Daugaard Near Sweep; South Dakota Northwest Is Munsterman Country!

Dennis Daugaard won over 50% in a five-man primary last night. Dennis is the big dog.

Daugaard won 59 counties. Where didn't he win?
Secretary Nelson's map shows Scott Munsterman (blue) won his home county of Brookings. In the most interesting geographical note of the primary, he also won the far northwest corner of the state. Harding, Perkins, Corson, and Ziebach: all Munsterman country... representing 1.3% of the state population. Did Munsterman win the great Northwest simply by showing up? Did he campaign there earlier and harder? I've lived in the Lemmon–Bison metroplex, and it isn't exactly the place where I'd think a fancy-pants college-town mayor would light up the crowd. Readers, your explanations for Munsterman's amazing island of support are welcome.

In Shannon County, 56 registered Republicans showed up at the polls and gave Ken Knuppe (green) his single county victory of the night. He beat Daugaard there 27% to 24%. Is his neighboring home county of Custer, Knuppe came in fourth, with 15%, behind Daugaard, Howie, and Munsterman.

Only one county went for Gordon Howie (yellow). Todd County tilted for Howie, giving him 37% over Daugaard's 34%. Howie broke 20% in only six other counties: Meade, Jackson, Harding, Fall River, Custer, Bennett. In his home county of Pennington, where he owes his neighbors $57K in property taxes, Howie got under 19%, second to Daugaard's almost 47% and just barely better than the local paper's endorsee Knudson.

South Dakota Primary Prediction 1: Daugaard 45%

Journalists, start your spell-checkers!

Five men are running for the South Dakota Republicans gubernatorial nomination. The SD-GOP votes tomorrow. Dennis Daugaard will win that vote.

My vote predictions:

1. Dennis Daugaard 45%
   
2. Dave Knudson 23%
   
3. Scott Munsterman 17%
   
4. Gordon Howie 10%
   
5. Ken Knuppe 5%
   

I'm picturing my prediction of Daugaard's number as the middle of a bell curve with a 5% standard deviation. That means I think there's a 68% chance that Daugaard's total will be between 40% and 50%. I think there's a 96% chance he'll win between 35% and 55%.

That also means I think there's a 2.3% chance that Daugaard will draw less than 35% of the vote tomorrow, which is the only circumstance under which any of the fellas vying for second place get a swing at Daugaard in a runoff. Run-off? Hardly.

How do I calculate these numbers? Pure vibe. But here's what generates that vibe:

Efforts to craft an upset narrative acknowledge Daugaard's frontrunner status while ignoring why he has it. He's been winning buy-in from Republican stakeholders by fundraising since 2007. He's got plenty of that money left to go to war with the Dems right away on June 9. He's the lieutenant to one of the most popular sitting governors in the country. That approval is going to be even higher among Republicans... and they're the folks making the choice tomorrow. Shout something about Daugaard being four more years of Rounds, and the folks voting tomorrow are more likely to say, "Cool!"

(Daugaard also has the best story and the best face of the bunch. If he grew Knuppe's mustache, I'd switch registration. Hubba, hubba.)

Joel Rosenthal likes Dave Knudson's ads. Mr. Rosenthal's commentary reminds me of the very different political world I live in. Thanks to the glory of the digital conversion, we no longer receive commercial TV. My picture of the political world is thus very different. I might see an ad once, if someone points it out to me on YouTube, but then it's gone, and I'm back to reading the news and the blogs. The only thing I've read indicating Knudson has made progress with voters is the May Rasmussen poll that shows Knudson and Daugaard as the only Republicans who poll stronger than Democratic challenger Scott Heidepriem.

The Munsterman wave is alive and well... in the imaginations of the pro-Munsterman blogosphere. Pat Powers insists that big media support for Knudson "continues Daugaard's rapid erosion of voters." Various commenters offer lots of "everyone I talk to likes Munsterman" talk. "Everyone I talk to" is the perfect introduction to the self-selecting and thus invalid sample. I have yet to hear any objective evidence from any objective observer that Munsterman or anyone else is putting a dent in Daugaard's support.

Journalist Bob Mercer does entertain the Munsterman question. He says any purported Munsterman surge is either a hoax or "the greatest stealth groundswell of modern times in South Dakota politics." Mercer says Team Munsterman will be seen as "the pre-eminent grassroots geniuses" of South Dakota politics "if their talk comes true." Given Mercer's opinion of blogs versus good newspapers, I suspect that when he uses genius and blogger in the same sentence, he's joking.

