On June 15, 2026, The Rapid City Sentinel submitted a formal press questionnaire to both campaigns competing in South Dakota’s first-ever gubernatorial runoff election.
The questions were sent to Governor Larry Rhoden’s spokesperson Ian Fury and to Toby Doeden’s campaign at their public press address with a follow up email sent June 20,2026.
The deadline was today, June 22, 2026.
Neither campaign responded. Not a partial answer. Not a request for more time. Not a decline. Silence.This is not a complaint. It is documentation.
Independent press is not entitled to access. Campaigns are under no legal obligation to answer our questions. But voters are entitled to know who answered and who didn’t — and what was asked.
Gatekeeping?
The Rapid City Sentinel is not alone in navigating a closed door. KELOLAND Media Group, one of the state’s largest broadcast outlets, extended a debate invitation to both campaigns for a televised one-on-one forum. Doeden accepted, but Rhoden declined — with a spokesperson explaining in a written statement that responding to his opponent’s claims simply takes too much effort.
Now, as the July runoff approaches, the candidates’ willingness to answer direct, unscripted questions hasn’t vanished entirely, but it has certainly receded from public view.
It feels less like a targeted decision about which specific outlets matter, and more like a collective decision by both camps to simply retreat from scrutiny, lower the blinds, and stick to the safety of managed talking points.
The Weight of Silence
When the political landscape gets difficult, the standard playbook often calls for silence. But independent journalism is either part of the accountability mechanism or it isn’t. Transparency shouldn’t scale back just because the cycle gets tense.
Because here is what matters more than campaign access. The questions we sent were not abstract. They were grounded in active issues that do not pause for an election cycle, and problems that will land on the desk of whoever becomes or remains governor of this state.
The ongoing oversight concerns surrounding state land sales and the foreign-owned GCC Dacotah operation. The strain resource-heavy data centers will place on local infrastructure and the environment. The lingering gap in voter registration laws for those using Tribal IDs. These are not hypotheticals. These are the realities on the ground.
Rapid City’s own mayor would presumably like to know where the next governor stands on some of these questions. So would Rapid City’s residents. So would anyone paying attention to what is actually happening in western South Dakota.
Neither candidate offered an answer. Not one word.
The Rapid City Sentinel Gubernatorial Questionnaire
The questions we sent were these:
1. Inflation is hammering people at the pump and the grocery store. Beyond simply criticizing federal policies, what specific, measurable state-level actions will your administration take to ease this localized financial burden for South Dakotans?
2. How will you balance the integration of AI in state government functions with the strict need for transparency and municipal accountability to the taxpayers?
3. In the wake of the GCC Dacotah fallout and ongoing concerns regarding long-term industrial oversight, what specific, stringent compliance measures will you implement regarding state land sales to foreign entities?
4. As development expands, specifically regarding resource-heavy data centers, how will your administration weigh the environmental impact and strain on local infrastructure against corporate interests?
5. South Dakota’s relationship with the federal government is constantly in flux — sometimes a partner, sometimes an obstacle. When Washington and Pierre’s interests diverge, where does your administration draw the line, and what’s an issue where you’d actively push back against federal direction?
6. Tribal ID cards are accepted at the polls and now qualify as proof of citizenship under SB 175, but they still can’t be used on their own to register to vote. As governor, would you push to close that registration gap?
7. Why should the average resident care enough to show up for this runoff?
8. Prior to active campaigning, what was the last book you read?
9. The Rapid City Litmus Test: A Pterodactyl at Dinosaur Park—yes or no?
These are not partisan questions. They are not gotcha questions. They are the minimum any voter deserves before casting a ballot for the person who will hold the most powerful office in this state.
South Dakota’s runoff law, SDCL 12-6-51.1, exists because the legislature decided in 1985 that a plurality wasn’t enough. That legitimacy requires a threshold. That voters deserve more than whoever happened to finish first.
Both men asking for your vote on July 28 declined to meet the threshold this outlet set.The record is clear. They were asked. The deadline passed. You are reading this.
We asked if they believed in dinosaurs.
They answered by becoming one.
Leave a Reply