Posted on Leave a comment

Wind Won’t Be Stopped

By Bernie Hunhoff

State legislators and energy lobbyists gathered on the fourth floor of the State Capitol on Monday night to hear a review of various issues from the Public Utilities Commission.

If there is any issue that unites Democrats and Republicans in South Dakota, it is the omnipresence of our prairie breezes. They say a real Texas oilman can almost smell where to drill. It is in his bones and nostrils, maybe the way a Northerner can feel the wind even when indoors or in a truck. We live with wind, and we believe in its power.

So the news from PUC commissioners Gary Hanson and Chris Nelson was heartening on that cold night in Pierre, who reported that in a scant decade our state has grown its wind energy industry from nothing to nearly 800 megawatts.

We lead all states in wind development when you rank it as a percentage of total in-state generation. Wind represents 23% in South Dakota. Iowa is second at 17%, followed by North Dakota and Minnesota at about 13%.

But our potential has hardly been tapped by the existing turbines. We could produce up to 4,000 MWs — twice the total annual peak demand for electricity in South Dakota. Consequently, if we are going to expand in the future we’ll need to export our energy to urban areas.

News came this week that a $730 million transmission line will be finished that will carry wind power from the Buffalo Ridge country in Brookings County to the Twin Cities. It is one segment of a string of proposed lines from North Dakota eastward.

Transmission towers are more important than turbine towers at this stage of the game. Also critical is a federal tax subsidy that pays developers up to 30% in construction costs. The federal credit has been an on/off program and it is currently scheduled to be switched off again in 2013, so next year is an important construction season for projects currently being planned.

The only downside to wind energy has been the realization that, beyond construction jobs, it doesn’t seem to create as many rural jobs policymakers had hoped. The PUC staff reports that only about 3 to 7 maintenance and operation positions are created in a 100 MW project.

But the other benefits — lease payments to landowners, tax receipts for state and local governments, cleaner air and less dependence on foreign energy — have all become realities in South Dakota.

Posted on Leave a comment

A Stereotypical Plainsman

By Bernie Hunhoff


“George McGovern is not your typical South Dakotan since he’s a Democrat deep in the red zone,” writes Mark Bittman in the New York Times this week. “But he’s got the combination of humanitarianism, compassion, idealism and utilitarianism that seems common to people born of the prairie.”

Bittman is a food writer for the Times, and his essay (titled “The Wisdom of George McGovern”) focuses largely on McGovern’s life-long effort to curb hunger in the world. McGovern was a bomber pilot in WWII, and he volunteered to keep on flying after the war so he could drop food to the very people that we were dropping bombs on days earlier.

The old senator is now 89, and took a nasty fall last week that resulted in hospitalization in Sioux Falls. Word is that he’s back on his feet and ready to resume writing, traveling and speaking. He wants to stay alive and active, he says, because he knows that he can use his stature as a senior statesman to help feed the world’s poorest people.

Not many South Dakotans have ever received such friendly attention in the New York Times. Bittman’s essay will make you proud regardless of your politics.

Posted on Leave a comment

Is It Cheaper To Live in South Dakota?

By Bernie Hunhoff

Politics are often cussed at Hunhoff holiday gatherings, and as many South Dakotans know, my extended family covers the ideological spectrum.

I happened to tell the clan of a fellow I know in Pierre whose home was heavily damaged by the flood. He was a state employee with a good job, but he couldn’t get financing for a home “improvement” loan, even if the improvements were necessities like new sheetrock and flooring. So he told the bank to just keep the house and he left the state for a better-paying job.

“Well, that could be any of us,” said one of my kin. “We could all get higher paying jobs elsewhere. But it’s cheaper to live here.”

Maybe I accidentally rolled my eyes, but I didn’t argue because, after all, it was a holiday gathering and I was eating free.

