This post at Brown County Matters.
Candidate Challenge: Election Board Hearing, Feb 19, 2026
The board upheld the challenge to Republican candidates Rich Stanley and Sherrie Mitchell and removed them from the primary ballot.
Rich Stanley plans to challenge the Election Board’s decision in circuit court. This legal step is necessary to build a case—if required—for a potential hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding alleged violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. (1)
The challenge and defense of Rich’s candidacy starts at the 44:47 mark.
The Election Board’s position supports the fact that political parties are considered private entities or clubs and do not need to provide justification when removing a candidate from their ballot. This position has been supported by federal and state courts.
Individuals can still run as Independents if they meet requirements established by both the parties and the state. In practice, winning as an Independent is similar to trying to get rich by buying a lottery ticket.
Justification? The irony is that Rich was removed from the Republican ballot because of his wife’s donation at a fundraiser for Independent candidate Greg Taggart. But the underlying reason was most likely his criticism of Mark Bowman’s leadership as Party Chair.
Taggart’s fundraiser was supported by leaders in the Republican Party despite concerns that it violated Rule 1-25. The precedent is that county partys’ within the state have banned candidates for up to 10 years for violating this rule. At a 2024 League of Women Voters forum, Taggart publicly stated that he was not a Republican and was defeated in the general election by Tim Clark, the Republican candidate.
Rule 1-25 states: “The term “Republican in Good-Standing” shall be defined as a Republican who supports Republican nominees and who does not actively or openly support another candidate against a Republican nominee.”
Individuals can still run as Independents if they meet requirements established by both the parties and the state. In practice, winning as an Independent is similar to trying to get rich by buying a lottery ticket.
Justification? The irony is that Rich was removed from the Republican ballot because of his wife’s donation at a fundraiser for Independent candidate Greg Taggart. But the underlying reason was most likely his criticism of Mark Bowman’s leadership as Party Chair.
Taggart’s fundraiser was supported by leaders in the Republican Party despite concerns that it violated Rule 1-25. The precedent is that county partys’ within the state have banned candidates for up to 10 years for violating this rule. At a 2024 League of Women Voters forum, Taggart publicly stated that he was not a Republican and was defeated in the general election by Tim Clark, the Republican candidate.
Rule 1-25 states: “The term “Republican in Good-Standing” shall be defined as a Republican who supports Republican nominees and who does not actively or openly support another candidate against a Republican nominee.”
Those in attendance at the 2024 fundraiser who are on the 2026 primary Republican ballot include:
-
Scott Rudd (Commissioner)
-
Pearletta Banks (Clerk)
-
Greg Taggart (Washington Township Trustee)
Party leaders reportedly supporting the fundraiser included: Robyn Bowman (Vice Chair) and Tanner Bowman (Secretary). Mark Bowman is the Party Chair.
Rule 1-25, in practice, can be overridden by “unwritten rules.” The written rules may be selectively applied—enforced for some and ignored for others.
The “unwritten rules” described by Republican Party leadership include the fact that Individuals may be deemed in “bad standing,” and therefore ineligible to run as Republicans, for criticizing party officials, previously supporting (no time limit) a non-Republican candidate, or for other perceived infractions.
Rule 1-25, in practice, can be overridden by “unwritten rules.” The written rules may be selectively applied—enforced for some and ignored for others.
The “unwritten rules” described by Republican Party leadership include the fact that Individuals may be deemed in “bad standing,” and therefore ineligible to run as Republicans, for criticizing party officials, previously supporting (no time limit) a non-Republican candidate, or for other perceived infractions.
Checks and balances on power are meant to come from Precinct and Vice Precinct Committee members—but these positions can be appointed by the Party Chair. Vacancies may also remain unfilled, potentially limiting opposition. History shows that centralized power can erode trust and accountability over time. Obtaining a list of the Precinct and Vice Precinct committee members has required signing a non-disclosure agreement.
The cost? A monopoly on political power such as exists in Brown County, reduces competition, can contribute to waste, inefficiencies, and moral corruption, and can limit the number of people that want to be involved in county government. Moral corruption refers to the decline of ethical standards and principles, leading individuals or political clubs to engage in immoral or unethical behavior.
A system perceived as corrupt risks undermining the ethics and integrity of those who operate within it—sometimes without them even realizing it.
A system perceived as corrupt risks undermining the ethics and integrity of those who operate within it—sometimes without them even realizing it.
A Way Ahead?
Organizations like Independent Indiana (IndependentIndiana.org) are working to challenge the system by supporting independent candidates. The belief is that independent candidates may be more focused on serving their communities rather than party structures or special interests. America’s Founding Fathers warned that political factions could become contrary to the intent of the Constitution.
The Brown County Leader Network (browncountyleadernetwork.com) also introduces methods and tools for improving systems and supporting structural reforms aimed at strengthening transparency, accountability and improving performance.
The challenge isn’t just about one candidate—it’s about fairness, transparency, and the future of representative government.
Footnotes:
- Rich Stanley, along with Tim Clark, is challenging a previous ruling that they are not in Good Standing with the party and cannot run as Republicans for five years. This decision was challenged in federal court, which ruled in favor of the Party and is also being challenged.
- Clark, Stanley lawsuit dismissed in federal court, Brown County Democrat. “Clark and Stanley have now formally appealed the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, asking the higher court to reverse the decision and allow their case to proceed.”
Oct 29, 2024. Letter: Republican commissioner candidate claims local party …by Tim Clark
Independent Voters of Brown County IN 