Lessons From A Georgia GOP Primary
This week’s Courier Herald column:
A funny thing happened on the way to voting “them all out” last Tuesday. After the votes were all counted, not a single Republican incumbent congressman or state legislator was voted out of office. Only two were pushed into runoffs statewide, and even then by a handful of votes in each case.
It wasn’t supposed to be this way. Those of us who write political opinion and news pieces were sure the “anti-establishment” furor was going to result in the defeat of a number of GOP incumbents. We are the same people that failed to take Donald Trump seriously nor fully understand his takeover of the national GOP. Many of us, still lacking the full understanding of what the heck is up with GOP voters, extrapolated the angry mood of the electorate that selected Trump into a certainty that these same voters would storm the gates of the GOP establishment and remove current elected officials en masse.
And here we are, with those same angry voters and the same GOP incumbents. The easy explanation from the political class is to say there was a “disconnect”. That’s a nice rhetorical way of saying that those of us paying attention understand what’s going on better than the voters. That is rarely the case.
It’s more likely that many of us who didn’t understand why voters were selecting Trump still don’t get it, at least at some level. We could pretend that voters squelched their anger after the SEC primary, or that they’re mad at everyone but their own state representative, senator, or congressman. It may be better to dig deeper and give the voter credit for not only being able to recognize causes of their frustration, but evaluate whether the solutions offered to the problems they seem to understand better than us were proper remedies.
Republican rhetoric has grown increasingly hostile toward government and “the establishment” for years. Many Republicans, especially those that loudly proclaim themselves “the base” and the silent majority, have shown little tolerance for governing. They have internalized the Ronald Reagan line “…government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem” as if it is a complete truism. Many conservatives have carried on with the belief that Ronald Regan wanted a complete shutdown of the federal government, and scoff at any reminders that the Great Communicator partnered with Speaker Tip O’Neill to become the Great Compromiser.
This core of the GOP has grown accustom to shouting down anyone that dares defend government, tries to make it work more efficiently, or in any way utilizes the current system to improve the lives of everyday Americans. They believe a total shutdown of the US Government was not only morally correct, but desired by the electorate. They deem anyone who disagrees with this approach to be less than conservative, and casually throw around epithets such as “RINO” toward them.
This core, fueled by talk radio, Fox News, and right leaning internet publications, have reaffirmed that their brand of “just say no” conservatism was what GOP voters demanded. Except, that’s not what Donald Trump has offered “the base”.
Trump’s positions – such as they can be nailed down – are far from those who would contain and limit the powers of the federal government. Quite the contrary. Trump wants to use the muscle provided by various government entities to “make America great again”. His message isn’t that the Federal Government has too much power. Rather, he believes we just haven’t been using that power “to win”.
If you listen to the rhetoric of Trump, you will scarcely find him offering a solution of “do nothing” to any problem, real or perceived. Which brings us back to Georgia’s primaries.
The insular GOP “base” displayed their usual disdain for Georgia’s governing majority throughout the primary process. There were threats to remove key members of the legislature for successfully passing laws that dealt with improving delivery of government services mandated by the Constitutions of the country and state.
The alternative offered almost exclusively in contested primaries were candidates that offered empty platitudes rather than tough choices and workable solutions. Those that ran against some of Congress’ most conservative members had a platform that would have ensured they had zero clout or influence in Washington.
Voters rejected the “do nothing” candidates across the board. Candidates that found constructive solutions to Georgia’s problems – even those that championed expanding mass transit – won sound re-election victories.
There is only a disconnect here if you believe those making all the noise are in fact the (non)silent majority. If, however, you believe that a majority of Republican voters want to see actual solutions to real problems, then Tuesday’s results are quite logical and understandable in the year that has given us Trump.
About Author
Charlie
Founder of GeorgiaPol.com; Now weekly columnist Very interested in Georgia and Georginas. Interest in politics is waning daily.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
If the state and presidential primaries were at the same time, do you think the result would be the same? Especially if the state primary was moved up.
A very good question, a little food for thought:
1) 20 percent voter participation is a large sample.
2) Smaller turn out works to the advantage of the most motivated voters, so we should of saw more upsets
I do agree combining elections is not only fiscally more efficient it would drive turn-out. The biggest issue, I see is how voters do not understand, how much local office holders effect their life way more, than federal offices.
While I agree that it would make sense for the angriest voters to be more motivated, but it can be hard to maintain that enthusiasm. I can’t think of any Trump-like candidates that we’re running that would get people excited.
So you’re back to the party establishment, the people who vote all the time anyways.
Texas had their primary on the same day as the presidential primary. Not a single member of congress lost their primary and there was quite a few very competitive races. Some one actually tried to run to the right of Louie Gomert.
