Noem and Varilek Debate for Sioux Falls Paper: A Synopsis!

Last updated on 2013.03.23

Princess Kristi Noem deigned to sit down with dragon-lady-slayer Matt Varilek to answer hard questions on Monday. In a conversation with staff from that Sioux Falls paper, Rep. Noem and challenger Varilek discussed, among other things, the deficit, the Farm Bill, Medicare, and Native American issues. Here's a synopsis:

The Federal Deficit, Spending Cuts, and Tax Increases: Rep. Noem said House has voted to cut over $6 trillion with targeted spending cuts instead of across-the-board cuts. She said Congress has actually enacted $2.2 billion in cuts, the first time since World War II of reducing spending two years in a row. Noem said the reductions have been done in a thoughtful manner to focus on priorities, but she avoided mentioning specific cuts beyond cuts in the House operational budget.

Varilek said Noem believes in a cuts-only approach that gives new tax breaks to folks at top. He said her commitment to the Grover Norquist pledge means that she cuts programs that benefit folks who need a safety net to fund more handouts for the rich. Varilek says that being serious about the deficit requires looking at the revenue side. If we let the Bush tax cuts expire (and Varilek said "Bush tax cuts," even though Obama owns them now, too), we won't need to do dramatic, radical things like privatizing Medicare.

Noem insisted that she's done tax reform, that she wants to close loopholes and exemptions and make sure everyone pays their fair share. But in Noem's book, that means cutting corporate taxes to make them competitive with global rates.

The Harsh Tone in Washington: Asked what he would do to change the "screaming" tone in Washington, Varilek said we need more people who are willing to stay at the table, work together, and negotiate. He said the Tea Party's refusal to even give lip service to compromise has led to the failure of the Farm Bill and the Production Tax Credit. He said Noem rode to power on the Tea Party wave and was elected to the leadership by the Tea Party freshman class. Thus, says Varilek, Noem should take at least some responsibility for the least productive Congress in over a century.

Noem answered, "I always take responsibility for my actions." She said she's always sought a Democratic co-sponsor for her bills, like the farm dust bill and impact aid bill for schools. She also said she has worked with Rep. Welch on the Farm Bill and with Democrats on reining in the National Labor Relations Board on the reservations. She criticized Democrats for walking away from the Farm Bill over food stamps cuts.

Varilek rebutted that the results in the House speak for themselves. He challenged Noem's assertion about taking responsibility by pointing out that with no Farm Bill passed, Noem blames the President and the minority party but doesn't acknowledge that she can't deliver support from the Tea Party caucus that she represents.

-------------------
Medicare: Noem said she supports Paul Ryan's Medicare voucher program because Medicare is going broke. She said we have twelve years to fix it or it will cease to exist like we see it today. Noem said the Ryan plan leaves everything the same for folks 55 and older. Everybody else gets two options: stay on traditional Medicare or take a government subsidy for a private plan. She said the plan is voluntary, subsidizes wealthy folks less and sicker people more.

Varilek said if the Noem-Ryan privatization plan were so great, they wouldn't have to go to such great pains to assure people that nothing will change for current seniors and that it's only voluntary.

Varilek said that Medicare faces serious challenges, that Noem gives us a false dilemma. Varilek said the clear third option is to preserve and strengthen traditional Medicare. Among other things, said Varilek, let's give Medicare the same power the VA has to negotiate drug prices.

Varilek then riffed further on Noem's "responsibility" quote, handing her a copy of her Medicare attack postcard and asking her to take responsibility for claiming Varilek wants to harm Medicare and for her own two votes supporting the exact same Medicare savings that the card demonizes. Noem responded by saying that Ryan's $716 billion in Medicare savings are different from President Obama's $716 billion in Medicare savings because Ryan doesn't use those savings to create a new entitlement.

Noem: I'll clarify. His $6400 in increased costs for Medicare recips came from CBO, but CBO has disowned those numbers. Matt's claim is false.

The $716B are in the PPACA. Our GOP plan puts savings right back into Medicare, not creating new entitlement program.

Noem then challenged Varilek's claim that the Ryan plan will bust seniors' budgets with $6400 in increased out-of-pocket costs. She said the Congressional Budget Office has disowned those numbers. Varilek answered that the CBO got those numbers scoring the 2011 plan that Noem voted for. That plan has since changed.

