Assessing Jamie Smith from a tribal perspective

Last week the NSNT interviewed South Dakota Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jamie Smith. Although the Native vote overwhelmingly goes to the Democrats in most elections, a Democrat has not occupied the governor’s chair since 1978, which made the Republicans complacent over the next few decades, figuring the Native vote didn’t matter to them since they were winning handily without it. This led to GOP Golden Boy John Thune’s shocking defeat in 2002 to incumbent Democrat Tim Johnson, when Shannon County overwhelmingly went for Johnson, turning a narrow Thune victory into a narrow 524-vote Johnson victory.

Despite the Native support given to Johnson, none of it much mattered on the key issues that matter to tribes, and despite the GOP hostility toward tribal interest, Thune has a positive personal relationship with Indian Country. Since former Democratic Senator Tom Daschle openly opposed the return of public lands in the Black Hills to the Oceti Sakowin, can tribes rely on either party to support our issues, or at best, just pay them lip service? This is the political reality every Native voter must ask themselves come November.

Essentially, tribes are “domestic dependent nations,” wards of the federal state, and tribal sovereignty, contrary to popular belief, does not protect tribes from the federal government, but it does protect them from state jurisdiction. Governor Kristi Noem is a political ally of North Dakota Senator Kevin Kramer who has been one of the leading threats to tribal sovereignty, championing state jurisdiction. She defeated her chief GOP rival Marty Jackley in the primary and then defeated Democrat Billie Sutton in the general. At present, Noem is a formidable in-state opponent, with aspirations for a spot on the 2024 GOP presidential ticket. To defeat her, a Democrat must not only win the Native vote, but get Native voters to turn out and vote in record numbers. Enter Jamie Smith. For the last four years, Smith, a Sioux Falls native, has been the Minority Leader in the SD State House. He is a large, congenial, readily accessible man. The NSNT attempted to set up interviews with both Noem and Smith. It took two minutes to contact Smith. Noem still hasn’t gotten back to us and probably never will. This alone is a fair indicator that we have the ear and respect of Democrats, but do they have the will or the power to support the issues that matter most to the Native voter?

NSNT asked Smith why Democrats have not held power in South Dakota for nearly half a century.

Smith: “One of the reasons was the way the maps have been changed for the legislature. The bench has been probably shallower. There’s been a shift in the funds that the Party has because of that. That’s part of it. Lack of resources and the money.”

Smith avoids addressing the reality that the entire country has been ratcheting to the right of the political spectrum for some time. For example, the positions Democrats generally hold now, were the GOP positions back in the 1950’s under Eisenhower. Still, whatever the Democrats are now, they are not the GOP.

Smith: “The Native vote is very important. Getting the Native vote out is key to winning and losing for certain, for me, and for any candidate that is aspiring to beat the Republican establishment in the state of South Dakota.”

Einstein said that if you can’t explain something in simple language, you don’t understand it, and Smith uses very simple language to explain why he is better than Noem.

Smith: “When I get up in the morning I think about what is best for the state of South Dakota. It’s not about me, it’s not about my future plans. I would sign a pledge today to serve all four years if elected. Not sure the governor can do that, she has different aspirations. She has been absent from our state and also absent from representing the basic needs of the people of South Dakota. Also, another big difference is our leadership styles. I’m much more of a collaborator. As the Minority Leader in the state of South Dakota you can’t do anything without making friends. As a Democrat you have to reach across the aisle and you have to try to work together.”

Like other Democrats, Smith will not openly support controversial tribal issues, and did not do so in this interview. Like Daschle and Johnson before him, Smith knows that would be political suicide.

Smith: “I’ve promised the tribes and the state that I will have an open door. I don’t have all the answers to solve every problem in the state. But I think if people sit down, have the tough conversations, and work together, we can solve quite a few of them by just acknowledging them and working together to find a better map forward.”

This is as far as Smith will go in addressing the specifics of tribal interest. Especially the Black Hills question.

Smith: “I don’t have enough information to give you a super intelligent answer. I know the wounds are deep because I’ve heard talk of them on the campaign trail and I am trying to grasp and learn about them. But I can tell you, as with any difficult decision, you would surround yourself with the people that are effected by the decision, and also the experts surrounding any of those decisions. My job would be to synthesize that information and make the decision that is best for the peoples of South Dakota. Again, decisions are poplar and unpopular and sometimes you are going to have to make the decision that’s not popular but good for the people.”

Smith has no problem, when it comes to Native issues, speaking about hunger, poverty, education, social injustice. He said that Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women is an issue of which he “deeply cares about.”

But even after the interview, even after being asked specifically about the Black Hills, we still don’t know what position Smith has on the Hills. He says he doesn’t have enough information to give a “super intelligent answer.” One has to ask, why doesn’t he have that information? As a lifelong South Dakotan, why are the specifics of this issue not on his radar screen? They are not all that complicated. A reasonably intelligent person, speaking to knowledgeable people, could learn a great deal about this issue, in just a few hours, certainly enough to share that knowledge meaningfully in an interview.

In this respect, Smith differs little from previous Democrats, who simply cannot function politically supporting what matters to tribes the most, the return of the Black Hills, so they don’t.

The best we can hope for from Smith is that he has respect for us, and cares about the problems he can safely care about, from a political standpoint.

Smith: “I have visited almost every tribe in the state (except one). It comes down first to just communicating, having a respect for one another, and me acknowledging the problems of the past and then saying we are going to go together and move forward in a good way to try and solve our problems. The problems, so many of them are jurisdictional, so much of it is federal and not state, to the ends that the state can be helpful, we want to be a partner in solving those problems.”

Smith concludes with: “I respect the sovereignty of all the tribes. I also acknowledge the fact that the tribes were here well before anybody else in the state…I’ve often spoke of starting back where Governor Mickelson left off before his untimely death. I would like to restore the spirit of reconciliation with all the tribes and show the respect that is due the tribes because I think there is a lot we can learn from each other.”

Is this enough? This is what every Native voter will have to decide in November.

On Saturday, September 17, Smith will be in Rapid City. Check out his website. On Friday, September 30, he will again be in Rapid City to debate Governor Noem.

(Contact James Giago Davies at skindiesel@msn.com)

The post Assessing Jamie Smith from a tribal perspective first appeared on Native Sun News Today.

Visit Original Source