This interview originally aired on "In the Moment" on SDPB Radio.
Our Dakota Political Junkies offer their analysis into the week's top headlines. What happens when there are too many news stories to keep straight in your head?
Jon Hunter is publisher emeritus of the Madison Daily Leader and a member of the South Dakota Newspaper Hall of Fame.
Michael Card, Ph.D., is a professor emeritus of political science at the University of South Dakota.
____________________________________________________________
The following transcript was auto-generated and edited for clarity.
Lori Walsh:
There's so much happening that you could be forgiven for not even knowing what next week is or what day of the week it is.
And Mike Card, that's kind of the point. Help us think about this.
Michael Card:
Well, I think there's a number of ways to think through this. One of which is the Steve Bannon's comment of flooding the zone, which means having all sorts of activities going on that you have a hard time keeping track of any one of them.
And so the human response is you just stop listening, stop paying attention. And for democracy, that's the worst thing that you could imagine.
But perhaps for an administration, that's exactly what you want to happen. You don't get any opposition. It's when people hear a policy and it becomes personal to them that they generally don't like it. And a negative emotion is part of what activates people.
But if things are coming at you constantly, you don't have time to realize what's going on and you don't listen for future news stories or examine how it affects people you know so you just sort of become numb to the stories. That's what we know happens.
But if you can see how it affects people, which is part of what we're seeing with the polling data, national polling data, regarding President Trump's approval rating. It's going down once people start thinking about, "Oh, you're separating mothers from their children." That offends almost everyone.
In similar situations like that, the ICE agents are masked, heavily armed. I can't imagine our Second Amendment people and stand your ground people thinking, "Well, how do you know who this is?" Because they don't identify themselves. They just come and grab people off the street.
And that, too, is leading to a reduced approval rating of the president.
Lori Walsh:
Well, and one of the things I want to know about is how some of these policies are sustainable because there will be another president in the future.
So when you hear about the southern border, the number of crossings has dropped this much and people are feeling secure because President Trump's approval ratings are slightly higher based on immigration, even though if someone's going to protest something.
So the opposition is very vocal, but overall the numbers show that some Americans like the fact that border crossings have decreased. But when there's another president, what is a policy that works for a certain president at a certain time and then somebody else comes along and that policy doesn't work anymore and you still have the same problem because you haven't really changed the structure?
Michael Card:
On the one hand you might say that because of these people not wanting to cross the border but, as you said, how sustainable is that for how long? Because we haven't corrected the conditions that lead people to want to leave the country they're in and to come to the United States of America for the opportunities that we present.
So until we get to dealing with those sorts of issues, I don't see it really changing. And as you're noting, I don't think it's really going to be sustainable over time.
Lori Walsh:
At some point, Congress has to be involved in immigration law reform. Or we still have a problem.
Am I wrong, Jon? You're kind of looking at me. So it's okay if I'm wrong.
I'm just saying this is one of the questions that I'm trying to ask. I'm like, I'm used to seeing an institutional solution that is based on compromise. What I'm seeing instead is strong action from some forward-facing Secretary of Homeland Security. And that's a person who wants to behave in a certain way. She's not always going to be there. And what's the policy that's underlying the publicity?
Jon Hunter:
I think you're absolutely correct in the fact that it's front-facing or high profile or whatever, which goes directly to your idea of a person or a publicity-seeking agency or whatever to do these high-profile things.
Yes, what really needs to happen is you get some reform, which would involve Congress and probably involve states and the administration and judicial system and everyone like that. And that's the best way of doing it.
If we get closer to a— I don't know what the right word is, but if a president who can do whatever without the use of the other two branches, you'll get more of this kind of activity where whoever's in there the latest would make their own decisions. Democracy in some senses is intended to be slow, is intended to make change thoughtfully, slowly, correctly, and all these checks and balances which are supposed to bring that together.
So if we lose the ability of the three branches to effectively do their jobs, you will continue to see these kind of big swings. If one person can say, "Let's bomb Iran," I don't know, it had to be more than one person, but there certainly Congress didn't approve it as they're supposed to and although the War Powers Resolution had changed, but the more you have a single person making decisions, the farther you'll be toward this swinging widely.
And in this case, at least the law only permits President Trump to serve three-and-a-half more years. We will have a new one.
And so I think that's part of the flooding the zone is "Listen, we've only got three and a half years to change the world. Let's throw everything in there." It is a chaotic circumstance. It's not what America was designed for. The design is for democracy to grind. What's the expression? Grind slowly or grind...?
Michael Card:
Well, yeah, it is not an efficient system. It's Churchill's notion that democracy is the worst form of government except for every other system that has ever been tried throughout time.
Jon Hunter:
So I mean, I think the checks and balances or the roles of all three branches are really in question right now. And that's what I think needs to be resolved.
