John Kasich in his “State of the State” explained what drives his actions. “Just about every day,” Kasich said, “I search for what the Lord wants me to do, because I know life is short, and I know that my purpose on this Earth, whether I’m the governor or whether I’m a has-been, is to bring about a healing.”

Yesterday, the Dispatch quoted Kasich as saying, “You know what? I think we ought to get up every day and figure out how to cut taxes.”

Putting these two Kasich declarations together, it must follow, then, that Kasich believes that God wants him to cut Ohio’s taxes, and to cut taxes in a manner that brings “healing.” Fair enough. Our governor deserves the courtesy of  taking him at his word and granting that in his own thinking, Kasich wants to advance public policies that will help build a strong and healthy society.  The problem is, there are many ways to cut taxes and Kasich is advocating a strategy — an “across the board” cut of Ohio’s income tax — that advantages the wealthy and penalizes the poor. We can grant that Kasich is sincere — that he wants to build a strong and healthy society — but the “trickle down” theory of economics that has been used to defend the kind of tax cuts Kasich is advocating is now thoroughly discredited.

Ohio’s tax system already, as a whole, is regressive — as incomes increase the percentage of income paid in Ohio taxes decreases.  The chart below shows that at the lowest income level, almost 12% of the income is paid in Ohio taxes while at the highest level  only 8% of income is paid in Ohio taxes. This fact, that in Ohio those least able to pay are taxed at a higher rate than those more able to pay, would seem to contradict an important principle of “fairness.” I’m thinking that those Ohioans who understand Ohio taxes, if asked, would not choose to make Ohio’s tax system even more unbalanced — more regressive — than it already is.

Since Kasich has framed his actions as Ohio’s governor as those of a sincere believer seeking to do God’s will, it seems fair that Kasich should be expected to explain why he’s concluded that, at this time in Ohio’s history, regardless of the apparent unfairness of such an action, God wants Kasich to advance a change in Ohio’s tax system that will make the system more regressive. Kasich needs to explain how changing Ohio’s income tax to further advantage the wealthy will promote the “healing” he seeks.

Although Ohio’s income tax is “progressive” — those taxpayer with more income pay income tax at a higher rate (dark blue) — Ohio’s total tax is regressive. In Ohio, taxpayers with smaller income pay a bigger share of their income in total Ohio taxes than those taxpayers with larger incomes.

An “across the board” cut in Ohio’s income tax system, such as Kasich is advocating, will decrease the progressiveness of the system by the same percentage as the percentage of the “across the board” cut.  See this 2008 post that analyzes Ohio’s 2005 “across the board” income tax cut of 21%:  Ohio’s 2005 Tax Reduction Law Diminished, By 21%, The Progressivity of Ohio’s Tax Code.

In response to my article,  The Dayton Daily News Cut Fifty Words From The Heart Of My Article, where I suggest that MCDP needs to be transformed, Stan Hirtle asked a good question — Can I provide any model of a local political party that has accomplished such transformation?  The answer is “No. Not yet — but here is a start on a two part strategy by which such a model might be developed”

Stan, the problem you cite — “imagining a political party being anything other than bosses and insiders raising money, handing out jobs and advancing and protecting themselves” — is exactly the problem that needs to be solved.

The problem of imagining what a transformed political party may look like is a systems’ problem, and, as readers of this blog know, I like to apply W. Edwards Deming’s insights concerning systems whenever possible. To imagine a transformed system, we need to remember that every effective system has two key aspects:

1. a well defined mission and
2. an organizational structure thoughtfully designed to best accomplish that mission.

Political parties are so focused on producing winning candidates that winning seems their entire mission. The “political bosses and insiders raising money, handing out jobs and advancing and protecting themselves” is defended as a structure that works to produce winning candidates. Boss centered, hierarchical organizations are defended as being effective in reducing internal conflict, and effective in conserving scarce resources. The argument is that winning an election takes effort and discipline and that a party that is organized as a anti-democratic hierarchy is much more likely to win elections than a party that is organized as a pro-democracy deliberative assembly.

A politics of winning at any cost has led to a big increase in the distrust, cynicism and apathy within the electorate. The resulting decrease in the number of citizens who are voting has benefited the Republicans. The response of political parties to growing voter cynicism has been to sharpen and expand their marketing efforts. This further increases voter cynicism. It’s an ever accelerating cycle.