Alas, Gordon Howie doesn't stand a chance. I say alas, because he is the candidate Scott Heidepriem could most handily destroy in November. Howie epitomizes all the reasons the Tea Party can't govern. He thought he saw a big wave coming, he grabbed his surfboard and leapt into the water... but he forgot to tie his swim trunks. And now he's caught in low tide with his tax pants down, behind $58,000 on his property taxes thanks to irresponsible land speculation.

Ken Knuppe failed to transform himself from dark horse to race horse. As a rancher never before elected to public office, he had the best chance to capitalize on any anti-insider sentiment. but he never built the campaign machine or momentum to establish himself in the public consciousness as a viable alternative or an embodiment of any new vision or policy direction folks might be looking for.

I stand by my numbers. Daugaard's going to win tomorrow and rumble hard with Heidepriem.

Republicans, feel free to prove me wrong me at the polls.

RCJ Endorses Knudson: What Bodes November?

The conventional wisdom is that the well-oiled, well-moneyed Dennis Daugaard machine has the GOP primary election in the bag. The Rapid City Journal says nuts to conventional wisdom and endorses Dave Knudson for Republican candidate for governor:

We need to curb the growth of South Dakota's government. We need to become more aggressive in addressing our budget shortfall with real cuts.

We need to reconsider the current funding formula for education but also hold school districts more accountable.

We need to work to eliminate no-bid contracts, putting an end to the secrecy. We need an advocate for open, transparent government of the people for the people.

We need someone who wants more for South Dakota, not just more of the same [Journal editorial board, "Dave Knudson Earns Journal's Endorsement," Rapid City Journal, 2010.06.02].

Now suppose the conventional wisdom holds and Daugaard wins on Tuesday. Whither the Rapid City paper's endorsement? The editors' language sounds an awful lot like the campaign lines coming from "Independent Democrat" Scott Heidepriem. If Knudson loses, the RCJ could easily rerun the above text and simply replace Knudson with Heidepriem.

Of course, Knudson backers might not want to mention that similarity to Tuesday's Republican primary voters....

Knudson Sound Bites Daugaard in Negative Attack

Coming off a poll showing he and Dennis Daugaard are the only Republican gubernatorial candidates beating Democrat Scott Heidepriem, Dave Knudson is stepping up the negative ads on Daugaard. Scott Munsterman campaign manager Pat Powers posts this new dinger from the Knudson camp, complete with wiseguy country music:

If you're interested in hearing Daugaard in context, here's the full video from the 2007 Homestake press conference clipped above, provided by the good old Hoghouse Blog:

I'll say this for now: were there telprompters? For a guy not too involved with the project, Daugaard sure seems to know a lot about the project and people involved. And that was three years ago.

Heidepriem Challenges GOP to Debates; Daugaard and Knudson Accept

Both of Scott Heidepriem's sons competed in Lincoln HS speech activities... and hey! Heidepriem wrote a biography of NFL founder Karl E. Mundt—how could he not appreciate the value of debate?

Credit Heidepriem with calling on his GOP challengers in the South Dakota governor's race to debate... and credit Dennis Daugaard and David Knudson for already accepting. The Heidepriem folks have issued a press release saying that Knudson has accepted at least three debates in September and October and possibly a total of eight debates around the state. Daugaard sounds ready to go balls to the wall, accepting Heidepriem's challenge to a debate on June 15, just one week after the GOP primary. Daugaard also plans at least three debates in the fall, plus the State Fair and DakotaFest. Rock on!

Daugaard's acceptance is particularly intriguing. Like Knudson, he gives the easy answer of "Sure, I'll debate," and avoids giving Heidepriem an easy political hammer. (Darn—guess I'll have to send my chicken suit back.) But Daugaard shows even more moxie and takes Heidepriem's full offer, including the early debate.

