Local Voices vs. National Pressure in Politics

Tuesday was the final day to vote in the primaries, and while the results are settled, the League of Women Voters sat down with candidates for District 44. At least one of the candidates, Clint Cooper, filed to run in a previous election year, and in spite of who wins in one given year, it’s worth knowing the candidates. Just as it often takes multiple attempts for bills to become law, also it takes candidates multiple campaigns to build name and platform recognition to earn votes.

Hoosiers are hungry for competitive primaries and general elections. We want and need multiple candidates in each party for spring primaries and multiple party candidates in the general elections. Robust competition leads to strength. As Michael Pollan writes in The Botany of Desire, under “safe” conditions where pesticides create artificial dominance, the fruit or produce available to humans becomes less beneficial for humans. For instance, pesticides on apples cause zinc nutrients to drop. In elections, competitive races offer the chance to put local citizens’ interests—it stops mission creep from national party agendas, as Hoosiers see in the intense downward pressure coming from D.C. to our local statehouse.

Since one mission of the League of Women Voters is election education, we sat down with two of the three District 44 candidates, Craig Haggard and Clint Cooper. Both challenged Beau Baird, the incumbent, whom we also invited to answer questions by email and reached out for an interview. Baird did not reply to our invitation to discuss topics that matter to locals.

Haggard and Cooper posted their priorities and platforms online—Haggard on his website, Cooper via his campaign’s Facebook page. Baird acknowledged to the League of Women Voters at the last Legislative Breakfast that he doesn’t have a website or platform posted. He invites constituents to call him. (Notably, we left two messages and await a reply.)

In a conversation with State Representative Craig Haggard, who currently serves in the Indiana House, Haggard shared from his state‑level legislative experience and background in the Marine Corps and local firefighting. He ran for office to “fight” for what he sees as core conservative principles, with particular emphasis on public safety and tax structure.

On fiscal policy, Haggard was one of a small number of Republican legislators at the statehouse who voted against 2025’s Senate Bill 1, citing concerns about its one‑size‑fits‑all approach to local government finance and the potential harm to schools and emergency services in communities like those he represents. He has worked on proposals to eliminate property taxes altogether and replace them with a broad‑based tax on services, arguing that such a shift could both protect older homeowners from losing paid‑off homes to rising taxes and still generate sufficient revenue—potentially more than the current system—while prioritizing public safety and infrastructure. He acknowledged that details are still being worked out and was candid that not every impact of this change is known. He assured the League that no legislation should be enacted without a full awareness of its ability to raise enough revenue to help local governments meet the needs of their community.

Haggard identifies public safety as his foundational priority, describing extensive collaboration with volunteer and professional fire departments and support for fire‑service legislation. He argues that local fire and police services should never have to rely on “boots on the side of the road” fundraising to acquire essential equipment and sees stable funding for emergency services as core infrastructure on par with roads and bridges.

When asked about childcare as infrastructure, an issue that local political leaders and citizens raise, Haggard acknowledged that concerns about affordability and access are major issues for working families. As a traditional, free-market conservative, he supports incentivizing employers to provide childcare, potentially through tax credits, along with carefully calibrated deregulation—he did not specify which regulations are driving up the cost of daycare—to reduce costs while maintaining safety.

Haggard did rebut arguments in full favor of early childhood education, which is often wrapped up with high-quality daycare, noting that its benefits may be strong initially but even out over each child’s lifetime. He acknowledged that not all households can support a stay-at-home parent, nor can all parents provide literacy support to children aged 0- 5.

On healthcare, Haggard pivoted his answer toward Medicaid initially, saying that everyone should be able to access care, but he says growth in Medicaid costs is, to some degree, the result of waste, fraud, and abuse, especially following loosened eligibility during the pandemic. He supports “cleaning the books” of people who no longer qualify so that limited funds can support those most in need. He has also shown interest in lower‑cost care models that bypass traditional insurers, such as direct‑care clinics that offer bundled services at sharply reduced prices funded through membership‑type arrangements.

