A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

Masson's Blog

Conservative Indiana Blog

by 1 Comment

For some reason, the liberal Indiana blogosphere seems generally more vibrant than the conservative Indiana blogosphere. Heartland Monitor appears to be a new conservative blog focusing on Indiana politics.

So, far the author — identity unknown (to me anyway) — takes positions I don’t agree with and seems to take pleasure in making fun of liberals and Democrats, but also seems to be hanging out within the bounds of civil discourse. Anyway, my suspicion is that this site could be a solid addition to the Indiana blogosphere, so I’d recommend checking it out.

Stampede Blue on Dungy’s Speech

by 9 Comments

Stampede Blue has an excellent post on the subject of Tony Dungy’s speech endorsing the Indiana Family Institute and their efforts on behalf of SJR 7 which bans gay marriage and limits the potential rights of unmarried couples.

Stampede Blue is a site which is resolutely non-political. In fact, when I put a link to the site up here at Masson’s Blog, the proprietor, “Big Blue Shoe” dropped me a note thanking me for the courtesy but apologetically advising that he could not reciprocate because the political nature of my site might alienate some Colts fans. I understood completely. Stampede Blue was about NFL football generally, and die hard love of the Colts specifically. Full stop. But, since the coach of the Colts has waded into the political arena, Stampede Blue’s ability to remain aloof from crass politics was ended.

Here is what I take to be the jist of the post:

I could care what Dungy believes in, or what anyone else believes. What I am angry with is Dungy shaming and marginalizing other Colts fans, making them feel like crap. Yes folks, there are many Colts fans who happen to be gay. Shocking, I know. They cheer just as loud as straight fans. They paint their faces blue and white, watch every game on Direct TV, and cried their eyes dry when Dungy was hoisted up on the shoulders of his players after Indy won Super Bowl 41. They shell out good money for game tickets, stadium concessions, and parking. It’s these loyal fans that Tony Dungy just kicked in the nuts, and that is just plain wrong folks.

. . .

(quoting Skins Patrol) Tony Dungy inserted himself into a controversial discussion. He has an absolute 1st Amendment right to do so, but that doesn’t mean it was the correct thing to do. . . . You want to make this about free speech when it isn’t; it’s about good judgment.

Jill Long-Thompson considers running for Governor

by Leave a Comment

Sylvia Smith, writing for the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, has an article entitled “Ex-congresswoman Thompson weighing run ‘very seriously.'” That would put her up against Sen. Richard Young and Indianapolis architect Jim Schellinger in the Democratic primary.

Thompson, 54, was elected to Congress in 1989 and was defeated by Republican Mark Souder in 1994. She was appointed to a senior Agriculture Department post by President Clinton and ran an unsuccessful congressional race in 2002. Since then she has headed an agricultural think tank in Washington, splitting her time between there and her husband’s farm in Marshall County.

Advance Indiana – Major Moves = Major Fraud

by 1 Comment

Gary Welsh at Advance Indiana has a good post entitled Major Moves = Major Fraud. At issue is the idea that we can’t build I-69 to Evansville without the two new toll roads proposed by the Governor this year. Says Mr. Welsh:

Excuse me Sen. Wyss, but I’m not an idiot. When the legislature passed Major Moves last year allowing for the privatization of the Indiana Toll Road, the public was told unequivocally that the plan would allow for the construction of not only I-69 from Indianapolis to Evansville, but also a Hoosier Heartland highway from Lafayette to Fort Wayne, I-31 expressway from Indianapolis to South Bend and 2 new bridges over the Ohio River among other projects.

He likens the moving target and forgotten promises to trying to strike a deal with a mortgage broker.

Weighing In on City Planning

by 11 Comments

(Via Slashdot) Science News Online has an article entitled Weighing In on City Planning. The article discusses research into the question of whether urban sprawl contributes to obesity in a city’s residents.

[Lawrence Frank] and other researchers have evidence that associates health problems with urban sprawl, a loose term for humanmade landscapes characterized by a low density of buildings, dependence on automobiles, and a separation of residential and commercial areas. Frank proposes that sprawl discourages physical activity, but some researchers suggest that people who don’t care to exercise choose suburban life. Besides working to settle that disagreement, researchers are looking at facets of urban design that may shortchange health.

As scientists investigate the relationship between sprawl and obesity, a compact style of city development sometimes called smart growth might become a tool in the fight for the nation’s health. However, University of Toronto economist Matthew Turner charges that “a lot of people out there don’t like urban sprawl, and those people are trying to hijack the obesity epidemic to further the smart-growth agenda [and] change how cities look.”

