Harris, McCormick, McCray, Wells all lose; supermajority intact
Two years ago analysts puzzled over why Hoosiers – particularly women – didn’t rebel against the Republican legislative supermajority just two months removed from passage of a strict abortion ban . . . despite polling showing a strong majority favoring much looser abortion laws. This year we got our answer, after Democrats running women for governor, U.S. Senate, and attorney general and legislative candidates focused on reproductive freedom were roundly repudiated by voters.
This occurred even as 10 states voted on ballot measures to restore or expand abortion access and reproductive rights on Tuesday. Seven of those states – including some deep red ones – voted to protect, preserve, or extend abortion rights, while three voted to restrict them.
Governor-elect Mike Braun (R) said of the McCormick campaign that “it was probably disingenuous and foolish to think that that was going to carry the day in a state that had just looked at it a couple years ago …. and I don’t recall any rep or senator losing his or her job for being a part of it.”
He affirms Wednesday morning that “I don’t think there’s going to be anything done on that issue, because it’s already been litigated.” Indeed, just as voters are seeing now nationally, in Indiana, abortion policy has likely found its ceiling
“The landslide election of pro-life Republican Mike Braun over abortion advocate Jennifer McCormick is a defining statement on the strength of pro-life support in Indiana,” declares Indiana Right to Life President and CEO Mike Fichter election night.
“Throughout her campaign, McCormick repeatedly stated she wanted the governor’s race to be Indiana’s referendum on abortion. Tonight, she got her wish. We are proud of the pro-life voters who turned out in force today, and we look forward to working with governor-elect Braun to make Indiana a model state in supporting pregnant mothers and protecting unborn babies,” Fichter adds.
Others, however, might suggest that Hoosier voters may simply have separated their support for abortion rights from their presidential or gubernatorial votes.
While the incoming governor sees it as McCormick having waged “a one-issue campaign, negative from the get-go,” there’s more at stake, of course, than abortion . . . as Republicans have shown in solidifying a new ruling coalition in Indiana that can’t be dented by women and the elite in exurbs, despite a growing perception that such communities were turning purple, if not blue.
But pro-life Republicans prevailed even in upscale, well-educated districts, even as they were also hit with other culture war attacks – book-banning was a biggie – and firing back with attacks on Democrats for backing biological boys in girls’ sports. That was the only social issue that polled well for the GOP even in, for example, Carmel and Fishers.
At the end of the day Tuesday, Hoosier voters had resoundingly placed their trust in Republicans to run government at all levels – president, governor, attorney general, the U.S. Senate and Congress, and the General Assembly.
Democrats waiting (since 2012 now) for the pendulum to swing back – hoping voters perceive Republicans overreaching with supermajority control – will have to wait even longer.
Perhaps even much longer.
Democrats will have to grapple with the fact that Republicans have actually extended their legislative supermajority for a seventh successive election cycle (no incumbents were defeated) . . . and that Micah Beckwith (R) will be the next lieutenant governor (perhaps a circumstance as fraught for the new governor and legislative leaders as for Democrats!).
The governor-elect, however, took pains at his transition briefing to suggest that the Beckwith nomination was a blessing in disguise for his campaign.
Sen. Braun explains that “it’s been a benefit, in a way, because it’s kind of brought the party together. The part of the party that I think he represents is where all the passion is on the conservative side, and I think now they’re on board, and it’s my job to make sure that the full spectrum of what being a Republican is about in this state is then going to be focused on the kitchen table issues I’ve been talking about,” and he says he plans to “incorporate people that you know and others that you don’t know in terms of their points of view.”
President
Despite national news media playing up early returns from Hamilton County as perhaps indicative of trends (the Wall Street Journal had suggested Hamilton County be watched for this), NBC News analysts and anchors spent valuable airtime during the 7:00 hour election night marveling over a Kamala Harris (D) lead over Donald Trump (R) – albeit by less than two points – with fewer than 60% of the votes counted. Yes, it fit the national media narrative, but Hoosiers know that the mail-ballot votes here are overwhelmingly Republican (which is why key GOP legislative candidates here have flipped from trailing in early counts to winning). Trump ultimately won the affluent county with the same percentage of the vote (≈ 52%) as he earned in 2020, a +6 margin – on turnout that topped 70% this year.
