By Scott Crass
Democratic South Dakota Senator Tim Johnson’s decision not to stand for re-election creates yet another Senate vacancy, and one that for both parties, creates a priority as high as Mount Rushmore.
Unlike other states, Johnson’s retirement won’t create a donnybrook. Each side boasts of no more than two potential major candidates. But it also leave Democrats the underdogs as they try to hold a 55-45 majority, with most of the pivotal contests involving “red” state Senators.
Johnson retirement means he’s taking a pass at overturning South Dakota’s three-term curse. George McGovern, Larry Pressler, and Tom Daschle were all one-time vote-getting legends in the state, but were shown the door as they aimed for a fourth term (only Walter Mundt had the distinction of achieving that status, and he suffered a crippling stroke midway through and was unable to resume his duties). And with popular ex-Governor Mike Rounds already in the race, Johnson was facing a long, tough race.
Despite polls that showed him trailing Rounds, Johnson is respected and durable enough that he could’ve made it a race. It’s likely that, with battle scars from his 2002 contest with John Thune visible (a contest that was fought to a draw), he simply didn’t want to exert himself to nearly two years of such another grueling fight.
Democrats are under no illusions that this seat will be extremely tough to hold. South Dakota Democratic Chair Ben Nesselhuff said he “rejects the idea that somehow the Republicans have a lock on this state. By no means is this an impossible task, or even improbable.” Impossible, no, but hard. Understated. Especially if Mike Rounds is the Republican nominee. But that’s up in the air as well. ”
Democrats cite Heidi Heitkamp’s victory against the partisan grain in North Dakota last year. What’s funny is that while Heitkamp did manage to hold North Dakota for her party but as recently as the 1990’s, it was South Dakota that was actually more friendly to Democrats. Carter just missed nabbing it and Clinton and Dukakis ran fairly close also.
Indeed, if the environment is geared more toward it’s neighbor to the north, Democrats, particularly without Obama on the ballot,could take comfort. If it is like it’s southern neighbor, Nebraska, Democrats should reach for the TUMS, as Bob Kerrey failed spectacularly in his comeback attempt last year. At the Presidential level, it is no where near as red as Nebraska. But it is not exactly hospitable to Democrats either.
Both sides may have to deal with primaries they view more as nuisances, yet involve schisms within the wings of the parties that could distract big time from the fall.
Many Democrats are talking up Brendan Johnson, the Senator’s son for the seat. He’s is currently U.S. Attorney and would have to resign to run. But others prefer ex-Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin, citing her fund-raising ability.
Herseth-Sandlin compiled a South Dakota-centric voting record in her 6 years in office. She opposed the Affordable Health Care Act, gun control, and was the only House Democrat to oppose a crackdown on credit card practices (South Dakota has a vibrant industry that is only getting bigger).That made her wildly popular, and in seeking her second and third full-terms, she exceeded 2/3 of the vote. Then 2010 happened as Kristie Noem, a State Senator and rancher who was dubbed, the “Prairie Palin,” beat her 48-46%.
Prior to her defeat, Herseth-Sandlin seemed destined to serve South Dakota for life (she seriously contemplated running for Governor, which her grandfather was and her father nearly became),but she got caught in the climate that was 2010.
It’s not all that clear that Herseth-Sandlin will be interested in returning to the trail. She’s since established a comfortable post-Congress life and, with a four-year old son (her husband is a former colleague, Texas Congressman Max Sandlin), she might not want to return to the trail. At least, not yet.
On the Republican side, Noem “could” beat Rounds in a primary. Conservatives have made no secret that they want an alternative to the former Governor and are inching for Noem to run. Rounds actually signed the first bill in the nation that would make abortion illegal in South Dakota should the Supreme Court overturn Roe vs. Wade (voters subsequently overturned it.). Rounds did propose some tax increases as Governor. But he was wildly popular and enters the general a favorite.
Folks have mixed opinions as to whether Noem would give up her House seat, and Rounds would enter the primary a slight favorite. But as we’ve seen in so many other states over the past two cycles, that can mean little once primary day approaches. Furthermore, because South Dakota’s Congressional seat is at large, Noem has the advantage of representing the entire state. So competing with Rounds as far as name recognition won’t be a hurdle.
Should she beat Rounds, a Noem/Herseth-Sandlin race could come down to how South Dakotans are swayed by national interest groups(NRA,etc). Noem beat Herseth-Sandlin by a narrow margin in ’10 but her 56% re-election margin belies questions she’s faced about her effectiveness. If both Noem and Herseth-Sandlin do aim for the Senate, Johnson could conceivably run for the House.
A Rounds/Herseth-Sandlin race would see no shortage of charisma.Both have high name recognition successes to boast of. But the state tilts R in the end and with Herseth-Sandlin having lost before, the Senate race has to be considered Republican leaning.
Speaking to “Roll Call,” National Republican Senate Committee spokesman Brad Dayspring said, “to use a sports analogy, we have home field advantage, the weather conditions are in our favor, but you’ve still got to put the best team out on the field and you’ve still got to execute the plays.” And as North Dakota showed, there’s no guarantee it will stay that way.
Stay tuned.