Lori Walsh:
And the distractibility of, now we mentioned bombing Iran and everything that you were paying attention to before, that was the news.
Remember the movie "Wag the Dog" where there was this low-key scandal of a fictional president? And then they're like, "Well, let's start a war." And they're like, "Well, we can't really start a war." So they start a pretend war and they film it and it's kind of this allegory for modern media and how they cover presidents.
But I mean they're going to vote on rescinding money to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. And I don't know how many people know that's happening today, Wednesday, because we're paying very close attention to what's happening in Iran and Israel.
Not that those two things are tied together, but there's many things happening that you're not paying attention to when you turn your eyes to the next thing.
Michael Card:
Yeah, and I think that's the entire point is these things aren't related to one another. And so there's just more things to consider, and it's very easy for us to shut down.
Lori Walsh:
People are exhausted.
Michael Card:
Yeah.
Jon Hunter:
Agreed.
Lori Walsh:
I do think it's worth acknowledging that that's what's happening and that's the world. We don't get to choose the times that we live in. And we are living in a time when a lot of things are happening quickly.
And in this case, most of those things will impact our lives and the lives of our neighbors. They aren't necessarily far-flung things.
Michael Card:
No, and I mean it is the media's responsibility from a government professor's perspective. The media has to tell people how this is going to affect their lives. And that is often viewed as being liberal bias because it deals with human beings. I don't know that it's liberal bias. I do know that what it is is actually explaining what these policies will do and how they will affect you and your neighbors.
And that is the issue here. Most people agree that one of the policies in the federal law where actually Congress is, for the most part, going to impact. If they approve this Big Beautiful Bill, that's its official title, these things are going to codify much of what those executive orders couldn't codify. These orders have the force of law as long as the president can enforce them through his agents in each of the agencies, but they're not law.
And so they're going to be codified if these bills pass as currently written and those that aren't thrown out by the Senate parliamentarian because they're not budget related. That's another topic probably for later.
But we need to pay attention to these things because there are things in those executive orders and the effects of those laws that will affect your neighbors, if not you directly.
Lori Walsh:
Yeah. I want to bring this really close to home and talk about state laws because we are approaching the 1st of July, Jon, and that means in case you forgot, that things that were passed during the legislative session are going to start going into effect. So we are going to be governed by some new laws, one of which is in litigation right now, even though it's going forward.
And that has to do with shortening the window for petition signing. You want to talk about that one first or do you want to go over some of the other ones that we're seeing highlights from the session?
Jon Hunter:
Well, a quick thing about July 1st, we think about this in the winter, January and February we're shivering and out in the cold, and then there's a veto day and so forth. But by then it's March and then we're on to the next thing and all of a sudden July 1st pops up and here we are, we're taking the bills.
Lori Walsh:
Then we say "What passed?"
Jon Hunter:
Yeah, I think of that a lot. A lot of them we've talked about on air already, but I think there were 210 bills that were passed, a couple vetoed, and most of them will take effect July 1st. There is the ability to put an emergency clause in there if you want to take it place right away, then they can do that. But anyway, I think there were a lot of interesting bills that we kind of forgot about.
And certainly the petition process was attacked in a couple different fronts. There was also a geographic distribution, I believe that was vetoed by the Governor. That's where you had to have 5% from each county or something like that, and the one you were talking about a moment ago.
Really, I think the prohibiting the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines was a significant one. Remember the previous session had the Landowner's Bill of Rights, which was kind of like, if this is going to happen, here's the structure of this. And it took a lot of legislators out because it appeared as though they were setting themselves up for a future passage. But that came out and it is limited. Lewis & Clark water system can still use eminent domain if they choose to. And so I think that was a big deal.
Yeah, there were a lot of them. And of course the budget starts on July 1st. And although that is a bendable number, and Mike has talked about that a little bit, you can use reserves, you can set away reserves. So every dollar that you bring in doesn't have to be spent. It might be more, it might be less.
And Governor Janklow was famous for accidentally having a nice surplus, which he could use as a kind of slush fund.
Lori Walsh:
Discretion.
Jon Hunter:
Yeah, discretion. That's a better term, actually, than slush fund. Thank you for cleaning that up, Lori.
So I mean, that's how we did a lot of wiring in the schools in those days, or laptops for students or whatever. Janklow had money at the end and he said that's what it was for. So getting appropriations I think is a big deal. And yeah, there was a lot of interesting bills.
Lori Walsh:
Well, I do want to go into definitions because of what the terms that people have to struggle to define. But sometimes in these laws as they're written, lawmakers have to figure out how to exactly define things. And you found some fun ones.
Jon Hunter:
Often bills will start out saying, "Look, let's define what we're talking about here. Appropriation means we're going to take money," or whatever that is.
