Some on the far left are burning her at the rhetorical stake, suggesting that U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin should leave the Democratic Party for refusing to support the House Democrats’ version of health-insurance legislation. It seems extremely far-fetched that she would switch parties. There are a few actual Independents in Congress, but considering her family roots (grandfather Ralph was governor, grandmother Lorna was secretary of state, dad Lars was a legislator and 1986 nominee for governor) in the Democratic Party, don’t bet on her dropping her party affiliation and switching to the (I) column either. Rather, consider how she chose to carve her own path and ran her campaigns her way outside the Democratic standard operating procedure. And also consider that she might be living up to the traditional definition of a representative: by deciding to vote no, she might be representing the majority view of South Dakota voters. And then there’s always this possibility. She read the bill, she thought it over and decided it shouldn’t be passed because it isn’t the right thing to do. In other words, no one should be surprised that she actually thinks for herself on this issue or many others.
As for the bigger picture, consider this: What if Democrat Tim Johnson hadn’t decided to seek re-election to the U.S. Senate in 2008 and Herseth Sandlin had ascended to the seat? Think of the pressure she would be facing as a Democratic senator on the Obama agenda regarding health insurance coverage and climate change. In the House, the Democrats have a large enough majority to have some margin for a few “no” votes. In the Senate, needing 60 votes procedurally, the Democrats have zero margin. We still don’t know where Rep. Herseth Sandlin was last June when she didn’t attend the South Dakota Democratic Party convention. But we are learning where she stands.
