Later this month, on March 26, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case that challenges the constitutionality of a federal fund that aids rural broadband service.

South Dakota advocates say a negative outcome could be devastating for customers.

A conservative organization brought the case, hoping to end a Federal Communications Commission fee that flows into what's known as the Universal Service Fund.

It provides $8 billion a year for telecommunications programs geared toward underserved populations. That includes high-speed internet service in rural areas.

Kara Semmler, general counsel and executive director of the South Dakota Telecommunications Association, said she worries about the impact if the challenge is successful.

"Children will be missing out on educational opportunities," said Semmler, "businesses will lose their competitiveness."

Industry groups say rates for customers, benefiting from the fund, will double if it's struck down.

The plaintiffs contend the fee mechanism used to prop up the fund is more like a tax, meaning Congress should have the oversight.

Semmler said shifting that power would result in funding uncertainty for an industry that relies on long-term planning.

Cellphone service providers and other telecom companies pay the fee that's at the center of the legal argument. Those costs are passed along to consumers across the country through their monthly bills.

Semmler said it's a small price to pay to maintain critical broadband infrastructure in rural pockets.

"It's that ongoing operation, maintenance, and affordability of the product," said Semmler. "It does no good to have infrastructure in the ground if it becomes unaffordable for South Dakota consumers to use."

Semmler said they've had productive conversations with South Dakota's Congressional delegation about "Plan B" strategies.

But she acknowledged the budget-cutting tone in Washington D.C. right now, while adding it would be hard for state government to fill any sudden funding gaps.




get more stories like this via email

Main Street businesses in South Dakota are playing what some describe as a "scramble game" in the fast-changing and challenging U.S. economy. As business owners keep an eye on new tariffs, they hope customers stay loyal.

Economists said the latest tariffs announced by President Donald Trump could lead to higher costs for products like electronics, clothing and food. Coffee is one of the popular items poised to become more expensive.

Deanna Muellenberg, who owns The Purple Pigeon Coffeehouse in Chamberlain, said she has not weighed all the details yet from last week's announcement but noted coffee prices for her have already increased by 40% since opening last year.

"I want to keep prices affordable for people that live in these small towns," Muellenberg explained. "But in order to be able to keep the doors open too, I might have to increase my costs."

So far, she has had to resort to a small price hike, with other popular sellers helping offset budget headaches tied to coffee supplies. The Federal Reserve Chair warned the new tariffs could lead to higher inflation again. Muellenberg recommended when locals do have a little extra to spend, they should keep small businesses in mind over corporate chains, because it benefits the town.

Nathan Sanderson, executive director of the South Dakota Retailers Association, acknowledged President Trump's argument about the need to "reset" the global trade market to establish fairness. But he does agree with other business voices an even bumpier road lies ahead.

Sanderson said with uncertainty almost a constant, policymakers need to set a tone emphasizing buying local.

"(Small) businesses are absolutely the heartbeat of rural communities," Sanderson stressed. "They are the entities that are supporting the local baseball team or the FFA chapter, or the dance troupe or what have you."

Outside of tariffs, Sanderson noted Main Street economies are seeing older business owners nearing retirement without enough younger generations to take over. According to federal data, South Dakota is home to nearly 90,000 small businesses.


get more stories like this via email

North Dakota has launched a new centralized online data hub and small-town mayors see it as an asset because information is power in trying to make their communities appealing to residents and future businesses.

The state's Information Technology department is out with a new platform it said will collect and disseminate reliable, up-to-date information from multiple sources, such as the Census Bureau. There are dashboards if you want to look up housing or workforce trends.

Michael Faught, mayor of Casselton, likes the idea of leaning on the tool when trying to boost development in his town of about 2,600 people. He said they need amenities to capitalize on population gains.

"There's a potential need for a new school, there's a potential need for a grocery store," Faught outlined. "With that growth comes growing pains."

Faught pointed out they have an economic development director but the town still faces limitations in retaining a robust staff to map things out. Like other cities, he noted when prospective businesses pay a visit, they need up-to-date details on local characteristics. For the most part, Casselton's population has climbed higher since the 2020 Census, putting pressure on the town to meet the needs of residents.

Kim Weis, chief data officer for the North Dakota Department of Information Technology, said a lot of the information is out there to find but it is often siloed. She agreed a central landing spot could remove barriers in seeking out community needs. She emphasized residents around the state might find it valuable, too.

"If they're looking to relocate in the state to be able to see, 'Hey, I'm interested in moving to this area, but boy, based off the data that's available, housing is pretty tricky there.' Or, 'They have workforce shortage issues in certain areas, so that'd be a great place for me to relocate,'" Weis pointed out.

Some dashboards on the platform have information which can be broken down at the county level. There are links to other sources allowing users to search for municipal characteristics. Weis added they plan to add more data and other bells and whistles moving forward.


get more stories like this via email

Virginians who work at low-wage jobs often don't have a workplace retirement plan so they can save money through payroll deductions.

A new study finds a similar gap between rural and urban workers, across the country.

The research by the Economic Innovation Group finds rural workers are less likely to have an employer-based retirement account compared to their urban counterparts.

Among high-income workers in both areas, the disparity narrows.

But overall, Sarah Eckhardt - a research associate with the Economic Innovation Group - said the gap between people in rural and urban settings who are offered a workplace retirement account is wide.

"Over half of full-time workers in rural areas do not have access to any kind of employer-based retirement plan," said Eckhardt. "This number is only 40% for people who live in urban areas. This is quite substantial and becomes even more salient when you look at the amount that people are actually able to save."

To help close the gap, Eckhardt's group is urging Congress to take up the Retirement Savings for Americans Act.

The bill would create retirement accounts for employees without one - and offer tax credits for lower-income workers as a matching contribution.

It has bipartisan support, but has sat in committee in Congress since 2023.

And it's about more than having a workplace retirement account. The disparity also includes how much people are able to save. The study found rural workers who do have a retirement plan have saved $55,000 less than their urban counterparts.

Eckhardt said the difference has real-world impacts on rural workers.

"Outside of retirement accounts, they tend to have fewer assets than people in urban places do, which means that they are less able to accumulate wealth and save for retirement," said Eckhardt. "Which could have consequences for how long they're in the labor force. Rural workers could be forced to work for more years than urban workers do, in order to make enough money to pay for their retirement years."

Eckhardt added that those gaps in retirement funds mean rural workers rely more heavily on Social Security -- and more frequently end up in poverty in their retirement years.



get more stories like this via email