But there was a bill about street racing, Senate Bill 116, which I read and the first definitions had to define what a donut or a burnout or a wheelie or any of these things. And it seems so serious like "A wheelie is when a vehicle has one or two wheels in the front are off the ground at a momentary time," or something like that. So it was obviously a law that was necessary. We've had street racing problems, certainly in bigger cities, Minneapolis has had a big problem with it, but Sioux Falls has some of that too. And so I guess if you're going to pass a serious law to address a serious subject, you got to define what it is.
Lori Walsh:
No more donuts?
Jon Hunter:
Well, you can eat donuts, right? But you can't spin donuts.
Michael Card:
But you can't spin donuts with your car.
Lori Walsh:
You can't do donuts.
Jon Hunter:
Yeah. The burnout, one in particular, "Spinning the tires while the vehicle's not moving, so that rubber and smoke will ..." Just ask the teenagers what it is and you can find out. But you're right, defining those things has to be done. And there it is.
Lori Walsh:
We have codified the definition of donut and burnout and wheelie.
I want to go back to the shortening of the petition window, Mike, because that is an ongoing tension between direct democracy and representative democracy in Pierre.
And Jon Hansen is on the stand talking about this, and he's also running for governor.
So how might something like that end up and certainly is instrumental in the eminent domain. He would argue, I'm guessing if he were here, that this is an example of why you would want to vote for him for governor, but a lot of people are also seeing that that's a reason not to vote for him.
So does this help him in a campaign, that kind of awareness, or does it hold him up as someone who doesn't want to do what the voters say?
Michael Card:
Well, I think both depending upon the population, and for those who are certainly not wanting initiatives on the topic of abortion, because there's a likelihood that they will pass eventually. Most initiatives do if they can keep raising the money to run an initiative process.
But certainly since 2004, a colleague of mine and a former student at Vermillion High School, we did a series of presentations around the state. There's also a South Dakota Law Review article that was published in this most recent edition that spoke about the legislature trying to limit the use of the citizen initiative.
And for my friend Doug Kronaizl and I, when we made some presentations about this, it started in 2004 near as we could tell, and that was about the abortion vote and the 2006 and then the 2008, and one was a referred measure. One was the initiative, and since then there have been at least three bills this year. I believe there were six that did some feature to make it more costly to run an initiative campaign.
And the issue here for a representative or Speaker Hansen and now candidate Hansen is there's a lot of people that are going to be strongly behind you, and as long as you can identify with that particular issue that is a morally repugnant issue to people, they have strong reason to get involved, it's going to support him in that sense. The activating the people that believe in this citizen initiative is going to be harder, but this is a lawsuit and it'll be judged based on black-letter law and how it's being interpreted by a federal judge according to what the U.S. Constitution provides.
Lori Walsh:
Yeah. Anything you would add to that, Jon?
Jon Hunter:
Yeah, I think the idea of citizen-initiated measures is really good, and I would hate to see it get confused with the issues that they may bring up.
In other words, if you say, "Look, let's make sure people can't bring up any petition because it might be an abortion petition," or whatever that thing is.
Frankly, I like South Dakota's history of being able to bring things up, and I think there is now a new significant wedge between the citizens of South Dakota and the state legislature based on this issue. I can't remember it. Was it IM 22?
Michael Card:
Oh, yeah.
Jon Hunter:
Which then was passed and then it was gutted and then it was redone or whatever that was, all of a sudden, and I think there are more citizens that support the citizen-based process than is recognized.
Now, legislators still being savvy politicians still seem to be able to either put these things in place or put up roadblocks or going back door to the Secretary of State and electing a Secretary of State who would encourage roadblocks. But I think if you just had a statewide vote of everyone, they'd say, "Yeah, I'd like a role in this process."
So I am discouraged if they're saying it's based on the possible issue that may come of it other than, look, and granted, we shouldn't vote on everything. We shouldn't have the 210 bills passed voted on by all South Dakota citizens. That's why we elect a representative legislature.
But we also shouldn't try to prevent citizens from participating in this.
Lori Walsh:
Or referring laws if they don't like.
Jon Hunter:
Or referring.
Lori Walsh:
That's a really important one.
Jon Hunter:
Very important.
Lori Walsh:
For citizens to be able to refer laws.
Jon Hunter:
It might be more important than the initiative.
Lori Walsh:
I might argue that.
Jon Hunter:
I think I might, because you say, "Look, this is not what we wanted. Just because you got 51% of the votes among these 105 people."
Lori Walsh:
This is how your Landowner's Bill of Rights goes away as it gets referred because that was passed and then they come with another option.