Trump’s largest “dead red” margins (+64) were achieved in Daviess County and Franklin County. The top Harris margins (+27) were generated by Marion County and Monroe County. Marion County moved by 2.0 points toward Trump compared to 2020, largely, we presume, due to a depressed 2024 turnout. Trump’s greatest improvement from 2020 numbers came in tiny Ohio County, growing by 10.0 points. Harris found her biggest positive swing in the metro donut, where Hancock County grew its Democratic presidential vote by 3.8 points. In the donut, Boone County (+2.4), Hamilton County (+0.7), and Morgan County (+0.2) also saw Democratic presidential gains over 2020.
No county south of the metro donut grew their percentage for the Democratic presidential nominee over the cycle.
The three-time GOP nominee also carried 88 of the 92 counties while improving his Indiana margin for a second successive election – performing best here without a Hoosier as his running mate for the first time in his three appearances on the Indiana general election ballot.
Year Trump Democrat
2024 58.93% 39.35%
2020 57.02% 40.96%
2016 56.47% 37.46%
This was the largest percentage any presidential candidate has earned in Indiana in two decades, since the 2004 reelection campaign of then-president George W. Bush (R). Harris underperformed Joe Biden (D) and his 40.96% in 2020, outperformed Hillary Clinton (D), but otherwise found herself in the ignominious Dukakis and Kerry territory:
2016 Clinton 37.46%
2004 Kerry 39.26%
2024 Harris 39.35%
1998 Dukakis 39.69%
One of the four counties that Trump failed to carry was Lake County, where he was only able to garner 46% of the vote in a county in which, as a Gary casino mogul from 1994 – 2005, our Hannah News Service sister newsletter INDIANA GAMING INSIGHT reminds us, his eponymous business plowed more than $155 million in capital investment into the Gary property, employed an average of more than 1,000 people annually, most from Lake County (and paid $221 million in wages locally over its first eight years in operation).
According to a 2004 Indiana Gaming Commission fiscal evaluation, “Trump is perceived as a good corporate citizen, spending over $75 million in the area and attracting new visitors to the community. Additionally, Trump has impacted the Gary area through close to a million dollars in sponsorships and contributions to local area organizations.” Yet he still lost the county 22 years after he brought his high-profile Miss USA pageant to the Genesis Convention Center.
U.S. Sen-elect Jim Banks (R) showed remarkable guts when he bigfooted former Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) out of the primary and then legally strongarmed John Rust (R) from the ballot, and earned big points from his future Senate majority colleagues by allowing them to ignore Indiana from a spending perspective and direct their cash to opportunity capital races. But he’s also now being looked to for his political acumen, having drafted the new Trump and GOP political model.
As the Wall Street Journal reminded readers Wednesday:
In a memo titled, “Cementing GOP as the Working-Class Party,” then-Rep. Jim Banks of Indiana argued that 79% of mechanics and 59% of custodians had donated to Trump, while 94% of college professors and 73% of bankers had donated to then-candidate President Biden. This division between what Banks called a corporate-minded cultural elite and the rest of the country was a “political gift” from Trump that the party could build on.
Banks argued that Hispanic voters would favor Trump’s tough policies to stop illegal immigration, and that both Black and Hispanic voters opposed transgender-friendly policies associated with Democrats. An agenda that continued Trump’s posture on these issues, as well as trade policies aimed at protecting American jobs, would draw more of these voters, he wrote.
On Tuesday, Banks won election to the Senate from Indiana. In his victory speech, he told supporters that his father was a retired factory worker, his mother a former nursing-home cook and that he had spent the first years of his life in a trailer park. He said he would devote himself to fighting for the people who live in that trailer park now, by pushing back on “the elites and the Democrats” who are “sending our jobs overseas to China and Mexico.”
“It should come as no great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working class people would find that the working class has abandoned them,” said U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) after the election. “First, it was the white working class, and now it is Latino and Black workers as well. While the Democratic leadership defends the status quo, the American people are angry and want change. And they’re right.” We wonder if the soon-to-be Banks colleague in the upper chamber will have a discussion about the phenomenon.
Don’t think for a minute that the president-elect doesn’t remember that Banks memo – and message (U.S. Rep.-elect Marlin Stutzman (R), one of three new Hoosier Republicans easily elected to the U.S. House – in his case following an eight year interregnum – donned a MAGA hat at his victory party).
