Noem in tune with West River

Journal Editorial Board rapidcityjournal.com | Posted: Sunday, October 31, 2010 6:00 am | (5) Comments

In what has been the most spirited Congressional campaign in South Dakota since 2004, Democratic U..S House incumbent Stephanie Herseth Sandlin finds herself in a fiercely close race with Republican challenger Kristi Noem.

Voters have been inundated with messages from both candidates since September, with money pouring in from inside and outside their campaigns. Noem, perhaps benefitting from the anti-incumbent sentiment being stirred up across the country, raised over $1 million in the third quarter. We wish Noem would have spent more time and advertising money sharing her background, her accomplishments, and her vision.

Instead, she opted to tear and twist the record of the incumbent.

We are not convinced that linking Herseth Sandlin to liberal House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does much to influence the undecided voters, who are more likely to cast their vote based on issues and character. Vilifying Pelosi only energizes the base, a base which can only vote once on Nov. 2.

However, while Herseth Sandlin admits that the House would benefit from leadership with more moderate views, she would not go so far as to say she wouldn’t support Pelosi as speaker, should Democrats retain a majority. That reluctance is unfortunate; Democrats (and Republicans) need more moderate leadership if there is to be any chance of changing the toxic divisive atmosphere in Washington. If Noem is elected, we would be equally concerned that House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) is just as divisive a leader for his party.

- – - – - – - – - -

What’s even more unfortunate is the disconnect which many West River residents have with Herseth Sandlin. She is not very visible in western South Dakota. Certainly this is not where her base lies, but we think she could have worked harder to reach out to those in this community who were looking for direct communication with their lone representative. The Black Hills area was especially incensed when Herseth Sandlin failed to hold health care forums in this region prior to her important vote in the House on reforms.

Herseth Sandlin inevitably voted against health care reform, but will not vote to repeal the bill as called for by Noem. We agree with the incumbent; there are many good provisions which reform provides to families and their children. Repeal or rework the bloated areas of the bill, but maintain those reforms which provide help for families. And work to reduce the cost of health care, something this bill failed to do in its final version. If Republicans vote to repeal this bill – which may only happen if they are able to elect a Republican president in 2012 – they may continue to stand by and watch as premiums skyrocket and more and more families can’t afford basic coverage.

Noem, to her credit, admits that the GOP – while in control of both the Senate and House – did little to address this country’s health care issues. She also admits there are good provisions in the bill, so we would encourage her to revise her platform on behalf of South Dakota families. Let’s not go backward, move forward to improve the existing bill.

To her credit, Noem also admits that the Republicans contributed to the huge deficit during the Bush administration (unlike some of her more partisan colleagues who would have you believe the deficit was created in the last two years). But, while she states that we need to cut the budget and reduce the deficit, her broad solutions leave a lot of room for interpretation. She is not alone. Republicans across the country are making political hay with the outrageous deficit, but are not offering much in the way of real specific solutions to curb the spending.

In addition, Noem is pushing for the Bush tax cuts to be extended indefinitely, which only helps to contribute to the deficit and will require larger cuts elsewhere. (Note to voters: Eliminating a temporary tax cut is not a tax increase, no matter how politicians try to spin it).

- – - – - – - – - -

Herseth Sandlin walks a delicate balance, a Democrat representing a historically Republican state.

And so, while many of her votes in Congress have put her constituents before her party (TARP, health care …), we question her judgment in voting for the Democrats’ $787 billion stimulus bill in February 2009 and wished she had joined the seven Democrats in opposition. This was a Democratic boondoggle, an opportunity for the new administration to pay for many of their initiatives without having to defend them individually on the House and Senate floor. They took advantage of the fear and uncertainty of the recession to push this massive spending bill through Congress, a bill which has not lived up to its price tag.

What this bill has done is prop up inefficient state governments with bailouts, governments like South Dakota which should have been more fiscally conservative. The bill also created more government and government-related jobs but provided far less help for Main Street businesses. And don’t even ask anyone to estimate the jobs created with the $787 billion. As we’ve seen in South Dakota (state budget director Jason Dilges kindly calls calculating stimulus jobs “a relatively wide path”), that accounting method is loose and unreliable.

Herseth Sandlin’s vote on the stimulus bill was costly. Throw enough money at anything and you can see some results. The country deserved better return on its $787 billion investment.

We have other concerns with Herseth Sandlin’s stance on issues.

She co-sponsored the Employee Free Choice Act in the House which we oppose as written. South Dakota is rightfully taking pre-emptive measures this fall (Amendment K) to prevent such union organizing tactics from reaching our state.

And Herseth Sandlin doesn’t seem to understand the concern that her husband works as a lobbyist in Washington. While we aren’t suggesting there have been violations, this relationship allows for a perception of a conflict of interest. Trust in Washington’s politicians is low, and trust in Washington’s politicians to police themselves may be even lower. Herseth Sandlin failed to acknowledge those truths; her defensiveness suggests that maybe she has been in Washington too long.

- – - – - – - – - -

In her three terms in office, Herseth Sandlin’s moderate views have helped her forge important alliances. She holds a leadership position within the Blue Dog Democrats, a group that wielded more clout these last sessions as the Democrats held a thin majority. If Democrats manage to retain a slight advantage in the House after the elections, Blue Dogs will be even more influential in helping steer or modify legislation. And that our lone representative in the 435-member House has managed to carve out some influence is a notable achievement – it would be easy to be ignored in Washington as South Dakota’s lone voice.

But we believe Noem is more in tune with the voice of South Dakotans. At her core, we feel Noem represents the views of western South Dakotans more clearly. Some of Herseth Sandlin’s decisions have been difficult for the congresswoman, when her personal and/or party’s convictions cross with those of her constituents. Noem would have no such conflict.

And while Noem may be riding the wave of political discontent and cry for change, we would caution her not to become a shrill mouthpiece for the angry radical right or join the stone-throwing obstructionists within her own party. They are contributing to the unproductive vitriol in this country which is turning off many Americans and disenfranchising young people. This country needs elected officials with positive, proactive solutions.

It is with that encouragement that we endorse Republican Kristi Noem for U.S. House.

Read more at Kristi Noem for Congress