The Unserious Party–Indiana Version

During her acceptance speech, Kamala Harris noted that Donald Trump is a deeply unserious man whose election would have very serious consequences. She might have broadened that observation by characterizing the GOP as an unserious political party.

I exited the Republican Party back in 2000, when the GOP’s transformation then underway was usually described as “rightward.” To the extent that “rightward” meant “toward fascism,” that description was accurate–but insufficient. It is equally accurate to note that the GOP has become increasingly unserious about governing.

Democrats do continue to focus on real governing issues–what should our foreign policy look like? What changes should be made to tax policy? What is government’s obligation to provide a social and physical infrastructure?  The GOP, in contrast, is focused on areas that are mostly off-limits to government under our Constitution: books they disapprove of should be removed from public libraries! Private companies should be forbidden from undertaking DEI activities! Women should be forced to give birth!

GOP priorities aren’t those that have traditionally been considered governmental.

 Indiana’s state tickets provide a picture-perfect example. The Republicans are all MAGA culture warriors, while the Democrats are focused on traditional governance issues: public education, taxation, the proper limits of government control over individuals.

The difference between the parties on issues of actual governance was recently explored by conservative economist Michael Hicks, who analyzed the seriousness of recent tax proposals. The headline was instructive: “Property taxes dominate the race for Indiana governor. Only 1 side has a real plan.” 

Indiana voters have now seen three separate property tax plans from candidates running for governor and lieutenant governor. All three offer insights into some of the fiscal philosophies of the candidates, the quality of their policy development process and the respect they have for Hoosier taxpayers.

Hicks began by discarding the plan offered by the Libertarian candidate for governor. 

Their proposal is to eliminate all residential property taxes, and instead tack on 7% sales tax to your home. I view their proposal as political posturing against the promiscuous use of tax abatements and tax-increment financing.

If you are tired of huge tax breaks for large companies, Indiana’s Libertarian Party is focused on your concerns. But their plan fails to consider things like the need to fund police protection, fire departments or provide heat to school buildings in winter.

In other words, it’s a very “unserious” plan.

Then Hicks took on MAGA Mike Braun’s plan.

The Republican — Mike Braun/Micah Beckwith — plan seems to have done two things. I say “seems” because it went through five major changes in three days after it was first announced. So, nailing down facts is not a trivial task.

The first thing this plan offers is the addition of a much larger exemption to homeowners. While this sounds alluring, it really has little or no effect on individual tax liability. Property taxes in Indiana are based on local government budgets, with caps placed on the value of the property, not the exemptions. So, for most Hoosiers, the first version of the Braun/Beckwith plan (or Beckwith/Braun plan according to the lieutenant governor candidate’s social media) had little or no effect on tax liabilities for most homeowners.

In response to major criticisms, the plan changed, but as Hicks noted, in its current iteration, it would either cut local government tax revenues or shift taxes to other taxpayers — primarily farmers and businesses.

Within farming communities, the property tax shift was enormous. Some farmers would see 70% tax increases…rural communities would see huge increases in farm taxes. Urban places would see big cuts in public services because of property tax caps, and suburban communities would need to pass school referendums to maintain bus service.

Hicks then turned to the Democrats’ plan, which would cut property taxes by roughly the same amount as the Braun/Beckwith plan, but in a way that doesn’t shift tax liability to farmers, renters or businesses. That plan

also ensured that local governments — schools, libraries, police and fire departments, and parks — would not face deep revenue losses.

Their plan had two distinguishing features. The first was that almost every element was analyzed by the Legislative Services Agency, with much of it taken from existing property tax proposals the legislature has been working on for the past 18 months. This means we know how much savings are to taxpayers, and how much and to whom the lost tax revenue flows.

The second key feature of the McCormick/Goodin plan was that most of the revenue losses were borne by state, not local government…  Notably, the Democratic plan actually caps property tax growth for individual taxpayers at a reasonable level.

Indiana Democrats want to govern. Unserious Republicans want the power to win the culture war. 

15 Comments

  1. While it is nice to analyze the various political plans to lower property taxes, the average Hoosier voter will only hear “We are going to lower your taxes”. The method to achieve that goal will be lost in the incessant noise of the sound bites about to overwhelm the airways and computer screens.
    Democrats continue to march forward on the fools errand of using reason and logic to persuade Republican voters to vote for intelligent plans for good governance.

  2. It doesn’t matter how great your plan is, if nobody knows about it. Did the Indiana Democratic Party benefit from the Harris bump? Do they have the capacity to put boots on the ground? Are they doing it?

    More importantly, are they going into the rural areas? They have a study that shows the impact of the tax plan would be an increase of 70% on them. Nothing frightens a Republican like the threat of a tax hike.

  3. Clean water. Safe streets. Access to health and medical. Quality education. Positive relations between private and public enterprises that encourages investment in growth and good jobs. Blend of attractive natural space and improved infrastructure to promote clean air and quality of life. All for a fair and efficient tax structure that is sustainable. That takes leadership. Yours and my political identity can take a back seat.

  4. I read this article and thought it was detailed and within the grasp of most people. But not enough will hear its message. Fewer will care (“I can’t afford food, let alone property.”) And too, way too many will only look for the R after the name when they vote.

    I agree we need a serious party in charge; we also need to stimulate a serious electorate.