“Kamala, you’re fired!” Rep. Banks said after the results were in Tuesday. “I’m excited to work with President Donald Trump in the Senate to Make America Great Again!’ ” He later added, “Tonight made it clear: Americans are sick and tired of literally and figuratively paying for Washington Democrats’ radical agenda.” Rep. Banks continues, “We took back the Senate, and in January we will take back our country. On day one, I will work with my colleagues in the Senate to secure our border, restore American strength, and bring down the cost of living for working class families.”
He was one of a number of Hoosier GOP candidates who tied themselves to the Trump brand in the campaign, and he and the man he will replace in the Senate, governor-elect Mike Braun (R), were the two most out-front in their support of the man and his message. And no statewide candidate won more counties than Banks did this week (Rep. Banks and Attorney General Todd Rokita (R) both won all save Lake County, Marion County, and Monroe County).
The Trump win in Indiana and nationally was so convincing that even Governor Eric Holcomb (R), who had earned the enmity of the Indiana GOP base for not being conservative or supportive enough on social issues and Trump backing, issued a gratuitous post-election statement (amidst speculation that the outgoing two-term governor wouldn’t turn down a cushy ambassadorship): “Congratulations to President Trump, again, on being elected to our country’s and the rest of the free world’s highest office. My past experience working with him during his first term gives me hope for another 4 years of strong policies and prosperity for the United State (sic) of America. His potential to do good is only matched by the historic urgency to show the world, America is strong and only going to get stronger.”
Governor
Sen. Braun easily won election with 56.5% of the vote, posting one of the three largest margins (15.70 points) in the past eight cycles, even after 60% of those who voted in the Republican gubernatorial primary voted against him. This was the widest margin of victory registered for an open governor’s office in the state since 1980, the first full cycle after the constitutional amendment allowing governors to serve two consecutive terms. Sen. Braun was able to consolidate the GOP base thanks to Trump and likely as well due to his lieutenant governor running mate, and Trump voters either pulled the straight party lever (Indiana remains one of only seven states with the ability to vote for all of a party’s nominees with a single mark, push, or pull) or at least stayed Republican through the statewide and congressional races.
Most pundits had projected Braun with a ceiling of 52%, and many had him performing even lower, at a 48% high, assuming that Donald Rainwater (L) would record between five percent and eight percent of the vote (recall the fears of the Braun campaign that led to him going negative on Rainwater via mailers). Rainwater, who surprised with a Covid-angered 11.4% of the 2020 electorate, only mustered 4.7% this time as the anti-shutdown, anti-mask crowd felt comfortable with Braun.
That left Jennifer McCormick (D) with 40.7% of the vote, a substantial improvement for Democrats from the 2020 Covid-dominated campaign, but effectively what former U.S. Rep. Jill Long Thompson (D) counted in her lackluster 2008 challenge campaign.
McCormick won only five counties in what Democrats thought would be the Year of the Woman, and carried no counties fully east of U.S. 31 or south of U.S. 50. She failed to win the state’s top office and join 13 other women (8D, 5R) who will serve as governors of their respective states in 2025 – a new record.
McCormick has appeared on the statewide general election ballot twice – both times with Donald Trump at the top of the ticket. When she ran with Trump as a Republican in 2016, she won her statewide race for state superintendent of public instruction. Running this time (effectively) against Trump as a Democrat, she lost.
After two close open-seat races (2012 and 2016), we’ve now seen a blowout. This is also the first time that Republican have been in the double-digit percentages in consecutive gubernatorial victories since their epic 1972-1980 stretch. Since Indiana last elected a Democrat as governor, the high water mark for Ds was a 46.56% showing by former House speaker John Gregg (D) in 2012.
Meanwhile, Democrats haven’t elected a governor since the turn of the century (2000), and have no immediate nominee apparent for 2028 (unless Beau Bayh, just sworn into the Indiana Bar this month, can follow his father’s footprints and first get elected secretary of state in 2026). Should Braun decide not to seek reelection at the age of 74, Republicans would have a long and strong line of hopefuls.
Democrats have now seen a female presidential nominee defeated for the second time in eight years, and their second female nominee for Indiana governor in 16 years also defeated for the second time.
One more note for anyone looking to succeed Sen. Braun as our next governor: We haven’t effectively elected a governor north of U.S. 40 (or I-465) since 1976. Then again, we hadn’t elected a governor who had been a sitting U.S. senator before this year . . . and we also hadn’t elected a former local school board member as governor since Samuel Ralston (D) in 1912, according to the Indiana School Boards Association.
