State influence profile · SD

South Dakota political money

9 federal politicians, $1.3M in PAC contributions received, and $17.2M in lobbying by in-state organizations, from FEC, Senate LDA, and USAspending.gov filings.

9
Politicians
$1.3M
Contributions
$17.2M
Lobbying
$57.5M
Contracts

South Dakota's three federal money flows

Campaign contributions received, lobbying spent by in-state organizations, and federal contracts awarded, side by side.

Contributions received$1.3MLobbying spent$17.2MContracts awarded$57.5M

Source: FEC, U.S. Senate LDA, and USAspending.gov As of 2023–2024

How Political Money Moves Through South Dakota

South Dakota (SD) shows three distinct federal money flows in the 2023-2024 reporting period: $1.3M in PAC contributions received by 9 tracked politicians from the state, $17.2M in federal lobbying expenditures reported by organizations headquartered in South Dakota, and $57.5M in federal contract awards flowing to in-state entities. Each channel is independently sourced, FEC filings for contributions, Senate LDA disclosures for lobbying, and USAspending.gov for contracts.

On the candidate side, Dusty Johnson leads South Dakota's politicians in PAC receipts, and the 9 federal candidates tracked here span Senate and House races where organizational committees disclose every contribution above FEC thresholds. On the organization side, BLACK HILLS CORPORATION ranks among the most politically active entities headquartered in the state when contributions, lobbying, and contracts are combined into a single influence metric. The top-ranked organizations above are ordered by combined influence footprint, not by any single channel.

Reading these three numbers side-by-side is what makes South Dakota's federal footprint legible: contributions signal which lawmakers in-state interests are prioritizing, lobbying expenditures signal which policy outcomes are being actively pursued, and contract dollars signal where federal procurement has already flowed back. Patterns visible in 2023-2024 filings will continue to shape South Dakota's federal posture through the next election cycle.

How to read the politician table: each row links to a candidate-level page where the full donor list, PAC affiliations, party identifier, and office sought are itemized. The "Total Received" column aggregates every itemized contribution above FEC reporting thresholds across the 2023-2024 reporting window, which spans both the 2024 general election cycle and the prior off-year fundraising period. Senate candidates raise across longer six-year cycles, so totals for incumbent senators may reflect carryforward fundraising from earlier years; House candidates raise on two-year cycles. Presidential candidates are tracked separately and may appear on the state-level page if their committee is registered to a South Dakota address.

How to read the organization table: rows are ordered by a combined influence footprint that sums campaign-contribution dollars with lobbying expenditures and federal contract awards over the same window. Each organization links to a detail page where the three channels are broken out separately so you can see, for instance, whether an entity primarily lobbies (heavy LDA filings, light FEC activity) or primarily contracts (USAspending.gov dollars dominate). Trade associations, corporate PACs, and registered lobbying firms all flow through the same combined metric, the detail page disambiguates which channel drives the ranking.

Source documents: FEC Form 3, 3X, and 5 filings ingested from the Commission's bulk download endpoint; Senate Office of Public Records LD-2 quarterly lobbying disclosures parsed from the Senate's XML feed; USAspending.gov contract award and obligation records sourced via the FEDERALAWARDS API. None of the numbers on this page are imputed or modeled, every dollar shown was disclosed by the filer themselves under federal reporting requirements. When a filer amends a prior disclosure, our next ETL pass picks up the amended record and supersedes the original.

A note on state-level totals and the limits of geographic attribution. PAC contributions are unambiguously state-level because every candidate registers their committee to a specific state. Lobbying expenditures, however, are reported at the registrant level, a Washington, DC-based lobbying firm representing a South Dakota client will disclose the lobbying engagement to the Senate without necessarily attributing the dollars to South Dakota; we attribute lobbying spend to South Dakota when the registrant declares its primary place of business in this state, which can understate the actual influence flow to or from clients in other states. Federal contract awards are attributed by the contractor's primary place of performance, not by where the buying agency is located. A defense contract executed in South Dakota but awarded by the Department of Defense in Virginia will appear under South Dakota's contract total. These conventions are explained in detail on our methodology page.

