The reality of the Electoral College keeps Americans fixated on the “swing states.” National parties and the media routinely dismiss Indiana as a place where voters would elect a rutabaga if that vegetable had an “R” next to its name. That belief isn’t founded on actual voter preferences; it’s a result of extreme gerrymandering. Our legislative overlords draw lines that cram Democrats into a few urban districts while ensuring that a majority of districts include a greater number of (presumably reliable) Republican voters.
I’ve posted frequently about the negative consequences of that practice, but I’ve recently stumbled across an emerging positive–the discernable over-confidence it breeds in GOP candidates.
Take a look, for example, at the campaign for Indiana’s House of Representatives in District 88. That district covers Geist, Lawrence, Ingalls, McCordsville, Fortville, and Cumberland, and was clearly drawn to maximize Republican advantage. But it also contains a lot of educated voters, and in the wake of growing MAGA extremism and the Dobbs decision, is considerably less reliably Red.
Enter a serious Democratic candidate: Stephanie Jo Yocum, who is emphasizing her support for women’s reproductive rights, strong public education, safe and connected communities, workers rights and economic prosperity for all. (You can access her interpretations of those promises on the “issues” page of her website.)
After a conversation with a member of Yocum’s campaign, I went to the websites of the incumbent Republican, Chris Jeter–a campaign site and a personal one–and was astonished to find that neither site bothered with those silly things called issues. Instead, there were photos of his family, a biography (including an undergraduate Baptist College), and his reportedly active memberships in his church and the NRA.
The absence of policy positions seemed odd to me, but I assume Mr. Jeter feels it is sufficient to be a Republican running in a “safe” district. No need to defend his positions, which–after more googling–are unlikely to be widely popular even among non-MAGA Republican voters.
Jeter earned a ZERO rating from Indiana’s ACLU, for example. That rating was based upon several votes: he voted FOR Indiana’s ban on virtually all abortions; FOR a bill discriminating against trans girls (a bill vetoed by our Republican governor); FOR onerous limits on charitable bail organizations; and FOR a bill that would have limited how public schools and employees could address concepts related to an individual’s sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, national origin, or political affiliation. (The vagueness of this bill would have effectively chilled discussion and instruction in Indiana classrooms.)
He also voted FOR new, onerous restrictions on absentee voting and voting by mail, and FOR a bill that would have given the Indiana Attorney General the power to request the appointment of a special prosecutor whenever county prosecutors exercise their (entirely lawful) discretion in ways the Attorney General disapproves, essentially allowing Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita to substitute his discretion for that of an elected county prosecutor.
My brief research into Jeter’s voting history told me two things: he is a Republican culture warrior, and he is relying on his district’s gerrymander rather than his performance to return him to the legislature. He evidently shares the belief that all he needs to prevail is that “R” next to his name.
My analysis of District 88 can be replicated around the state. But despite the smug assurance of the Republican operatives who drew the lines and the candidates who confidently expect to benefit from them once again, I think they are missing some significant danger signals.
Over the past several years, Republican reliance on the “rutabaga” theory of Hoosier elections has allowed the party and its candidates to become more and more extreme–to ignore the grind of actual governance and constituent service and to focus almost exclusively on waging culture war. Rather than the day-to-day business of ensuring that Indiana’s bridges and roads and parks are well-maintained, they’ve waged war on women’s reproductive rights and the LBGTQ+ community; rather than attracting business to the state by enhancing our quality of life, they’ve cut taxes for top earners and their donors. Rather than strengthening our public schools, they’ve siphoned off tax dollars and sent them to religious schools.
The basic question for Hoosier voters in November is whether we will continue to vote for the rutabagas–the empty suits and Christian Nationalists and gun extremists and “privatizers” who–thanks to the absence of competition ensured by gerrymandering– now represent virtually all of Indiana’s Republican candidates.
Stephanie Yocum’s positions are far more likely than Jeter’s to reflect those of voters in House District 88, Democrat OR Republican.
It’s really past time to retire the rutabaga vote.
I live in Jeter’s district. Your description is 100% accurate. His initial campaign presented him as a veteran and Christian. That was about it. And his performance is a reflection of his campaign profile. But he has won twice. I wish Stephanie the best; we could use real representation.
I am convinced that your “jaundiced look at the world we live in” and reference to “rutabaga elections” are reflected across the country as well. Best of luck to Ms. Yocum and all those who stand up against the gerrymandered.
Why is it that these “safe” districts would rather sell their mothers into slavery than vote for a Democrat? Seems pretty stupid to me … but then, I’m not a Republican.
From your mouth to g-d’s ear, as my mother would say. Thanks for this inkling of potential positive results from Dem votes in Indiana. 🙂
The rutabaga effect is alive and well in Indiana. Last week, from one of the few days the Indianapolis Star runs editorials, there was a letter by a Republican voter proudly proclaiming she could no longer vote for Trump, but will skip voting for president and will still be voting for all the Republicans down ballot because she couldn’t stomach the socialist, anti-gun, anti-free speech policies of the Harris and Waltz.
Dan,
Thanks for making my point. I recently had an “exchange” with one of the truth-deniers and it was very disappointing. I thought human brains were supposed to think. My bad.
Volunteer and send money to Yocum even if you are not in her district. Democracy is not a passive sport.
The founders of our country must have known that the distribution of education on governance across the population here and then would be a typical normal distribution: some highly educated (like the leading founders), most average, and some below average.
Despite numerous populous movements, the average voter was adequately informed to hang on to freedom.
Why the trouble today?