But between you and me, I just haven’t noticed that K-mart prices its lawn chairs and cranberry juice any cheaper in South Dakota than the rest of the country. It’s well-documented that housing costs are on par with all but the high-cost areas of the USA, unless you live in one of those cool little West River towns like Fairfax or Bonesteel where the fishing is great and you can still get a decent old house for $12,875. Our energy prices were once lower, but they are catching up with the rest of the nation.

But what do I know. So I checked it out online, and soon came to this 50-state comparison. Of course, I was right … and fortunately I am the only one in my family with a Web site — so I get the last word.

Check it out. South Dakota ranks 28th in cost of living — about in the middle of the pack. I was surprised to see that according to this data base, Nebraska is far cheaper. So are neighboring states Iowa and Wyoming. We are basically tied with North Dakota and Montana.

Wages are considerably lower in South Dakota. We generally rank around 50th in that category, so people working for wages are likely being squeezed here. Business owners, farmers and ranchers may or may not feel the same pressures, depending on their industries and their luck.

You know that we normally like to shed as nice a light as we can on life in South Dakota. But we also don’t think it benefits anybody when we perpetuate a myth. If you take taxes into account (which this particular comparison doesn’t seem to do) then South Dakota’s ranking would probably improve somewhat. But not for the working man or woman, because they pay a far higher percentage of their pay in taxes than their wealthier neighbors.

And if you took taxes into account, then you’d want to also tabulate a hundred other things — like the fact that our technical school tuition is among the highest in the country. We are one of the only states that do not help low income students get a college education. One of the few that does not assist local communities and poor families with pre-school. Etc., etc. There’s a flip side to being a low-tax state. So perhaps this comparison (which leaves out taxes) is one that might actually help the Hunhoffs to avoid family arguments. Or even eye-rolling.

South Dakota is a beautiful place to live. We don’t need to perpetuate myths to make it seem even better.

Posted on Leave a comment

Occupiers Vs. Tea Partiers

I have had the pleasure of attending and speaking at two Tea Party meetings, one in Watertown and the other in Aberdeen. This weekend I got a good look at Occupy Cincinnati, one of the anti-Wall Street protests currently happening across the country. Returning to my hotel this evening, I was swallowed up by a column of protesters winding down Vine Street. They were chanting”Bankers got bailed out! We got sold out!” I didn’t chant and I marched only to avoid being trampled. I did pump my fist in the air a couple of time, just to put some skin in the game. So I can honestly claim to have participated in both protest movements.

I am in a good position to report on both the tea partiers and the occupiers. The protesters in Watertown, Aberdeen, and Cincinnati tended to be rather young or rather old, but in opposite proportions. The average age at the tea party gatherings was probably over sixty, though there were college-age folks at both. Most the occupiers looked to be in their twenties. Many of them sported punk rock haircuts, leather, and chains. There was a sprinkling of folks old enough to be receiving Social Security checks. Most of those older occupiers were decked out in hybrid hippie style. The men had beards and long hair tied back in ponytails. They wore hats and blue jeans and, amusingly, sports jackets. Despite their anti-industry bias, nearly everyone there seemed to be supporting the tobacco industry.

In spite of the rage expressed in the signs they carried, the occupiers were a pretty friendly bunch and seemed to be having a good time. The same was true of the tea partiers. At Aberdeen and Watertown there were several American flags waving in the prairie winds. The tent camp set up below my hotel (I can hear them from my balcony) is also flying Old Glory.

Both the left and the right in American politics want to believe that their own army of protesters is spontaneous and righteous and that the folks across the street are artificial and pernicious. In fact, the Tea Party movement and the Occupy movement are entirely genuine, composed of red-blooded American sons and daughters of liberty. We’re mad as Hell and we aren’t going to take it anymore, or at least not without a good shaking of our fists.

After the Tea Party movement emerged Democrats launched a campaign to show that the movement was violent and racist. Neither accusation was true. Whoever you are, you’d be safer at a Tea Party gathering than pretty much anywhere else. And now that the current favorite of the tea partiers is Herman Cain, the charge of racism is refuted.

It’s true that out of the hundreds of tea party gatherings a handful of racist signs have been observed. It’s also true that some occupiers have carried anti-Jewish posters. There are bad eggs and oddballs at any gathering.

