Candidates missing opportunity to illustrate vision

Georgia will begin early voting for partisan primary races along with non-partisan judicial races on Monday, April 27^th. The votes cast between then and Georgia’s official primary date of May 19^th will determine the judicial races, but most of the focus will be on the partisan contests. 

Much of the early oxygen has been consumed by the Governor’s race. With two of the Republican candidates each able to self-fund eight figures of ad buys and direct mail, they’ve likely gotten your attention.  If you missed their commercials, don’t worry. You’ve probably gotten a dozen or so unsolicited texts.

The Democratic primary for Governor has been a bit more low key, as the candidates in that race don’t have the money or in many cases name ID that their Republican counterparts have. They’re also having to define not only themselves, but as members of a minority party without a clear state or national leader to set the tone, what Democratic governance should and would look like if they are able to take the Governor’s mansion after an almost quarter century’s absence.

While there are additional contested primaries for Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, State School Superintendent, Secretary of State, Public Service Commission, not to mention Federal races for U.S. Senate and Congress, it will be the next Governor who sets the tone for Georgia. As the chief executive and spokesperson for the State, it is the Governor who decides more or less what changes we’re going to make – and those that we will not – and who tells the rest of the country and world who we are. 

That tone is important. It’s not often set in the primaries. 

Eight years ago the usual suspects in media decried Georgia’s reign as a state to do business was over when then Governor-elect Kemp had just won a campaign largely due to his “Jake” ad, where he jokingly threatened a potential suitor of his daughters with a gun.  He’s not only presided over one of the most impressive economic development records for rural America, but is generally viewed as a pragmatic centrist for how he led the state through the Covid crisis. 

Eight years before that, I, at the peak of my “hot-take” blogging role, referred to candidate Nathan Deal’s campaign for Governor as “toast” after he had made a few missteps in trying to appeal to the right flank of the GOP base. He managed not only to get Georgia’s economy out of the great recession with entire new industries located and thriving here, but managed to get bipartisan consensus on common-sense criminal justice reforms.  He too can be labeled a successful pragmatic centrist for his tenure.

What is much more clear in retrospect about both of these Governors is that they had a clear vision for the path they believed the state needed, and were willing to make tough choices – sometimes against their own base – to ensure the state got there.  That’s what leaders do.

Modern campaigns don’t allow for much of that anymore. Consultants are highly paid to instruct candidates for all levels to message in generalities, avoid specifics, and above all, make sure they voters hear what they want to hear – and only that.

As such, thus far we’ve heard a lot about tax cuts. We’ve heard very little about spending cuts.  

The state’s budget must be balanced, every year.  If you cut a dollar of incoming tax revenue, you have to cut a dollar of spending.  Alternatively, you can cut a dollar of tax revenue by making it up with another tax or “fee” coming from someone else.

There are several proposals floating around dealing with property taxes.  These are not state revenues, but local ones. Candidates for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, State Representative and State Senate that are promising to cut property taxes are ultimately going to have to fight the bumper sticker of “local control” if they are truly trying to curtail spending by counties, cities, and school boards.  That’s a fight the locals usually win.

Voters care about a lot of other things than taxes, even if taxes are the one thing voters will generally agree are all too high.  They want good roads and to spend less time in traffic. They want their schools to be safe, and their children to be highly educated and employable when they graduate from them.  They want access to healthcare in their own communities, and they are increasingly aware this includes facilities for mental health. 

They want to know their homes, streets, and communities are safe. They want those who the police arrest to be prosecuted for the crimes alleged, and if convicted, to receive appropriate sentences. They’re tired of stories of some District Attorneys refusing to bring appropriate charges and some local judges keeping revolving doors on county jails.

Cutting taxes are nice. A vision about how to fix the state’s most pressing problems while effectively and efficiently using tax dollars is much harder.  Too many candidates are avoiding the topics altogether.