What, no dickering? What does this move say? Here are my five reads, in descending order of importance and credibility:

1. Daugaard knows he's got the primary in the bag and is ready to pivot to hammering on Heidepriem.
2. Daugaard knows he doesn't have the general in the bag and needs to start hammering on Heidepriem. Someone 30 points ahead could afford to play haughty and decline to dignify Heidepriem with more than a minimum of side-by-side stage/camera time. Even if the Daugaard people think they have the general in the bag, they are too thorough (or superstitious) to play the frontrunner.
3. Daugaard wants to shift attention from any lingering animosity from the five-way primary to unite the party, including any sour-grapes Sioux Falls Republicans who might slide from Knudson to Heidepriem. Holding a debate right after the primary says to party wafflers, "So you voted for Knudson, and Knudson lost. Get over it. Time for the main event—let's beat some Dems!"
4. Daugaard is looking across ticket (Dennis is a nice guy; he does think of others) and setting a precedent for the GOP challengers to draw Herseth Sandlin out. GOPers have already made some hay criticizing SHS for not coming out to health care meetings and other public forums last year. Correct or not, it sure sounds good. Team Daugaard may be saying to Teams Nelson, Noem, and Curd, "Get ready, challenge SHS to debates, get all the stage time you can with her!" All three GOP challengers get a boost in ethos from appearing on the same stage as the sitting Congresswoman.
5. Absolute skullduggery: Daugaard secretly supports SHS, knowing we need a Dem in Congress to get the Speaker's and President's ears and bring home the bacon. Daugaard knows SHS will eat anti-pork posers Noem and Curd alive in head-to-head policy debates... and he wants to set an example that they will foolishly follow. (Nelson might hold his own on policy... but Daugaard knows that when Nelson gets done pandering to the hardcore wingnut primary voters, he'll settle down and be a pragmatist again, so Daugaard isn't worried about him.)

GOP friends, there's one more reason to vote for Daugaard: more debates sooner! Bring it on!

Knudson Uses Selective Quotes in Latest TV Ads

I guess I should watch more TV....

An eager reader points out some clear distortion from the Knudson campaign. The latest Knudson ad cites applause from the Aberdeen American News:

• "Knudson truly is a problem solver."
• "Knudson might be the most effective member of the Legislature."
• "Knudson's legislative record would dwarf that of Daugaard."
• "Knudson's legislative record exceeds the Governor's in many respects."
• "Knudson's been a champion of holding down property taxes, more state aid to K-12 public schools, promoting economic development."

All of the above are relatively accurate quotes from four paragraphs in this May 1 op-ed by Bob Mercer. But those four paragraphs were sandwiched with some critical analysis of the Knudson campaign.

• Mercer questions Knudson's claim to have led the effort to balance the 2011 budget: "It is true that Knudson appeared to be a leader in the effort. But all of those debates and discussions took place behind closed doors at the Capitol. So who can really know?"
• Mercer notes that Knudson's claim might have some credence if at least one other legislator would step forward and vouch for Knudson. Otherwise, Knudson comes off sounding like Gordon Howie (and Rule #1 on the Team Knudson Strategy Board: Do NOT sound like Gordon Howie!).
• Mercer also questions Knudson's taking credit for the 1995 school-aid fix: "Knudson, a Sioux Falls lawyer, was the temporary chief of staff for Gov. Bill Janklow in the 1995 legislative session. In the 15 years since then, I've never heard Janklow give all or even most of the credit to Knudson for those pieces of legislation that Knudson worked on" [Bob Mercer, "Capitol Notebook: Closed Doors Obscure Facts in Campaign Fight," Aberdeen American News, 2010.05.01]
  

Mercer also credits Daugaard with running a better campaign, noting that going negative may hurt Knudson, especially since he's putting his face on those attacks.

Speaking of faces...


...who the heck is doing your ads, Dave? I see this image, and I see Daugaard first. He's looking right at me! I can see his eyes! His lighting is better! You obviously have a Daugaard mole on your staff who keeps screwing up your TV spots. Whack the mole, do your ads right!

And consider quoting Bob Mercer in context.

Howie Stumps for Pastor Vote... Gets One

Perhaps Gordon Howie's next slogan will be, "A Groundswell of One."

South Dakota GOP gubernatorial candidate and self-proclaimed teabagger Gordon Howie challenged pastors last week to endorse him from their pulpits. Now the Howie campaign issues a press release trumpeting the results of that bold challenge: one pastor said "Vote Gord!" from the pulpit Sunday. One. Constitutional prooftexter extraordinaire H. Wayne Williams of teetotalling Liberty Baptist Tabernacle in Rapid City. So much for walking circumspectly in this world.