The Tea Party movement had a big influence on the last election. The influence of the Occupation remains to be seen. Let me just say that this is how Americans are supposed to behave.

Dr. Ken Blanchard is a professor of Political Science at Northern State University and writes for the Aberdeen American News and the blog South Dakota Politics.

Posted on Leave a comment

Noem Kicking Up Congressional Dust

Congresswoman Kristi Noem has made blocking dust regulations a centerpiece of her legislative agenda this year. Rep. Noem has proposed H.R. 1633, a bill that would exempt nuisance dust from the Clean Air Act. This bill responds to concerns that the Environmental Protection Agency is planning to hamstring farmers and ranchers by lowering the amount of dust they can stir up from their fields, pastures, and gravel roads. The bill also responds to the normal conservative urge to root out regulations that get in the way of business, profits, and the general ability to do whatever the heck we please.

If you live by a gravel road or a farm field, you understand that dust is a part of rural life. Farmers don’t want to kick up any more dust from their fields than they have to, since that dust is also their topsoil, their livelihood. But agriculture is dusty work. You can’t wait for a gentle rain to settle the dust every time to want to haul another load of corn to town.

Nonetheless, dust can cause problems. Dust can cause asthma, bronchitis, and heart attacks. Recent research found that erionite in the gravel used on some North Dakota roads contributes to an increased risk of mesothelioma, a form of lung cancer. (South Dakota is one of several states with erionite deposits.)

Nobody who eats wants to put farmers out of business. Nobody who breathes wants to live in a cloud of dust. Fortunately, the EPA seeks neither extreme. Just last Friday, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson said her agency is not going to tighten standards on nuisance dust. Her scientists and other data tell her that current dust standards strike the right balance between agribusiness and public health.

The problem is that Jackson, Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack, and others have been saying that for months. The tightened dust regulations that worry Rep. Noem so are a myth. Yet when told there is no problem Rep. Noem insists that there is a problem. She continues to argue that Congress should pass her bill to stop the EPA from doing what it is not doing.

I understand the conservative need to portray regulations and regulators as bad. But there are plenty of existing regulations to study and improve without kicking up dust over rules that don’t exist.

Cory Allen Heidelberger writes the Madville Times political blog. He grew up on the shores of Lake Herman. He studied math and history at SDSU and information systems at DSU, and is currently teaching French at Spearfish High School. A longtime country dweller, Cory is enjoying “urban” living with his family in Spearfish.

Posted on Leave a comment

Wealth, South Dakota and the Social Contract

“There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.”

Elizabeth Warren, consumer advocate and Senate candidate from Massachusetts, thus blasphemes the American ideals of the rugged individual and the self-made man. We build and secure wealth, says Warren, in the context of a social contract. We pay taxes, and in return we get schools to educate workers and consumers, infrastructure to transport our goods and services, and police and banking regulations to protect our wealth.

South Dakota’s state government doesn’t quite dig how Warren’s social contract works. South Dakota’s wealthy businessmen depend on an educated workforce. However, South Dakota resists the notion that those wealthy businessmen ought to pay state taxes on their income. South Dakota state government also resists the notion that it should pay for the education that makes that wealth possible. South Dakota state government pays the second-smallest share of K-12 education funding in the nation, leaving federal and local governments to try filling the gap.

Rather than asking the wealthy to pay their fair share of the cost of civil society, we brag about our low state tax burden. This low-tax/no-tax mindset leads to the odd situation where our state’s wealth (as measured by GDP) can grow by over 4% in 2010, yet our depleted state coffers require that we cut education and other public services in 2011 by 6% to 10% or more. Meanwhile, we pave our roads and runways and care for our ill and elderly with federal assistance that exceeds by 50% the taxes we South Dakotans pay Uncle Sam.

