IBJNews

Amid leadership issues, Indiana Dems fight over future

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Next year was supposed to be the start of the Indiana Democrats' Bayh-gone era.

For close to a quarter century, former U.S. Sen. Evan Bayh shaped Democratic Party politics in roles as secretary of state, governor and senator. And even after Bayh decided against seeking re-election last year, his former aide, Dan Parker, continued to run the state party.

Having a strong figure running the show has helped hold together disparate factions of a party that include conservative Butternut Democrats in the south and Chicagoland liberals from up north. It has also given the party enough cohesion to fight a much stronger Republican Party in contests for governor.

But that top-down decision-making also built tension among the rank and file. That tension snapped earlier this month during a meeting just days after Parker submitted his resignation, saying it was time for someone else to lead the party.

Parker's decision to step down was seen by many as an opportunity to find fresh blood to lead Democrats through fights to win back the governor's office and a U.S. Senate seat next year.

"They finally said, 'Well, wait a minute. There's no Evan Bayh to tell us what to do, there's no governor to tell us what to do. We want to pick,'" said Kip Tew, a former state Democratic Party chairman.

Instead, Parker pulled his resignation at the last minute and narrowly won a vote to keep his job, and many Democrats walked out feeling sore that they would not get a say about who runs the show.

The showdown was also an early test of leadership for Democratic gubernatorial candidate John Gregg, who had picked former chief of staff Tim Jeffers to take control of the party. But Democrats at the meeting say Gregg and Jeffers never collected enough votes to win the chairmanship, which left them scrambling to keep Parker in the job.

The meeting exposed longstanding rifts in the party and tensions that could stall fundraising and dampen voter turnout next year, Tew said.

Indiana Democrats lost their only U.S. Senate seat last year and have not held the governor's office since 2004. They are also outnumbered 6-3 in the congressional delegation, 37-13 in the state Senate and 60-40 in the Indiana House of Representatives. They'll also be fighting to hold the state for President Barack Obama, who in 2008 became the first Democratic presidential candidate to win the state since Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

Parker isn't flustered by the flap and contends his resignation was genuine and that his goal was to give whoever took over enough time learn the ropes.

"Electing a new chairman is a nasty thing, it's a messy thing and it's an internal family debate," Parker said.

Parker said he urged former Rep. Baron Hill's daughter to take over, but she didn't want the burden of running the party while trying to raise a family. Ironically, that's the same reason Parker cited when he tried to leave the job: to spend more time with his family.

Former Indiana Republican Party Chairman Mike McDaniel understands Parker's pain, as well as that of party members looking for new leadership. Party members who take orders — whether from the Evan Bayhs or Mitch Danielses of the political world — without seeing election wins tend to get frustrated, he said.

"After an extended period of time, if there aren't winning results that go along with that kind of leadership, then you see people on the committee become very anxious and frustrated and want a voice of their own," he said.

McDaniel guided the Republicans from 1995-2002 while they fought to regain control of the governor's office and lost a Senate seat — a relatively dark time compared to their fortunes now.

It's easier for any party when they have a governor in office calling the shots, because nobody's going to question the governor's choice for party chairman, McDaniel said. The natural divisions within any party are overcome by the power of the office. Likewise, without a clear statewide leader, those fractures reappear, he said.

Those fractures in the Democratic Party now appear obvious.

Marion County and northwest Indiana Democrats have long felt "taken for granted" by southern Democrats and Bayh supporters, said Lake County Democratic Chairman Tom McDermott, who attended a tense, closed-door meeting of state leaders who confronted Parker earlier this month.

"What they're doing is alienating Marion County and northwest Indiana," McDermott said of Parker and Gregg. They "took their ball and went home" rather than let the members elect someone other than their pick for chairman, he said.

Parker and Gregg deny that Parker's resignation was anything other than a voluntary passing of the torch to the next generation of Democratic leadership. And both men say Parker was asked to stick around because he was best positioned to hold the party together.

Gregg believes Democrats will put their differences aside when faced with the prospect of four more years of Republican control. The fighting even has an upside, he said, by breathing some fire into the party base.

"When you hear the cats in the alley fighting and all, what they're really doing is making more cats," Gregg said. "Well, when you hear Democrats fighting, what we're really doing is making more Democrats."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • All Republicans
    All Republicans are the same rather you say your [sic: YOU ARE] conservative liberal moderate whatnot.

    All Repbublicans went against Obamacare [sic: No such thing as "Obamacare;" it is called "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act"]

    All the Democrats went with it cause we know its constitutional AND because it is the right thing to do.

    Hence why the Democrats control the Senate and no more crap from Boehner. He is destroying our country slowly but surely.
  • All Democrats
    All Democrats are the same rather you say your conservative liberal moderate whatnot.
    All Democrats went for Obamacare
    All the Republicans went against it cause we know its unconstitutional.
    hence why the GOP control the house and no more crap from Obama. He is destroying our country slowly but surely.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. liek the rest of America

    2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

    3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

    4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

    5. whoa!

    ADVERTISEMENT