Attorney General
Four years ago, none of the 10 attorney general races on the ballot nationally flipped parties, and no incumbents lost this time out of the blocks. Despite all the controversy GOP AG Todd Rokita has chosen to embrace, he easily won his fourth statewide general election race, with his 59.5% performance slipping only marginally from the 60.4% he earned in 2020. Destiny Wells (D) outperformed the 39.6% of the vote recorded by former Evansville mayor Jonathan Weinzapfel (D) in 2020 and the 37.7% of the vote garnered by retired judge Lorenzo Arredondo (D) in 2016.
“The people of Indiana have rejected this push to the left,” an exuberant Rokita said to supporters election night, noting that he never went negative in his campaign, unlike Wells. “[N]ow is the time to keep fighting, to lead boldly, to take the gloves off to protect Hoosiers, preserve and defend liberty in this country,” he pledges.
General Rokita conserved his campaign resources, continuing to raise big bucks in the final weeks of the campaign, even from the Republican Attorneys General Association, finishing the pre-election campaign finance reporting period with an eye-popping $1.45 million. That leaves observers speculating on what direction he might choose to follow four years hence, with lots of talk about a U.S. Senate seat (recall he lost the 2016 primary to a fellow Wabash College alum, Mike Braun), or governor (he lost an Indiana Republican State Central Committee vote in 2016 to Eric Holcomb fill the Pence gubernatorial vacancy). Three of his AG colleagues were elected governor of their respective states on Tuesday. There are also rumblings that he could end up in a top Trump Administration position, potentially removing him from the local political or office-related impact of any disciplinary action that might be forthcoming from the Indiana Supreme Court.
Democrats are looking for the new governor and his attorney general, both Wabash alums with no love lost for each other after a bruising 2016 U.S. Senate primary, to quickly clash over who should direct state legal policy (such as joining “The State of Indiana” on amicus briefs as opposed to having them joined by “The Attorney General of Indiana.” If someone is spoiling for a fight, one can easily be arranged.
The General Assembly
Democrats had high hopes for making inroads into the GOP legislative supermajority; perhaps even eliminating that edge in the House (in addition to what some saw as making a late half-hearted play for the Baldwin, Carrasco, Charbonneau, Freeman, and Young Senate seats).
Not only did Democrats fail to win any Senate seats, but their Hamilton County strategy fell short after mail-in ballots were counted, and they only narrowly retained the HD 10 seat of veteran Rep. Chuck Moseley (D) in a district that had gradually been turning more purple.
The challenge to Rep. Jim Lucas (R) fell embarrassingly short, while Rep. Becky Cash (R) survived thanks to votes from Brownsburg; open Hamilton County-centric seats were won by Danny Lopez (R) and Hunter Smith (R) after hard-fought campaigns; and Rep. Dave Hall (R) eked out another razor-thin win in an unfavorable district.
Perhaps the sole bright spot for legislative Democrats was the election of Rep. Wendy Dant Chesser (R), caucused-in post-session to a marginal seat in Jeffersonville. She won a close race (recall that two years ago, it looked like Demos had lost this one until after a recanvass/recount), leading in both Clark County and Floyd County. Two Republicans with strong business ties who backed her told us that she is the model of what Democrats need to win legislative seats: A woman with strong local business experience and long ties to the community who campaigns credibly on economic issues, and who can draw campaign cash and support from the business community.
Whither (Wither?) the Democrats
Hoosier Democrats haven’t just stumbled in their two-decade struggle to regain relevancy, much less power – they’ve fallen flat on their faces. They are demoralized and see no path back to relevance in Indiana – either by dint of policy or personality. Even more so than their party faces nationally, Hoosier Democrats lack a leader as well as any semblance of a clear ideological identity . . . or at least one that resonates with the current electorate, which doesn’t appear to be trending in their direction even as the Baby Boomers are aging out (although Indiana voters just selected a 78-year-old president and a 70-year-old governor) and a new generation of younger voters becomes the predominant bloc.
Democrats find themselves back lost in the proverbial wilderness of the early to mid-1980s – without the benefit of about half of the state’s congressional delegation they boasted back then. While they managed to effectively become the state’s majority party by the end of the decade, it’s tough to chart out such a return today (in fairness, none was apparent to them Back in the Day, either).