Perhaps South Dakota’s tendency to take more from the social contract than it pays in flows from our history. Our pioneer forebears built the foundations of our wealth on government assistance. The U.S. Army executed the wars and enforced the treaties that cleared the previous inhabitants from the territory our forebears craved. Our forebears received their parcels of Dakota Territory through one of the greatest giveaways of public wealth in history, the Homestead Act. Railroads built with government subsidies and immigrant labor helped that wealth grow.

Since our first sod homesteads, no South Dakotan has gotten wealthy solely by his or her own efforts. We make and maintain our wealth thanks to the common efforts of citizens in society. We all thus have an obligation to pay taxes to support the public institutions that benefit all citizens.

Cory Allen Heidelberger writes the Madville Times political blog. He grew up on the shores of Lake Herman. He studied math and history at SDSU and information systems at DSU, and is currently teaching French at Spearfish High School. A longtime country dweller, Cory is enjoying “urban” living with his family in Spearfish.

Posted on Leave a comment

Faith in the Voters

South Dakota voters have enacted dozens of laws at the ballot box and challenged many more since we became the first state to adopt the initiative and referendum in 1898. We’ve nixed the inheritance tax, banned corporate hog farms, okayed a Right to Work law and said”no” to moving the University of South Dakota from Vermillion to Sioux Falls (7 percent favored the latter). Plus we’ve passed term limits, family farm acts and daylight savings time.

Some state lawmakers find the process insulting — even embarrassing — when their laws are referred and defeated by unelected common folk. Business lobbyists would clearly prefer to argue their positions in the halls of the state capitol than in 66 counties. But citizens and grassroots organizations — including some who can’t afford to send a lobbyist to Pierre — have won major victories because they collected thousands of signatures and took their ideas straight to the people.

November-style democracy was the inspiration of a feisty Catholic priest who harbored a healthy distrust of institutions and politicians. An Aberdeen fixture for a third of a century, Father Robert Haire played controversial roles in many important territorial and early statehood events. On his 70th birthday in 1915, an Aberdeen newspaper published a tribute to the pastor who was once called the Terror of all Evil-Doers:”A quarter of a century ago, Haire was one of the best loved and best hated men in the community, this because he was a pathfinder. Today, everybody loves him and looks up to him.”

Robert Haire was born in Freedom, Michigan, in 1845. His Irish Presbyterian parents named him Robert Emmet Haire after the Irish rebel Robert Emmet. As a young man he taught in a rural school near Flint and boarded with an Irish Catholic family. Inspired by their devotion, he converted to Catholicism in 1865 and later entered the seminary. He then changed his middle name to William because there’s never been a Saint Emmet. Ordained in 1874, Haire returned to Flint and developed a westward itch along with many of his parishioners. Hearing stories of prosperity in Brown County, Dakota Territory, they headed west, arriving on June 26, 1880. Haire celebrated Mass the very next day in a sod shanty. He filed a claim near Columbia and began plans for Brown County’s first Catholic church, an 18 by 45 foot sod structure.

Shortly after arriving, Haire went to Watertown to prove his claim. On July 4, 1880, he celebrated Mass in the Watertown courthouse and then stepped outside to deliver a rousing Independence Day speech, revealing his twin passions for God and country to his new neighbors.

Haire offered his services to Dakota’s pioneer bishop, Martin Marty, thus beginning a long and tense relationship. Marty assigned him a large territory running from the Minnesota border to the Missouri River and from Huron to what became the North Dakota border. Haire traveled on foot, horse, buggy, and train, celebrating Masses in homes, hotels, and railroad cars. He visited 40 to 50 stations and built churches in several communities. He took up temporary residence in Aberdeen’s Sherman House, which he referred to as”a lighthouse on the coast of hell.” His Masses in the Sherman House dining room sometimes drew as many as 150 worshippers.

In the winter of 1881-82, Haire’s sod church in Columbia caved in, so he looked to build again. That spring, the city of Aberdeen raised money to build a church but the Presbyterian minister was the first to apply so he won the funds. When Haire launched his own building campaign, both Catholics and non-Catholics donated land and money. He dedicated the new Sacred Heart Church on December 26, 1882 (the Presbyterian church wasn’t dedicated until 1883).

