This interview originally aired on "In the Moment" on SDPB Radio.
Our Dakota Political Junkie dives into the question of open primaries ahead of the upcoming election season.
Tom Dempster is a former South Dakota state senator. He shares his views on why open primaries are a more democratic alternative.
Plus, we hear Dempster's analysis into the essay an NPR senior editor published accusing the news organization of losing its listeners' trust. We discuss what open and curious coverage can look like.
____________________________________________________________
The following transcript was auto-generated.
Lori Walsh:
You are listening to "In the Moment" on SDPB. I'm Lori Walsh and seated across the table from me, former State Senator Tom Dempster, who is stepping in for our political analysis of the week as our Dakota Political Junkie. These segments air every Wednesday. Welcome.
Tom Dempster:
Thank you.
Lori Walsh:
Thanks for being here.
Tom Dempster:
Thank you for having me. I'm delighted to be here. This is great.
Lori Walsh:
It's an election year.
Tom Dempster:
Indeed. It is.
Lori Walsh:
It's approaching primary season, and you've talked before often about the importance of primary season in South Dakota, largely because some of the biggest decisions about who will serve in November are actually decided during the primary.
Help people understand if they're new to South Dakota politics why this is.
Tom Dempster:
South Dakota currently has a closed primary. Only Republicans can vote for Republicans, Independents can vote for Democrats, Democrats can vote for Independents, I suppose.
But the difficulty with that is, as a disclaimer by the way, I'm part of the group that's sponsoring the constitutional amendment in this year's election in November to change the constitution that basically says everybody should have the capacity of voting for whom they want to vote for. It's a fundamental democratic thing.
But in South Dakota and in the last election, I think a third of our House members, and I think two-thirds of our Senate members to the South Dakota legislature were elected — well, guess what? — not by the general election, but by the primary election. And that means that for 25% of our voters, the Independents, that the vote simply doesn't matter at all.
We think that's fundamentally unfair. We think even the South Dakota Constitution, as it exists, says that that is fundamentally unfair.
The South Dakota Constitution, I think it's Article 7, says that all elections should be fair and equal. Let me repeat that. It says all elections in South Dakota should be fair and equal. Well, guess what? They're fair, but they're not equal. Can you imagine denying some people the capacity to vote?
Second section to that, if I may, says that every US citizen 18 years and older should be entitled to vote in all elections. Should be entitled to vote in all elections. The way that we practice elections in South Dakota is inconsistent with our South Dakota Constitution, and what we seek to do in open primaries is make primaries consistent with the South Dakota Constitution.
Lori Walsh:
So the people who were opposed to this would of course say, you are allowed to come to the polls and vote, sign up for a political party, be active in that political party. If you don't like how the Republican Party is, then show up for the cracker barrels and the party meetings and do something. Participate, that's what they would say.
What would your response to that be?
Tom Dempster:
Well, my response to that would be there's a small subset of people that would not be interested in open primaries, and that small subset of people would be those people who would be extreme party members that want to elect extreme representatives. Those are the only people that should be opposed to open primaries.
Lori Walsh:
In your opinion, yeah.
Tom Dempster:
In my opinion, absolutely correct. The people that should be interested in open primaries are Make America Great Again Republicans who are sick and tired of someone else, not them, having a say in elections and how they are run. They should be regular Republicans, mainstreamer Republicans who don't want just a very narrow of voters electing their representatives.
Lori Walsh:
Do you think it would get more people to the polls because voter turnout is low? And I'm wondering what your thoughts are on younger people really caring about what party they're in or caring about the party at all. And likewise, people leaving parties because they're frustrated, or disgusted, or want to throw up their hands and say, "I don't want to affiliate with this group because I don't appreciate this issue and how they stand on it, but I still want to show up and vote."
It seems like more and more people are opting out of the process, or I know several personal stories of people who've just said, "I can't be part of this party anymore. I'm an Independent now." So the Independents become a force to be reckoned with.
I've said a whole lot there, so what stands out to you that's worth continuing to spin out?