We’ve pointed out the shrinking margins they have been producing in key statewide races since they lost the Governor’s Office in 2004, and the legislative supermajority continues to defy expectations and expand, despite Republicans having to contend with legislative districts that they can’t even gerrymander because they have to accommodate helping out their growing roster of incumbents. Sure, Democrats posted some nice wins in the 2023 mayoral cycle, but their bench and resources remain thin, and some of their rising stars have backed off requests for them to climb the political ladder because of both the political climate and the lack of an effective statewide support network.
Pete Buttigieg (D) ran for state treasurer in 2010 when he was a total unknown. After two terms as mayor of South Bend, he found it less daunting to run for president of the United States than for another statewide or congressional office in Indiana. And even after serving as a member of the Biden Administration cabinet, he chose to move to Michigan and explore a gubernatorial run there rather than return to Indiana as the state party’s savior.
If Mayor Pete has given up on Indiana, how can, for example, first-term mayors Brandon Sakbun (D) of Terre Haute or Stephanie Terry (D) of Evansville feel about their larger future? Can Gary Mayor Eddie Melton (D) see himself again as a statewide candidate after how he saw the party treat Hammond Mayor Tom McDermott (D) in his 2020 U.S. Senate bid?
Democrats have failed to win a statewide office since Glenda Ritz (D) in 2012 (Ritz was – ironically – defeated in her 2016 reelection bid by a novice Republican Jennifer McCormick, who ran with Trump at the top of the ticket). This was the only statewide state office that Democrats had won since Frank O’Bannon (D) was reelected governor in 2000. Former U.S. Sen. Joe Donnelly (D) was the last Democrat to win a U.S. Senate race in Indiana, after that “Mourdock Moment” in the late 2012 debate. Donnelly was taken out by Braun in the next cycle, 2018.
Democrats this cycle thought that they could capitalize on “reproductive freedom” and health rights, while blaming Republicans for spending too much time and attention on social issues that were not the “kitchen table” issues that Democrats as well as candidate Braun sought to address. That certainly didn’t work, making one wonder just what kind of Democratic ticket is needed to win. If McCormick, a former GOP statewide official elected in 2016 on a ticket with Donald Trump running with a copperhead Democrat LG candidate who was pro-life and against same-sex marriage in his legislative tenure wasn’t enough to attract GOP votes, Demos will be hard-pressed to find the right team going forward. Indeed, one veteran lobbyist suggested to us that the McCormick-Goodin ticket could have been elected as Republicans as recently as a decade ago.
Legislative Democrats are caught up in a Catch-22 situation. They can’t raise money and recruit good candidates until they become relevant, and they can’t become relevant until they run good, fully funded candidates. They’ve largely lost their mojo as a launching pad for candidates for other offices over the decades, and that has hurt their party writ large. Five of the seven Republicans who will serve Indiana in the U.S. House next year were helped by their state legislative service (and it would have been six if the life of one hadn’t been claimed by an untimely car accident); ditto for your next governor and U.S. senator. Democrats have not been able to field the same kind of farm team in the General Assembly as have Republicans and that has stymied them.
Interesting to note: First-time gubernatorial voters this year (those who turned 18 since the 2020 election) have never lived in an Indiana led by a Democratic governor.
What Happens to State Government?
While Braun believes that the state has recently enjoyed “good stewardship,” he suggested that “doesn’t mean, though, that you can’t do better. Maybe you plateau after you’ve been holding the reins for a good amount of time,” he mused.
The biggest open secret of the gubernatorial campaign all summer has been the shadow transition office operating on behalf of the Braun campaign, the most active pre-election transition effort we’ve witnessed in at least 10 cycles. Thus, it was no surprise that it only took Team Braun about 12 hours to fully detail the transition team members and outline what Hoosier should expect between now and the inauguration (oh, yeah – there is also an inaugural committee assembled).
One missing link at the unveiling event: lieutenant governor-elect Micah Beckwith (R).
Transition and Inauguration
The transition chair will officially be Victor Smith, a partner in the business services and governmental services groups at Bose McKinney & Evans LLP and a principal of Bose Public Affairs Group. Smith., who has been the extremely active unofficial transition leader through the summer, previously served as Secretary of Commerce in the Pence Administration. Serving as transition director is Braun’s Senate Chief of Staff Josh Kelley, his longtime campaign strategist.
Anne Hathaway will chair the Inaugural Committee, an assignment that comes on the heels of running the 2024 Republican National Convention. The Hathaway Strategies leader also recently chaired the Indiana State Republican Committee and has served in a leadership role in three national GOP conventions. Veteran event planner Emily Daniels Spaulding, owner of Daniels Spaulding Consulting, will be the inaugural director.