The press release also cites Pastor Steve Hickey, but only to say that pastors' political speech is "a very important topic to be talking about." Pastor Hickey addresses the issue of whom to endorse directly on his own blog:

I can't stand up and say vote for Howie**** because I have no Scriptural justification to favor him over Munsterman, Daugaard or Knuppe. Pastors need to focus on what is clear in Scripture - good/bad/right/wrong- the leadership and fiscal nuances that distinguish these four candidates right now don't catagorize them morally as good or bad choices [Pastor Steve Hickey, "Pastors: IRS Code Does Not Trump U.S. Constitution," Voices Carry, 2010.05.17].

I would love to see Pastor Williams and Pastor Hickey compare notes on Scriptural justification on this one.

So a candidate tries to manufacture an issue. He adds one pastor to his vote count. Not the best return on investment.

-------------------
Kevin Woster tries to help Howie raise his profile by asking another gubernatorial candidate, Dave Knudson, what he thinks about Howie's "challenge" to pastors. Knudson, bless him, doesn't pander to the Howie crowd:

Knudson: America was founded on a concept of freedom of religion. The safest way to preserve that is observe separation of church and state. You are in fact free to endorse from ther pulpit as long as you do not want the special tax exempt treatment. I think the restriction against direct involvment in political campaigns is fair if you want the special tax exempt treatment.

Woster: Do you think this is an effective political point for Gordon in a primary where the Republican base - what some might argue is a strong pro-God entity - is especially influential?

Knudson: It is always dangerous to encourage people to break the law (even a law you do not agree with ) at their risk and not at your own risk. This is especially suspect when done for political gain.

Woster: As a business lawyer, if you were representing a church, what would you advise the minister to say about politics during a primary season?

Knudson: This not an area in which I am particularly knowledgable but I believe one is free to talk about issues but not to endorse particular candidates. As a lawyer I would not advise a client to put their tax exempt status at risk [transcript, live chat, Mount Blogmore, 2010.05.17].

Daugaard Clear Favorite Among Liberal Blog Readers

GOP friends, is that a good thing?

The latest Madville Times poll asked readers "Which Republican is best qualified to be South Dakota's next governor?"

Dennis Daugaard	58% (105 votes)
Dave Knudson	17% (31)
Scott Munsterman	12% (23)
Gordon Howie	7% (13)
Ken Knuppe	3% (6)

Granting a margin of error for online polls slightly larger than the Jim River Valley, what alternative hypotheses might we frame from these results?

1. The sensible read: The GOP primary will go the way the conventional wisdom expects, with Dennis Daugaard's three-year fundraising campaign swamping all comers.
2. The whisker read: Republicans think more like my wife than I about handlebar mustaches. (Or maybe Knuppe just needs to big mutton chops!)
3. The skeptical read: The fine young folks working in the Daugaard campaign office are spending too much time on the Internet.
4. The right-wing read: The liberal readers of the Madville Times clearly prefer Progressive Republicans-in-Name-Only to brave and pure conservatives like Gordon Howie who know that nothing is more important than fighting the culture war.

I'm willing to speculate at this point that South Dakota's gubernatorial candidates will come out in the primary in the same order as this poll... with the possible exception that Munsterman and Howie might swap places, given Howie's potential to coalesce the wingnut vote. The most interesting question may be whether Daugaard can get the mainstream of the party to close ranks and give him a clear majority on June 8.

Knudson Hops in Wayback Machine... Tangles Spacetime-Detroit Continuum

And now word from the Madville Times Media Affairs Department...

Check out the new ad from South Dakota GOP candidate for governor Dave Knudson:



Ah, makes me feel all old-timey, like I'm electing Ward Cleaver to drive us to Pierre in a nice tail-finned Ford Taurus...

...wait a minute. Play that tape back:

Ah ha...

...ah ha...
...ah ha.

People get paid money to do things like this right. Aaarrgghh!

p.s.: Little known fact: Dave Knudson was my local interviewer when I applied to Harvard in 1989. He apparently gave me a good review! But I'm still not voting for him. I'm an ungrateful cad. ;-)

SDGOP Mud Wrestling Begins; Dark Horses, Keep Riding!

The Dave Knudson for Governor campaign sends me its fun little press release tweaking Dennis Daugaard for his apparent flip-flop on Governor Rounds's budget.

Part of me goes Tee-hee! at the prospect of Republican mud-wrestling. But part of me thinks of 2002 and gets a little antsy. Daugaard and Knudson have their differences, but they are cut of similar pragmatist cloth. They'll lead the fight for the mainstream Republican vote.

