The House Committee on Courts and Criminal Code will consider SB 63 today. It enhances the penalty for nonsupport of a dependent child if the individual has a prior conviction for the offense. It also, based on the fiscal note, removes the enhancement for first time offenders whose support arrearage exceeds $15,000. So, in other words, repeat offenders with smaller arrearages (less than $15,000) would suffer from the enhancement and first time offenders with larger arrearages would benefit from a lesser penalty. The fiscal note indicates that this is expected to reduce the Department of Correction incarcerations somewhat. The note doesn’t say, but I would assume that this creates the potential for local incarcerations in the county jail to go up somewhat as well. But, the fiscal impact does not seem to be dramatic either way.

Jud McMillin’s HB 1351 which requires drug testing for welfare benefits and restrictions on the types of food available for purchase through food stamps is premised on the notion that poor people are dishonest children. It passed the House 71-22 and is now in front of the Senate.

Other states have tried the drug testing for welfare recipients and have found it to be a waste of taxpayer money. The idea is, I suppose, that their poverty is the result of their poor moral choices, e.g., doing drugs. If they weren’t so drug addled, obviously they would be productive citizens. But, it turns out, not so much. The welfare population doesn’t seem to do illegal drugs at a higher rate than the population at large. The experience of other states is that it costs as much or more to test people than it saves by denying benefits to those few who test positive.

The bill also provides that SNAP benefits should only be used for food, food products, and beverages that have sufficient nutritional value as determined by the division of family resources. This feels a little like a throwback to the old tales of young bucks eating T-bone steaks.

By a vote of 48 – 0, because who wants to vote against Christmas?, the Senate passed SB 326. The bill permits school corporations to instruct students about the history of traditional winter celebrations and will also allow students and employees to offer “traditional greetings” such as “Merry Christmas,” “Happy Holidays,” and “Happy Hanukkah.”

The bill also purports to allow school corporations to display “scenes or symbols” associated with “traditional” winter celebrations such as a Menorah, Christmas Tree, or Nativity Scene. No word on scenes or symbols associated with Saturnalia, Festivus, or other winter festivals which are undoubtedly part of somebody’s tradition. However, the use can’t include just one religious symbol – it has to include either more than one religious symbol or a religious symbol and a secular scene or symbol. Presumably a devotional to Jesus is acceptable in a kindergarten class if there is a Santa Claus or Christmas tree laying about somewhere nearby.

As far as I can tell, this bill is useless. If there is a prohibition on these sorts of activities (and for the most part I don’t think there is in the first place), that prohibition is imposed by the U.S. Constitution. The General Assembly can’t do a thing about restrictions imposed by the Constitution. More likely is that this legislation would tend to encourage school corporations to violate the Constitution in reliance on the statute; thereby incurring unnecessary legal fees.

It also tends to reinforce the persecution complex of those who believe the hype about the “War on Christmas.” If the General Assembly had to step in to protect Christmas, things must have been serious! At the end of the day, it feels like a manifestation of cultural panic by those who perceive that the culture is changing and don’t like the change.

Legally, I don’t see that this legislation does any particular damage, but I guess I regard its passage as symbolically questionable.

By a vote of 67-28, the House has passed Jud McMillin’s HB 1403 which imposes restrictions on a political subdivision’s ability to regulate rental properties. Landlord tenant relations strikes me as something that, by and large, should be under local control. It’s a matter of local quality of life, and the particulars can be quite variable from place to place. The rental situation in Brookville, Indiana is going to be a lot different from that of West Lafayette.

Most of the changes seem to grandfather in rental regimes in place before 1984.

It restricts the ability of a political subdivision to require a landlord to obtain a permit or attend a class prior to leasing a rental unit. However, a permit may be required if its free, doesn’t expire, and will cover an entire rental unit community.

It prohibits a political subdivision from inspecting and imposing a fee on a rental unit managed by a professional manager, has been inspected by one of a variety of professionals (architect, engineer, inspector for insurance companies, HUD), and the inspection indicates that electrical, plumbing, water, HVAC, bathrooms, smoke detectors, and the structure are all safe and habitable. Inspections beyond those specified items are not allowed. The subdivision could inspect beyond that if it received a specific complaint but could not impose a fee for the inspection.

A registration fee of $5 is permitted, but a rental community can only be subjected to one registration fee. It can’t, apparently, be per unit. A penalty for a nuisance or ordinance violation can be imposed but only if the landlord is given notice and an opportunity to cure the nuisance first.

Rep. Torr has introduced HB 1083 which addresses certain child labor law issues. Current child labor laws have certain exemptions for when a child is working for the child’s parents. This bill would expand those exemptions for cases where the child works for a legal entity solely owned by the child’s parents. For example, the parents set up an LLC to shield themselves from personal liability. My only problem with this has to do with the one way nature of the corporate shield and not so much with child labor in particular.

It seems that, lately, I’m seeing an effort to allow the individual owner’s rights to pierce the corporate shield while still preventing liability from piercing the shield and getting back at the owner. In this case, there is a common sense notion that parents should be able to decide what’s good for their kids. But if, say, an overworked kid negligently harmed a third party in the course of his or her employment with the LLC, would the injured party be entitled to pierce the corporate veil and get at the parents’ individual bank accounts for compensation? I doubt it. (I probably wouldn’t even note this except for a more politically charged issue where the religious beliefs of corporate owners are being allowed to pierce the corporate veil for purposes of allowing the corporation to resist the Obamacare contraception mandate.)

The bill also expands the hours a kid between the ages of 14-16 can work – from 7 p.m. under current law to 9 p.m. on a school night, 10 p.m. on a non-school night, and 11 p.m. during the summer. It also increases the maximum hours for working on a school day from 3 hours up to 4 hours.

Finally, the bill provides for civil penalties for violations of employment certificate violations, hazardous occupation violations, and age violations of the child labor law. The House Labor Committee passed the bill, and it is now ready for Second Reading.

Rep. Eberhart introduced HB 1271 which would allow table games such as roulette, craps, and poker at “racinos” — the race tracks which now have slot machines. It was assigned to the House Committee on Public Policy. However, time is running out for bills to be heard in committee. I’m not absolutely certain, but looking at the deadlines and counting backward, I think maybe this Thursday (Jan. 30) is probably the last day for committee hearings.