The Transition Team’s vice chairs include a passel of lobbyists, a trio of former Daniels Administration officials, individuals close to the alcohol and gaming industries, and board members of the Braun-aligned not-for-profit organization Hoosiers for Opportunity, Prosperity & Enterprise (HOPE), which helped him flesh out much of his campaign policy agenda.
– Betsy Wiley, president and CEO of Hoosiers for Quality Education, served eight years as deputy chief of staff in the Daniels Administration. She is also a HOPE board member.
– Jim Bopp, of Terre Haute’s Bopp Law Firm PC, also secretary, treasurer, and general counsel of HOPE, and a former Republican National Committee general counsel.
– Ryan Kitchell, interim CEO of the Crossroads of America Council and chair of the Holcomb Administration’s Governor’s Workforce Cabinet. He was a Daniels Administration director of the Office of Management and Budget.
– Jim Purucker, president of the John Frick & Associates lobbying firm and a board member of HOPE.
– Brad Rateike, founding principal of Bar Communications and former Daniels Administration deputy press secretary and former director of cabinet communications in the Trump Administration.
– Randy Head, a Logansport-based former state senator, attorney, and current chair of the Indiana State Republican Committee.
– Matt Bell, a former state representative from Fort Wayne and principal with the Catalyst Public Affairs Group lobbying and association management firm.
– Dan Dumezich, a former state representative from Schererville, former state party official, former chair of the Indiana Election Commission, and retired partner and tax attorney at Deloitte Tax LLP.
Among those unnamed but expected to be key in the transition effort are former attorney general Steve Carter (R) (administration) . . . Mitch Roob (health) . . . Paul Mitchell and former Rep. Matt Ubelhoer (R) (energy) . . . and Quincy Cunningham (agriculture).
Gubernatorial Staff
What should you expect in terms of gubernatorial staff and appointments to lead state agencies?
Recall first that we’ve reached a point where, after 20 years of Republican control of the executive branch, effectively any qualified Republican who has wanted a job in state government has served and left, or is now fully vested for pension purposes and can depart for greener pastures.
Recall his comment about state government perhaps having plateaued.
Braun will find it difficult to attract new blood into his administration. As best as we can count (check our math!), Indiana has never had one-party control the Governor’s Office for five consecutive terms and then have to staff a sixth. The closest analogy might be to the City of Indianapolis through the Lugar, Hudnut, and Goldsmith administrations . . . where by the end of the Goldsmith Administration there wasn’t much left to choose from among Republicans.
For his part, the governor-elect pledges that “we’re gonna have a great team. I’m gonna have a staff generally that has been with me through the whole Senate gig. How do you think you get the most legislation passed in any freshman Senate office?”
Staffing Agencies and Departments
As for department and agency heads, the incoming governor acknowledges, “We’ve had tips and cues for a long time from legislators that think ‘this agency needs improvement,’ ‘that one needs improvement,’ ‘this one’s running well’,” and he says that he intends to solicit that kind of input “from across the board, not just from the people I’m going to have to work with.”
What will Sen. Braun be looking for from these individuals? “Well, do you have the experience. Are you willing to reform if it needs to be reformed. Do you have ideas to where you’re going to be kind of ‘simpatico,’ and are you going to be a self-starter with energy that gets in there and actually starts doing the job so that, again, is not going to be difficult when you were running an organization number one that was so small and scrappy, you had to figure out how just to survive …. You’ve just got to focus on how to run things well, attracting talent and sizing them up [–] something that most governors have not done before. I did that for a long time before I got into public service.”
His appointees “will be people that understand that it’s going to be my vision of being an entrepreneurial governor. That’s going to be conservative on the financial side, but very entrepreneurial on the problem-fixing side.”
“All I can tell you is, I move fast. I’m used to it. And also know how to be patient when you need to be patient, so just expect that to all come out soon.”
The transition team is wasting no time, despite its unofficial summer head start vetting potential top staffers. Holcomb Administration agency heads received a five-page letter from Transition Director Kelley on Wednesday, formally requesting detailed information about agency responsibilities, staffing, financing, operations, and issues – on Braun Transition Team letterhead describing BraunTransition.com as “A PROJECT OF HOOSIERS FOR OPPORTUNITY, PROSPERITY AND ENTERPRISE, INC.”; from a Hoosier HOPE email address, and requesting the information be returned to a Hoosier HOPE email address by November 11, the Veterans Day national holiday.