  5. Most of the serious electorate here understand that lowering taxes is good for them, reducing government expenses (services) is bad for the country, and increasing debt is merely us putting off paying our bills and asking our kids, theirs, and all future generations to pay them.

    Reds solve that complex math by cutting services to others and lowering taxes on the wealthy.

    Blues accept the reality of the problem and work on incremental progress towards real solutions.

    The purpose of government is to provide acceptable safety from many of the anchors life throws at people, which personal wealth also protects from.

    Government is a wealth redistribution game, with the Reds focused on moving wealth up and Democrats down where the greatest needs are.

    Balance offers solutions, and extremism provides problems, as in all life.

    Let’s continue to live in a successful country by ignoring the red life, which is full of anger and fear and the tall tales of woe spread by the wealthy to bring hardship down.

  6. Not to quibble with timing, but this “slide” into fascism began with the Reagan/Regan embrace of Milton Friedman’s idiotic “Supply-side” economics. Trickle down was, and still is, hogwash. And yet … the “serious” Republicans took this as part of their operating philosophy since 1982.

    It should also be noted that even during the Eisenhower administration, the Republican tax cut brought the top tax rate down to about 55%! ALSO, during the 1950s, the middle class emerged as the engine for the booming economy. It was when a single-income family of 4 could afford buying a home, a new car every other year and ate wholesome food (Not the cheap, overly-processed swill now on the shelves) and experienced very high-quality public education.

    The Republicans being “unserious” means, today, that they want to turn the middle class back into the serf class. That means more profits for corporate/banking America. Don’t believe that? Well, guess who is buying up all the vacant property in downtowns and the suburbs.

  7. I can still remember the photo of Mike Hicks and Art Laffer at a business meeting for ALEC in Ft. Wayne. Laffer has been laughed out of the economist profession for his work with Friedman. Art played a role in Reagan’s neoliberal party. Hicks has been trying to distance himself ever since.

    Anywho, those touching on the “electorate” in Indiana are spot on. Most of the people reading this blog and posting comments can determine within 30 seconds that Fox News is garbage. However, that’s where all Republican officials go and vent about Democrats. If it’s on the television, it must be the truth. Most believe it must be the truth if it’s on an Internet meme. I’d like to give them the benefit of the doubt by calling them “unserious,” but it’s much worse than that.

    One of the brighter electorates, a high school classmate, posted some drivel about Kamala’s tax plan to raise taxes on all Americans. I posted an article from The Independent that said taxes would only be raised for the uber-wealthy. He disagreed and posted an opinion article on Fox News by a guy funded by Bob Mercer and Marcus (Home Depot). It was a scare piece aimed at the Middle Class and full of false claims about Harris’s plan. My classmate didn’t even know it was an opinion piece or take 30 seconds to investigate the author.

    Would you call that “unserious” or something else?

    The Republican Party has a vast network of propaganda artists aimed at the 5th-grade mentality, including evangelicals barking hell and damnation to their parishioners. The Democrats have a vast network of propaganda as well, but they cannot get away with spreading outright false information or risk losing subscribers ala NYT and WaPo.

  8. Cutting taxes is a fine goal, both federal and state, but as El Salvador president Nayib Bukele pointed out, the U.S. doesn’t run on taxes; it functions on the over-printing of currency, to which there is no limit.

  9. An example just received today by Indiana Capital Chronicles who obtained a letter sent to Noblesville residents by the Heritage Foundation, the author of Project 2025:

    “Despite all the evidence, you have probably heard claims that voter fraud doesn’t exist. That’s the baseless narrative constantly pushed by leftist politicians, radical fanatics, and their establishment media mouthpieces who vilify any Americans who demand free, fair elections.”

    Heritage claimed to be a “nonpartisan organization,” which is a blatant lie.

    So, why would the Republicans send a two-page letter to Noblesville residents claiming voter fraud?

    https://indianacapitalchronicle.com/2024/08/30/national-conservative-group-alleges-systemic-election-fraud-in-survey-sent-to-indiana-voters/?

  10. The Republicans have not been interested in actual governing since Reagan, whose economic plan was designed to further enrich the rich. Done.

  11. In support of my above contention, I quote HCR from her posting of today:
    ” For their part, Republican politicians focused on spreading capitalism rather than democracy, arguing that the two went hand in hand.”

  12. Last night Kamala interview – if you can call it that – was like “putting paint on a turd” – I almost died laughing when I heard some describe it that way.. She’s got NO clue and SHE is the current administration….. so a “new way forward” is NOT her. Interesting she needed to bring her support dog with her.

  13. Really – Gail? Mindless hate, indeed. There is an artist who does paint, and/or polish turds Christopher Ofili – in this case, specifically elephant turds. Given the current reality of the world wide health/surviving numbers of these wonderful beasts, we have to believe that bringing positive attention their way is an act of love and that there will be success.

    For yourself, you too deserve love and support. I have to believe (hope) there are folks in your life who can see positives in you, despite your ugly words and evidently equally ugly thought processes. I hope you can discover and embrace different, helpful, patterns and begin to contribute positives to our world.

    You are welcome to write me off as sanctimonious, not to mention, unable to spell. Nonetheless, I wish you well. Cheers!

Comments are closed.