But as they start fighting—and they will, they have to, that's a primary reality—they may find themselves rolling down the same road as Steve Kirby and Mark Barnett in 2002: the road to defeat at the hands of a dark horse challenger.

And who are our dark horses this year?

Well, there's rancher Ken Knuppe, who's probably going to Wasson out on us any day now.

There's Scott Munsterman, whose events calendar does look distressingly empty this month. I wouldn't go so far as to say the wheels are coming off the Munsterman campaign, although his campaign manager has certainly been making a push to supplement his income with more blog ads.* I find it hard to believe that Munsterman would bail on the campaign after selling his business and driving all over kingdom come last year. If the two big guys are fighting, why not stay and fight to be the Mike Rounds surprise of 2010?

Because, as Badlands Blue points out, there's another dark horse who may have an even better shot at gobbling up the remnants of a GOP electorate split by a Knudson–Daugaard bloodbath: Gordon Howie. Yes, he's a nut, but he might be the right kind of nut.

Daugaard and Knudson can split the sensible GOP–Chamber of Commerce vote. Munsterman has that good-old fundagelical Wesleyanism in him, but for all his signals to the theocracy crowd, he's still a relatively practical policy wonk (read the briefs, read the book). The radical right knows Munsterman isn't quite the rabid anti-abortion crusader of their dreams.

The great non-wonk right that votes on nothing but fetuses and fags† knows Gordon Howie is their man. He's built his reputation in the crusade for theocracy. The moment he submits his petitions for governor, he has a lock on the Unruh block of the GOP. Munsterman will be left playing for the scraps of the sensible Republicans, and unless he and Knudson roll over to save the party, Howie could be the nominee.

...at which point, Heidepriem wins.

Gee, I guess all of me is saying, Tee-hee!

---------------------------------
*Powers's latest ads include the Pothole Fairy! Hmmm... conservative blogger advertises for lobby supporting more government spending—wrap your brain around that one!.

†I apologize now to my friends on the left who may be offended by my use of the term. I use it for alliteration and to capture the homophobic thinking the Howie crowd's bullying and bias demonstrate. As always, the comment section is open.

Munsterman Campaign Manager Thumps Knudson for Supporting Tax Increases

Munsterman for Governor campaign manager Pat Powers uses his blog to take more digs at gubernatorial opponent Dave Knudson, this time criticizing Knudson's support for increasing gas taxes and vehicle registration fees to address South Dakota's budget shortfall.

Never mind that Knudson may be the only fiscal realist among a field of GOP fantasists who think $150 million shortfall will go away with wishful thinking coupled with continued quiet acceptance of federal money. What I find interesting is that of all the members of the Long-term Highway Needs and Department of Transportation Agency Review committee who Knudson predicts will vote today in favor of those increases, Powers leaps at the chance to single out his boss's political opponent for criticism.

But Powers assures us his site is his opinion only, not a campaign website.

To his credit, Powers follows up with a list of committee members (after I send him the link in a comment). He pre-emptively blames any vote for an increase on "Liberal Republicans on the panel" and those darn minority Democrats.

Still absent from his criticism: Dakota War College favorite Shantel Krebs, who is the chair of the committee Powers puts on the hotseat. Krebs was on the SDPB news breaks yesterday thumping the drum for tax increases. She said that South Dakota could jack up road taxes and still have the lowest taxes in the nation.

I assume Powers be cheering Krebs’s “former” status as well and calling for her to resign her vice chairship of the state GOP. After all, she must be one of those fake Liberal Republicans.

Reasons I Like the Munsterman Campaign So Far

As a registered Dem who will hoot and holler for Ron Volesky and then vote for Scott Heidepriem in November, I should be focusing on what the noisiest Republican in the governor's race is doing wrong and would do wrong as governor.

There will be time (and material) for that. But on this glorious South Dakota State Fair weekend, I'm feeling generous. And heck, if I can find things I agree with the Madison Glenn Beck fan club on, I can find good things to say about the Scott Munsterman campaign. I may not know head from hindquarters on winning elections (I've lost two here in Madison, twenty years apart), but on strategy, I see the Munsterman machine making a few good moves:

1. Making noise: I've had some interesting discussions with fellow politics watchers (and players!) about the merits of early campaigning. I still wish we could wait until January 1 or even April 1 to have a nice, concentrated campaign when everyone's listening. But if I were Munsterman, challenging two GOP big dogs with better statewide recognition and bigger money, I'd be taking the same tack: pumping out the press releases, touring the state, doing blog interviews, grabbing all the free press I could. Every time Munsterman's name appears in print, even amidst snark from some pinko secular humanist on Lake Herman, he gains recognition and forestalls being relegated to the position of third man in a two-man race. (Heck, criticism from liberal blogs might even help Munsterman raise his stock among the voters in his immediate challenge, the Republican primary.)
   
