The Ideological Split in the South Dakota and National Republican Party

Political divisions between the leadership and the rank-and-file

The latest Freedom Index, a legislative scorecard produced by The New American magazine, illuminates the voting records of federal and state legislators based on their voting records on key legislation. The evaluation framework used is “adherence to constitutional principles of limited government, fiscal responsibility, national sovereignty, and a traditional foreign policy of avoiding foreign entanglements.” In short, the evaluation criteria are focused on the liberties framed in the US Constitution by the Founders.

In South Dakota, the results show is split between the Republican Party leadership a number of rank-and-file members in the state legislature that parallels the ideological split between Republican leadership in the US House of Representatives and more conservatives members that led to the demise of Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Let us examine the topic.

FREEDOM INDEX EVALUATION CRITERIA

The 2023 South Dakota Freedom Index was based on legislators’ votes on various bills during the state’s legislative session. Examples include the following: fiscal year 2024 budget, defunding lewd and lascivious content, “electronic money” in the Uniform Commercial Code, banning eminent domain for carbon capture pipelines, prohibiting ranked choice voting, protecting minors from sexual mutilation, conscientious exemption from COVID-19 vaccination, etc.

At the federal level, the following are examples of the bills that factored into evaluating US House members: forced vaccinations, terminating the COVID-19 emergency, non-citizen voting in Washington (DC), ESG fiduciary rule, bipartisan debt limit deal, federal water rule, terminating the Dept of Education, etc.

Grades are computed by dividing a legislator’s constitutional votes (i.e., those related directly in support of provisions in the US Constitution, and considered “pluses”) by the total number total number of votes cast (pluses and minuses, with the latter being votes cast directly at odds with provisions of the Constitution).

THE SCORES

In South Dakota, the Republican leadership of the South Dakota state Senate scored as follows: Lee Schoenbeck, Senate Pro Tempore (40%); Casey Crabtree, Senate Majority Leader (33%); and only one of the four majority whips scored above 50% (a paltry 58%). The Republican leadership in the House scored as follows: Hugh Bartles, Speaker of the House (25%); Mike Stevens, Speaker Pro Tempore (42%); Will Mortenson, House Majority Leader (33%); and none of the five majority House whips scored above 50%. In short, the entire leadership in the South Dakota state legislature consists of moderates, with those at 33% or below equaling the scores of several Democrat legislators.

At the federal level, the Republican leadership of the US Senate scored as follows: Mitch McConnell, Minority Leader (50%); John Thune, Minority Whip (60%); John Barrasso, Minority Conference Chairman (78%); Shelley Moore-Capito, Minority Conference Vice Chairman (60%); Joni Ernst, Minority Policy Committee Chairman, (70%); and Steve Daines, Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman (80%). The top leadership is moderate, a couple in the moderate-conservative range (70-80%).

The leadership of the US House of Representatives under Kevin McCarthy scored as follows: Kevin McCarthy, Speaker (through 3 October) (50%); Steve Scalise, Majority Leader (67%); Tom Emmer, Majority Whip (80%); and Elise Stefanik, Republican Conference Chair (50%). Kevin McCarthy’s leadership team consisted of all moderates except for one. Perhaps this factored into the vote to vacate the speakership as a secondary consideration.

By way of comparison, the Democrat leadership scores in the South Dakota state legislature are all less than 33% with three at 0%. Meanwhile, the Democrat US House leadership all scored 0%. In the US Senate, the Democrat leadership scores did not exceed 20% except for one at 40%.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

South Dakota is one of the reddest states in the union, according to the party affiliation of its elected officials. For the past thirty years, Republicans have owned the trifecta in the state: governorship and control of the state house and senate. There are 94 Republican legislators and only 11 Democrats. No Democrat holds a statewide office in South Dakota. Several Democrats switched party registration to the Republican Party in order to have careers in South Dakota politics over the years. Sixty-two percent of all voters voted for Donald Trump in 2020. The state rank-and-file is conservative (which even includes “the last of the conservative Democrats” and some independents).

No rank-and-file conservative members (i.e., members of the South Dakota Freedom Caucus or US House Freedom Caucus who generally score 90-100% in the Freedom Index) serve in leadership positions. This follows a long trend in Republican politics since the Ronald Reagan era, as Establishment Republicans have long tamped down grass roots conservatism in order maintain political power. Just as Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy have diverted large campaign contributions to allies and moderate Republicans in primaries over the years, so too does South Dakota “kingmaker” Lee Schoenbeck (see here and here) as all three seek moderate allies. Money speaks volumes in politics!

It is always a good idea to compare and contrast Republican behavior with that of Democrats for context purposes. In addition to the foundational ideological differences between Democrats (big government socialists and hedonists) and Republicans (proponents of limited government and maximum individual freedom with responsibilities), also noteworthy is the difference in each Party’s tolerance for dissent. By and large, the Democrat Party does not tolerate dissent among its elected members, especially in the public arena, and the Party votes in lockstep with leadership positions. This explains why Democrat Freedom Index scores circle the drain (with very few moderates in evidence).

Republicans, on the other hand, often air their differences in public and have a wider spectrum of ideological differences within their federal and state legislative conferences. The latest Freedom Index would lend credence to that generalization.

The end.