I cannot speak to the local races though.
That is very interesting. Especially having Cruz as Trump doing well.
Voter apathy may be the main reason. In Cherokee only about 18% of the eligible voters cast ballots and maybe much less in other areas. Presidential primaries tend to always attract more of the eligible voters. I always try to point out that the closer a politician is to your pocket book (the more local they are) the more impact they will have on your life. I do think it is a bit of a stretch to think because some politicians who won will translate into an endorsement of public transportation even if the Atlanta news paper said it was.
” If, however, you believe that a majority of Republican voters want to see actual solutions to real problems”
Optimism I want to believe. It will take a visionary at the Federal level to use their power to sort out what the Feds can accomplish best and what is best left to states (many bigger than most in the U.N.)
Republicans, I’d hope see a major realignment toward a league of states with common core interests, not a federal government with a financial billy stick and run by those far removed in pay and vision from the average citizen.
Don’t say “common core”!!
the article presents an interesting angle.
as an additional element to add to the hypothetical analysis, the presidential seat was also “open”. if president romney was running for re-election, odds are very high that donald trump would not have been so successful. he probably wouldn’t have even ran bc of the power of incumbency.
and i also see no “disconnect” either; rather, a struggle in most voters between a desire to change, and a desire not to change. and perhaps all voters are “conservative” in the sense that the default position is no change. to vote for change, a candidate has to motivate at least an extra 20-30% of voters to overcome just enough of the typical complacency, and with such limited amounts of voters, and limited energy and tolerance for elections among the populace generally, that limited energy could doubtfully ever throw “all” the bums out. in fact, with the open presidential seat, no one actually even got “thrown out”.
Actual solutions – transportation – policybest.org flat put their finger on the pulse when explaining where Georgia stands on real funding and the diversions of tax monies. The “we already paid” bunch is in the same groove with the “we diverted the money” bunch. They both want to use what we collected toward the $500 million in maintenance and see where we are and what we need to do.
170 is in place, we are growing at an incredible place in some areas and doing the same old same, nothing, on roads. An update from policybest would be nice as the elected (many looked like the frying pan over a fire breathing opponent) continue with poli-speak.
Given that the first money from HB 170 was just appropriated two months ago I’d like a better explanation of “doing the same, nothing” before I try to fight what I believe is an imaginary dragon.
Fair point – but I’d imagine the first few months revenue gives you some hopeful trend, it is not to early to see some formulations. Locally while we went with Beach (reason above) we were unable to extract a pledge to address state roads with thousands of new homes planned or underway. You referred me to John K who responded it was a county issue.
There is not an elected official responsible to Cherokee Co. Citizens that does not agree we have serious road problems and not one that takes their office as the one to get a plan in place, much less pouring asphalt.
I should add a list of intersection improvements and wish lists to someone else is not a viable plan for the zoning changes approved and building permits going.
Still not sure what you’re expecting to have seen or will see. Atlanta (region) didn’t pass a TSPLOST. Cherokee was one of the strongest against it. Maintenance projects have been accelerated per plan to get repaving and bridge replacement done statewide. New project dollars are mostly prioritized on congestion relief efforts and freight corridors. Cherokee is getting a re-route of Highway 20 and express lanes added to 575/75.
When the traffic/funding problem was studied, the number needed for significant congestion improvement was between $2.9 Billion to $5 Billion. HB 170 raised $1 Billion. If Cherokee wants more than what they’re already getting, they’re going to need to do what Fulton’s doing and create their own TSPLOST either within the county or in partnership with a neighboring county. That’s another feature of HB 170. (Note that 3 regions of the state still have TSPLOST, and those crafting 170 worked hard to emphasize to regions with and without TSPLOSTs in effect that TSPLOST was still a necessary part of the funding formula going forward).
Of further note, the “new homes planned or underway” isn’t a state created problem. Zoning is a local issue. The myth of the suburbs is that people can move to a low tax jurisdiction that provides few services, watch it grow, and expect those taxes to remain the same while increasing their demand for services. The growth also pushes up the cost of providing these services (think increasing land values with respect to purchasing right of ways).
In summary, you’re expressing the constant frustration of suburbanites: We want low taxes, and we want the state to mythically come up with money beyond what we’re paying to fix our self-inflicted problems.
The state has stepped up with its part. It’s time to focus some of your attention locally.
Regional TSPLOST rejected as a wave of you do you trust, a poor plan and as the burbs are creating growth/jobs but have little regional muscle.
