House Education Committee lawmakers in South Dakota decided on Monday to postpone a plan that would have limited student cell phone usage during school hours.
The decision came after critics argued that local districts already have established policies and should retain autonomy over the matter.
SB 198 would have prohibited cell phone use by students during the school day, barring a few exceptions like medical/educational accommodations or emergencies.
Supporters pitched SB 198 as a statewide safety standard intended to reduce distractions and conflicts in classrooms.
“A bell-to-bell policy creates clarity. It removes gray areas. It removes daily arguments,” Rep. Taylor Rehfeldt, R-Sioux Falls, told the committee.
Sen. Chris Karr, R-Sioux Falls, said the issue “rises beyond district lines,” calling it “a matter of statewide responsibility.”
Critics informed legislators that phones pose challenges, yet they stated the state should not impose a uniform rule across all districts.
State Secretary of Education Joe Graves urged lawmakers to kill the bill, saying the decision belongs at the local level.
“The issue before us is not they should be eliminated from classrooms, but who gets to make that decision and who should best make that decision. The answer to that is educators at the local level,” Graves said.
Rob Monson, executive director of School Administrators of South Dakota, said a statewide mandate isn’t needed.
“At that time (2024), 102 districts responded to that survey. 94 percent already had a policy in place,” he said. Monson added, “When asked in the survey if they, in their opinion, believed we needed a state-level policy or law, it was an overwhelming no.”
The committee voted 8-7 to send SB 198 to the 41st legislative day. Committee Chair, Rep. Lana Greenfield, R-Doland, said, “With that then, Senate Bill 198 has failed.”
However, immediately after that vote, some commmittee members wanted to consider a move to recall the bill so the committee could take up a hoghouse amendment labeled “HB198B.” The proposed amendment would have replaced the cell phone bill with language “to provide for the establishment of charter schools,” creating definitions and an authorization framework.
Rehfeldt objected, saying the amendment would swap in an entirely different subject and “circumvent the process.” The recall motion failed 7-8.