There is an association between the amount of time people spend in cars and how much they weigh and a similar association between the amount of time people walk (and the “walkability” of their cities) and how much they weigh. Apparently a typical white male living in a compact, mixed-use community weighs about 10 pounds less than a smilar man living in a diffuse subdivision containing nothing by homes. There might be a chicken & egg problem here, however. It may be that people with health habits and other propensities toward weight gain might choose neighborhoods where driving is the easiest way to get around. Other researchers challenge that hypothesis for a variety of reasons.

Locally, I suppose, this might put Gov. Daniels fitness agenda at odds with his road-building agenda. Though, to be fair, to date, his toll road proposals probably have more inter-city impact than intra-city impact.

Tolls possible for I-69 after all

by 4 Comments

The Evansville Courier Press is now reporting that the governor will entertain proposals for the construction of I-69 that result in the road or portions thereof being toll roads. This contradicts a recent statement by Indiana Department of Transportation spokesperson Jamie Jorczak that “Gov. Daniels is firmly against making the planned I-69 from Indy to Evansville a toll road.”

The new party line is:

“Nothing can be ruled out,” Daniels said when asked if he could give an assurance that the I-69 extension still would be a freeway instead of a tollway.

Let’s get on the same page people.

Executive Order for Indiana Finance Authority to negotiate lottery privatization

by 2 Comments

On December 28, 2006, Gov. Daniels signed Executive Order 06-18 requiring the Indiana Finance Authority to implement Hoosier Lottery privatization and negotiate with potential private operators. Specifically, it directs the IFA to use its existing powers to retain consultants, attorneys, and investment bankers in connection with the project. (Send lawyers, guns & money!) It is further directed to use the resources of other state agencies, in particular the resources of the Indiana Lottery Commission and the Indiana Gaming Commission.

[tags]Executive Order 06-18, privatization, lottery[/tags]

Trifles from Anderson

by 6 Comments

I’m not sure if I’ve mentioned this blog before or not, but in case I haven’t, I thought I’d recommend “Trifles from Anderson.” The stuff I’ve read has all been good. It’s left-leaning, I suppose (though it all depends on your perspective – the point of view seems similar to mine which I regard as center, perhaps center-right, only appearing to be leftish because the power in the country has been so concentrated with the hard right.) Anyway, check it out.

Abdul’s small town theory of Gov. Daniels unpopularity

by 25 Comments

Ruth Holladay has already tackled this one, but I have a couple of thoughts of my own on the recent Nuvo article by Abdul on small towns and Gov. Daniels. (Abdul, of course, being, among other things, the Indiana Barrister.)

His theory, essentially, is that small towns dislike the Governor and big cities like the governor. For purposes of discussion, he designates cities with buildings more than 5 stories high as the dividing line. He is correct that Governor Daniels is more popular in Central Indiana, particularly Indianapolis, than he is elsewhere in the state.

Based on a recent survey, Mitch has a 43-49 percent approval rating; definitely not good by any measure. But when you break it down by region, you get a better picture of who’s mad. The governor’s strongest approval ratings are in Indianapolis at 55 percent. Indianapolis has a lot of buildings taller than five stories. The governor’s lowest approval ratings, by region, are all outside of Indianapolis: Northern, 51 percent disapproval; Southern, 46 percent disapproval; Central (outside Indy), 59 percent disapproval. All places where tall buildings are few and far between, the governor is not a well-liked individual.

However, I think this has less to do with Indianapolis as a big city and is more particular to Indianapolis itself. The opposition to Gov. Daniels, Mr. Shabazz suggests, comes from a resistance to change. But, let’s look at what changes were being resisted. Specifically, the article mentions the Toll Road privatization and Daylight Saving Time. When you look at these issues in particular, it is no wonder there wasn’t much resistance in Indianapolis. These things barely meant change at all in Indy. Folks from the Indianapolis area don’t spend much time driving on I-80/90. You can bet there would’ve been a great hue and cry from Indianapolis if the proposal had been to make I-465 a toll road for the next 75 years. And, as for Daylight Saving Time, the main difficulty to date has been with respect to who was going to have the time zone line in their back yard. It sure wasn’t going to be Indianapolis. They are safely insulated by a county or two from that line.

It isn’t the smallness of the population centers that creates the resistance to the change but the proximity to the change. Look at South Bend — strong opposition to both the toll road and to Daylight Saving Time coming from that sector. And why? Because these things have a strong impact on folks from South Bend, because of the proximity. The time line was in their back yard. Governor Daniels threw away his pretense to be in favor of local control of the issue, going so far as to break a law in order to support Elkhart County’s opposition to St. Joseph County’s decision. And the Toll Road, of course, is something northern Indiana’s motorists drive on all the time. No wonder the Governor isn’t popular. And it isn’t because of the smallness of the communities there.

[tags]DST, Toll Road, privatization, Mitch Daniels[/tags]