The transition effort seeks detailed information on agency organization, metrics, budget, contracts and acquisitions, “taxpayer service delivery,” legislative requests, and regulations.
Agencies are asked for full organizational charts with areas of staff responsibility and authorized/filled positions along with statutory authority for agency activities.
Budgets from the past two bienniums are sought along with an assessment as to whether the funding is adequate; unfunded liabilities or unfunded mandates; dedicated funds and their sustainability; non-budgeted but planned or expected future expenditures; federal funds and outside funding (and prospects for switching funding sources). Officials are also asked for their proposed budget for the coming biennium . . . and to identify “specific opportunities” that can generate 10% General Fund savings in their current budgets.
Transition officials seek information on constituencies served, performance metrics and status, and interfaces for customers and constituents . . . and any pending legal matters or litigation involving the entity.
Facts on (and copies of) “significant” contracts and vendor agreements must be provided, along with services provided, length of the deals, and whether renewal requires an RFP. The team also wants to know pending or necessary procurement and acquisition decisions ahead, and assorted records related to agency vehicles and to whom they are assigned. Other questions revolve around upcoming, time-sensitive issues or projects (such as federal waiver deadlines).
The agency’s legislative priorities over the past two legislative sessions must be provided, along with “legislative requests” for the 2025 session, to be accompanied by a description of the request, record of any relevant correspondence with legislators, and the projected fiscal impact.
Queries are also made about regulations being considered, developed, or promulgated and their content and timeline. A brief summary of the decisions made by the agency during its regulatory sunset review process is also pursued by the transition team.
In the equivalent of a test essay question, administrators are asked about the top three to five areas of areas of significant entity strength as well as issues of concern or challenges for the entity in the next three months; next year; and over the coming five years – together with recommendations (both long- and short-term, if applicable) to address those concerns. Officials are also requested to address three to five opportunities to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of the entity, and to assess how the entity has changed over the last eight years, including major programs or initiatives that continued or were wound down. The transition team also wants to know specifics about any new initiatives, programs, fees or fee increases, program enhancements, or other “go-live” dates for the agency in the next six months.
All of this is in advance of agency meetings with transition team staff for what the Braun transition office nebulously labels as “further review.”
Addressing Issues
Sen. Braun noted from the 40,000-foot view how his thought process works. “I never ever focus on the particular or the specific issue that you’ve got to get through,” he explains. “I’m going to be always focused broadly – just like I was in building a business, or just like I did when I ran for Senate in that primary – and you’re going to incorporate people that you know, and others that you don’t know in terms of their points of view.”
So what should you expect from the new governor in the policy realm? “Republicans have always been flat-footed on policy,” he contends, while “I’ve been fleet-footed on policy.” “I’m in it to actually get some things done, with a track record that – I don’t know how you could have more of it – that shows that you know how to get from here to there,” he adds.
While he faces a “platter of opportunity,” expect an early emphasis on the “kitchen table” issues he discussed during the campaign: property tax relief, healthcare reform, workforce development, education, and energy . . . but don’t overlook his interest in bringing Indiana on par with states such as Florida, Tennessee, and Texas on certain levels – using language which Democrats might infer as code words for divisive social issues.
“To me, those are states that emphasize freedom and opportunity,” he said in response to a question about his priorities, “and they are states that legislatively – I’m not necessarily saying we’re going to emulate them, but they have the basic core that, ‘We get by with less government, and we run that government more efficiently.’ ”
But he also quickly moved on, reminding reporters at his transition briefing that “I don’t think there was one social issue in the seven or eight I mentioned (tackling), and yet that doesn’t mean you’re going to be oblivious to them, or you’re not going to be drawn into the fray. All I can tell you is, that immediately creates division, and they change over time. Just look at some of the recent ones. A couple decades ago, it was this way; now it’s this way. So they are moving all the time …. And the other issues I’ve mentioned is where my focus is going to,” he said, turning to more detailed specifics about his likely legislative agenda.
Property tax relief will be his initial key focus. “I’m going to probably spend my time there as we articulate the legislative agenda, and I was the first out on reforming property taxes. Hopefully that can be Senate Bill 1, House Bill 1 (sic), and do it in a way that builds on the platform I put out there. And I think we’ll get that done. That has been by far the thing I have heard the most about over the last two years. And no one ever agrees with the fact that you should be growing taxes faster than the growth of your economy, and no one disagrees with the fact that we need to encourage home ownership, especially among young people, and for older people to stay in their homes. So (we will) look at the apparatus, make sure it’s running efficiently with people that are reflecting my vision, and then start rolling out the legislative side of things.”