In 1886, Haire invited the Sisters of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Fargo to help him establish a school in the church. A year later, they launched an effort to build a freestanding school. Haire helped haul lumber during the construction. The three-story Presentation Academy of the Sacred Heart opened in 1888.

Haire also recruited the Knights of Labor, a national organization made up mostly of Catholics. The Knights of Labor was viewed with suspicion by the Church hierarchy until Pope Leo XIII gave his approval. Eventually Haire became the Knights’ state leader and newspaper editor. His early political activism also included the Dakota Farmers Alliance, formed in reaction to farmers’ sense of mistreatment at the hands of politicians, corporations and railroads. As Dakota Territory moved toward statehood (Haire was a delegate to a statehood convention), the Alliance attacked Gov. Arthur Mellette for being too friendly with the railroads. Still, Mellette later appointed Haire to the state board of charities and corrections.

Haire helped form the Alliance’s political wing, the Independent Party. Eventually becoming the Populist Party, it focused on regulating railroads, coinage of silver, and democratic reforms like the initiative and referendum. Haire is considered the originator of the American initiative and referendum process; he advocated for the idea several years before it became part of the Populist Party platform in 1890.

His political philosophy and his distrust of politicians led to his desire to create a way for people to propose laws without interference by elected representatives. He laid out his thoughts in an 1891 issue of the Dakota Ruralist:”These men make the laws to suit themselves — are a law to themselves. The people seldom get any law passed they want.”

Plutocrats resisted his proposal and he quickly refuted their arguments.”Of course, the entire plutocracy, given over to fleecing the values that labor produces, are afraid of the people,” Haire contended.”Such fellows will jump on any proposition with both feet when it is proposed to give the law-making power into the hands of the electors.” Nonetheless,”the people are capable of feeling for, giving form to, and finally decreeing their own laws.”

He described his program that would replace the legislature with a system for popularly proposed legislation:”any law that has been demanded by 25 percent or more of the precincts of the state shall be drafted and printed,” and distributed statewide. On the first Monday after the fourth of July,”the electors in their several precincts, shall either confirm or reject said law, using the Australian voting system. If a law passes, it is law. If it does not get a majority of the whole state electorate, it is no law.”

It wasn’t until 1898, during the re-election of South Dakota’s only Populist governor, Andrew E. Lee, that the initiative and referendum appeared on the state ballot as a constitutional amendment. The amendment passed easily, making South Dakota the first state in the nation to give voters such power.

“…Haire was one of the best loved and hated men in the community, this because he was a pathfinder.”

The initiative and referendum has become common in American democracy. Twenty-six other states have adopted one or both procedures. Since the first use of the initiative in Oregon in 1904, voters across the United States have considered about 2,300 statewide initiatives, approving 41 percent.

Despite the relatively infrequent use of initiatives in South Dakota, critics charge that it’s too easy to get issues on the ballot. By law, petitioners must collect signatures from 5 percent of the voters in the last gubernatorial election. Gov. Peter Norbeck raised the concern as early as 1917, but legislative efforts to increase the number of signatures needed to put a measure on the ballot have been rejected in statewide elections. During one legislative session, a proposal that would have required the requisite signatures from at least 33 counties was defeated when arguments arose over the”one-man, one-vote” principle. Shouldn’t two signatures from Mitchell count just as well as a signature from Eureka and another from Ipswich?

David Owen of Sioux Falls, president of the South Dakota Chamber of Commerce and Industry, has worked to both support and defeat ballot initiatives. He believes the process needs”respectful reform” and he lobbied successfully in the 2009 legislative session for several changes. Owen believes South Dakotans like the grassroots initiative process but he also thinks they’re put off by the”commercialization” that’s developed around the process, in which consultants and signature-gathering firms sell their services to interest groups.†

Before the initiative and referendum were approved, Haire served on the Board of Regents during some tumultuous years. Gov. Lee thought there were enough colleges in the state, but Haire believed at least one more was needed in Aberdeen. The governor vetoed the first attempt to create a”normal school” there, but later acquiesced. Northern Normal and Industrial School opened in 1901, and Haire received much credit. A memorial to him stands on the Northern State University campus, a rare tribute to a man of the cloth on a public campus.