2. Putting challengers on defensive: Munsterman is laying land mines for his challengers. In explaining how he'll address South Dakota's budget deficit, Munsterman highlights the growth of state government and reliance on reserves under the Rounds-Daugaard administration, thus challenging opponent Dennis Daugaard to either defend or distance himself from his boss. In his missive to the state legislature's Medicaid Reimbursement Study committee, Munsterman challenges opponent David Knudson to defend his indefensible proposal to tax medical services, the very issue that clinched PP's support for the Munsterman campaign.
3. Targeting key constituencies: His talk on small schools targets the small towns (and he manages to phrase it in free-market language for the Milton Friedman fans). His interview with Pastor Steve "All Abortion All the Time" Hickey sets off my alarm bells, but it rings the church bell for South Dakota's fundamentalist voters who need the smell of red (herring) meat to draw them to the polls. And heck, Munsterman's drive across the state for a YouTube interview in Wasta on Hubba's House makes a grab for the constituency of Hubba's West River neighbor and hat, ranch, and manly-mustache kinsman Ken Knuppe. It may be early, and a majority of folks may not be paying attention, but Munsterman is giving the opinion leaders in those constituencies who are listening just the right hooks to remind them to mention Munsterman when the primary gets closer.

Harbor no illusions that Munsterman has positioned himself as a frontrunner: George Foreman looked good in early rounds, too, until Ali decided the time was right to throw punches.

As I recall, Munsterman sold his practice so he could campaign full-time for the job he feels he is "supposed to do" (I'm listening for the "God told me to" line). Given the magnitude of that gamble, I can imagine Munsterman thinking, "I could hold back, wait for January to campaign hard... but then I'd feel like I didn't give it my all." If you're going to go for something big, you might as well go all out. Munsterman is doing just that, and I commend him for that.

Knudson Proposes Taxing Sick People

South Dakota gubernatorial candidate David Knudson wants to raise your taxes. To be fair, State Senator Knudson appears to be aiming for a trade-off that would reduce your property taxes but squeeze you more at the grocery store... and the hospital.

But even a trade-off isn't enough for conservative Dakota War College to swallow the proposal. Pat Powers's fiscal conservative sensibilities are sufficiently offended for him to refer to Knudson's medial services tax as part of "the clincher" that motivated him to throw in with the Scott Munsterman campaign.

Knudson's medical tax proposal is offensive on multiple levels. Property tax may be an outdated method of taxing individual wealth, but taxing injury and illness is even worse. Knudson reasons that much of the tax will be paid by the federal government via Medicaid and Medicare, but that idea reeks of the South Dakota "We love pork!" attitude. Our neighbors in other states pay their taxes, Congress designates that money for health care, and we reappropriate a slice fo that money to fill potholes. Is that even legal?

Knudson's thinking is reflective of the whole legislative session this year, where we nibbled about the edges but saw no real fiscal leadership in coming up with broad, serious reforms in the state budget. Evidently the best Knudson can come up with is another sop to regressive taxation and reliance on Washington.

Knudson, State Affairs Cave to Big Energy, Continue $143M in Corporate Welfare

You know that state budget deficit South Dakota has been fretting about since Governor Rounds's first FY2010 budget address back in December? What if I could wave a magic wand that would put $143 million back in the budget? That would be enough to wipe out this year's and next year's combined budget shortfalls of $135 million and leave a down payment to cover 2011's projected $91 million deficit.

$143 million is the amount of potential sales- and excise-tax refunds the state may gave back to big industry projects that qualify for what Bob Mercer calls "special treatment." And that doesn't count the potential taxes we could receive when TransCanada starts plowing Keystone XL through West River.

Senator David Knudson (R-14/Sioux Falls) waved magic wand that could have brought a substantial portion of that $143 million back on budget last week, when he successfully hoghoused HB 1276 to exempt pipelines, railroads, power transmission lines, and any other "linear conveyance or transmission facility" from the refund program. Senator Bob Gray (R-24/Pierre) jumped in to add a provision that would make those refunds matters of public record. The bill passed Senate State Affairs, though good friend of TransCanada and other big energy corporations Senator Russell Olson (R-8/Madison) voted to keep handing money back to the wealthiest among us.

