risti Noem may no longer hold the title of Governor, but the shadow of her tenure—specifically the alleged blurring of lines between public service and personal promotion—looms large over the public spaces she once governed. From state aircraft to the very image of South Dakota's natural splendor, critics argue that Noem pioneered a new level of public service as a personal billboard, funded and maintained by the taxpayer.
🏛️ When State Resources Become Campaign Props
During her time as Governor, and continuing into her subsequent role as a cabinet-level official, Noem repeatedly faced allegations that she used state resources for explicitly non-state business, activities that benefited her personal political brand and her private financial interests.
The fundamental accusation is one of transforming government assets—which are meant to serve all citizens—into infrastructure for her individual career advancement.
The "Personal Airplane" Controversy
A key focus of ethics complaints against the former Governor was her use of state-owned aircraft.
The Allegation: Reports emerged that Noem used the state plane to travel to out-of-state events hosted by purely political organizations, such as the Republican Jewish Coalition and the National Rifle Association. South Dakota law explicitly states that state aircraft must be used only for "state business."
The Defense: Her office frequently defended these trips by broadly defining her role as the state’s "ambassador" to bolster the economy and promote South Dakota.
The Outcome: While an ethics board eventually dismissed the complaint due to the state law's lack of a clear definition for "state business," the perception of using taxpayer-funded air travel to attend political fundraisers and private speaking events remains a major ethical stain, suggesting the public plane was effectively her private political jet.
đź“š The Book, The Brand, and the Backdoor Payments
The line between public official and private personality was further erased by activities centered on her personal finances and literary works, most notably her two books, Not My First Rodeo and No Going Back.
Public Appearances for Private Profit: Critics questioned whether official state events or venues were utilized to facilitate the promotion and sale of her personal books, converting government time into book-signing opportunities.
The Dark Money Cut: Investigations revealed that while Governor, Noem took an $80,000 cut from political donations raised for a "dark money" nonprofit that promoted her career, routing the funds through a personal LLC. She failed to disclose this income on ethics forms. This practice is seen as the ultimate form of self-dealing, where the engine of political fundraising—often involving events and travel subsidized by the state—was used to directly boost her personal bank account.
This intricate web of financial and promotional activity suggests a governing philosophy where the official duties of the office were inextricably linked to, and often subservient to, the needs of the personal brand.
đź–Ľ️ South Dakota: The Ultimate Backdrop
Perhaps the most potent form of public space Noem utilized was not an airplane or a convention center, but the natural, iconic landscape of South Dakota itself.
For a politician whose brand is built on a rugged, independent, "heartland" image, the mountains, plains, and monuments of the state served as the perfect, unpaid backdrop for her political advertisements and social media presence. Every photograph, every scenic vista used to convey her image, felt like an appropriation of public scenery for personal political capital.
Public Trust vs. Personal Image: The issue is that the natural beauty and state symbols—like Mount Rushmore—belong to all citizens equally. When a governor continuously uses these images in a way that primarily promotes their personal brand and political aspirations, it is perceived as an attempt to monopolize the public identity of the state for private, political gain.
⚖️ The Enduring Question of Accountability
Now that Noem has moved on, the questions about her ethical practices remain critical.
The core principle being challenged is whether a politician can use the full weight and resource of a public office—the airplanes, the executive mansion, the time of staff, and the state's very image—to construct a profitable and potent national political identity, only to then use that identity to pursue private interests, like book sales and lucrative political fundraising, all while the taxpayers foot the bill.
The legacy of Noem's time in office may be less about policy achievements and more about the template she created: Public Office as Personal Launchpad, where the taxpayer's land is the most valuable billboard.