By the time the college was formed, however, he wasn’t exactly a man of the cloth. Years earlier, his activism had put him in conflict with Bishop Marty. One of Haire’s earliest causes was temperance. He spoke around the state in support of a prohibition clause in the state constitution. While Bishop Marty shared Haire’s disdain for alcohol, he preferred to leave state regulation out of it. Others also disagreed with Haire. In 1888, the Aberdeen News reported that some of his parishioners were petitioning to get him removed, noting that,”this attack was conceived in the late Brewers convention in St. Paul.” Haire confronted them directly. During a Sunday mass, he asked those present who supported him to stand. The”congregation rose en masse.”

Haire was perhaps more directly antagonizing to his bishop when he launched Dakota’s first Catholic newspaper, the Dakota Catholic American. In the first issue in 1887, editor Haire wrote:”In politics we will be strictly non-partisan. In religion we will be what our name indicates. In economic measures we will be for the right. We have the approbation of our good father, Our Bishop Marty. Thus fortified, we cannot fail.” The good father’s approbation failed rather quickly. Future issues betrayed Haire’s politics, and Bishop Marty shut the paper down in November 1888.

Haire’s progressively radical politics probably sealed his fate. The Aberdeen News reported on a lecture he gave in 1888:

[Fr. Haire] emphatically declar[ed] that the time had come when the laboring masses would have possession, and if this could not be secured in any other way a bloody rebellion would certainly be the result. He said, also, that he was getting very tired of this representative form of government, but hoped with all his heart for the time to come when the old Puritan democracy principles would rule the nation; when the laws would be framed by the people themselves and not by a few pinheads and trading representatives of the Vanderbilt-Gould type.†

Bishop Marty soon traveled to Aberdeen and ordered Haire transferred to Wakonda in southeast South Dakota. When Haire declined the bishop dismissed him. He remained a priest, but could no longer serve as a parish pastor or administer sacraments.

Haire’s punishment weighed heavily on him. He later told a friend,”Do you know what has kept me in the church in spite of my exceeding bitterness against the bishop? It is the Blessed Sacrament. When I kneel before the altar, I seem to hear a whisper, ëStay a little longer. All will be well.’ And so I hang on in spite of everything.”

In religious exile, Haire grew more involved in politics. He took an active part in the Fusion Party, the coalition of Populists, Democrats, and Silver Republicans (Republicans who left their party to support coinage of silver) that elected Gov. Lee in 1896. Soon thereafter, however, Haire saw the coalition fragmenting and vented his disappointment. In speeches at Fusion Party meetings in 1898, he alternately raged at his comrades and called for harmony

Eventually, however, Haire began to step away from the state stage. He was a Socialist presidential elector in 1900, and in 1902, the Socialists nominated him for the U.S. Senate. Otherwise he seemed to be more interested in his local Socialist meetings, where he was recognized as a mentor according to a tribute published by the South Dakota Socialist Party after his death:”During the earlier years of the organization, he seldom missed a meeting, always taking a leading part, but gradually teaching us to think and speak for ourselves. Later on, he would take no part unless we seemed to be drifting from Marxian principles when he would set us right.”

Despite Haire’s challenges and successes in public affairs, there was a hole in his life. When Bishop Thomas O’Gorman replaced Bishop Marty, Haire submitted his case for reinstatement. O’Gorman asked Haire to make a 30-day retreat and a confession. When Haire complied in 1902, the bishop assigned him as chaplain to the Presentation Sisters and their new St. Luke’s Hospital in Aberdeen. He served there for the remainder of his life.

In January 1916 he wrote to his brother,”My own health is on the down grade, yet no grippe.” On March 4, 1916, he celebrated Mass and then went to his room. He fell ill and reportedly called for a local Baptist minister who had been a Socialist comrade, but the friend arrived too late.

