penalty. It would also allow individuals to grow up to six marijuana plants in a secure, locked location within their home. If multiple adults live within a single household, they would be able to cultivate no more than 12 marijuana plants. Smoking marijuana in public places would be prohibited. Employers would not be required to accommodate employees’ marijuana use, nor would employers be prevented from forbidding marijuana use by employees.
Measure 29 does not authorize a commercial market for marijuana, nor does it require the legislature to do so. Passage of Measure 29 would, therefore, not result in the emergence of commercial marijuana growing facilities or dispensaries. Instead, Measure 29 protects the rights of individuals to deliver, transfer, or sell marijuana to each other. Presumably, individuals would procure this marijuana through their ability to grow a limited amount in their private residence.
Fiscal Impact
Legislative staff has not developed a fiscal impact statement for Measure 29. The measure should not affect state or local revenues because it levies no fees or taxes. However, it may result in cost savings for law enforcement, courts, and jails, which needn’t arrest, try, or detain individuals for possession of small amounts of marijuana.
Proponents’ Arguments
South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws is the organizer of Measure 29. It argues that marijuana legalization would:
- Lead to less teen cannabis use if South Dakota follows the trend in other states that have legalized.
- Improve the rate at which police solve violent crimes by freeing up resources from marijuana enforcement.
- Lead to fewer accidents from marijuana impaired driving if South Dakota follows the trend in other states that have legalized.
- Lower rates of alcohol, nicotine, and pain reliever misuse among young adults.
- Allow people who have difficulty acquiring a medical marijuana card to gain access to marijuana products.
Matthew Schweich, head of South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws, also told the Associated Press, “I think for me, the strongest reason at its core is that if we’re going to allow alcohol to be legal in our society, then it makes absolutely no sense to punish people for using cannabis because alcohol is more harmful to the individual and to society than cannabis.”
Opponents’ Arguments
The Catholic dioceses of South Dakota released a joint statement in opposition to Measure 29 warning that marijuana has become more potent since the 1970s and that it can lead to mental health problems. The diocese claims that “youth consumption of marijuana has increased significantly in states that have legalized recreational marijuana” and that this is a major public health concern. More broadly, the dioceses claim, “There is abundant evidence that marijuana contributes to a host of problems that weaken the social fabric of society.”
Protecting South Dakota Kids is an advocacy organization formed to oppose Measure 29. It claims that Measure 29 is intended “to mislead voters on the ‘merits’ of legalizing a dangerous drug.” The organization continues by claiming that marijuana leads to child abuse, teen suicide, and traffic fatalities, and addiction.
The South Dakota Republican Party adopted a resolution in June 2024 urging “all party members and Republican organizations to lend whatever practical support they can to assist in the campaign to defeat Initiated Measure 29.”
Discussion
This year will be the third consecutive ballot cycle in which South Dakota voters will consider recreational marijuana legalization. In 2020, voters approved a constitutional amendment that legalized possession of marijuana for adults and required the legislature to authorize sales of hemp and medical marijuana. After passage, Gov. Kristi Noem challenged that initiative in court, arguing that it violated the constitutional requirement for an initiative to only address a single subject. Circuit court Judge Christine Klinger struck down the approved amendment on that basis in early 2021, with the state supreme court later upholding her ruling.
Organizers responded by qualifying Measure 27 for the 2022 ballot. That proposal was similar to Measure 29 this year in that it only legalized the possession and home cultivation of marijuana in order to avoid a challenge under the single-subject rule. Measure 27 was rejected by 52.9% of South Dakota voters.
Twenty-four states now sanction a recreational marijuana marketplace for adults aged 21 and over, and 38 states sanction a medical marijuana market. Although California voters were the first to approve a medical marijuana law in 1996, regulated marijuana marketplaces now exist in states that lean both Democrat and Republican. Each market operates somewhat differently, but some conclusions can be drawn from the group of states that offer a recreational marijuana market:
- Teen Use: A study published by the American Medical Association in April 2024 surveys data from 47 states, including responses from nearly 900,000 research subjects, and concludes that recreational marijuana laws are not associated with any increase in adolescent use. In fact, the data indicate that recreational marijuana laws are associated with “significantly lowered use” among teens. Similarly, the state-administered Healthy Youth Survey of teenage students in Washington State found overall declines in both recent and lifetime use of marijuana by teens since that state’s adult-use marijuana market was approved by voters in 2012. Students also indicated that marijuana has become harder to procure since legalization took effect. These results are consistent with the regulatory goal of age-gating marijuana products, which is not a common practice among illicit sellers.
- Crime: There has not been a significant difference in the rates of violent crime between states where marijuana is legal for adults and states where it is not. According to FBI crime reports, crime rates in most states with legal marijuana markets have closely tracked the national average, while crime rates in Maine and Nevada declined faster than the national trend and crime rates in Alaska and Massachusetts increased relative to the national trend.
- Economic Growth: As a group, states with recreational marijuana markets have not experienced a significant difference in economic growth compared to states without recreational marijuana. Economic growth improved slightly in some early legalization states, including Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Nevada and Alaska, but this effect seems to have dissipated as more states launch recreational markets.
- Tax Revenues: States with recreational marijuana markets collected nearly $3 billion in marijuana-related tax revenues in 2022, according to the Tax Foundation. The Tax Foundation also estimates that nationwide legalization could generate $8.5 billion annually for all states. However, there is a clear tradeoff between generating tax revenue and the other policy goals of legalization, such as displacing illicit sellers and their often violent supply chains. High tax rates create a price difference that places legal marijuana at a disadvantage relative to illicit marijuana. Surveys show that marijuana users strongly prefer legal marijuana products when the prices are competitive but will revert to illicit sellers if the price difference becomes substantial.
- Mental Illness: A 2020 study published by Yale University and other research institutions finds that recreational marijuana laws are not correlated with any increase in mental health disorders. However, the same study finds that suicide rates among men fell 3.3% following a state’s legalization of marijuana for recreational use, even during a time when suicide rates were rising nationally. This is the only statistically significant mental health outcome associated with recreational marijuana laws in the states.
Many of these facts directly contradict the claims of opponents of Measure 29. Assuming South Dakota follows a path similar to other states that sanction recreational marijuana markets, youth use should decline while rates of violent crime, economic growth, and mental illness remain roughly the same.
Despite proponents’ claims, Measure 29 does not authorize any tax or fee, so it would not result in increased tax revenue. However, Schweich has also noted that he hopes the South Dakota Legislature will subsequently authorize a commercial marijuana market if Measure 29 passes and this market could be subject to taxation.