A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

Masson's Blog

HB 1176 – Residential Mortgage Lending Practices

by Leave a Comment

On a 50 – 0 vote, the Senate passed HB 1176 which probably would have been more useful several years ago, but better late than never, I suppose.

For residential first mortgages closed after June 30, 2009 with an adjustable rate, prepayment fees or penalties are banned. It prohibits “improperly influencing” the independent judgment of a real estate appraiser or the development of an appraisal. The legislation identifies bribery, coercion, extortion, intimidation, and collusion as “improper influences,” but leaves the definition open to additional forms of “improper influences”. Improperly influencing an appraiser or an appraisal would be a Class A misdemeanor and subject to civil enforcement by the attorney general.

And, among several other items, the bill imposes record keeping requirements on “foreclosure consultants.” And it prohibits certain misrepresentations with respect to real estate transactions.

HB 1037 – Alcohol Mumbo Jumbo

by 2 Comments

I’m just going to come clean. I have little to no understanding of our alcohol distribution laws. I know that the laws are usually contained in Title 7.1 of the Indiana Code. After that it gets pretty hazy. (Insert alcohol induced memory loss joke here.) My suspicion is that many of my difficulties stem from our alcohol laws not being terribly rational.

In any event, the Senate passed HB 1037 without amendments on a 49 – 1 vote (Senator Kenley was the “no” vote) and returned it to the House.

The digest reads as follows:

Product transfer between beer wholesalers. Provides that a primary source of supply that acquires brands of beer or flavored malt beverages: (1) shall reappoint the existing beer wholesaler to distribute the brands; and (2) is prohibited from transferring the brands to another beer wholesaler; if the brands represent at least 15% of the existing wholesaler’s dollar sales in the 12 months preceding the acquisition. Requires a primary source of supply that acquires brands of beer or flavored malt beverages to give a beer wholesaler notice of the primary source of supply’s intent not to reappoint the wholesaler not later than 60 days after acquisition of the brands.

Actually, I guess this one isn’t terribly difficult. It is apparently protecting beer wholesalers when, I suppose, a brewer gets acquired and the successor wants to use a new wholesaler, reduce the existing wholesaler’s territory, or offer less money

SB 57 – Sign language interpreters in schools

by 3 Comments

SB 57 concerning sign language interpreters in schools passed the House on a 97 – 0 vote and was returned to the Senate without amendments. It requires the Advisory Board of the Division of Professional Standards of the Department of Education to set standards for sign language interpreters who provide services to children with disabilities in an educational setting and an enforcement mechanism for the interpreter standards.

Ah, sweet, sweet bureaucracy.

SB 98 – Mental health Medicaid quality advisory committee

by Leave a Comment

SB 98 cleared the House on a unanimous vote. Now it goes back to the Senate with amendments. The Senate can either agree to the amendments or hash out its differences in a conference committee.

The bill creates a committee that will advise the drug utilization review board concerning the implementation of IC 12-15-35.5-7(c). That provision allows restrictions to be placed on antianxiety, antidepressant, or antipsychotic central nervous system drugs if certain findings are made.

This is one of those laws that is like following a Choose Your Own Adventure when you try to figure out what it actually does.

SB 136 – Preferences for Indiana Businesses

by Leave a Comment

SB 136 passed out of its House Committee. It repeals the expiration of a provision that gives preferences to Indiana businesses for contracts awarded by the State. The language on what constitutes an Indiana business is awfully squishy. (That language isn’t added or modified by this legislation.) A business is an “Indiana business” if either:
1. Principal place of business is located in Indiana.
2. Pays a majority of its payroll (in dollar volume) to residents of Indiana.
3. Employs Indiana residents as a majority of its employees.
4. Makes significant capital investments in Indiana.
5. Has a substantial positive economic impact on Indiana as defined by criteria [ginned up by the Department of Administration and the Economic Development Corporation.]

I don’t have any real problem with items 1 through 3. Under item 4, Wal-Mart would seem to qualify as an “Indiana Business;” and item 5 seems essentially standardless.

Headline Madness: Property Tax Edition

by 6 Comments

The Louisville Courier Journal has what appears to be a fairly misleading headline: “Daniels casts Bauer as obstacle to property tax relief.” The article discusses Bauer as an obstacle to a vote on a Constitutional amendment with respect to property tax caps. The reason the headline is misleading is that the property tax caps are already law — hence, there is no “relief” to be had through the constitutional amendment. Proponents of the constitutional amendment would argue that it is necessary to prevent burdens in the future; but it wouldn’t do a thing to reduce property taxes from the levels already set by Indiana law. From reading the article, this error appears to be the paper’s and not Gov. Daniels.

