Tag Archives: donald-trump

2026 Primary: Candidate Challenges

Uncategorized, , , ,

Last updated: March 6, 2026

Summary:

  • Both the Democratic and Republican appointees on the Election Board reinforced that their Party is a private entity (a club) that can decide who can be on its ballot. They can create “any” criteria they want and expect a “county government” election board to enforce their decision.
  • Sure, it’s “possible” an individual can run and win as an independent in the general election, which, in our current system, is equivalent to telling someone to buy a lottery ticket if they want more money.
  • When is the centralization or monopoly of political power ever a good thing? The two-party system in the county is not leading to attracting the best candidates for the available offices. In fact, the system likely deters qualified people from getting involved at all.
  • An option is to move to recruit and support Independent candidates that focus on county interests over party interests.

Mar 4, 2026.  Brown County – Follow-up articles

Brown County Democrat – Article on the meeting.

The following  post is 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.”
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.
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 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:

  1. 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
Brown County Democrat
Feb 5, 2025.  Letter: Clark responds to ruling on GOP chair complaint, Brown County Democrat

Clark Responds to Ruling by Region 9 Republican Committee

Uncategorized, , , ,

Last updated: 02/09/2025

A slightly shorter version – without the references, of the post below was submitted to the Brown County Democrat for the Feb 4, 2025  edition. The Democrat limits submissions to 800 words.   Clark Response to Region 9 Decision.

This post shared at Brown County Matters.

Clark Responds to Ruling by Region 9 Republican Committee
The more extended version with references

After years of attending county government meetings and documenting issues, concerns, and challenges, I chose to run for Commissioner to contribute to improving the quality of services provided to Brown County citizens. I outlined my motivation and strategy on my campaign website, TimJClarkforCommissioner.com.

One of the challenges that I saw was the current leadership of the Brown County Republican Party, which is headed by Party Chair Mark Bowman. The one-party monopoly on power in Brown County leads to a centralization of power. This power can be abused and used to dictate policy by influencing (1) who will be supported as a candidate, (2) who can be selected to boards and commissions, (3) who can keep and get county government jobs, and (4) who should be appointed to fill a vacancy in an elected office.

My candidacy was challenged by Bowman, claiming “Incomplete & untrue candidate forms submitted. Not affiliated with the Republican Party.”  The Brown County Election Board refused to consider Bowman’s argument that I was not in good standing and confirmed that I met the criteria to run as a Republican.

Bowman’s contention was that I was an Independent as opposed to a Republican who has an independent mind. An Independent voter would include someone who votes for the best candidate despite political affiliation. In my case, I have consistently primarily voted for Republicans but have also very occasionally voted for a non-Republican who may have had a more conservative position on issues than the Republican candidate.

It is interesting that Mark Bowman shares this philosophy. In an interview after the 2018 county election, where Republicans swept the elections, he was interviewed and confirmed his support for independent voters:

    • “Even as a party chairman, Bowman said he doesn’t like to see so many voters choosing the straight-party option. To him, that shows voters lack knowledge about the candidates. The choice listed from one’s own party isn’t always automatically the best choice for the job, he said.”  “GOP SWEEP Nov 14, 2018, Brown County Democrat.

After I won the May primary, Bowman publicly supported an Independent Candidate – Greg Taggart, to challenge my candidacy in violation of Rule 1-25. Taggart has stated that he was a Republican running as an Independent. Taggart also identified that he was an independent voter:  In his closing comments at  the  League of Women Voters Candidate Forum, on Sept 21, 2024, he stated, 

    • “I am not a Republican, I am not a Democrat, do not put me in a category. … if you want to say I am a Republican, I am not that…” 

In December, I filed a complaint with the 9th District Republican Committee against Bowman for violating Rule 1-25. I was supported in the complaint by Rich Stanley, Charles Shaw, and Ben Phillips. 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.” Many voters commonly choose to vote for the candidate that they believe would best serve the community. However, if you are in a party leadership position or an elected official, you should respect the documented rules of the State Party.  

On January 23, 2025, the 9th District Republican Committee held a hearing on my complaint. However, at the hearing, the District Officers ignored the arguments that I raised in my complaint. Instead, the District Officers put me on trial along with Rich Stanley without telling us that we were now the ones on trial instead of Bowman. We did not really even try to defend ourselves at the hearing because we had no idea that we were actually the ones being tried. We only realized what was happening after the hearing was complete and the District Officers issued their decision. In the decision, the District Officers dismissed my complaint against Bowman (which they never seriously considered). But they went even further than that by punishing me and Rich Stanley with bans preventing either of us from running as a Republican for a period of five years. Although the District Officers have no power to remove me from my current position as Commissioner of Brown County, if I had the desire to run for reelection in four years, I would not be able to run as a Republican if the Brown County Election Board supports this judgment.  (Reference: “Clark’s complaint against GOP county chair Bowman rejected”, by Dave Stafford, Brown County Democrat, Jan 27, 2025.)

The Region 9 Committee’s decision will be appealed. It will be interesting to see if the State Republican Party follows this illogical and deeply flawed decision.

At the hearing, Amanda Lowry, Chair of the Region committee, explained the unwritten rules that governed the committee’s decision:

  1. “The Republican Party is a Private Club with Rules.”
  2. You are NOT a Republican in good standing if you criticize the party or its members, vote, or donate money to a non-republican candidate—at any time in a person’s life.
  3. The rules can be selectively applied – as they were in this case.

Given this Region 9 criteria, President Trump could be considered a Republican “not” in Good Standing.

While we wait for a decision on our appeal, please remember that the election of new officers for the Brown County Republican Party is on March 1, 2024. The election is for the Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary, and Treasurer. If you want to see a positive change in leadership, contact your precinct and vice precinct committee members.

Tim Clark, Richard Stanley, Charles Shaw, Ben Phillips