Meet the Candidate: Taffy Howard seeks return to the Legislature
Will face Rapid City attorney Jason Green in primary
Taffy Howard is seeking election to the South Dakota state Senate in District 34. The district consists of western Rapid City, just beyond downtown. She seeks to replace outgoing lawmaker Michael Diedrich.
Howard is a longtime lawmaker who served in the state House until 2023, after mounting a bid for South Dakota’s lone seat in the U.S. Congress.
The Dakota Scout sent a series of questions to all legislative candidates running in contested races for the state House and Senate in the June 4 primary election. Candidates were asked to limit their responses to each question to 150 words or less.
Age: 55
City of Residence: Rapid City
Public service/community service experience: Former U.S. Air Force officer; Volunteer in the local community and church (Love, INC.; Cornerstone; etc.); Former state representative
Family information: Husband, Mark, married for 35 years; son, Austin, LT in the U.S. Navy, married to Morgan; Matthew, a physician in a neurology residency at Cleveland Clinic, married to Taylor, one daughter, Juliet, eight months.
1) What's the government's role in facilitating economic development in South Dakota?
For most of the history of our nation, government was not directly involved in economic development. A more hands-on involvement really came about after the Great Depression with Roosevelt’s New Deal. Roosevelt was a Democrat and at the time he was very much opposed by Republicans who decried how much power he was giving the federal government. South Dakota followed the federal government in getting more involved in this aspect of society in 1934, although it seems the office ceased to exist for a while before being brought back in 1987 when the Department of State Development, the Agricultural Development Division, and the Division of Industrial Development merged to become the Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GOED). Gov. Rounds placed GOED under the Department of Tourism and State Development before it was recently made a cabinet-level position by Gov. Daugaard. As a Republican, I believe in a free market society. I believe in competition and entrepreneurship. I believe government’s role in our lives should be very limited. As Reagan once said, “Man is not free, unless government is limited.” To that end, I believe government’s role in economic development should be in the form of getting government out of the way, but a little “blocking and tackling” BY our state government FOR small businesses to flourish is an important role. Regulations should be eliminated to such an extent as is possible and taxes should be reduced or eliminated to allow a vibrant and thriving business community. Government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers…the market accomplishes that.
2) If you could have dinner with any person, dead or alive, who would it be and why?
Wow, there are so many people throughout history I’d love to chat with…Jesus (although with Him, I know it will happen sometime down the road), Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, Gordon Lightfoot, Jim and Elizabeth Elliot, George and Martha Washington, Marcus Aurelius, etc. I’d love to ask them about the challenges they faced (whether as missionaries or in service to their country or as artists), and how they overcame those challenges. But top of my list would have to be both my parents. I lost them both more than 20 years ago and there are so many questions I never asked them and so much family history that I don’t know but would love to know. My mom was so young when they married (she was a few days shy of being 17 and crossed state lines in order to do so without parental permission), and they divorced after seven years. I’d like to know what life was like for them and what they would do differently if they could and what advice they’d give to me at this stage of my life.
3) Does the "Landowner Bill of Rights" -- adopted by the Legislature amid opposition to carbon pipeline companies using eminent domain -- strike the right balance between the interests of property owners, counties and the ag industry - and should voters get a say when they head to the polls in November?
No, SB 201 caved to Summit Carbon Solutions. It pandered to a company that stands to make over $1B dollars on the backs of taxpayers to build a boondoggle of a Green New Deal pipeline. To make matters worse, several ethanol industry leaders have openly stated their industry does not need this to stay competitive. This bill took away local control from the counties and the residents of those counties who elect their commissioners. Our Declaration of Independence had the words “inalienable rights,” which the founding fathers understood to include the right to own property. The right to own your own property without fear of the government taking it away for capricious reasons is fundamental to this country and the freedoms we enjoy here. I believe all you have to do is “follow the money” though to understand how Summit was able to get this deceitful bill passed. Voters should absolutely have a say in whether or not we are going to strip away property rights in this state and allow eminent domain to be used for a private company to make an obscene profit at taxpayer’s expense. The catchphrase “No eminent domain for private gain” should be a rallying cry we can all get behind, because while this may not affect those of us west river now, we need to stand in solidarity with our east river neighbors because we never know when we might need their support.
