What's in a Name?

by: Alan Malavolti

Sioux Falls, SD - With John Thune’s campaign self-destructing and Mike Rounds, “The Silent Republican,” being… well… silent, the South Dakota Republican Party turns, once again, to William Janklow as their only hope of gaining a major office.  If last Tuesday’s debate at Dakotafest, South Dakota’s largest farm show, is an indication, Janklow will not disappoint them.  As the two candidates for U.S. House of Representatives spoke, it became abundantly clear that Governor Janklow is too much for Democrat candidate Stephanie Herseth.  While Herseth is playing out of her league, Janklow is in a league of his own. 

Since the June 4 primary elections, both candidates admit the race for the House will be largely based on the issue of experience.  Still in her early thirties, Herseth wants to offer South Dakota fresh ideas and new perspectives on the issues.  Being the daughter of a former State Senator and granddaughter of a former South Dakota Governor adds intrigue, but cannot make up for the fact that Herseth has never held an elected office.  To be a successful candidate, she must overcome her complete lack of experience by demonstrating an excellent understanding of the issues and an ability to convincingly articulate her new ideas to the people.

Serving South Dakota for more years than Stephanie has been alive, Janklow is South Dakota politics.  Currently finishing the second of two nonconsecutive eight-year terms as governor, he is intimately familiar with the issues facing South Dakota and has vast experience dealing with them.  As governor he receives media attention for any action he takes, which is an obvious advantage for his campaign.  Even more important than his experience as a policy maker is his character.  Janklow is an extremely decisive individual, who takes a highly active role in his government, but he has also made no major mistakes that would drive off supporters.  As a leader, no one can dispute his many achievements benefiting South Dakota.  This kind of experience, as Herseth will discover, is not easy to defeat.

During the debate, Janklow performed flawlessly.  In answering each question he began by explaining the issue to the audience, showing his own knowledge of the problem, then he discussed actions he has already taken to address the issue, and concluded with his ideas of what should be done at the federal level.  This formula enables him to subtly emphasize his experience, but also tells the audience he has more work to do, if elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.  It is a masterful strategy because he is able to tie experiences of the past to actions of the future.  Without being brash, or arrogant, or belittling, he effectively draws an easily recognizable distinction between himself and the inexperienced Herseth.

Sharing the stage with Janklow may prove to be Herseth’s major mistake, though an unavoidable one in South Dakota politics.  When speaking to a group of Democrat voters, as the only speaker and on a topic of her choice, she is undoubtedly intelligent and certainly persuasive.  Before a mixed audience of Democrat, Republican, and undecided voters and talking about issues not of her choosing, Herseth does much to reveal herself as a political novice.  In answering the questions, she casually wandered in the direction of the issue, strolled around its parameter, and left the audience wondering if she understood the question or the issue.  Because of Janklow’s vast knowledge of the issues and exception oratory skills, Herseth’s shortcomings in public speaking were only accentuated by the direct comparison afforded to the audience.

Running a campaign focusing on agriculture, Dakotafest represented Herseth’s core voters and portraying herself as a farm girl, it should have been her forum.  Janklow essentially came into her home, spoke to her people, and gave her an embarrassing lesson in politics.  Even though he won every question, three exemplify the overwhelming defeat of Herseth before her crowd. 

The first question leading to Herseth’s demise should have been her best response and a point she should have won.  As if presenting her with a gift, the moderator asked the question of what should be done about environmental regulations that hinders the implementation of value-added agricultural programs.  Even though she frequently calls for expanding value-added agriculture in the state, Herseth seemed almost confused by the question.  She began by saying the Representative in Congress should, “be an ambassador for South Dakota,” then muttering, “I like that… an ambassador.”  The rest of her response was a strange confabulation about how the Representative should work with the regulatory agencies, but gave no indication how this was to be done or to what specific end the ambassador should work.  She did mention the EPA as a regulatory agency, which everyone understands, but also spoke of the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission), which baffled even the most astute members of the audience.

Then, Janklow cleared his throat and began speaking.  Calling agricultural people the best environmentalists, he immediately won them to his side.  Reminding them of his “Tank Yank” program that has removed thousands of old and leaking tanks in the state and has gained national attention from the EPA, he firmly established himself as a pro-environment candidate.  Emphasizing his experience, he discussed how he gained approval for Ethanol by contacting the EPA and working with other states.  Looking to the future, he told the audience water would be South Dakota’s main environmental issue and gave some ideas of what needs to be done.