A local SPLOST might get legs if 100% devoted to roads and bridges and I suspect it would carry with some clarification on the situation. The county earns some understanding of what part of the billion dollars – $500 mil for mantenance you say and $500 mil for infrastructure might drift to one of the fastest growing counties. Hopefully more than a 20 reroute someday to get through trucks a little relief.
I think you need to take a look at growth in the current cycle. It isn’t in Cherokee. Also, Fulton is paying for decisions made in Cherokee (see SR 140 AKA Arnold Mill Road). I would argue the microregionalism has more to do with our problems with local officials only focused on their own jurisdictions without considering how those decisions impact their neighbors.
It goes back to local impact fees. In Holly Springs the zero impact fee fueled growth, but left no money to deal with the mess. The same problem companies make when they price a product at a loss for growth, and hope to make it up in volume. We have to many politicians that spin BS, and blame others with no real plan. The concept of impact fees was to avoid this mess, and let infrastructure stay ahead of growth. We have politicians claiming this is a tax, when in truth it is called being fiscally responsible.
Definition:
……An impact fee is a fee that is imposed by a local government within the United States on a new or proposed development project to pay for all or a portion of the costs of providing public services to the new development……
An impact fee is a tax, John. It creates revenue for the government, paid for by the developer, and ultimately the purchaser of the home. Typically they pay for sewer, fire and police infrastructure to serve the new growth, and other services like libraries, etc. They are less likely to pay for transportation.
Also the no impact fees in the Hickory Flat area, to dive growth was not a rational long term plan. Free sounds great, but free usually has a catch……and we know that area is a disaster, and people are pissed. What bothers the most is the free lunch BS solutions pushed by politicians.The reality is you can build that many homes, and businesses with no impact fees, and not expect what happened. Charlie has done a great job with his educational video statewide on transportaion funding. This last election, the reason I got heavily evolved in the Beach race, is I heard so much factless BS from his oposition I wanted to puke. As we have talked, I do not 100 percent agree with Beach on all issues, but when comes to transpotaion, he is telling people the truth, over what they want to hear. I am glad enough voters saw through the BS from the other side.
John,
I have been an advocate of impact fees for years. Starting at $5k per residential. You are talking about a city, Holly Springs. The county cut theirs and reduces/waives it at a hint of HS annexation. No state legislator will talk about addressing this, the GA cities wouldn’t have it.
Also the no impact fees in the Hickory Flat area, to dive growth was not a rational long term plan. Free sounds great, but free usually has a catch……and we know that area is a disaster, and people are pissed. What bothers the most is the free lunch BS solutions pushed by politicians.The reality is you can build that many homes, and businesses with no impact fees, and not expect what happened. Charlie has done a great job with his educational video statewide on transportaion funding. This last election, the reason I got heavily evolved in the Beach race, is I heard so much factless BS from his oposition I wanted to puke. As we have talked, I do not 100 percent agree with Beach on all issues, but when comes to transpotaion, he is telling people the truth, over what they want to hear. I am glad enough voters saw through the BS from the other side.
Sorry about typos…..drive growth…..cannot build…..
I guess I’m one of the seemingly few in the Republican Party who understands that governing is a lot harder than we realize. We get distracted by red meat issues that get magnified into “yuuuuge” problems that have to be dealt with immediately (see the 2016 session of the Georgia General Assembly). A lot of times it’s a distraction from the real problems our state is facing, like transportation and education. The Transportation Bill was a tough decision for our Party, but, even after the new excise tax took effect, I didn’t see much (if any) change in the price of gas here in northwest Georgia.
We have challenges for our state, and we send our elected officials on our behalf to make the best decision with the information they have at the time. Sometimes they make good decisions and sometimes they don’t. Of course, how many of us have people blowing up our phones and Facebook pages complaining how awful we are because of a decision we make?
We have a habit of making our elected officials out to be evil people, but I would venture to say that a good majority (both Republican and Democrats) under the Gold Dome are generally decent people who want to make their respective communities better.
Of course, I’m just a member of the #RINOEstablishment. 🙂
#RINOPride
Nathan said: “The Transportation Bill was a tough decision for our Party, but, even after the new excise tax took effect, I didn’t see much (if any) change in the price of gas here in northwest Georgia. ”
The trick is that the state took the money the counties/cities were getting so the total tax stayed mostly the same. What I haven’t seen is the impact on local government – have they restored the sales tax or is the increased property tax digest (in general anyway) covering their loss from sales tax?