I believe that, in a word, the answer is Murdoch.
This was so well-done. Thank you. One of my ancestors was from Indiana – a Quaker who received her Master’s degree at the U. of Indiana in 1897, and I think she would be greatly saddened by what is happening in her home state. She certainly learned to care about everyone and would have wanted that for all. The world we’re in now doesn’t seem to have that as a priority.
It might take an hour, but before each election, I print off a sample ballot and then spend a few minutes with Google looking at down ballot candidates. I will look for an official campaign web page or even Facebook page. Several organizations (ballotpedia comes to mind) send out questionnaires and publish the results. Serious candidates will actually answer those.
In the age of MAGA, official campaign information has devolved to the point where no policies are posted on personal sites. I’m sure that it’s because if you put something in writing, then you can be attacked on it, or maybe the dog whistles are best left unsaid. I don’t know.
Most of the time it quickly becomes apparent who are just bodies to put a name on a ballot. It’s harder sometimes to discern if the person has any policy positions. Local papers used to play a role here, actually interviewing candidates and posting answers to questions side by side, but that’s all gone, so I can see why we seem to have so many more rutabagas than we used to.
Well said! My theory of change is that we must invest in our state house races. As a current candidate for State House District 60 (running against Peggy Mayfield), I can confirm there is little support available from the state party for down ballot candidates, especially for those of us running in “safe red” districts. That is because there is little support for Indiana at the national level because we are seen as a “safe red” state. The only way I know to change this is to turnout voters this election cycle to turn purple districts Blue and red districts purple, setting them up to flip next election cycle. And who better to engage voters across county lines than the gerrymandered House candidates, who are in relationship with up and down-ballot candidates! Support a House candidate, who runs every two years, and you effectively remain connected across the political spectrum.
For those of us in southern Indiana, we have created a growing coalition of House candidates currently organizing 10+ candidates across 25 counties (covering 28% of Indiana) specifically to engage rural voters. Check us out at https://indianaruralsummit.org.
I just saw a commercial for “Trumpy Trout” a talking fish, who is the biggest fish in the pond. I had a hard time believing what I saw, I’m just about to see who’s behind the bragging fish. I’m betting that someone will be getting sued very soon.
Excellent points. I believe that the GOP’s complacency and arrogance is our secret weapon. Like Michelle Higgs said, we must GOTV! The candidates for state and local races have a hard job ahead due to the gerrymanders they face, but if every Democrat got registered and showed up to the polls to vote it would be a very different story.
So well said Sheila. And so well said Michelle! Both of you—keep it going.
I think a lot of low information people vote Republican on the utterly mistaken–but pernicious and long-held–belief that Republicans are better for the economy. Republicans _are_ generally better for rich people, but not the economy overall, and not for the non-rich. Those people who describe themselves as “culturally liberal, fiscally conservative” need a serious dose of education. They are voting for the wrong party! One of you down there in the USA needs to tell them!
Tomi, I’m not sure Yocum could win even if there were a 70% turnout in her district. That’s the point of gerrymandering. Of course, a 70% turnout is a grand exaggeration on my part because Indiana consistently gets in the low 20% turnout. And as you’d guess, it’s because of gerrymandering and the other fact that voting in elections hasn’t really changed things for most Hoosiers.
It’s the Charlie Brown and Lucy skit about trust and insanity – kick the ball this time, Charlie, I won’t move it on you! LOL
Jeter is a typical Republican who runs a campaign on Hoosiers showing “active memberships in his church and the NRA.” I’ll never understand how those two can coexist, even though I am the owner of several guns. If you truly believe in God, you don’t need a gun for self-defense. I mean, the supernatural god should protect you from all heathens. Why would you need a weapon?
I don’t see a pathway to victory for Democrats in Indiana. We elect rutabagas because voters aren’t much brighter than rutabagas. This has been a truth for decades.
I have long believed anything is possible in politics, although I have also had reservations about Rutabaga Indiana. My brother’s first law partner had been a liberal Democratic State Senator from a ruby red district – different time and different state.
One problem is the state party, and I will not lay blame. It is circular. The state party does a poor job, so its donations suffer, leaving it underfunded, so it cannot do an adequate job. I don’t know where is started. Evan Bayh Democrats (unlike his father’s ilk) could have been conservative Republicans. The current Democratic party is not there.
At the local level, anything is possible. An aggressive campaign against a lazy incumbent can create an upset. An old equation attributed to political scientist A. F. K. Organski stated (approximation here) that power equals money times organization. Basically, this tells us that “ground game” can make up limited cash. At the national level, this looks promising for Harris-Walz, as they have both. In Indiana, it means – Get Organized – Get to Work.
Sheila – this was so well written and spot on. District 88 needs someone to represent the people, not the NRA. Jeter needs to go – it’s time.
To anyone in the area that has a little extra to give, please consider donating to Yocum’s campaign in this final stretch: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/yocum-for-indiana-1
And @Todd – the margins have been getting closer and closer each race in this District. Stephanie and team have been putting in SO MUCH effort this year, I think there is more of a chance than ever. Power of positive thinking and EFFORT 🙂
Thank you, Sheila, and everyone for your comments. @Todd I can tell you from the registered voter data that over 58 percent of voters in my district have a moderate to democrat voting history so there are the voters to win the district. We are missing 3 main things 1) the narrative that we CAN win – the republicans have done an excellent job convincing us all that its not possible when it most certainly is; 2) voter turn out; 3) consistency in a democratic challenger. I can tell you that I am committed to all three – I am in this to win it either this cycle or next. The former two will take us all.