Gov.-elect Braun concedes that “some of the things I’m talking about aren’t going to be fixed in one session,” particularly “if you start really trying to reform health care. Well, they’ve been trying it for six years, and they made a little headway. I got a bill introduced in the U.S. Senate that would be by far the most important piece of legislation that we passed there in two decades, coauthored by a guy named Bernie Sanders. And you talk about something being tough – we wouldn’t agree on anything other than I got him to believe in competition and transparency. Generally, Democrats there just want more government, regardless of what it costs. When I explained to him that if we could lower costs by the providers out there, it would cost Medicare and Medicaid less – starting to see the head nod. Within a week, we crafted a bill that would have been way bigger on health care than Obamacare ever was – which was big government and big insurance, and has ended up in being mostly very costly, even though it has provided, which I believe in significantly more access to health care, obviously covering pre-existing conditions. So there’s plenty of stuff to get busy with.”
As for Medicaid and the Pathways program, Braun acknowledges “that’s obviously an area that caused a big distortion in the budget, and to me, we’ve already done some remediation towards it. I’ll have to find out how Indiana – where you’ve got more people wanting to do that kind of managed care, but yet, then you’re involved with a program that’s going broke at the federal level because they pay no attention to costs, and then you’re cost-sharing with them. That’s a particular issue that I think will stem the flow of any bleeding there, but it’s got a much broader issue of, ‘How do we lower health care costs?,’ which is hopefully something I’ll be able to weigh in on.”
He continues, “if it’s a good idea, I don’t care where it comes from, I’m going to try to incorporate that into something that’s unique to where we actually tackle those issues we’ve talked about, and do it in a way where many governors may not approach it. When you want to reform health care, you think, ‘Has anybody tried that in the past?’ No, because it’s one of the biggest sectors of our economy. It’s got political risk to it. I size up all that. I’ll put a team together. And I think that is – if you want to pick the number one issue – it’s the one that we have the worst results compared to most other states, measuring it down as finally, as infant maternal mortality – those percentages are shameful, our general health as a society. Cost of it is something that, if we get that correct, that will singly be better than what we’ve probably done collectively over many generations of past governors.”
The former local school board member also believes that schools can be funded more efficiently, observing that “we have put a lot of cost into administration and buildings, and we’ve not been putting it into the classroom.” Yet despite a high level of funding for education, “how we measure [achievement] is showing that it’s not improving.”
Our sister Hannah News Service newsletter INDIANA EDUCATION INSIGHT serves newsletter dishes details this week on how a Braun Administration intends to approach expansion of school choice and offering more opportunities to students in rural areas with stagnant populations.
Working with Lawmakers
Braun, of course, is a former member of the Indiana House, where he served on the Committee on Ways and Means, so he has a familiarity with the legislative and budget process and players . . . but he also wasn’t seen as the most patient member of the General Assembly, and we expect he will continue to face some frustrations with both the pace of legislative activity and the pushback from a branch that often felt overlooked and neglected by the Holcomb Administration.
Looking to the Third Floor, the next occupant of 206 observes that “Most of the committee heads and folks running it are still the same” as when he served in the supermajority a decade ago. “I view that as something that would be a lost opportunity if we don’t make real progress,” he explains, and makes an early statement about involving Democrats (remember what he said about not caring where an idea emanated from, and his work with Sen. Sanders). “And again, looking across the aisle as well, because I’ve been the loudest voice on health care reform, that’s generally the issue that the other side of the aisle claims to be most interested in. I think [education] is a golden opportunity when we pay more than almost all states do for it, we have poor outcomes, K through 12 being half our budget. Post-secondary, another 15% – workforce, education, very important. And those two lead issues, along with I’ve talked about – child care, rural broadband, affordable housing – and now what you never expected in a state that’s abundantly blessed with annual rainfall and good water resources, that’s an issue going forward, not to mention every larger business seems to need a ton of juice or electricity, which is not easy to put together. So those are some challenges that if we get it right here, that differentiates us among the other 49 states, and so I view it entrepreneurially. It’ll be done with fiscal responsibility. That’s the easiest thing.”