-------------------------------

Wind Energy and the Production Tax Credit: Rep. Noem cited the layoffs at Molded Fiber Glass in Aberdeen as a reason we need to pass the Production Tax Credit. She said she has circulated a letter and encouraged the leadership to take up the PTC.

Varilek said the PTC is extremely important, but we've seen no results from Noem's efforts. He said that the assertion that government "can't pick winners and losers," as Noem has previously said, is exactly the language the PTC opponents are using! We should pick wind as a winner; Noem says she supports it, but she's in the leadership, has special access to the Speaker, and has failed to produce results, which means people are losing jobs.

Noem followed up poorly here, saying "I support an American energy plan." She said she has supported a four-year extension of the production tax credit, but again, she failed to answer for not producing results.

-----------------------------------
Native American Issues: Varilek noted that while working for Senator Johnson, he spent a lot of time in Indian Country helping find resources for infrastructure, business investment, and tribal colleges. He then pointed to Noem's opposition to Native American provisions in the Violence Against Women Act.

Noem said the House passed a provision to help women get federal court restraining orders, which have more teeth than tribal court orders. She said she worked to get an office of tribal relations in USDA to help Native American farmers access programs and got that added to Farm Bill. She also carried the bill to protect tribal sovereignty from NLRB.

Noem went on to say underfunding of Native American programs is a large problem. She said the feds haven't followed through on commitment to tribes. She said we need to provide the funding for water and infrastructure projects.

Varilek responded that he just got the endorsement of Great Plains Tribal Chairmen's association. He also noted that it's fine to say we need more investment, but Noem has voted for budgets that slash those investments. Working for Johnson, Varilek says he got to help the Lakota Fund help small business owners in Pine Ridge.

Cuts in South Dakota: Asked what specific cuts they would make that would affect South Dakota, both candidates dodged. Noem talked about the cuts in the Farm Bill, but quickly turned to talking about strengthening crop insurance and spending more to fight pine beetles. Varilek talked about getting rid of the tax breaks for Big Oil that Noem supports, but he didn't point to any Big Oil companies in South Dakota that would be hit by those cuts.

Assault Rifles: Asked if they would vote to ban assault rifles, both candidates said no. Both spoke of great respect for the Second Amendment and South Dakota's hunting tradition. Neither mentioned how assault rifles are part of our hunting tradition.

[hunting with assault weapons?]
------------------------------------
Cap and Trade and the Environment: Noem said Varilek's policy of cap and trade would devastate the South Dakota economy. She cited a PUC study that said cap and trade would raise utility costs for $1500 per year per family. She said the government should not dictate how much energy we use.

Varilek responded that he has not advocated and does not advocate cap and trade. He pointed to reporter David Montgomery in the room and said his own report reached the same conclusion. Varilek said Noem's attacks on his environmental work show that Noem doesn't want to talk about her own record of non-accomplishment. Instead of looking at where Varilek worked and studied years ago, Varilek said we should look at the Big Oil subsidies Noem has voted for in the here and now.

Varilek then got out the climate change guns: he said he believes climate change is real and that we should take action to protect our economy from the damage. He reminded us that Noem supported the 2010 South Dakota Legislature's resolution declaring climate change a result of astrological forces. He turned to Noem and asked, "You somehow think that the fact I'm a Taurus has something to do with climate change?"

Noem said she doesn't believe there is consensus that human activity is the sole reason for climate change. She does believe there is climate change, but we must look at cost-benefit on policy. She said that our emissions are the lowest now since 1997, without Kyoto or cap and trade, so we can just let the market solve our climate change problems.

Defense of Marriage Act: Varilek said he supports civil unions. Everyone should be treated the same on taxation, visitation in the hospital, and benefits. He says we should leave "marriage" to states and churches to define. Pressed, he said that means he does not support defining marriage at the federal level.

Noem said she believes in protecting sanctity of marriage and would vote to protect it.

----------------------------------------

That's a pretty wide-ranging interview! Both candidates threw punches; both dodged a little. The biggest issue presented to voters, though, is Noem's record of achievement. Our Congresswoman talks about working to achieve a lot, but the results do seem paltry. Noem's presence in Washington has not produced a Farm Bill, a production tax credit, a serious jobs bill, or a grand bargain toward a balanced budget. Voters must look at the above discussion and the coming debates and decide whether they prefer Noem's empty pronouncements of "working hard" to Varilek's policy agenda.