Finally, the League asked about an issue prominent on Haggard’s platform: restricting land purchases and certain investments by governments and entities tied to the Chinese Communist Party and other nations designated as adversaries by the U.S. State Department. He is careful to distinguish between the Chinese government and the Chinese people and frames this work as protecting national security rather than targeting individuals.

The other Baird competitor, Clint Cooper, comes from a background in law enforcement, real estate and community involvement, including service on the Putnam County Planning and Zoning Board and several local boards and youth sports programs. He describes himself as a “straight up, straightforward” conservative who entered the race after hearing persistent concerns that District 44’s state representation has been largely invisible on major local issues.

Cooper’s platform centered on support for working families and local jobs, strengthening public education, protecting farm ground and the environment, defending Second Amendment rights with an emphasis on safety and training, and preserving local control over land use and large‑scale projects. He notes his own experience raising a family on modest incomes in law enforcement and teaching, and he says he wants to bring that day‑to‑day understanding of budgeting and rising costs to the federal legislature.

Public education is central for Cooper. His children attend public schools, and he expresses concern that many local classrooms rely on non‑licensed or emergency‑licensed staff because schools struggle to attract and retain fully licensed teachers. He is not opposed to charter or private schools, but he resists policies that he believes drain resources from public schools, especially in rural areas where public education is often the only realistic option. He questions choices that prioritize high‑end athletic facilities over investments in teachers and staff, arguing that strong academics will naturally support other programs.

Cooper has been a visible supporter of shooting‑sports education through Friends of NRA, helping organize local fundraising that channels grants to youth shooting teams, ROTC programs, and safety training. He emphasizes that his involvement is about responsible handling and storage rather than “guns, guns, guns,” and notes that a substantial share of funds raised in Indiana stay in‑state for youth education.

On local control, Cooper was sharply critical of House Bill 1333, a measure dealing with solar project data, stating that many local officials feared would weaken county‑level authority over large energy developments. Drawing on his experience on the planning and zoning board, he says he would have voted against that bill, arguing that state‑level mandates should not override local communities on major land‑use decisions. He ties this to other situations where residents felt left out, such as the handling of hazardous‑waste shipments from an Ohio train derailment to a facility in Russellville, where he believed local voices and visible leadership from state‑level officials were lacking.

On childcare and early childhood education, Cooper supports treating childcare as community infrastructure and backs vouchers or funding that help families and providers, noting from personal experience how expensive early childhood care can be on modest incomes. He is sympathetic to parents who stay home because childcare costs exceed wages but worries they may become isolated and believes children benefit from structured interaction with peers.

Cooper was also critical of the property‑tax and local-government-finance changes in Senate Bill 1, especially how they were marketed as straightforward homeowner relief while, in his view, obscuring potential consequences for city and county budgets and emergency services. He echoed local leaders’ concerns that reductions in business personal property assessments could significantly squeeze the revenue base needed to maintain fire and EMS coverage, particularly in communities like Greencastle that provide services for surrounding rural areas. He supports exploring targeted local revenue tools, such as modest per‑ton fees on heavy extraction industries like limestone, to help counties repair roads and bridges without overburdening residents.

Notably, both candidates responded to more local, state-oriented concerns—those raised at this year’s Legislative Breakfasts—and both indicated that elective officials should be attentive and responsive to the needs of their constituents over the demands of the national party.

While this year’s primaries are over, and hopefully you cast a ballot in either the Democratic or Republican races, it’s worth getting to know the candidates who may well return in the future. After all, Rome wasn’t won in a day, and neither are most political campaigns.

The League of Women Voters is a nonpartisan, multi-issue political organization which encourages informed and active participation in government. For information about the League, visit the website www.lwvmontcoin.org; or, visit the League of Women Voters of Montgomery County, Indiana Facebook page.