(The state eliminated 4% state sales tax plus up to 4% local sales tax and increased the 7.5 c/gallon excise tax to 26 cents/gallon. Their estimates at then-gas-pricing was that this would reduce state/local tax from 26.53c/gallon to the 26c/gallon. This cut the county/city portion 9.5 c/gallon if they had 4% sales tax. I think I got my math correct 🙂 )
I know that raising taxes for transportation is the right thing to do (and we need to do more). This underhanded taking money from local government to give to state government so they can say that they didn’t raise taxes is a bit much for me……
I do know the City of Roswell has not raised millage rates.
The state did not end up taking the money the cities and counties were getting. That’s why the bill went from being revenue neutral to being a 6.7 cent/gallon tax increase.
The problem with that is that most cities/counties aren’t spending this money on transportation. Three in particular are using the truck stops to tax diesel fuel to float their local government’s general obligations. The state constitution directs motor fuels to be used by GDOT for transportation. The problem is when the state constitution was written SPLOSTs weren’t really a thing. Because the way that was worded, a lot of local governments get fat off of this money, and it proved too politically challenging to try and take it back.
Thanks Charlie. I must have lost track of revisions because I thought they took away the sales taxes and gave the counties/cities the right to go put them back if they chose.
On the other side of things…. I spent some time today on gdots website looking through the project list for my area. I’m happy with most of the choices – they seem to make sense. I’m also mostly happy with Gwinnett country transportation.
Sorry John and Salty. Impact fees have had no effect on growth in Cherokee. The reason Holly Springs is a hot bed of growth has everything to do a business friendly environment without jumping through bureaucratic hoops to get your development approved. As Jon said all those fees are just one more tax.
If you really want to know why growth exploded in Cherokee go back to the administration of Emily Lemke. The tax policies of her administration cause caused many larger landowners to bail out, sell out , and leave. That’s when the fate of Cherokee was set and now there is no return.
So since impact fees are nothing more than a tax and the counties officials have voted for most of the last 15 years not to roll the millage rate back to revenue neutral essentially raising property taxes every year. How many more taxes do you guys want? Soon property tax bills will look like Clintons 1040EZ with two lines. How much money did you make? Send it in.
In all due respect, impact fees are a one time charge to cover the cost of expansion , not a property tax. It is only charged to new people creating the needs of infrastructure expansion and or upgrades.
In all due respect John impact fees are a tax, period.
Developers do pass on the impact fees or tax if you will. So what? If you don’t want to see the existing landowners adversely affected by growth with tax increases then who better to tax than those causing the greenfield developments? Higher growth = higher taxes. Period. Gwinnett boomed for years along with developers paying no one but the commissioners. Not only do we have regular property tax increases but have had SPLOSTs and ESPLOSTs practically in perpetuity since the state has allowed them. At least get some of it on the front end. Nobody cuts and runs faster than greenfield developers. They could have taught Genghis Khan a thing or two. Look at the article Teri linked today on storm sewers. We now pay a “fee” on our property taxes in Gwinnett because of the malfunctioning storm sewers the developers got away with in the 80s & 90s. They are collapsing or causing sinkholes in every neighborhood around me. This is a cautionary tale, take it or leave it. Or as the Fram guy used to say, “pay me now or pay me later”.
Oh and there is a difference in the semantics on calling it a fee or a tax. We don’t get to deduct the stormwater runoff “fees” from our income tax but what the hell, that batch of commissioners got to claim they didn’t raise “taxes”.
Incumbents win. We remember Kantor and Daschle going down and forget that 98+ percent of congressional incumbents keep winning elections until they get bored or find themselves in a scandal.
The same is true at the state level. The advantages of incumbency are so great that challengers are always a long shot.
Locally is no different. Here in Oconee we’re dealing with a variety of water and sewer problems, and the board of commissioners has been much less than forthcoming on how we got where we are and how we can expect to get to a better place and what it will cost. Many people claim to be very upset but the two commissioners up for re-election pulled 70 percent.
Some favor Trump because he says he’s gonna do something. They don’t know what, don’t really care, just the words are enough. Others are born rock-throwers and Trump is the biggest rock around. Neither attitude was ever likely to extend to anyone but Trump.
With the exception of some piker running against an entrenched sheriff we had no other contested races locally or for congress in the Republican primary. In North Gwinnett the Republican Primary is the real election so that means no incumbent had to even get out of the house this go round. Kind of hard to vote them out that way. I’m going to be writing in Willie Nelson as a protest against Renee Unterman in the Fall. Just abstaining doesn’t feel good enough this time.
Nobody runs really. Everyone today just wanted to whine because Trump is winning. This article has some valid points, but still mentions bits and pieces of the story to firm a narrative. Whatever narrative that may be, up to you. Not to mention that Georgia recently did have somewhat of a Trump with Perdue. Although he’s in a political family he was still an outsider and was in business for 40 years.