Dana Hess writes for South Dakota Searchlight, an online news organization.

It has been known for some time that there are two Republican parties in the South Dakota Legislature. Now one of them is getting bigger.

The Republican primary earlier this month saw 14 legislators defeated. Add to that 21 Republican legislators who chose not to seek reelection or were term-limited in their chamber and did not try to switch chambers, and that’s quite a bit of institutional memory that has been shown the door.

The two Republican parties consist of one group of traditional conservatives and another group that’s even more conservative and not at all traditional. One group is interested in steering the ship of state while the other would rather run it aground.

The primary election losses by traditional Republicans were due partially to a backlash against carbon pipeline legislation that many of them supported. The legislation calls for counties to be paid for allowing the pipelines access, and includes other new protections for local governments and landowners.

There is an effort now to get that law referred to a vote of the people in November. Detractors fault the bill for the power it gives to the state’s Public Utilities Commission. The PUC already had the power to overrule restrictive local pipeline siting laws, but had declined to use it; the legislation makes that power automatic when the PUC issues a pipeline permit, unless the PUC decides to require compliance with local laws. Crucially for pipeline opponents, the legislation does not ban carbon pipeline companies from using the legal process of eminent domain to obtain access to privately owned land.

Just as pipeline opponents crowded the primary ballot, leading to 44 GOP contests, many of the people who went to the polls in the lightly attended primary were pipeline opponents, too.

There’s no telling yet what, exactly, the next Legislature will look like. While the primary set the Republican field, Democrats will get their turn in November. Democrats have done a better than usual job this year of attracting candidates. However, they are still leaving plenty of legislative openings uncontested. Republicans will get 18 of 35 Senate seats without a fight as well as 36 of 70 House seats.

Perhaps this new batch of Republicans will have more on their minds than pipeline legislation. There is a chance that they care about more of the issues facing South Dakota. Maybe, even now, they’re busy studying education standards, familiarizing themselves with tax policy and looking for inventive ways for the state to take care of the people who can’t take care of themselves. Here’s hoping they approach their work in Pierre in a statesmanlike, workmanlike manner.

If, however, as Shakespeare said, the past is prologue, there’s a chance their approach to governance will reflect the work for the ultra-conservatives who have gone before them. This could include an emphasis on personal freedom and social hot-button issues. If they behave as their predecessors have, we can expect symbolic commemorations designed to split the party and votes on bills with topics that don’t solve problems but are designed to make incumbents vulnerable in the next primary.

If this year’s primary marked a trend, and more candidates like these ultra-conservatives keep getting elected, we may not recognize our state when they’re done with it:

• Eminent domain will not be nearly so eminent.
• Vaccinations will go from mandatory to voluntary before they are banned outright.
• Guns will be free.
• LGBTQ laws will be so strict that grocery stores will no longer be allowed to sell rainbow sherbet.

Once they figure out a Landowners’ Bill of Rights that’s more to their liking, these one-issue wonders will discover that they have two-year terms that come with the expectation that they do the hard work of governing the state.

They may think they have a mandate to fix the pipeline laws when they ride into Pierre, but the expectations for all lawmakers are greater than that. Legislators are supposed to serve the people on all the issues, not just the one that helped get them elected.