Skip to main content
The Full Record
Menu
Portrait of Amber ArlintPhoto: siouxfallschamber.com

SD · Officeholder

Amber Arlint

RState Representative · District 12

On the ballot Nov 3, 2026: South Dakota House District 12

Biography

Amber Arlint is a Republican state representative who has represented South Dakota House District 12 since 2023 and is seeking re-election on November 3, 2026.[1][2][2] A former insurance agency owner with a doctorate in adult and higher education, she faces Democrat Stephanie Arne and Republican Kerry Loudenslager for the district's two seats, according to Ballotpedia.[1][2]

Amber Arlint earned a B.S. in political science in 2009, an M.A. in adult and higher education in 2014 and an Ed.D. in adult and higher education in 2018, all from the University of South Dakota, according to Ballotpedia.[1] Her career experience includes owning a State Farm Insurance agency, working as a distributor sales representative with Western Refining and serving as director of sorority/fraternity life and leadership at the University of South Dakota.[1]

Arlint took office on January 10, 2023, and for 2025-2026 Ballotpedia lists her on the House Education, Retirement Laws and Transportation committees.[1]

  1. 1.Amber Arlint · Ballotpedia Reference
  2. 2.South Dakota House of Representatives elections, 2026 · Ballotpedia Reference

Researched from the cited sources on 2026-10-21. Not yet independently fact-checked.

South Dakota House District 12

Amber Arlint is on the Nov 3, 2026 ballot for South Dakota House District 12 as R. Not researched in depth — candidate list only.

Ballotpedia ↗

Other candidates for this seat

Votes by issue

Their recorded votes on bills that divided the chamber (unanimous votes left out), grouped by topic. A bill can sit under more than one topic. "With" and "against" compare each vote with how most Republicans voted. How topics are assigned

Where they stood out

Voted against most of their party on 4 of 18 party-divided votes on file.

  • consider a cultivated-protein food product to be adulterated food.

    A yes vote was to override the governor's veto of HB 1077, which would classify cultivated-protein food products as adulterated food. (AI-written)

    What it does: Adds cultivated-protein food products, defined as foods resembling animal tissue made by growing animal cells in vitro, to the foods deemed adulterated under South Dakota food law.

    Voted no · most Republicans voted yes · Democrats 0–5, Republicans 32–27

    Mar 30, 2026Official record ↗

  • restrict the use of a cell phone by a student during the school day.

    What it does: As amended, bars student cell phone use during the school day, except for administrator-approved health care, Section 504 plans or IEPs, teacher-permitted lessons and emergencies; requires school boards to adopt disci…

    Voted yes · most Republicans voted no · Democrats 3–2, Republicans 25–37

    Mar 5, 2026Official record ↗

  • amend provisions pertaining to the publication of the statewide voter registration file.

    What it does: Requires the secretary of state to post the complete statewide voter registration file and a rolling five-year historical archive on its website before 11:59 p.m. central time each Monday.

    Voted no · most Republicans voted yes · Democrats 0–5, Republicans 36–25

    Mar 3, 2026Official record ↗

  • consider a cultivated-protein food product to be adulterated food.

    What it does: On the version voted Mar 30, 2026: Adds cultivated-protein food products, defined as foods resembling animal tissue made by growing animal cells in vitro, to the foods deemed adulterated under South Dakota food law.

    Voted no · most Republicans voted yes · Democrats 1–4, Republicans 44–18

    Jan 28, 2026Official record ↗

How this is counted

Their votes on the most contested roll calls

The votes in their chamber that came out closest and most divided by party, among those they voted on. How we rank

See all their split votes

Substantive votes concern legislation or nominations; procedural votes concern how the chamber considers them. A Yes vote applies to the motion shown, which may not be final passage.

HB 1077 · SD HOUSE

consider a cultivated-protein food product to be adulterated food.

NoVOTED

Motion: Veto override

A yes vote was to override the governor's veto of HB 1077, which would classify cultivated-protein food products as adulterated food. (AI-written)

Adds cultivated-protein food products, defined as foods resembling animal tissue made by growing animal cells in vitro, to the foods deemed adulterated under South Dakota food law.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Failed 32–32·Substantive·Mar 30, 2026Roll call ↗
SB 121 · SD HOUSE

transfer moneys and make an appropriation for the replacement of the Richmond Lake dam and spillway and to declare an emergency.

YesVOTED

Motion: Conference Committee Report adopted

A yes vote adopted the conference committee report on SB 121, setting the transfer and appropriation for replacing the Richmond Lake dam and spillway at $8,212,497. (AI-written)

Transfers $8.2 million from the unclaimed property trust fund to the general fund and appropriates the same amount to replace the Richmond Lake dam and spillway.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 61–3·Substantive·Mar 30, 2026Roll call ↗
HB 1326 · SD HOUSE

appropriate money for the ordinary expenses of the legislative, judicial, and executive departments of the state, the current expenses of state institutions, interest on the public debt, and common schools.