Who Will Reform the Reformers?

by 1 Comment

News reports on a legislative committee hearing today on local government restructuring suggests that circus music should have been playing. Mary Beth Schneider, reporting for the Indianapolis Star, has a story on today’s four hour hearing in the House Government and Regulatory Reform Committee. Characterizing the hearing as “sometimes bizarre,” I got the sense that the General Assembly should put its own house in order before looking to fix local government.

The proposals to eliminate or at least reshape township government — including legislation that would have created a single county executive in each county and consolidated library districts –will now remain dormant for the remainder of this session unless they can be revived in the final days, when the Senate and House negotiate final versions of bills.
. . .
[After various shenanigans amending the bill,] [W]hen it came time to vote on the bill itself, a revamped Senate Bill 452 which now included all the reforms, only one Democrat, Rep. John Barnes of Indianapolis, voted for it, with the other six Democrats and one Republican voting no.

The remainder of the Republicans walked out, demanding the right to caucus and discuss the vote privately.

Afterward, both parties accused the other of political games to kill the reforms.

Update Jim Shella has more on the chaotic hearing on the local government restructuring bill. He seems to attach a bit of significance to the fact that most of the committee Republicans didn’t actually vote against “the governor’s proposal.” I think it is significant that none of them actually voted for it.

Senate Considers Unemployment Fund

by 4 Comments

Niki Kelly has an article about testimony in the Senate yesterday with respect to fixing the unemployment fund. Apparently there was a good deal of focus by small business owners on abuses in the system. I suspect abuses are a small fraction of the cost, but anecdotally I can say the system has its flaws with employees terminated through their own fault being awarded unemployment benefits. Employers have to sustain a high burden of proof before an Administrative Law Judge will uphold denial of a terminated employee’s benefits. I guess that is a valid policy choice, but perhaps one that should be revisited in light of the shortfall. Other testimony suggested that some businesses use the unemployment system as part of their business plan with seasonal layoffs. Those employers might reasonably be expected to pay more into the system for the luxury of keeping a chunk of their workforce effectively on call.

But, really, I expect that the fundamental problem of too many people receiving too many benefits on the strength of too little money paid into the fund won’t be fixed by working around the edges. Employers will have to pay more and former employees will probably have to take less. Obviously the best solution would be to have fewer unemployed people. Maybe they can legislate that.

Long Session Predicted to Resolve Unemployment Mess

by Leave a Comment

Senator David Long surprised most folks by suggesting that a long session might be necessary to deal with the insolvent unemployment fund. He’s grumpy because the House took a pass on offering a solution to the problem — primarily because the House Republicans were hoping House Democrats were politically stupid — and now the Senate has to begin the hard work. It’s no secret that fixing the unemployment fund is no fun for anybody. Taxing businesses or reducing benefits for the unemployed, particularly in the current economy, will not win you any votes. But a combination of these things will probably have to happen to fix the unemployment fund — a fix that should have been made years ago.

House Democrats came up with half a loaf; a bill that did not entirely fix the problem which the Senate Republicans probably would not have found acceptable in any case. House Republicans made it clear they would not offer any help on the House bill, presumably having visions of nifty attack ads about how the House Democrats gleefully and recklessly tax businesses. Now the Senate Republicans have to do the leading. Senate Democrats are mostly irrelevant so the Senate Republicans probably have more freedom to make unpopular decisions. Ultimately whatever the solution will have to pass the House as well; meaning some support from House Republicans.

I don’t know whether to be more annoyed with politicians willing to use & govern in fear of disingenuous attack ads or of an electorate uninformed enough to be swayed by such ads.

Update Niki Kelly has a good general round up of the session half way through. One thing caught my eye – Gov. Daniels is taking advantage of Indiana’s low base line of wages to characterize Hoosier unemployment benefits as “Rolls Royce.” See, Indiana replaces wages at 54.6% which makes it the third highest rate. But, because wages in Indiana were crappier to start with, that means an average Indiana unemployment check is $290 per week — less than all surrounding states except Michigan. That princely sum of $290 per week for people who lost their jobs to continue paying for food and rent is what our governor calls “Rolls Royce.” Hot streak!