Posted without opinion, bias, or editing.
Not long after Republican Precinct Committeeman Phillip Schultz decided to create the Facebook page “Citizens of Evansville Against a Taxpayer Funded Hotelâ€, another page cropped up on Facebook borrowing heavily from the opposition formula calling itself “Citizens of Evansville For Progress on a Convention Hotelâ€. The pro-hotel page even went so far as to swipe the opposition’s artwork, replacing only the name, which itself reveals something interesting.
Rather than simply replacing opposing terms in the name – i.e. rather than calling themselves “Citizens of Evansville For a Taxpayer Funded Hotel†– this page’s creator dropped all reference to taxpayers, opting for the more palatable (and telling) term “progressâ€.
In the succeeding days since their respective creations, each page has garnered a sizable following and some interesting demographic data has come to light. As the CCO previously reported, according to Facebook statistics, the pro-hotel page sees its largest group of supporters in the 35-54 age range, while the opposition page sees its largest support group in the 25-34 age range.
This is backward from what one might usually expect, which makes it interesting. The prevailing theory seems to be that young people are skeptical of such a large subsidy for a hotel because they realize that they will be the ones ultimately bearing the brunt of the expense over their working lives. Whatever the reason for this subtle demographic difference, one similarity between the pages is even more striking – both pages were created by Republican Party Precinct Committeemen.
In a revelatory exchange in the CCO comment section, Phyllip Davis, a PC in German Township Precinct 6, has revealed he is the progenitor of the pro-hotel page. This revelation further underscores the divisive nature this hotel subject is having on the local Republican Party. With its top two most visible representatives – the Mayor and the Chairman – being in favor of taxpayer subsidies for a private business, a stance more typically held by liberal Democrats and “Progressivesâ€, many Republican party members, including Schultz, have seen this issue as a fight for the heart and soul of the Party.
The 2012 Indiana State Republican Party Platform states that the Party advocates fiscal responsibility: “We are committed to…Fiscal Responsibility by living within our means. This means keeping taxes low and government spending under control.â€
In the section of the platform entitled “Limited Governmentâ€, the Party advocates facing obstacles in a “in a sober and meaningful way†while being “more judicious†in the way services are provided, and “ridding our system of fraud, waste and abuse.â€
“Living within our means is more than a phrase.” the platform continues. “It’s the way we approach every fiscal decision made.”
On the subject of jobs and economic growth, the platform is clear: “The proper role of government…is to get out of the way and let Hoosier entrepreneurs and job creators build, grow and expand their private enterprises…”
In the section devoted to the taxpayer, the platform is unmistakable: “…promoting policies that encourage growth and investment in our state’s economy and keeps taxes low is among our highest priorities.†This section goes on to say, “…government should only request of its citizens the dollars it needs to provide necessary services. No more.â€
Clearly this philosophy of providing only “necessary services†excludes a luxury convention hotel half-funded by taxpayer promises to pay at a future date, and the proponents of this hotel within the Republican Party – Mayor Lloyd Winnecke, Chairman Wayne Parke, Precinct Committeeman Phyllip Davis, Precinct Committeeman E. Lon Walters, County Commissioner Marsha Abell and others I might have forgotten – are at odds with the Indiana State Republican Party Platform in a very fundamental way. The platform contains no less than 27 references to “taxes†and “taxpayersâ€, and in none of these references is the progressive/liberal stance taken that taxpayers should be in the business of funding private companies for the “betterment of the collectiveâ€.
This issue has created a deep schism within the Vanderburgh County Republican Party. I have personally had occasion to have been harassed and harangued on the merits of this taxpayer-funded hotel by not only Progressive Democrats, but by the top representatives of our Republican Party. The loudest proponents continue to come from within my own Party – a Party that clearly professes to advocate against this sort of thing in its own platform.
My fear is this issue and others like it will continue to divide Republicans until some leader steps forward who can clearly articulate true, paleo-conservative Republican positions and focus all these disparate, flailing, neo-liberal viewpoints into a coherent, overarching philosophy to move us forward. Without this, the Republican Party can look forward to another 20 years of local irrelevance.
2012 Indiana State Republican Party Platform:Â http://www.indgop.org/ContentFiles/476/2012%20Platform.pdf