During a recent visit to South Dakota, President Bush denied federal drought relief, indirectly giving Herseth an opportunity to win a point from her Republican adversary.  Speaking second on this issue and being the number one issue in the state, Herseth could have prepared remarks that refuted any argument Janklow might have presented.  Instead, she allowed Janklow to carry the point and deflect an odd comment she often makes about taking “her energy” to Washington, which seems to be some insinuation regarding their difference in age. 

Janklow started his response to the question by saying he had returned to Pierre, SD at four o’clock that morning, after being at the scene of the forest fire burning in the Black Hills.  This debate, in Mitchell, SD, began at eleven o’clock in the morning.  By these statements, Janklow let Herseth and the audience know he still has some energy left in those old bones.

He went on to tell the audience exactly what they wanted to hear.  Tying the fire into his response, he told them he had fire fighters, the national guard, specially trained prisoners, and a great deal of equipment working to put out the fire.  “It all costs money,” he said, “I haven’t looked for the money, yet.  We’re gonna put out the fire, then find the money.”  That is how he would deal with drought relief.  The farmers and ranchers of South Dakota need drought relief; get it to them and “then worry about where the money will come from.”  The audience exploded into a hearty round of applause.

Herseth agrees with Janklow that the issue has become too political and South Dakotans must receive relief.  She received a loud round of applause for her statement, “If we can send 9 Billion dollars to Brazil to support their currency, then we can find 5 Billion dollars for drought relief.”  Observing the need for drought insurance, she made an excellent point that until this happens the federal government needs to implement a policy of market protection.  Though Herseth made a valid point, this is not what the audience wanted to hear.  Janklow told them he would take immediate action, ignoring bureaucracy, and get them relief.  Herseth wants to create more bureaucracy that would delay action and delay relief.  To the farmers and ranchers sitting under the large tent, she basically told them the same thing President Bush had said, no drought relief. 

Perhaps the most devastating question for Herseth came from the audience.  The question asked the candidates what their first actions would be, if elected.  If the gentleman asking the question was not a Republican strategist, he should be. 

Speaking first, Herseth saw a need for South Dakota’s ambassador and single vote in the House to build relationships.  She would learn who was on each caucus and committee, building relationships with her fellow Congressmen and women.  Then, it was Janklow’s turn to speak.

Janklow’s first task would be getting to work for South Dakota.  He has already built countless relationships with people in Washington over his years of service to South Dakota.  He listed several governors who have been elected to Congress, as well as several members of Congress he knows personally.  As governor he has developed working relationships with Senators Daschle and Johnson.  As for President Bush, he has been a long time family friend.  Avoiding the difficulties Thune now finds himself, Janklow added that he might not have a great deal of influence, but it would be good for South Dakota to have a close, personal friend of the President representing them.  To add insult to injury, at the conclusion of the debate, Lars Herseth, Stephanie’s father was recognized by the moderator for being in attendance.  Janklow’s eyes lit up, “Where’s Lars at?  Lars, where are you?”  Janklow’s experience and connections run embarrassingly deep for Stephanie Herseth.

Seeing Janklow and Herseth debating is like watching the Minnesota Vikings play a Pop Warner team sponsored by the downtown Swill and Guzzle bar and grill.  Governor Janklow is too experienced, too seasoned, too much for Stephanie Herseth.  At best, only a few hundred people saw for themselves Herseth’s defeat in this debate.  But, the best way to feel the heartbeat of South Dakota is to drink an early morning cup of coffee in any small town greasy spoon.  Throughout the state, farmers and ranchers meet for coffee and discuss politics and policy.  Janklow has given them something to talk about.

It should also be said that Stephanie Herseth could have an outstanding political career in this state, if she chooses.  There can be no denying it; she is an extremely ambitious and intelligent individual, perhaps a bit too ambitious.  The United States House of Representatives is a lofty goal for any politician, let alone one who has never been a politician before.  After this election, Herseth will likely have a difficult decision to make.  She can go back to her career in law, or she can stay in South Dakota and be elected to a lesser office.  Working her way up, building her own credibility and experiences, she will one day represent this state in Washington.  Rightfully, she is proud of her name, proud of her father and grandfather, proud to be a Herseth.  She needs to realize at the level of politics she is currently competing her opponents have built a name for themselves. 

Alan Malavolti is a contributing writer for PurePolitics.com who lives in Sioux Falls, SD.