But I think, to your point, if you're trying to go around and convince people to vote for you, you pick the issue that you think that they're really going to get engaged in and that's going to help you move your case down the road.
I do want to ask you both, who is in the best position for the gubernatorial primary in the Republican party?
Jon Hunter:
I think the dark horse is Marty Jackley. So a lot of people are saying, no, Rhoden has this thing and Doeden, Hansen and all the others, Dusty Johnson has all the money, all those kinds of things.
But remember, Marty Jackley was on the verge of being governor. If it weren't for the last week before the primary against Kristi Noem, he would've won that primary and then he would've won the general election. He has done nothing since then that would reduce that from where he was then.
Lori Walsh:
He has only helped himself since that week.
Jon Hunter:
He's only gotten better, right. Yes. And so I think as far as capabilities, he's certainly thought about it. He's been right in the middle of the process for all this thing right now.
Lori Walsh:
From a horse race standpoint, who is? Because these people, Marty Jackley has not said he's running for governor. At least not publicly, I guess, I don't know what he's said privately in places, but he's not made a public announcement that he's running.
Michael Card:
Well, and I think this will be a lot like 2002 that he's sitting in the dark, just like Mike Rounds was, while the first two candidates literally beat each other up and turned most people off.
Jon Hunter:
Mark Barnett and Steve Kirby.
Michael Card:
Right. I can remember I would take my kids to the equivalent of a Hy-Vee kitchen for lunch, and I was there to listen. It also placated my children so I had mixed motives in doing this, but I would hear people say, "I don't know who this Rounds guy is, but at least he sounds okay."
Lori Walsh:
He seems like a nice guy.
Michael Card:
And that was enough to get him past that 35% barrier, and he came out of the blue. But he also went around the state and made sure that people knew who he was, even if he didn't have enough money to be on the media all the time as those two candidates did.
So I think that's further support for Jon's comment, that Marty Jackley sitting out there just waiting for other candidates to destroy themselves. I think the two most likely to neutralize each other are Toby Doeden and Jon Hansen, which then, if that assumption is correct, then we're starting to look at current Governor Rhoden.
Lori Walsh:
Who has not announced.
Michael Card:
Who's not announced, but is effectively going around the state.
Lori Walsh:
But it looks like he is.
Michael Card:
He sure does.
Lori Walsh:
Sure looks like he's running, but he has not said that.
Michael Card:
And Dusty Johnson who has said that he will decide later. So I don't know how to horse race that one, but it also seems like they're sort of both similar to the Make America Great Again crowd, going to the right side of the party away from where the central Republicans are. And we don't know how many central Republicans there are. Because the first thing is you got to get through the Republican primary, and more than likely whoever wins the primary will win the general election.
Lori Walsh:
Yeah.
Jon Hunter:
Let's clarify what actually happens. Let's say there's five candidates in there and they somehow split that vote up. It was the 35% you were mentioning is one candidate has to reach that, otherwise you have a runoff?
Michael Card:
Otherwise you have a top-two runoff.
Jon Hunter:
So it's 35%. So if you get 35.1% among five candidates, you win.
Michael Card:
Right.
Lori Walsh:
I want to start watching the registration numbers now to see how many people switch to Republican. A whole lot of people want to vote in that Republican primary.
Michael Card:
Well, and what may happen is we have roughly 51% Republican registered voters. We have 26 or 27% independents and 22 to 25% Democrat-registered voters. How many independents are really Republicans who would change their registration to vote in the primary?
Lori Walsh:
Who will go home.
Michael Card:
Yeah.
Lori Walsh:
Yeah. Or Trojan horse Democrats.
Jon Hunter:
But we have the whole deal where people who are residents or citizens of South Dakota, but not necessarily residents. Will they play a role in this thing too?
Lori Walsh:
Oh, I hadn't thought of that.
Jon Hunter:
Because some people try to characterize those people as particular types of voters that I'm not sure they are. There was one bill that takes effect next week where there's a little chipping away at that.
It said unless you spend at least 180 days a year here, you can't get an in-state fishing license. I think maybe hunting too. So that's the first time we're kind of saying, "Okay. You're not a real citizen."
Lori Walsh:
Ed Hochuli, NFL referee, we're talking to you.
Jon Hunter:
Is he a citizen of South Dakota?
Lori Walsh:
Lee Strubinger reached out and talked to him about whether or not he was really a citizen of South Dakota, and I believe that he said, "Yes I am and do not doubt me." But he's not here a lot.
Jon Hunter:
I bet. I did not know. Well done.
Lori Walsh:
I refer you to Lee Strubinger's reporting.
Jon Hunter:
We'll give you credit for that.
Lori Walsh:
Jon Hunter is publisher emeritus of the Madison Daily Leader. Michael Card is a professor emeritus of political science at the University of South Dakota.
