Not specifically about Sen. Kruse or Indiana’s situation, but Fred Clark has a post entitled Your lips say ‘school prayer,’ but your eyes tell me ‘desegregation’

He has a Venn diagram suggesting an overlap between people upset about the Supreme Court’s 1962 Engel v. Vitale decision concerning school prayer and those upset about its Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954.

In any event, school prayer advocacy isn’t really about piety and prayer so much as it is about asserting cultural hegemony. (In my prior posts, I’ve frequently used the concept of marking territory). That’s also what the “we want to take our country back” business is about.

Sen. Waltz has introduced SB 156 which would prohibit police from downloading cell phone information for purposes of determining whether a person had violated the “no texting and driving” statute or other ordinance violation; unless the officer has a warrant or probable cause to believe the device has been used in the commission of a crime. (The texting and driving statute is penalized as an infraction and, therefore, not a “crime” I believe.)

I would suggest amending this to include probable cause that the telecommunications device contains evidence of a crime rather than solely in commission of a crime — or at least specify that an officer is allowed to secure the device long enough to get a warrant where he or she has probable cause that it contains evidence of a crime. If the cop saw a person taking a video of a robbery with their phone, chased them down and stopped them while they were driving and texting their buddy about the crazy thing they just saw, the officer should probable be allowed to at least take custody of the phone until he or she was able to get a warrant from a judge authorizing them to look for the video of the robbery.

Rep. Crouch has introduced HB 1051 concerning the certification of music therapists.

In the licensure world, there are three basic approaches: licensing, registration, and certification. Licensing generally prohibits an activity unless you have demonstrated certain qualifications and the state has issued you a permit to perform the activity. Registration says that pretty much anyone can do the activity, but you have to sign up and provide the state with certain information first. (This can bleed over into licensure inasmuch as you might have to jump certain hoops before you’re allowed to sign up.) Certification says that anyone can perform the activity but only people who meet certain qualifications can hold themselves out as “certified”; the idea being that the consumer can then decide whether credentials or price is more important.

This bill is an odd hybrid. It looks a lot like a certification bill – it says that you can’t call yourself a certified music therapist unless the “the individual holds and maintains the credentialing administered by the Certification Board for Music Therapists.” (CBMT). CBMT is apparently an outfit based in Pennsylvania.

On the other hand, it also simply prohibits people from practicing music therapy if they aren’t credentialed by CBMT. However, there is an exception for other credentialed or licensed professions to perform music therapy where that therapy is within the scope of their practice.

So, on reflection, I think this bill would be better if it referred to licenses instead of certifications.

As to “music therapy” it is defined in the legislation as, “the clinical and evidence-based use of music interventions to accomplish individualized goals within a therapeutic relationship.” That’s a nice piece of jargon right there.

In any event, the motivation of these bills always has a mix of protecting consumers and the public as well as protecting professionals from competition. The first is a legitimate public interest. The second seems more likely to drive the sort of lobbying necessary to get these bills passed.

Sen. Glick’s SB 20
would give Sheriffs more flexibility in the purposes for which they can spend money in their extradition funds. Currently certain money from forfeited bail goes into the Sheriff’s extradition fund. The Sheriff is limited to using that money to offset the costs of extraditing criminal defendants. This legislation would rename it the Sheriff’s extradition and assistance fund and could also be used for training and equipping officers, and for providing law enforcement services.

Sen Tomes has introduced SB 20 concerning the use of drones to monitor people. The bill would make it a Class D felony to monitor or observe an individual by using an “unmanned aerial vehicle” without the consent of the subject of the observation. It would also prohibit the use of evidence obtained through such monitoring by law enforcement as evidence in a judicial or administrative proceeding.

I’m not unsympathetic to this legislation, but I think the genie is out of the bottle in terms of being observed surreptitiously. If I’m reading this correctly, it would prohibit Google from using satellite imagery to update its maps. I think we’re in the Panopticon and we might just need to come to grips with that.

Disturbingly, more of my political philosophies probably derive from Frank Herbert’s Dune series than the classes I took earning a degree in political science. One line I remember from the Dune was “Control the coinage and the courts, let the rabble have the rest.” It seems that Sen. Banks’ SB 99 might be straying from that aphorism.

