Looks like there is a newish blog that might be worth watching going by the name of “Hoosier Advocate.” It describes itself as a blog for “independent, liberty-minded Hoosiers” and is based out of southwest Indiana.

Just an aside – when I hear “advocate” in publications, I think of gay issues. That does not appear to be this publication’s focus. Their use of “Democrat” instead of “Democratic” as an adjective is a verbal tic of sorts that gives good indication that someone leans politically to the right. The rest of the content so far seems to confirm that hypothesis. That notwithstanding, the writing seems solid.

Their most recent entry has to do with a Republican primary eligibility challenge to Sue Ellspermann’s efforts to run for the state House of Representatives against Russ Stilwell (D-Boonville). Hoosier Advocate states that she participated in Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos” by voting in the Democratic presidential primary in 2008. We’ve seen in Tippecanoe County that that can throw a wrench into a Republican’s efforts to run in the Republican primary.

The issue isn’t so much that Ellspermann voted in the 2008 Democratic primary as that she failed to disclose this fact in her Declaration of Candidacy. Hoosier Advocate suggests that she forgot which primary she voted in. If that had not slipped her mind, she could have gotten the blessing of the chair of her county party. Now she has to deal with a challenge to her candidacy due to the incorrect information she certified in her declaration.

Someone alerted me to this John Nichols post at the Nation on the topic of Bayh’s departure from the U.S. Senate and thoughts on his replacement. Nichols pointed out that Bayh wasn’t doing Democrats any favors to start with and replacing him might be an opportunity. He suggests that the seat doesn’t have to be won by a Republican or a pro-corporate Democrat.

Indiana has been badly battered by the current recession.

This is an angry state that is looking for change, and rightly so.

Even before the economy went south, however, Indiana was experiencing the sort of rapid deindustrialization that devastates working families and their communities. Few states in the nation have suffered more seriously as a result of a ill-thought and poorly-implemented “bailout” of the auto industry and even more ill-thought free trade arrangements with China. (Even before the current downturn, the Economic Policy Institute determined that Indiana had lost more than 45,000 jobs because of the US-China trade imbalance. That number is unquestionably worse now. The state has, as well, lost an estimated 35,000 jobs as a result of the North American Free Trade Agreement.)
. . .
[Bayh’s departure is] good news for Democrats who would prefer that their party stand for something.

And it might even be good news for Indiana Democrats.

The question is whether they can find a candidate who is willing to run as a genuine economic populist — not a compromised centrist like Bayh or an apologist for Obama, whose policies have been at best murky (he still does not seem to get the jobs issue and he has yet to take a clear position on trade) and at worst damaging (his auto bailout has helped fund the closing of U.S. manufacturing plants in states such as Indiana).

All things being equal, Republicans will win this seat.

The key for Democrats then is to throw the balance off by finding a candidate who is capable of expressing the frustration and anger of voters in a state that has significantly higher unemployment than the rest of the country.

But, even if such a person could win, the fact is that Indiana Democrats won’t run a populist because Bayh strategically announced this just before the primary filing deadline. The result was that no Democrat filed to be on the primary ballot. This means the state party’s central committee will pick the candidate for the general election. I’m told that state chair, Dan Parker, is a Bayh man through and through as is, generally, the state party organization. So, we’ll get someone acceptable to (and, I suspect, ideologically similar to) Bayh.

Right now, one of the front runners is probably Representative Brad Ellsworth, a former Sheriff from the southwestern part of the state. He’s cast fairly conservative votes as a Democrat. In terms of winning the seat, he’s probably not a bad bet. He has a law enforcement background, he’s good looking, and he might have some appeal for conservatives. The problem is that the progressive wing of the Democratic Party is getting tired of working hard, keeping quiet, and getting nothing out of the Democrats who do get elected in the state. In particular, gay and lesbian activists in the state will probably seriously consider sitting this one out. They aren’t a huge voting bloc, maybe, but they are organized, active, and fairly well funded.

We can be reasonably confident that a Birch Bayh liberal will not emerge from the Democratic central committee. We’ll likely get someone else in the Evan Bayh/Dan Quayle pro-corporation [*] mold. Which is too bad, because there is a decent chance that relatively fringe Republican could emerge from their primary — former Representative Hostettler or Richard “getting his guns ready for the big show if 2010 elections don’t go the ‘right’ way” Behney.

Former Hoosier, Senator and lobbyist Dan Coats would be a safe choice for the Indiana Republicans, but doesn’t seem to fit the mood of the Republican electorate. Off hand and subject to change as I learn more, I’d say that state Senator Marlin Stutzman (who I don’t, frankly, know much about) would be the Indiana Republicans’ best fit between electable and sufficiently conservative for the base.

[*] I probably need a better description than “pro-corporate.” A corporation is just a fictitious legal entity and can encompass a vast range of activity, some of which is helped by policies Sen. Bayh has favored and some of which is hurt. “Pro-business” also does not capture his policies because a lot of what he has supported hasn’t done much to help, for example, the little shoe store on main street. Pro-Mega Corp?

Eric Bradner, writing for the Evansville Courier Press, is reporting that long time Representative Dennis Avery (D-Evansville) will not be seeking re-election in 2010. He was first elected in 1974 and was a strong advocate for children’s rights.

“It has been a tremendous privilege and honor to serve Southwestern Indiana,” Avery said in a statement Tuesday announcing his retirement.

“I’m deeply proud of the many ways I have been able to work with leaders and constituents to strengthen and build our communities. As I leave the Legislature, I look forward to continuing to be a voice for the state’s most vulnerable children and for the needs of Southwestern Indiana.”

I had the opportunity to work with him briefly (I think it had to do with fireworks enforcement issues) during my time at LSA. He was courteous, smart, and willing to listen – great qualities in a legislator. I hope his retirement is enjoyable.