Swing State Project

« TX-28: This Is Crunch Time | Main | FL-Sen: Time to Start a Dead Pool »

Monday, March 06, 2006

SD-Gov: Now We've Got Some Ammo

Posted by DavidNYC

South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds couldn't hide behind technicalities this time. Today, he signed a law banning all abortions in South Dakota except to save a mother's life. Not her health, only her life. It also includes no exceptions for rape and incest. None at all. If some sick father rapes his thirteen-year-old daughter, this law would require that she bear his baby. There are no words to describe the disgust I am feeling right now.

The human rights, civic and legal dimensions of this appalling bill are being widely discussed throughout the blogosphere. The political angle, though, should not be disregarded. Don't get me wrong: I would much, much rather that this bill have never passed. It's a true abomination. But since it has - and especially since Rounds signed it - we now have the opportunity to use it against him.

As I wrote recently, the Democrats currently have no one running against Rounds this fall. This matters not because we have any realistic shot of beating him, but because right now, he's well-poised to take on Sen. Tim Johnson two years from now. However, if Rounds can be taken down a few pegs, that'll make him a less attractive candidate.

If SD Dems can't use this as ammo against Rounds, then I have no idea what would work. But this bill is truly an outrage, and it's already brought all kinds of negative attention to South Dakota. Rounds should be made to suffer for his complicity in this obscenity. The Dems need to find a candidate and start hammering.

UPDATE: HellofaSandwich offers up a suggestion: A comebacker for Tom Daschle.

Posted at 05:39 PM in 2006 Elections - State, South Dakota | Technorati

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.swingstateproject.com/mt/mt-track-ssp.cgi/2204

Comments

Off topic, but we got us a candidate now in MO-07, Blunt's seat! http://www.sos.mo.gov/candidates/DisplayCandidatesPlacement.asp?vOffice=2USC07&vElection=P106

Posted by: Mike at March 6, 2006 06:20 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Mike, I just did a short check on Miller, and I have some bad news.

It appears that Miller is a racist nutjob.

The address on that link is the address of a "Frazier Miller"

And he's well known too.

"Glenn Miller went on the lam in 1986 after mailing a letter to 5,000 people calling for "total war" against the feds, blacks and Jews."

"Glenn Miller of Aurora" is listed as a publisher of "The Aryan Alternative"

But, on the upside, this should motivate the party in Southwest Missouri to actually get somebody else to run for that office.

Posted by: RBH at March 6, 2006 07:34 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Hey, guys. There's an open thread just a couple posts down....

Posted by: DavidNYC at March 6, 2006 08:21 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Yeah, SHEESH guys...

So who else watched the Oscars last night? ;P

(Sorry, David, I couldn't resist... :P)

I wonder who will step up for the Democrats in SD? I imagine the bench over there isn't exactly deep (though we have Johnson and Herseth--but they'd be insane to give up their seats) over there. Hehe, how about Daschle? For all his talk about fighting, here's a juicy opportunity to land a blow for Democratic values!

Posted by: HellofaSandwich at March 6, 2006 08:26 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Yeah, is anybody in the state willing to at least run on a "Hey Government, butt out!" platform (for at least a few issues)?

Any thoughts on that?

Posted by: RBH at March 6, 2006 08:43 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Actually, more of a "pro-privacy" thing could work. As it doesn't sync into the worst parts of Libertarianism.

Basically, there are various things that the state governments should not outlaw.

South Dakota probably has some higher priorities than outlawing Abortion.

Posted by: RBH at March 6, 2006 08:50 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

RBH, and those higher priorities will be undermined footing the bill for months worth of legal fees inevitably stemming from this diabolical ruling. Basically, South Dakota's lackluster public education system and Third World-quality highways will now receive even less funding than usual because limited public resources are being allocated towards an extremist ideology. South Dakotans will be spotlighted as deranged hicks, fairly or unfairly, because of the actions of radically overreaching state lawmakers.

It all strikes me as a formula similar to that which drove CONSERVATIVE voters in Dover, Pennsylvania, to dump their incumbent school board members last fall. According to SUSA's poll, South Dakotans are evenly divided over abortion rights....and it strikes me that it's much easier for one to declare themselves "pro-life" when the topic is presented in the abstract, as opposed to the real possibility of back alley abortions returning. Furthermore, my guess is that a clear majority would disapprove of an abortion ban making no exemption for rape and incest.

Ultimately, the fallout from this abortion ban is likely to make otherwise safe incumbents vulnerable, including Rounds. If South Dakota's Democratic Party is even remotely functional, we could be listening to Pat Robertson prophesize about buffalo stampedes and 40 years of Dust Bowls punishing God-less South Dakotans come November 8.

Posted by: Mark at March 6, 2006 10:16 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

The issue should clearly be framed as the Republicans siding with Rapists instead of women. Its that simple.

Posted by: DavidG at March 6, 2006 10:42 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Okay so time to figure out who to send letters to... Who should we push to run? any local SD'ders on the Blog? Also one interesting thing is that Shannon County is one of the most Democratic Countys in the nation despite the fact that it is part of the very red SD. Sorry got bored.

Posted by: D in FL. at March 6, 2006 10:48 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Shannon County is also the site of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, and one of the poorest counties in America.

Posted by: RBH at March 6, 2006 11:09 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Shannon County is not one of the most Democratic counties in the nation....it is THE most Democratic county in the nation, going 87% for Kerry. It's closest rival was San Francisco County, California, at 84% Kerry.

Posted by: Mark at March 6, 2006 11:23 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Checking Dave Leip's site. Shannon gave Kerry 84%. San Francisco gave Kerry 83%. If you count DC as a county, then they're the winners, since they gave Kerry 89%.

Posted by: RBH at March 7, 2006 12:07 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

It would be better to run Stephanie Herseth. She might win.
And she's certainly pro-choice;
Emily's List had a lot to do with the fund-raising power that helped her win in a Red state,
against a Red tide that swept an incumbent Senator out of office, in the ballot slot above her.

Here's a scenario, if we're daydreaming:
Herseth takes out Gov. Rounds;
and a repentant Tom Daschle runs for the at-large House seat,
vowing to heed voters' 2004 complaint that
he'd gotten out of touch with South Dakota issues.
Instead of throwing that fat warchest out the window in search of a presidential nomination that's just a pipe-dream, anyway.
No one's voting in the 2008 primaries for a candidate who lost the last time he ran for office.
But a candidate who helped turn a Red state completely Blue... welll...

Posted by: Christopher Walker at March 7, 2006 10:42 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment