Lisa Trigg, writing for the Trib Star, reports that federal charges have been filed against Max Judson, a 70 year old member of the Sullivan County Council.

The complaint states that between March 22, 2014, and May 6, 2014, investigators believe that Judson solicited a voter to complete an absentee ballot application, knowing that the voter was ineligible to register to vote. The second count alleges that between March 22 and July 8, Judson hindered, delayed or prevented communication by the voter to a law enforcement officer with information relating to the possible commission of a federal offense.
. . .
According to the affidavit, one voter resided in Greene County but Judson allegedly gave that voter a ballot with another person’s address on it and directed the person how to vote. Some of the voters told the FBI that they were disabled while others said they were not disabled, yet Judson assisted in filling out their absentee ballot application and ballot. The investigation also determined that Judson was not eligible to assist absentee voters or possess absentee ballots.

One voter interviewed, according to the affidavit, told the FBI that the voter wanted to receive a Republican primary absentee ballot but was given a Democratic ballot by Judson and was directed to vote for Democratic candidates.
. . .
FBI agents also report in the affidavit that some of the voters interviewed were allegedly told by Judson that they would “go to jail” if they told the police about Judson assisting them with their absentee ballots.

Apparently there were some close races in that primary. Judson beat his primary opponent by 18 votes and the Sheriff and a judge’s race were decided by less than 30 votes.

Kyle Bell, writing in the South Bend Voice, has some charts indicating that Indiana’s voter turnout was the lowest in the nation in a midterm election that was historically low in terms of turnout.

Indiana ranked as the worst state in voter turnout. Only 1.35 million of the 4.8 million adults eligible to vote showed up to the polls on Tuesday, giving the state a horrifically low turnout rate of just 28 percent. Turnout was even lower among the voting age population at only 26.8 percent — barely 1 in 4 adults in the state.

Dave Bangert, writing for the Lafayette Journal & Courier, suggests that the Republican success still counts as a “mandate” regardless of the turnout.

Consider this comment the morning after the election on “The Diane Rehm Show,” where a lamenting listener wanted to know if it was fair to discount the mandate Republicans were claiming because of historic low turnouts.

The panel assembled on the public radio show entertained the idea, at least long enough to do the math to suggest that, given a crummy 30 percent turnout, it took just 16 percent of the voting population to set the course for the nation, for states and for local governments. (In Tippecanoe County, turnout was right at 30 percent.)

But that’s a false proposition, akin to calling a football team’s victory something less in the standings because the stadium was 30 percent full.

A win’s a win’s a win.

I agree that a win is a win. But a win isn’t necessarily a mandate. If you view the election as a sporting event and the electorate as mere spectators, the analogy holds up. Bellyaching about the turnout is like saying the winning team still isn’t very good because they’ve only played weak opponents. But you can only play the games on the schedule. So, it’s a little unfair to criticize a win under these circumstances.

However, citizens shouldn’t be spectators in their own democracy, and I think the “mandate” question suggests a more active role by the electorate — it’s a conceit that the electorate has spoken to endorse the views of the winning candidates. In this case, there has been an acquiescence. With votes from something like 16-17% of eligible citizens, the winning candidates obviously have the right to govern; but any claim that we can discern the “will of the people” from this election is disingenuous. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. The people simply have not spoken. They stayed home instead.

Nationally, the Republicans had a pretty good day and the Democrats had a pretty bad day. (The Democrats had an oddly good day — mostly personality driven — where they managed to field candidates in our local Tippecanoe County races.)

The human mind being what it is, I immediately began looking for analogous situations. To me, this one feels a lot like 1994. Being a white man, I’m sensitive to the white guy zeitgeist. (Punk bands searching for a name – feel free to use that). Maybe I’m projecting a whole lot of crap on the electorate that doesn’t belong there, but I think the white men were feeling angry and picked upon and were, therefore, more motivated to vote. I remember having that feeling in 1994 as a college student as well. Dennis Miller had a bit about how, as a white guy, he was everyone’s asshole that resonated with me at the time. Over the years, I’ve developed more of an appreciation of race and gender based privileges and an ability to not take criticisms on those subjects personally. But that kind of equanimity isn’t universal.

I’m not trying, by the way, to make the case that whatever crap white guys have been taking lately isn’t justified to a greater or lesser extent. But even justified criticism provokes a response. If I’m correct about the white guy zeitgeist, the response of feeling picked upon is to be more motivated to vote. If the rest of the electorate chooses to stay home, you have a situation where something like 16 – 17% (30% turnout times 55% of the vote) chooses the House of Representatives and 1/3 of the Senate.

If it is like 1994, then we’ll see a lot of unproductive slavering over the President — particularly in light of the strengthened filibuster the minority Republicans are giving to the Democrats & the Presidential veto — followed by a Presidential election where things get reset a little bit.

This weekend was the state’s GOP convention, and from my casual observation, there were three matters of note that took place which were, in declining order of significance:

1. Dark horse candidate for the state Treasurer nomination Kelly Mitchell won on the third ballot. She defeated Marion mayor Wayne Seybold (the “establishment” candidate) and Don Bates (the “Tea Party” candidate). The first ballot had all of them taking roughly 1/3 of the vote. When it became clear that Bates would not win, most of his delegates jumped to the Mitchell camp. Mitchell is an employee at the Treasurer’s office. Normally, I’d say that’s a good thing for a position like this — Treasurer isn’t a position you want making headlines — it’s just one where you want the job done competently and quietly. And, maybe her experience is a good thing. My only reservation is that Richard Mourdock has been running that office for the last 8 years. I’ve had a decidedly dim view of his judgment since his self-aggrandizing nonsense with the Chrysler bankruptcy.

2. The party adopted a platform plank stating: “We believe that strong families, based on marriage between a man and a woman, are the foundation of society.” By implication, strong families based on other arrangements – same sex marriages, single parent households, widows and widowers, extended families – are second class. My thought is that strong families are to be valued no matter how they are composed. So, the culture wars will continue on that front until further notice, I suppose.

3. Not content with being known for venturing a public statement presuming to know the mind of God and his intent that a rape result in pregnancy, state Treasurer Mourdock decided to go the full Godwin in his farewell speech:

The people of Germany in a free election selected the Nazi Party because they made great promises that appealed to them because they were desperate and destitute. And why is that? Because Germany was bankrupt. . . . The truth is, 70 years later, we are drifting on the tides toward another beachhead and it is the bankruptcy of the United States of America.
. . .
Over the next several years, every time a program began to fall apart, Mr. Hitler’s party was very, very good at dividing Germany by pointing to this group or that group,” he said. “First they went after their political opponents. Then they went after the aristocrats. Then they went after the trade unionists. And ultimately of course they went after the Jews. They deprived them of their property, their rights, their citizenship, and for millions their humanity. Because they were bankrupt!”

(See also – here for quote.)

His grasp on history is clearly tenuous if he sees strong parallels between the current U.S. and 1920s and 30s Germany – reeling as it was from the horrors of World War I and the burdens of Allied reparations. But, really, you don’t have to be a scholar to avoid these sorts of missteps. If you’re a public official and you are thinking of saying something about rape and Nazis other than to observe they are evil. Just don’t. Come up with a non-rape, non-Nazi way to make your point. (Pro-tip: slavery too.)

Rep. Kreg Battles (Democrat) has resigned as Representative of the 45th District in Vincennes. He was facing a rematch with former representative (Republican) Bruce Borders in the general election. The two were thrown into each other’s territories through redistricting. Battles narrowly won in 2012.

Precinct committeemen will choose an individual to complete his term through January and, presumably but not necessarily, slate the individual as the nominee for the general election. (Edit: I’ve been corrected by a reader. A legislator’s term lasts through election day and the new legislator is sworn in on organization day. There is apparently no representative during the period between election day and organization day.)

Leslie Weidenbener suggests that the resignation is possibly, in part, a function of the Democratic Party’s lack of power in the General Assembly. It’s tough to be in Indianapolis for months only to go and be essentially powerless.

For my part, I always saw Rep. Battles as the guy who knocked off Troy Woodruff in 2006 after Woodruff reneged on a promise not to vote for Daylight Saving Time, casting the deciding vote that gave us Daylight Saving Time.

Barb Berggoetz and Tony Cook, writing for the Indy Star, report that two Republican nominations for House seats were taken from incumbents by more socially conservative challengers. Rebecca Kubacki of Syracuse was defeated by Curt Nisly. In Columbia City, Kathy Heuer was defeated by Christopher Judy.

In both cases, the report says, the incumbent votes in favor of marriage equality and against SJR 3 was a major factor. With respect to the Kubacki/Nisly race, at least, another issue was Kubacki’s support of additional regulations at daycares in Indiana. Those additional regulations were prompted over concern about lax oversight having lead to cases of abuse and neglect of children at daycare. Some church groups who run daycares bristle at the prospect of such oversight.

Regardless of the defeat, Kubacki says that she wouldn’t have changed her vote on either issue. With a line almost worthy of a stock movie villain, Curt Smith, president of Indiana Family Action, said, “If you want to thumb your nose at the pro-family groups, you do so at your own risk.”

Sen. Pete Miller has introduced SB 28 which makes it a crime to “recklessly or knowingly” rent property or provide or arrange for the use of the property “for the purpose of allowing the or enabling a minor to consume an alcoholic beverage on the property.”

This feels like one of those bills responding to a specific incident; but I don’t know if that’s the case and, if so, what the incident might have been. My initial reaction is that this is probably an unnecessary bill. To the extent consumption of alcohol by minors is a problem; the place of consumption is a little bit incidental. Usually, kids will be able to find some woods or a cornfield for drinking if they have access to the booze. Or worse, just cruising the back roads while they drink.

Interesting piece by Eric Bradner, stating that the selection of Tim Berry by Gov. Pence to run the state GOP is calculated to block any plans Richard Mourdock might have to run for state Auditor. Berry is currently the auditor and term limited from continuing in the position. By selecting Berry as head of the state party now, Pence gets to appoint someone to be auditor for the remainder of the term. In all likelihood, that person will then win the primary for the 2014 election. Richard Mourdock is finishing up his eighth year as treasurer and is also term limited.

Bradner suggests that Gov. Pence wants to keep Mourdock off the ticket because of his implosion during the 2012 senate race; after knocking off shoo-in Richard Lugar as a darling of the Tea Party, Mourdock made the thelogically plausible but politically suicidal assertion that children of rape were God’s will. In addition to making the GOP look bad, this had the effect of allowing Joe Donnelly to win a Senate seat that would have been secure, but for Treasurer Mourdock.