YesVOTED

Motion: Do Pass

On the version voted Mar 11, 2026: Appropriates money for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027, for the ordinary expenses of state government's legislative, judicial and executive departments, state institutions, interest on the public debt, and common schools, with amounts set by budget unit.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 50–17·Substantive·Mar 12, 2026Roll call ↗
HB 1051 · SD HOUSE

revise property tax levies for school districts and to revise the state aid to general and special education formulas.

YesVOTED

Motion: Do Pass Amended

Sets school district general fund property tax levy caps for taxes payable in 2027 and later, including $4.867 per thousand dollars of valuation generally, and revises state aid for general and special education.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 66–1·Substantive·Mar 12, 2026Roll call ↗
SB 78 · SD HOUSE

revise the General Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2026.

YesVOTED

Motion: Do Pass Amended

On the version voted Mar 11, 2026: Changes dollar amounts in the fiscal year 2026 General Appropriations Act for operating budgets of numerous state agencies and funds.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 52–15·Substantive·Mar 12, 2026Roll call ↗
HB 1200 · SD HOUSE

make an appropriation for victim services provided by nonprofit organizations.

YesVOTED

Motion: Conference Committee Report adopted

A yes vote adopted the conference committee report on HB 1200, setting the appropriation for victim-services grants at $5,500,000. (AI-written)

On the version voted Feb 26, 2026: Appropriates general fund money to the Department of Public Safety for grants to nonprofits assisting abused or neglected children and victims of domestic violence, sexual assault or trafficking, for services such as emergency lodging, licensed counseling, crisis lines and child advocacy centers.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 58–8·Substantive·Mar 11, 2026Roll call ↗
HB 1274 · SD HOUSE

prohibit the dispensing, distribution, sale, or advertisement of certain articles or things for purposes of an unlawful abortion and provide a criminal and civil penalty therefor.

YesVOTED

Motion: Concurred in amendments

A yes vote accepted the Senate's amendment to HB 1274, which revises SDCL 22-17-5.1, the Class 6 felony for administering or procuring an abortion, to cover "any person" instead of "any pregnant female". (AI-written)

Makes it a Class 6 felony to knowingly dispense, distribute, sell or advertise items for an unlawful abortion, and lets the attorney general seek civil penalties up to $10,000 per violation, plus injunctions.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 61–6·Substantive·Mar 10, 2026Roll call ↗
HB 1323 · SD HOUSE

modify the requirements to refer an ordinance or resolution to the voters of a political subdivision.

YesVOTED

Motion: Failed to concur, no committee appointed

A yes vote rejected the Senate's amendments to HB 1323, which shorten the petition filing period to 20 days and cap required signatures at 2,500 registered voters, without appointing a conference committee. (AI-written)

As amended, changes how voters refer county, municipal and school district decisions to a public vote: petitions need signatures of 5 percent of registered voters or 2,500, whichever is fewer, and certain county and municipal decisions cannot be referred.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 40–27·Substantive·Mar 10, 2026Roll call ↗
HB 1215 · SD HOUSE

authorize counties and municipalities to issue a license for a cigar bar.

YesVOTED

Motion: Concurred in amendments

A yes vote accepted the Senate's amendment to the cigar-bar licensing bill, which drops the limits on the number of licenses and the cigar ring-gauge and filter definition, and replaces annual reporting to Revenue with keeping three years of records. (AI-written)

Lets counties and municipalities license cigar bars on the premises of certain alcohol-licensed establishments that have a humidor, enclosed ventilated space, and at least 10 percent of income from cigars, and allows only cigars to be smoked there.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 63–4·Substantive·Mar 10, 2026Roll call ↗
HB 1220 · SD HOUSE

regulate the sale of nicotine products, and to provide a penalty therefor.

YesVOTED

Motion: Concurred in amendments

A yes vote accepted the Senate's amendments to HB 1220, which set conditions for shipping alternative nicotine products to consumers (age-21 signature, labeled packages, buyer records, tax remittance, audits) and make resale of shipped products a Class 1 misdemeanor. (AI-written)

Requires nicotine product distributors to hold a Department of Revenue license ($1,000 fee), limits retailers to buying from licensed distributors, sets age-21 verification for direct shipments to consumers, and makes unlicensed sales a Class 1 misdemeanor.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 60–7·Substantive·Mar 10, 2026Roll call ↗

Showing 10 of 108 votes in this collection. Coverage may be incomplete; each entry links to the official record.