Bishop O’Gorman presided at the funeral in the Sacred Heart Church that Haire had built three decades earlier. Both former Gov. Lee and Socialist leader Eugene Debs sent notes. Debs wrote,”Father Haire was a true follower of the Judean Carpenter. He gave all he had, and best of all, he gave himself to the poor. But he not only sympathized with the poor, he told them why they were poor and how they might put an end to their poverty.”

A newspaper profile after Haire’s death related a telling story. Haire and a parishioner were approached on an Aberdeen street by a vagrant who successfully solicited a dollar from the pastor. The parishioner scolded,”That bum’ll probably get drunk on your dollar.” Haire replied,”Let’s give the poor fellow the benefit of the doubt. If he was indeed hungry — and I believe he was — how would I have squared myself with the Giver of all good things had I refused him?”

A few months after Haire’s death, Bishop O’Gorman penned a fitting epitaph:”He had been in earlier years, when the State was still in the pioneer stage, a most zealous missionary. I believe that the last ten peaceful years of his life and his happy death were rewards of the good and fruitful work of the early years.”

Editor’s Note: This story is revised from the September/October 2009 issue of† South Dakota Magazine. To order a copy or to subscribe, call 800-456-5117.

Posted on Leave a comment

Civilized S.D. Politics

Like my friend Cory Heidelberger, I was delighted when South Dakota Magazine invited me to contribute a column. As instructed, I will tell you a little about myself. I grew up in Arkansas and went to graduate school in Southern California. I have been teaching at Northern State University since 1989.

I teach political science and philosophy. My field of research is Biopolitics, the intersection of biology and political theory. I recently edited a book, Darwinian Conservatism. I write a regular column for the Aberdeen American News, and a blog called South Dakota Politics.

I will write here on state and national politics and occasionally on scientific questions and energy policy. If my friend Cory writes from the left, I once took a survey that identified me as a conservative with libertarian tendencies. That’s about right.

I think the federal government is spending way beyond its means and that our welfare state in its current form is unsustainable. I believe in government but I also believe that power always involves temptation and corruption. Accordingly I believe in limited government. I like the Constitution just fine and the Declaration of Independence even better. I am prolife because I believe that all human beings are created equal, male and female, rich and poor, black and white, born and unborn.

On the other hand I am, somewhat reluctantly, opposed to capital punishment. I am in favor of legal, same sex marriage. I believe firmly in Darwinian evolution and use that theory in my teaching and scholarship.

One more thing that Cory and I share is a love of the Rushmore State. Shortly after I came to South Dakota, a debate was held on the Northern campus. Prolife conservative Phyllis Schlafly debated Sarah Weddington, a lawyer who argued Roe v. Wade before the Supreme Court. Sitting just in front of me was a tall, lean man with several children around him. He was not prochoice on abortion. Whenever Schlafly finished a comment, his large hands would come together in thunderous claps of applause. When Sarah Weddington spoke, those same hands would grip one another and, I am not kidding, I could see his jaw clinch. However, despite his visible passion, he never interrupted a single word that Ms. Weddington said.

South Dakota is an altogether civilized place. One purpose of this column will be to celebrate its virtues.

Posted on Leave a comment

So You Think I’m a Leftist

South Dakota Magazine has invited me to contribute a”From the Left” column. I am honored to answer that call… but I wonder: Is there a”left wing” in our state? Calling a fellow South Dakotan a”liberal” feels like calling Sioux Falls”the big city.”

If South Dakota has a left-wing, I wonder: do I really represent it? I oppose Governor Daugaard’s Large Project Fund because it prioritizes corporate welfare over education. Some folks consider education a leftist fetish (the poppycock! you hear comes from William F. Buckley’s ghost). But I’m just as cranky about corporate welfare because it interferes with the free market.