Tom Dempster:
What stands out for me for sure is that our numbers and our statistics say that in open primaries, you will have 50,000 more people vote in South Dakota elections. That means more people are enfranchised. That means more people elect our elected officials. That means we have a stronger and a better democracy than what we have today when so many people are not able to vote for their elected candidates.
Lori Walsh:
Right. So note to listeners, of course, that's a ballot question, so we'll be inviting people who disagree with Mr. Dempster to talk about this on the show as well in the future.
Tom Dempster:
How could that possibly be true?
Lori Walsh:
How could you possibly disagree with Mr. Dempster? I don't know, but I'm thinking they'll send me an email.
Tom Dempster:
Undoubtedly.
Lori Walsh:
There's an article you wanted to talk about that was published in South Dakota Searchlight, and this was written by Dana Hess, who is, I believe, retired but has 25 years in South Dakota journalism according to his bio on the website newspapers in Redfield, Milbank and Pierre, and he is talking about the primary slug fest. Tell me about this article and what stood out to you.
Tom Dempster:
Well, the problem is, as an econ guy, I should be interested in open competition as a good thing, but not open competition when you've got just a very few number of people who are electing our elected officials. But I think he pointed out uber-Republicans increasingly are running in Republican primaries because they can be elected by uber-Republicans. And that again, is an argument for open primaries saying you should not have a very small set of people electing extreme people to Congress or to the South Dakota Legislature.
All you have to do is just look at Congress right now, say, "Are you happy with Congress? Are you happy with all of these extreme groups not being able to compromise not to make effective public policy?"
That in itself is probably the strongest arguments for open primaries. People are sick and tired of it.
Lori Walsh:
All right. The piece that Dana has written talks about remembering those postcards are going to show up in your mailboxes, and sometimes those postcards are highly funded by people out of state who are trying to get into South Dakota politics and have a say. That's nothing new. Are you concerned about, have you seen it in your political career get worse? It's always been rough and tumble. Politics is always rough and tumble. When does it cross the line for you?
Tom Dempster:
Oh, it's always been rough and tumble. As a candidate myself, as I would be knocking on doors I would be surprised to see all of these nasty postcards about me. I'd say I hope that they don't have a big difference. I don't know if they did or not. Somehow I was able to make it across the finish line, but it is just all part of the deal.
Lori Walsh:
Yeah. Anything that ever really stung that you thought crossed the line? You don't have to repeat it if someone spread a lie about you, that wasn't true, but when does it cross the line, I guess?
Tom Dempster:
One of my favorite people in the world was David Kranz.
Lori Walsh:
Newspaper reporter for the Argus Leader.
Tom Dempster:
Newspaper reporter for the Argus Leader, political reporter for the Argus Leader. And he wrote in his column that I had the ugliest political brochure he had ever seen in his political career. And I did as we're doing now, I laughed, but my wife was furious.
Lori Walsh:
He didn't mean that you were unattractive.
Tom Dempster:
Well, perhaps he did.
Lori Walsh:
He didn't mean that it was ugly because your face was on it. Did you have a graphic design problem that you'd like to share with us?
Tom Dempster:
When I looked at it, I said, "Maybe I should smile in my brochures."
Lori Walsh:
This is my least favorite and also favorite thing to joke about with those postcards, which is when the opponent tries to find the unattractive photo of their opponent, and there are certain people who will go nameless, but you can't really make them look bad. They just look good in every picture. And then they have this terrible language about how awful and untrustworthy you are. I'm like, "I'm not sure this is working."
Tom Dempster:
I know. Well, and today, now that's exacerbated by AI. Can you imagine what some of these candidates are going to look like when you enhance them or dis-enhance them with AI? Well, it is whatever.
Lori Walsh:
That would be pretty unethical.
Tom Dempster:
People can discern those issues and those categories where you get hit that make sense. More often than not, I think they dismiss the irrelevant and the ridiculous. Is that called faith in the voter? Oh, indeed it is.
