SOUTH DAKOTA BECOMES 14TH STATE TO RATIFY KRATOM PROTECTIONS AGAINST “SUPERCHARGED” PRODUCTS

Typically, kratom regulation has come from areas with population density, progressive social policy and a bipartisan approach to legislation. 

South Dakota is challenging that norm. 

A bill to ban harmful kratom products breezed through both chambers of the state legislature, providing the state with an updated set of kratom regulations similar to states that have passed laws known as Kratom Consumer Protection Acts. South Dakota identified an issue in the kratom industry locally and instead of seeking a ban, legislators sought more information on the problem. 

Less than a month after the bill was introduced, both houses unanimously advanced the measure. When Gov. Larry Rhoden signed the bill into law on Feb. 25, it gave the state a law that limited specific products from the market and established a solid framework of rules and regulations to protect kratom customers. 

“This is an education for us and this is an important bill,” said Rep. Brian Mulder, the prime sponsor of House Bill 1056.

Mulder introduced the bill in reaction to concerns about synthetically enhanced kratom products and how those products affected customers in South Dakota, including pregnant mothers. After reports of babies being born showing dependency, Mulder heard from his constituents that it was time for lawmakers to look into the matter.   

“You may ask, why don’t we just ban kratom?” Mulder said. 

Regulation Over Prohibition

Mulder explained it’s a complicated matter beyond just blaming kratom. If the state were to ban the plant, nothing would stop consumers from buying online. In his testimony before the House of Representatives, Mulder said that the issue is not with kratom–it’s with additives and synthetically enhanced kratom that leave consumers with a lack of information concerning the products they are purchasing. 

Without instructions on dosing, safety regulations or a list of ingredients, Mulder said customers are in the dark about the effects of those kratom products. So while many had come to enjoy kratom in its natural leaf form, other products carried risks that weren’t explained at the point of purchase or through labeling. 

That’s where Mulder’s bill comes in. 

In addition to setting limits on the concentration of alkaloids, HB 1056 also bans synthetic alkaloids, poisonous substances/controlled substances, and any product mixed with a non-kratom substance that aims to affect the quality or strength of the kratom product. At the same time he introduced the bill, Mulder also included an amendment to strengthen labeling requirements. 

“My perspective is to take these products that do occur naturally but point out that as they’ve been put in retail settings, that really they’re supercharged,” Mulder said. “People have taken them and added synthetics and other products to them that make them more potent than their natural form.”  

Support From the Medical Community

At the initial hearing for the bill, Mulder introduced the legislation and then turned the conversation over to medical experts. A representative of a local healthcare system testified to that committee that they were experiencing an issue of pregnant women in the community who were unaware of how kratom use could affect their unborn child. 

In one instance, a baby was born that required a month in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit due to kratom use while pregnant. That mother was purchasing kratom over the counter and had no guidance on recommended use, either from the point of sale or in terms of labeling. 

But rather than race to ban kratom, the discussion was framed as an opportunity to educate those who choose to use kratom as a supplement, and to offer safeguards against both lack of information and kratom products with additives or synthetics. 

“It’s definitely something where we need to be more proactive in providing information to our patients so they can make more informed decisions,” said Dr. Katherine Wang. 

By the time the bill had its committee hearing in the state Senate, the same coalition of support showed out, including a voice from the harm reduction community that spoke about the dangers of these “supercharged” products masquerading as natural kratom. Among those who have had issues with products presented as kratom, Terry Dosch from the South Dakota Council on Substance Abuse said patterns have emerged around the type of products that cause concerns. 

“Particularly when the kratom source is synthetic, then we see extreme withdrawal symptoms that are associated with that,” 

With a diverse coalition of support behind the bill, Mulder capitalized on the moment's momentum and fast-tracked his plan for kratom regulations. 

The bill received a hearing in the House within a week of being filed and progressed out of the Health and Human Services Committee by a vote of 12-0. Mulder amended the bill on the House floor the next day to add stricter rules around labeling–that amendment passed by voice vote before another unanimous vote in favor of the bill advanced the measure to the state Senate. 

It took a couple of weeks for the Senate’s Health and Human Services Committee to hold a hearing on the bill. All six members of that committee voted in favor of the bill. 

The next day, a 35-0 vote on the Senate floor advanced the bill to the governor’s desk without a single legislator voting against the bill at any step of the process. During that hearing in the Senate, Sen. Kevin Jensen thanked Mulder for bringing the bill, and made it clear why this bill had the complete support of South Dakota’s elected officials. 

“I just think we need to get a handle on all of these substances… especially the labeling. I think that’s smart to do,” said Jensen, the chair of the Senate’s Health and Human Services. “The concept of ‘let’s get the bad stuff out of there’ and knowing what’s in it–both of those are very good and I urge everyone to support.” 

“This one we might be actually getting ahead of the curve on this,” Jensen said, “so thank you for bringing this.”