Politicians from South Dakota

# Politician PartyTotal received
1 Dusty Johnson House R $1.3M
2 Sheryl Johnson House D $5K

Top organizations in South Dakota

BLACK HILLS CORPORATION$57.8MPOET$7.7MAMERICAN COALITION FOR ETHANOL$1.7MSANFORD HEALTH$1.2MPATHWARD, N.A.$923KFLANDREAU SANTEE SIOUX TRIBE$545KNDN COLLECTIVE$491KPATHWARD, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION (FKA PATHWARD (FORMERLY METABANK, N.A.))$420K
Top organizations by combined influence footprint · South Dakota
# Organization Total influence
1 BLACK HILLS CORPORATION pac $57.8M
2 POET pac $7.7M
3 AMERICAN COALITION FOR ETHANOL lobbying_client $1.7M
4 SANFORD HEALTH lobbying_client $1.2M
5 PATHWARD, N.A. pac $923K
6 FLANDREAU SANTEE SIOUX TRIBE lobbying_client $545K
7 NDN COLLECTIVE lobbying_client $491K
8 PATHWARD, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION (FKA PATHWARD (FORMERLY METABANK, N.A.)) lobbying_client $420K
9 MEDGENE LABS lobbying_client $420K
10 OGLALA SIOUX TRIBE lobbying_client $358K
11 SOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY lobbying_client $340K
12 SOUTH DAKOTA SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY AUTHORITY lobbying_client $320K
13 EMPIRICAL FOODS (FKA BEEF PRODUCTS INC.) lobbying_client $300K
14 SOUTH DAKOTA ELLSWORTH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY lobbying_client $256K
15 SOUTH DAKOTA CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION lobbying_client $242K
16 NORTHWESTERN ENERGY lobbying_client $240K
17 PREMIER BANKCARD, LLC lobbying_client $240K
18 LEWIS & CLARK RURAL WATER SYSTEM lobbying_client $210K
19 THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY lobbying_client $200K
20 WAKPAMNI LAKE COMMUNITY CORPORATION - ARROWHEAD ADVANCE lobbying_client $180K

Frequently Asked Questions

How much political money flows through South Dakota?

South Dakota politicians received $1.3M in PAC contributions during the 2024 election cycle, while organizations headquartered in the state spent $17.2M on federal lobbying and received $57.5M in federal contracts. Data comes from FEC filings, Senate LDA disclosures, and USAspending.gov.

How many politicians represent South Dakota at the federal level?

9 politicians from South Dakota are tracked in FEC filings for the 2024 cycle. This includes candidates for Senate and House seats. The top fundraiser is Dusty Johnson. All data covers PAC and organizational contributions, not individual donations.

Which organizations have the most political influence in South Dakota?

BLACK HILLS CORPORATION is among the top politically active organizations headquartered in South Dakota. Influence is measured by combining campaign contributions, lobbying expenditures, and federal contract awards. See the full organization rankings above.

What is the difference between contributions, lobbying, and contracts?

Campaign contributions are donations from PACs to political candidates (tracked by the FEC). Lobbying is spending to influence legislation and regulation (disclosed via Senate LDA filings). Federal contracts are government procurement awards to private companies (tracked by USAspending.gov). Together, these three channels represent the primary ways organizations exert financial influence in federal politics.

Where does South Dakota political money data come from?

All data is sourced from official federal government databases: the Federal Election Commission (campaign contributions), the Senate Office of Public Records (lobbying disclosures), and USAspending.gov (federal contracts). PlainInfluence aggregates and presents this public data for transparency. Data covers the 2023-2024 reporting period.

Data: FEC, Senate LDA, USAspending.gov. 2023-2024 data. Verify filings at fec.gov/data.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainInfluence Editorial.

Every figure on PlainInfluence is rendered directly from official FEC, Senate LDA and USAspending records, no number is typed in by an editor. State-level totals are aggregated directly from FEC, Senate LDA, and USAspending bulk data, no figure is hand-entered. Disclosed contributions, lobbying, and contracts are lawful, regulated activities, appearing on this page is not an allegation of wrongdoing. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, our disclaimer, or report a data error. Data current as of 2023-2024.