The challenge for the Democratic Party is to break this cycle by consciously transforming itself. The Democratic Party is a huge organization. It is a huge system. Every successful organization is guided by a mission that inspires and motivates. A local church, for example, does not define its mission as constructing buildings and raising a lot of money. The effort to construct buildings and raise an ever larger budget is inspired by a bigger purpose that motivates its members.

The purpose that should animate the Democratic Party must be one that transcends simply winning elections. Here is one suggestion for how the purpose / mission for the MCDP should be stated: To empower democracy to work in all aspects of Montgomery County. 

To accomplish such a mission, the MCDP would encourage the growth of grass roots democratic structures throughout the county. Brainstorming what such structures might look like is the next step. For one thing, the MCDP itself should be structured as a model of a democracy empowering organization. As I said in my DDN letter, “Democrats now are looking for a 21st century organization that is democratic and inclusive, and that welcomes them into a meaningful and connected community.” Not only Democrats would support such a transformed party, but such a party would have wide appeal to many who currently are disengaged from the whole political process.

Success for the MCDP ultimately would still be measured in terms of how many elections are won by Democrats. My premise is that an engaged, connected, empowered and informed electorate is much more likely to vote Democratic, rather than Republican and so winning elections would be a side-effect of pursuing the mission of empowering democracy to work. Here is the analogy: The mission of General Motors is to produce quality automobiles.  Making a profit for its shareholders is by-product of accomplishing this mission. The MCDP needs to focus on making democracy work — winning elections will be a by-product of such effort.

This notion that MCDP should be seen as a system guided by a mission and empowered by an organizational structure that advances the mission should provide a platform for thoughtful discussion — a good structure for imagining what a transformed political party may look like. The devil, as usual, is in the details. To help inspire discussion, I intend on continuing this line of thought with further analysis and development.

The Dayton Daily News finally published my letter — on the editorial page (p. 9), under a large headline “On Your Mind”, and under an eye-catching cartoon by Mike Luckivich.

Fifty words, exactly, are cut from the article I sent to the DDN — 50 words from the center of the article and at the center of the message I wanted to deliver. Most of the third paragraph was cut — the very part that I worried most about, because it is the most accusatory and antagonistic sounding. The DDN kept the first sentence of this paragraph and merged it with the fourth paragraph. (The part omitted is in bold.)

 If you are a loyal and active Democrat, you may be scratching your head and wondering why  you’ve never heard about this important meeting. In fact, the lack of any effort of the MCDP to inform the grassroots is an indictment of the MCDP. The insiders want to maintain their right to make endorsements and to hand out patronage jobs, and the prospect of empowering grassroots Democrats to change the status quo is unacceptable. 

Before I finally decided on the 332 words I sent to the DDN, I almost settled on a version that omitted this “indictment” — wondering if a less harsh sounding argument might, in fact, be more effective in interesting Democrats to become involved. It was a close decision and after I sent the letter in, I kept wondering if I should have omitted the very part that the DDN eventually cut.  So, in one sense, maybe cutting these words improved the article, but, it bothers me that the DDN make the decision to omit those words, not me.  And, now the third paragraph seems haphazardly written. The article as it appears in the paper is seen below:

How Grassroots Democrats Can Transform Their Local Party

Every four years, Democrats have a rare opportunity to change the constitution and leadership of the Montgomery County Democratic Party (MCDP) at a “reorganization meeting.” This important meeting is scheduled for June 2014, and the deadline to start the process to become a delegate is February 5.

A reorganization meeting is structured much like a political convention. At this meeting, decisions are made according to the majority of delegates voting. Every precinct can send one delegate, but in 2010 out of 360 possible precincts, only about half elected a delegate.

If you are a loyal and active Democrat, you may be scratching your head and wondering why  you’ve never heard about this important meeting. The big task for the reorganization meeting is rewriting the MCDP constitution. The current constitution harkens back to a time when political parties centered around “bosses.” Today, however, this boss system hinders the success of the party. Democrats now are looking for a 21st century organization that is democratic and inclusive, and that welcomes them into a meaningful and connected community.

The MCDP constitution will not be changed unless a majority of delegates vote for change. The reorganization meeting is a wonderful opportunity for grassroots Democrats to have real influence in setting the course of the local party for the next four years, and in creating a party structure that will encourage and inspire new commitment from Democrats.

Time is running out to meet the February 5 deadline. Any Democrat living in Montgomery County who is interested in being a delegate to this important meeting should contact me at mcbock@me.com.

Mike Bock

Democratic Party, Kettering Ward 4 Leader

.