Lori Walsh:
I am all about dismissing the irrelevant and ridiculous. You wanted to talk about one more article, and this is about the National Public Radio. SDPB is of course a member of the NPR network of stations and some criticism where a veteran editor wrote a editorial in The Free Press, which is the place where former journalists go to complain about what they didn't like about their previous newsroom.
Tom Dempster:
Oh, really?
Lori Walsh:
And said some things about NPR's coverage, and that's been a little bit of news in the month of April. What stands out to you about this?
Tom Dempster:
Well, the thing that was most interesting to me is a long time ago, I had the opportunity — guess what? — To have lunch with Susan Stamberg. And I asked her, I said, "NPR is often charged with being liberal." "Well," she says, "What we are is that we are curious and we're compassionate."
And when I look at you and when I look at "In the Moment," when I look at the work that you do on this show, it is curious and compassionate always. When I look at what South Dakota Public Broadcasting does in their coverage to the Legislature, it's extraordinarily good and extraordinarily valuable.
When I look at the criticisms of this former journalist with NPR who basically makes the charge and says so much of what's covered always had to do with race, gender and ethnicity. If I were ever interviewed by NPR, I think they would start off with saying, "Here's Tom Dempster. He's from South Dakota and he's a white man." And I'd go, "Oh."
So what more can I possibly say at the story?
And over, and over, part of the criticism was there's one story after another that is involved over and over again with racism, with trans, with climate apocalypse and with bad coverage on Israel and the dire threat of Trump just over and over and over again. And even me, who I would like to think that I'm open-minded when it comes to Morning Edition or when it comes to even Sunday Morning Edition. There are many times where I would feel that over, and over, and over again, and I'd say to my wife as we're traveling in the car, I'd go, "Again, do we have to do this again?" And I would turn it off.
Lori Walsh:
You would hear what and have to turn it off.
Tom Dempster:
It'd be another story about race, it'd be another story about ethnicity.
Lori Walsh:
So you didn't like the coverage is what you're saying?
Tom Dempster:
No, because it was just a long train of this over, and over, and over, and over again. And I get it, but is that all you have to cover? And I would ultimately, I think that does damage to Lori Walsh, I think that does damage to the open and the curious and the compassionate coverage that you and South Dakota Public Broadcasting is so well known for. Because like-minded people may very well just say, "Ah. Again, again?" And turn it off.
Lori Walsh:
This veteran editor, he'd been there a couple of decades, I think is suspended for five days without pay, is what I'm currently seeing as of April 16th. An article by David Folkenflik on NPR.
That's what's been public about this, is they continue to sort that through. Any other thoughts, Tom Dempster, about this idea of confirmation bias? If you already are thinking that the media is one thing, and certainly many news organizations have been accused of not covering stories fairly or concentrating on one topic more than the other. Similar to what you said about political parties or what you say about the White House, or what you say about health care or the state senate, some people want those institutions to be lambasted in public and it delights them. Others are convinced that this is a right-wing hit job. Everybody comes away thinking that their bias was confirmed. What are your thoughts on confirmation bias when we talk about stories like this?
Tom Dempster:
Ultimately, you know where you go. You know what you can listen to. You're going to find those outlets of journalism that not confirm your bias necessarily, but inform you, again, with openness and with curiosity that tell you things that you didn't know before. Not a constant stream of, "I believe this, I believe this," and not a constant stream of, "this is the way I want you to think, this is what I want you to believe." All too often whether it be most especially like Fox News, I haven't listened to that for 20, 30 years. Even network news, too much entertainment for me. NPR, your hour broadcast at six o'clock in the afternoon or in the evening, finally, a news story that I can listen to that challenges me, that tells me things that I don't know, that has interviews that are profoundly insightful. I need that. I don't want propaganda when I turn on the news.
Lori Walsh:
Tom Dempster, former state senator and our Dakota Political Junkie for today, thanks so much for stopping by. We appreciate it.
Tom Dempster:
Thanks again for the invite. A pleasure to be here.