Specifies that gold and silver coins issued by the United States government are legal tender in Indiana. Provides that a person may not compel another person to tender or accept gold or silver coins that are issued by the United States government, except as agreed upon by contract. Provides that the sale or other exchange of gold or silver coins issued by the United States government is exempt from state gross retail tax and use tax. Specifies that capital gains incurred on a sale or exchange of gold or silver coins issued by the United States government are not included in adjusted gross income for purposes of the state adjusted gross income tax.

But, I’m not sure if it does stray because I’m not sure what it’s actually intended to accomplish. It’s apparently a tea party initiative (see also) – and, my guess, it has something to do with Ron Paul’s distrust of the federal reserve system. I’m guessing the people who advertise silver and gold on AM radio stations also support such initiatives.

Senators Banks, Kruse, and Yoder are proposing to amend a venerable piece of law. Senate Bill 36 would amend IC 4-6-7 which appears to have been on the books in its current form since at least 1905. It permits the attorney general to employ an assistant residing in D.C. “to assist him in the presentation and prosecution of claims of the state against the United States, pertaining to swamplands, or swampland indemnity.” As compensation, that assistant can be paid up to 25% of the money he recovers and turns over to the state.

SB 37 would basically gut that law and allow the Attorney General to employ a deputy in the D.C. area to monitor federal legislation and regulations and lobby on behalf of the attorney general with respect to legislation or regulations that might affect Indiana.

I have no idea what impact this would have on the vital swampland indemnity program.

Less than a day after I complained about the bills not being available online, they appeared. Is my power just that vast or was it just a happy coincidence?

Anyway, the first one that catches my eye is SB 5, introduced by Sen. Steele concerning hospital and ambulance liens under IC 32-33-4 and 32-33-5. Those chapters set forth procedures by which ambulance companies and hospitals can assert a lien against a patient’s personal injury claim.

Sen. Steele’s bill would repeal those chapters but preserve the lien rights of those who already have liens. I don’t know his motivation, but these lien procedures seem to be relatively unused and cause problems for insurers of defendants when they are used. (Seems like Parkview Hospital out of Fort Wayne came up in the case reports as a frequent user of the hospital lien procedure.) Maybe there is a better way, but when you are settling a personal injury claim, I got into the habit of calling the Indiana Department of Insurance. If I recall correctly, the call got routed to the Medical Malpractice section even though the hospital liens aren’t limited to medical malpractice claims. It almost seemed like the people there had to fire up a separate computer to check their list for a lien against a particular personal injury plaintiff.

I have not personally come up against issues involving ambulance liens; I suspect because they tend to be a few hundred bucks versus hospital liens which can be quite significant. In the case of hospital liens, there are other notice provisions and a defense insurer who finds itself on the hook paying a hospital lien usually at least theoretically has recourse against a personal injury plaintiff it paid but who didn’t satisfy his or her obligation to the hospital. But personal injury settlement money can evaporate awfully fast, and that recourse might not amount to much.

I think Rep. Steele’s bill raises an interesting question about whether hospitals and ambulance companies really ought to have a priority claim against personal injury claims not available to other sorts of creditors. I don’t have any strong opinions on that one.

I’ve been a little bummed this year that the bills for the 2013 General Assembly haven’t been available as early as they have been in years past. Usually, it seems like I can start getting a look at them the last week of December. This year, it’s starting to look like they won’t be available until the General Assembly convenes on January 7. Which would make some sense, since I don’t think bills are technically “introduced” until then. Still, I enjoy having some time to browse before the hustle and bustle of the session gets everything moving quickly.

Come across a couple of pieces mentioning our State Senator’s views on guns, schools, and the Newtown Shooting:

1. Sen. Tome thinks teachers should be armed.

State Senator Jim Tomes says teachers are closest to students, the first responders to any emergency and, for those reasons, should be armed.

Arming union thugs? Should make the next State House protest more interesting. . . except, of course, the State House is about the one place where the General Assembly still seems to think guns should be prohibited.

2. Sen. Delph views the Newtown murders as a consequence of government prayer not being permitted in schools. (Individual prayer is, of course, not prohibited.)

Instead, Delph said, the “evil that occurred” in Connecticut last Friday stemmed from an abandoning of traditional family and faith values.

“When we ban prayer from school, when we become hostile as a culture to traditional faith and values,” he said, “I think that has a negative coarsening effect on the culture, and it’s really sad.”

Which, of course, explains why the less religious countries of western Europe are awash in mass murders.

Note on governance: These two senators represent 7.7% of a majority vote in the Senate.