SD Watch notes that as expected, Heidepreim is the new Senate Minority Leader
My friend Todd Epp noted today over at SD Watch that according to the Argus Blog, Scott Heidepreim is the new Senate Minority Leader:
This means that if the Senator Majority wants to stifle their attempts, they're going to need to hold together.
The Senate of 2007 is going to be a vastly different atmosphere from the Senate of 2006. As opposed to an opposition caucus that worked with the administration on issues, I think a new Democratic Caucus led by Scott Heidepreim will be much more calculating. Don't take that as saying they're being sinister, as much as they will be a more politicized body.
I don't think there's a doubt in anyone's mind that Heidepreim as well as others seek a higher office at some point, so we will likely see Dems seeking the media spotlight more than we've been used to recently, and taking shots at the opposition if they think they make hay out of it.
Where does this leave the GOP Senate caucus?
Sure, a few will have to put hard feelings aside, and possibly bite their tongues when they'd rather let fly. But if they want to hold on to what they have, the key is presenting a strong and united front.
As opposed to the solid conservative core that would have been expected had such candidates as Latterell, Schwiesow, Johnson, Earley, and Klaudt prevailed, we're more likely to see a caucus leadership coalition built between the more moderate elements of the caucus and some of the more conservative. You're as likely to see an Apa or Greenfield in top leadership as much as you would a Dempster, McCracken, or Knudson. Those who seem to ably flow between (and be palatable to) both circles such as a McNenny or a Gray are almost guaranteed to speak as the voice of the Republican Senate Caucus.
One big thing I see if the caucus is to prosper is that they need to collectively determine what they want to accomplish, and to enumerate those goals. They might find it handy to make that a comprehensive statement of beliefs and philosophy and to run any legislation through that as a filter.
But it has to pass the muster of what they all agree to accomplish.
What do I think this session holds from this new minority leader? Expect a minority who's main goal will be to trip up the majority. Whether it's through legislative maneuvering, or by playing a game of divide and conquer, their energies will be directed at coming out on top.The Argus Voices blog notes (Heidepriem takes over) that my fellow Democrats finally did something excellent and elected State Senator-elect Scott Heidepriem as Senate Minority Leader.
The Argus thinks this is odd and a poor reflection on the depth of Democratic talent. On the contrary.
This means that if the Senator Majority wants to stifle their attempts, they're going to need to hold together.
The Senate of 2007 is going to be a vastly different atmosphere from the Senate of 2006. As opposed to an opposition caucus that worked with the administration on issues, I think a new Democratic Caucus led by Scott Heidepreim will be much more calculating. Don't take that as saying they're being sinister, as much as they will be a more politicized body.
I don't think there's a doubt in anyone's mind that Heidepreim as well as others seek a higher office at some point, so we will likely see Dems seeking the media spotlight more than we've been used to recently, and taking shots at the opposition if they think they make hay out of it.
Where does this leave the GOP Senate caucus?
Sure, a few will have to put hard feelings aside, and possibly bite their tongues when they'd rather let fly. But if they want to hold on to what they have, the key is presenting a strong and united front.
As opposed to the solid conservative core that would have been expected had such candidates as Latterell, Schwiesow, Johnson, Earley, and Klaudt prevailed, we're more likely to see a caucus leadership coalition built between the more moderate elements of the caucus and some of the more conservative. You're as likely to see an Apa or Greenfield in top leadership as much as you would a Dempster, McCracken, or Knudson. Those who seem to ably flow between (and be palatable to) both circles such as a McNenny or a Gray are almost guaranteed to speak as the voice of the Republican Senate Caucus.
One big thing I see if the caucus is to prosper is that they need to collectively determine what they want to accomplish, and to enumerate those goals. They might find it handy to make that a comprehensive statement of beliefs and philosophy and to run any legislation through that as a filter.
But it has to pass the muster of what they all agree to accomplish.
Comments
good luck with Heideprim, the John Kerry of South Dakota politics...
Thanks for your posts. I wonder if you were the same morons predicting Dick Kelly's win. Probably so.
Heidepriem will lead the Democrats effectively for the same reason he won the election.
Democrats will continue to focus on issues that our state has some general agreement on.
Your party will continue to focus on abortion, gay marraige and abstinence only education. After last Tuesday, there sure is a lot more room left in your "big tent".
Great work.
There is a reformulation of the parties and the citizens in those parties. Scott is but another example of that process.
And as to the school lawsuit, the lead attorney is Scott Abdullah, I believe. Scott is a good GOPer and his dad's credentials as a GOP are not bad either. There's another guy named Janklow in the firm who's related to the former governor.
And also, like it or not, the legal system is another way that change comes about in our society. Perhaps you heard that Amendment E went down in flames?
Also, why is okay for Scott Abdallah and Russ Janklow to be involved the lawsuit in lawsuit but not Scott?
What is wrong with sipping latte?
What is wrong with being a millionaire?
Finally, is it ever okay to change your position on an issue or issues?
Thanks.
Yes, as 8:38 pointed out, Heidepriem truly is ambitious.
Ambitious and tasteless.
Seems to me if Scott Heidepriem is a millionaire, than good for him. Republicans thinks Steve Kirby walks on water for being a millionaire and he inherited his. Why the bitterness when Heidepriem actually earns his?
Good thing there's no law against hypocrisy.
whose funeral was this?
The louder you whine, the more wounded you seem? What do you miss most? Scott's legal abilities, his large contributions to your slush funds, chairing your committee meetings to prevent Democrats from seizing control, staying Republican long enough to give the illusion of a big tent party, his intelligence and insight, or his free legal services when you're stealing elections?
A guy doesn't stir up 30 venomous posts like this if it didn't really matter.
I've known Scott for many years from both sides of the wall. Glad he's over here. He'll make a fantastic Governor in 2010, about when you realize that Rounds' 2010 Initiative was just a hollow joke.
How very true. The Republicans SHOULD be scared. Heiedepriem will win big and finally put down the theocrats in South Dakota who put church above everything else.
Do you read the vile things that some Republicans post on this site? Name-calling is par for the course for these people. Do you call THAT nice?
Nobody likes a traitor and a glory hog. If the Dems really wanted to work to get something done and if Scott really has higher aspirations, he should not have been chosen. I equate Scott as the Hillary Clinton in SD and if he thinks that being an eternal antagonist to Republicans is going to help him, he is sorely mistaken.
I don't hate Scott, I don't even know him and I certainly am not afraid of him.
Why is it okay for John Thune to spend his whole life plotting to be U.S. Senator and its not okay for Heidepreim to plot to be Gov?
Also, why is it okay for Republican hero Ronald Reagan to flip flop his registration but not for Scott?
Thanks for your answers.
If Scott wants to be Gov, more power to him. The people of SD don't take kindly to people who openly say they are moving their way up and the current office is merely a stepping stone. John Thune never said he was going to run for higher office when he was ED of the R party and never said when he was in the House he was going to run for Senate. People may assume that he did but he never uttered a word personally about it.
You are part right but leaving out much of the story as it related to Reagan. Reagan changed his party affiliation in 1962. He was elected Governor in 1967. I am not sure when Heidepreim made his switch but I am pretty sure it was about 5 years ago.
As for Thune it is clear you didn't hang around him in the late 80's and early 90's. John Thune has wanted to be Senator since at least 1986 when Abnor lost to Daschle. John was Abnor's protege.
My point is this. If one doesn't agree with Heidepreim's politics fine. All of the comments here sound like something from middle school. Can we at least talk issues?