Alas, as Bob Mercer reports, the utilities lobbyists raised holy heck, and Knudson actually called the bill back to committee, where it was put to sleep. (See Bob Mercer, "State Has Paid $46 Million in Tax Refunds for Big Projects," Aberdeen American News, 2009.03.09.)

Now the argument for continuing these tax refunds, as stated by Rep. Val Rausch (R-4/Big Stone City, home of another really big energy project), is that these big energy companies are big investors in our state and thus promote economic development.

But consider Iberdrola Renewables, the company that got HB 1276 started. Iberdrola built the Buffalo Ridge I wind project in Brookings County. They fouled up their paperwork and missed out on the tax refund. They wanted the original version of HB 1276 to let them retroactively qualify for the refund. (Typical big corporate philosophy: if you can't follow the rules, change them!) Iberdrola sent Pierre energy lawyer Brett Koenecke (who also shills for TransCanada) to lobby for the bill... but then, even after State Affairs tucked its tail between its legs and restored the bill to the special treatment Iberdrola wanted, Iberdrola abruptly told Koenecke to tell Knudson et al. to let HB 1276 die. "We don't think going farther would be productive at this point," Koenecke told the committee. "We appreciate the consideration given to the bill."

In other words, that big tax refund wasn't essential for Iberdrola to complete Buffalo Ridge I or continue its operations. It sounds to me like that tax refund wasn't worth even this little bit of attention, not to mention the possibility that the exact numbers behind this corporate welfare would become public.

$143 million would go a long way toward balancing the state budget. Big corporations don't need that welfare to survive. Education, the arts, Birth to 3, and other valuable state programs do. Senator Knudson, toughen up, and tell the utilities they can pay their fair share for the privilege of doing business in South Dakota.

-----------------
Update 12:15 CDT: My lovely wife and I just bought into a mutual fund this morning, Calvert Global Alternative Energy Fund (CGAEX). The second largest holding in that portfolio? Iberdrola. Hey! About that tax refund... ;-)

Herseth Sandlin for Governor? Don't Order Those Inaugural Ball Tickets Yet...

I told myself I wasn't going to say a word about the 2010 election until, well, 2010. But Kevin Woster's Mt. Blogmore musings over Stephanie Herseth Sandlin's chances at the governor's seat, if she runs for it, got me thinking.

Woster offers a number of reasons that we Dems shouldn't think we've got the governor's office in the bag if SHS throws her hat in that ring. The most relevant reasons have dollar signs in front of them, like Dennis Daugaard's $400K in the bank at the end of last year. Of course, if Dave Knutson really can raise a million, and if the Republicans drain their war chests in a bruising primary brawl, that strength could disappear.

Also don't forget that deep down, every South Dakota voter knows South Dakota is a welfare state, and we like sending Republicans to Pierre to keep our taxes down and Dems to Washington to bring home the pork to make up for the shortfall.

In terms of pure campaigning, I would never underestimate a Groton National Forensic League veteran (not to mention a national tournament orator!). Nonetheless, eager Dems might also want to note that SHS hasn't faced a tough election since 2004. South Dakota's Republicans have seemed willing to let our lone seat in Congress go without much of a fight. Threaten the GOP with a historic surrender of the South Dakota veto pen to a Democrat, and they might break out the brass knuckles. (Don't think they'll hit a girl? All's fair....)

Bets on the race now are silly. We don't even know which horses are running, let alone whether they'll be running in a recession, a depression, or Year Two of the Glorious American Restoration. Nonetheless, for kicks and giggles and New Year's cocktail chatter, here are the Madville Times early odds on who could beat Stephanie Herseth Sandlin:

Dennis Daugaard: even. (Fundraising since last year!)
Scott Munsterman: 1.5 to 1 (Exectuive experience! Alas, he'll catch some Joe the Plumber heck in the primary for ruling the People's Socialist Republic of Brookings. And Mr. Mayor, switch off that automatic audio on the website!)
Dave Knudson: 3 to 1. (SHS can play the anti-Sioux Falls bias against Knudson, who just won't look as good on a tractor.)
Ken Knuppe: 10 to 1 (if he could beat his 50 to 1 odds in the primary. I want to believe in the handlebar 'stache, but I know better.)