I oppose the Keystone oil pipelines less out of fear of global warming (come January, I favor global warming) and more out a belief that South Dakotans’ property rights ought never be taken away by a foreign company, not even a nice polite company from Canada.

I support building more wind farms not just because wind power pollutes less, but because wind power could make South Dakotans rich and self-reliant. I oppose the No Child Left Behind Act not just because George W. Bush signed it, but because it defies the very principles I hear from Republicans that big government shouldn’t be meddling in local issues like education. And No Child Left Behind is one big-government program that I have yet to see do any South Dakota child or teacher any good.

Even in my support for universal single-payer health insurance, I groove to good capitalist arguments. Private health insurance creates friction in the labor market that prevents people from taking entrepreneurial risks (you want to leave your office job, start your own shop, and buy your own health insurance? Yikes!). A single-payer system, like George McGovern’s”Medicare for Everyone,” pay health care costs more efficiently and free up more resources for production and spending in the broader economy.

I take a fair share of left-wing positions, but I can take them for right-wing reasons. And left or right matters much less to me than figuring out what policies are good for South Dakota. If loving South Dakota makes me a lefty, then I’m a lefty. I’ll be proud to bear that banner in this corner of the South Dakota Magazine website.

Cory Allen Heidelberger writes the Madville Times political blog. He grew up on the shores of Lake Herman. He studied math and history at SDSU and information systems at DSU, and is currently teaching French at Spearfish High School. A longtime country dweller, Cory is enjoying “urban” living with his family in Spearfish.

Posted on Leave a comment

The Cowboy Governor

Charisma and money are the top qualifications for getting elected to high political office these days. Historians wonder whether some of our best leaders of yesteryear would have been able to serve in our YouTube world.

But South Dakota historians don’t question the electability of Tom Berry, the Belvidere rancher who was elected governor of South Dakota in 1932 during the depths of the Great Depression.

And I was reminded of Berry’s popularity again today when Jan Rasmussen, a White River rancher and the niece of the governor, emailed a story about her”Uncle Tom.”

Mrs. Rasmussen wrote that her dad and her uncle ran the popular West River Frontier Days rodeo for a number of years. The Frontier Days rodeo ranked alongside the Cheyenne, Calgary and Belle Fourche rodeos in those days. The Berry brothers probably did everything from lining up the riders to ordering the beer and selling tickets.

For a few years, Uncle Tom even helped judge the bucking bronc riders. Of course, there’s always a wiseacre around to question whether a politician knows what he’s doing. One day, a spectator questioned whether Tom Berry knew anything about broncs.

The cowboy politician — then a state legislator, and never one to take much guff — immediately left his judging station in the arena, climbed aboard a wild, snorting bronc, and told the chute men to open the gate. The first bronc didn’t buck too much so Berry climbed on another and rode it as well. That seemed to satisfy anyone in the crowd who didn’t already know that Tom Berry could ride a horse.

We’ve collected a lot of good Tom Berry stories through the years, and published most of them in the magazine.

Anyone who wonders how a Democratic candidate won the governorship hasn’t heard of how he campaigned. He would stop wherever there was a crowd, and then proceed to regale the people with stories and good jokes. Some compared him to the great Western humorist Will Rogers.

Berry seldom drove by a threshing or haying bee during campaign season, because he knew there would be people and a good noon meal. He was invariably invited to sit down with the workers. On one occasion, he showed up at the Gene and Linnet Hutchinson ranch in Mellette County, where the family had gathered to put up the hay.

Mrs. Hutchinson was very pleased to have such a distinguished guest but she was also embarrassed by the men’s manners. And she wondered what would happen after dessert, when her husband, her sons and the hired man generally took a nap on the living room floor. Surely, she hoped, they wouldn’t do anything so rude with a would-be governor in the house.

The men and boys, of course, were not burdened with such a strong sense of propriety. Once the pie was eaten, they retired to the living room and soon were snoring. Berry, sensing Mrs. Hutchinson’s discomfort, assured her that there was no reason for apologies. Then he took off his cowboy hat and got down on the floor for a snooze of his own.