Opinion: Values Matter More Than Political Calculation

Immigration attorney and nonprofit leader Taneeza Islam argues that values, not perceived electability, should guide South Dakota voters in the 2026 U.S. Senate race.

By: Guest Columnist Taneeza Islam, Esq.

Editor's Note: This article is part of South Dakota Voices, Turn South Dakota Purple's guest opinion series. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Turn South Dakota Purple.

To earn my vote, a federal candidate must share the fundamental values that guide my life and my work: that the Constitution is a living document, meant to grow as our understanding of justice and equity grows; that all people are created equal and deserve the same basic rights and dignity: undocumented people, transgender people, poor people, unhoused people, and everyone too often pushed to the margins; and that government has a moral responsibility to protect the vulnerable, repair inequities, and stand with those who have been left behind. 

In the race for U.S. Senate in South Dakota, there is only one candidate who meets that standard: Julian Beaudoin. I have known Julian for more than 13 years, and I have never seen him waver or reshape his values for votes, "likes" or personal gain. He has paid a real price for his convictions—losing friends, opportunities, and jobs because he refused to abandon the principles above. Can either of the other candidates honestly say the same? 

At this moment in history, we do not need someone whose convictions shift with political convenience. We need someone with a clear red line—someone willing to risk their position in office rather than betray the values they promised voters they would uphold. I am not willing to gamble on a candidate who has not proven they will stand firm when it costs them. And I am certainly not willing to gamble on someone who has already shown us they lack those convictions, while hoping they may change later. The stakes are too high. The people who most need government to work—the immigrant facing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the patient facing cancer, the person battling addiction, the mother giving birth in a broken system—are the ones who will pay the price. Some will pay with their lives. 

Money matters—but the recent Sioux Falls mayoral election reminded us that money is not the only thing that matters. What mattered more was believing in a person who reflected voters’ values, organizing around that belief, and then showing up at the ballot box. 

After more than a decade of fundraising for SD Voices for Peace—the only immigrant advocacy and legal services nonprofit in the state—I can tell you plainly: national organizations, major donors, and outside investors often do not send their money to South Dakota because, to them, South Dakota does not matter. But do you know who South Dakota still matters to? South Dakotans. And with all the struggles of the South Dakota Democratic Party, we have seen what happens when national leaders defund rural offices and abandon the heartland: a red brick wall forms where opportunity should be. The only way that changes is if you and I decide to invest in candidates who run openly on our values. We cannot keep complaining that Democrats never have “good candidates” and then, when a strong candidate appears, dismiss them by saying, “Well, they won’t win anyway.” The way we win is by investing, knocking doors, talking to our neighbors, refusing cynicism, and most importantly—voting. 

I am not a political pundit, but one thing has become clear to me over the last six election cycles: polls cannot measure everything. They cannot capture grassroots energy, neighbor-to-neighbor conversations, quiet determination, or the momentum that builds when people finally decide they are done waiting for permission to believe change is possible. 

I also want to be clear about why I believe voting for Bengs will not produce the change South Dakotans need. Bengs ran as a Democrat in 2022 against Thune and lost by more than 43 percentage points.He then changed parties, became an Independent, and has said he will not caucus with either party. In Washington, D.C., that matters. I do not believe Democrats or Republicans will welcome someone who crosses the line vote by vote, issue by issue, without a party home or a governing coalition. Whether we like it or not, we still operate within a two-party system. 

For me, the larger question is this: what does it actually mean to be an Independent from South Dakota? The Independents who support Bernie Sanders in Vermont are not necessarily the same as the Independents who support Kevin Kiley in California. That is the problem. “Independent” is not a platform. It does not tell us what a candidate will fight for, who they will protect, or where they will draw the line when power demands compromise. An Independent can lean conservative or liberal on any issue, at any time, with no shared platform holding them accountable. 

Winning matters, but winning cannot be the end of the conversation. We also have to ask what the person will do with power once they have it. In a two-party system, will real change come from an Independent with no clear governing home, or from a Democrat whose values, record, and commitments are already clear? For me, this race is not only about crossing the finish line. It is about what happens the day after—and who will still be standing with the people who need government to fight for them most. 

Let's beat Rounds and be assured that real change is possible. Vote for Julian Beaudoin.

About the Author

Taneeza Islam, Esq., is an immigration attorney and the founder and CEO of SD Voices for Peace and SD Voices for Justice. She has spent more than a decade advocating for immigrants and underserved communities in South Dakota through legal services, public policy, and civic engagement.