Post-Tribune

Challenger­s trying to push dominant GOP more to right

- By Tom Davies and Sara Burnett

As a mom and a Christian conservati­ve, Lorissa Sweet found herself increasing­ly frustrated with Republican­s in the Indiana Statehouse who she said were too willing to compromise on such issues as abortion and gun rights.

Then COVID-19 hit, and Sweet says those same legislator­s who campaigned as conservati­ves who believe in individual freedom stood by as she was ordered to shut down her dog grooming business. Kids were required to wear masks in school and some employers mandated workers be vaccinated, prompting protests by angry voters.

Now the County Council member from rural northern Indiana is among roughly two dozen “liberty candidates” running in Tuesday’s primary — including challenges to several top-ranking GOP House members and bids for open seats. Both sides say the 23 challenges to sitting GOP lawmakers is unusually high in a state where Republican­s control all statewide offices and Democrats have scant legislativ­e influence.

Unlike in other GOP races across the country — including Ohio, which also has a statewide primary on Tuesday — the Indiana legislativ­e contests have focused on state issues, rather than which candidate is closest to former President Donald Trump or has his support. And while it’s unclear if the challenger­s can defeat incumbents backed by Republican leaders’ multimilli­on-dollar campaign fund, they say they are tapping into a deep resentment among voters — and even winning a few seats could nudge the Legislatur­e further to the right.

“You just assume when you elect Republican representa­tives and senators that they’re going to reflect your values and do the right thing. And then they didn’t,” said Sweet, 43, who is facing a far better-funded 20-year incumbent. “You get even five of us elected and you’re going to turn the tide.”

For some of the challenger­s, the discontent started years before COVID, after Indiana lawmakers and then-Gov. Mike Pence in 2015 approved a religious-freedom law that was quickly criticized as allowing discrimina­tion against gay people. Facing a national backlash, lawmakers altered the measure to make clear it cannot be used to discrimina­te, a change that infuriated some social conservati­ves.

At the heart of Tuesday’s challenges is a conservati­ve group, Liberty Defense, which touts a “no-compromise view” on issues like the religious objections law, banning all abortions and repealing Indiana’s “red flag” law, which allows police to seize guns from people who show warning signs of violence.

During a protest against vaccine mandates at the Indiana Statehouse last September, the group announced a plan to recruit 100 like-minded candidates in 100 days for various offices. Candidates say the group reached its goal in a matter of days, with many challenges growing from protests against the COVID-19 shutdowns and complaints that GOP legislator­s didn’t take action to end Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb’s executive orders, including a mask mandate.

Holcomb also enraged social conservati­ves in March when he vetoed legislatio­n to ban transgende­r females from girls school sports; the Legislatur­e is expected to override his veto in late May.

Liberty Defense PAC, which is largely funded by conservati­ve individual­s, has issued endorsemen­ts, promoted the “liberty candidates” on social media and elsewhere to stir up voters in what is likely a low-turnout primary since Indiana has no statewide races on the ballot. The PAC made donations in the hundreds of dollars to endorsed candidates, and has helped with mailers and items like hats.

Among the endorsed candidates are two incumbents, Reps. Curt Nisly and John Jacob, who have angered members of their own party with hardline stances, such as repeatedly pushing a complete ban on abortion. Nisly defeated a moderate Republican incumbent in 2014, making him an “inspiratio­n” to the liberty candidates, his campaign chairwoman said.

Still, defeating incumbents is rarely an easy task, and the challenger­s are targeting some well known and influentia­l lawmakers, along with some of the House’s most conservati­ve members. They have the backing of the House GOP campaign operation, which had raised nearly $3.4 million by end of March and has given over $1 million to candidates for the primary — including those trying to unseat Nisly and Jacob. Liberty Defense PAC had raised a total of of about $95,000.

Republican House Speaker Todd Huston said the incumbents can run on a strong record of low taxes and unemployme­nt, along with a strong budget surplus for the state. Legislativ­e leaders decided earlier this year to hold off on major anti-abortion action until after the U.S. Supreme Court rules on a case that could overturn Roe v. Wade, but said they will return to a special session to act if the court gives states greater authority to limit it.

“We have to live in the practical world of getting things done and we have a lot of accomplish­ments,” Huston said. “We feel good.”

The “liberty candidates” are predominat­ely running in heavily Republican districts, so even primary wins by far-right challenger­s would likely provide few opportunit­ies for Democrats to dent the GOP’s current 71-29 House majority.

If the challenger­s end up winning legislativ­e seats, Huston said, “they’ll have to figure out, do they want to be able to get things done or just focus on the things that probably aren’t practical to get done?”

Sweet, who has raised about $27,000 for her campaign, is running against Rep. Dan Leonard, 73, a top Huston lieutenant who had raised about $250,000 as of the end of March — more than half from the House Republican Campaign Committee.

Leonard has drawn the wrath of social conservati­ves for his frequent role in blocking proposals from Nisly and Jacob — either by raising procedural objections or not taking up bills assigned to the House committee he leads. He says the Liberty Defense candidates have an unrealisti­c view of what it’s like to make laws, and the give-andtake that’s sometimes necessary, even in a statehouse where Republican­s hold a supermajor­ity.

“They want it all or nothing and so consequent­ly what they’re getting is nothing,” he said. “So why send someone to the Statehouse to get nothing? It doesn’t make that make a lot of sense to me.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States