A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

Masson's Blog

Local government spending per capita

by 1 Comment

Senator Kenley has a column in the Indianapolis Star about the property tax “circuit breaker” that places a 2-percent limit on the amount of property taxes that can be levied against the assessed value that mentions the Department of Local Government Finance report (pdf) on 2005 expenditures per capita. He seems largely dismissive of most of the common complaints he cites: inability to complete projects, inability to pay debts, and increasing bond rates. Lack of financing options, however, Senator Kenley has some sympathy for. But, he blames the House of Representatives for this. The Senate, he says, has pushed for legislation that would allow local governments more flexibility to impose a local option income tax in order to reduce the reliance on property taxes.

Of more immediate interest to me, however, was the report he cited on expenditures per capita. The range was really surprising to me. The median expenditure of a county per person was $929.24 and the average (presumably the mean) was $1,149.36. But expenditures ranged from $538.87 per person (Franklin County) to $3,213.97 per person (Warren County). Some of the bigger spenders were Decatur County ($2,691.13), Elkhart County ($2,432.38), Newton County ($2,617.16), Putnam County ($2,775.35), Rush County ($2,868.00), and Switzerland County ($2,673.21). Marion County wasn’t included in the county comparison due to the unique city-county government structure it has.

Tippecanoe Politics on Buyer and the Merchant Marines

by 10 Comments

There is a good discussion over at Tippecanoe Politics on the issue of Rep. Buyer and the Merchant Marines.

Go to Tippecanoe Politics and the Lafayette J&C story for more detail, but basically the issue is this: Merchant Mariners of World War II engaged in hazardous duty as part of the military effort — they transported bombs, gasoline, shells, ammunition, food, guns, and more and an estimated 9,497 died during the war —  but were not recognized as veterans until 1988. Because of the delay, they were not able to take advantage of such benefits as the G.I. Bill.

House Resolution 23, entitled “Belated Thank You to the Merchant Mariners of World War II Act of 2005,” currently has 258 sponsors and would provide to a merchant marine or surviving spouse a monthly benefit of $1,000. To qualify for the benefit, the merchant marine must have served 1) between December 7, 1941 and December 31, 1946; 2) on a vessel operated by the War Shipping Administration or the Office of Defense Transportation (or its agent); 3) in waters other than inland waters, the Great Lakes, or lakes, bays, or harbors of the U.S.; and 4) was a licensed crewmember of the vessel.

Presuming the 258 sponsors all voted for the Act, it would have enough votes for passage if the resolution was allowed to be taken to a vote. Unfortunately for the merchant marines, Rep. Steve Buyer, a former military lawyer, is the head of the House Veterans Affairs Committee where the resolution has been languishing since January 4, 2005.

By way of explanation (sort of), Buyer’s office had this to say:

A spokeswoman for Buyer praised the merchant mariners and acknowledged their service “played a fundamental part in the successes” of the Allies in both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

But, said Buyer’s deputy chief of staff Laura J. Zuckerman, “These men were volunteers working for shipping companies, who could choose their voyage with the knowledge of potential risks and could end their service at any time.”

To me, this supports the case for the merchant marines rather than diminishing it. These guys criss-crossed a North Atlantic full of German subs and other dangers to keep our war machine functioning. They volunteered to do it. And they kept doing it even though they were free to leave.

Old economy v. New economy

by 17 Comments

It’s hard not to regard the announcement of a new Honda plant coming to Greensburg as good news for the state. However, this story by Ted Evanoff of the Indy Star (and this most excellent comment from Paul O’Malley), suggest that the new plant won’t be an unmitigated blessing.

Our state and local governments are subsidizing Honda to provide more of the same to Indiana. It’s most likely a net positive to the State since Honda will most likely pay a good wage to a lot of people who will in turn spend their money locally, thereby benefiting a great many Hoosiers, not just those who land jobs at the new plant.

However, there are some opportunity costs involved. Money, labor, and ingenuity spent on manufacturing cars will not be available for riskier but potentially more beneficial entrepreneurial ventures down the line.

“Often when you bring in an established concern that’s going to employ 2,000 people, you don’t get the growth possibility that you would if you put your money on a young Bill Gates who has three employees now but will have 30,000 in the future,” said Jon Teaford, professor of urban history at Purdue in West Lafayette and author of the book “Cities of the Heartland: The Rise and Fall of the Industrial Midwest.”

Mr. O’Malley suggests:

It is possible too that our long time emphases, first on agriculture, then on manufacturing, encouraged an attitude that education is not important. Our high school drop out rate has for years stood out as being much higher than the national average. See the Kids Count Data Book for 2006. Perhaps the recent increase in the age for dropping out from 16 to 18 will help here.

. . .

Growing up in Marion I heard many of my parents’ friends, who generally ran small manufacturing concerns, talk about how when GM came to town in the 1950’s they thought it would be great, but in the long run how it proved a disaster for the community because of some of the attitudes it fostered. In part they were just griping about having to compete with Generous Motors’ wage scales, but I think too they had a point about believing that we could actually do something for ourselves.

When I took my first gainful employment in the mid 1980’s I was assigned by my employer to San Jose, California. The most shocking thing to me about California was the attitudes of my neighbors. So many of them really believed that they too could start a business and make a million, or ten. Indiana will never be a place attractive to our children until we learn something of that attitude, rather than believing that an auto assembly plant is way of the future.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting we not go after projects like the Honda plant, but we should be ambitious. These good manufacturing jobs should be regarded as somewhere in the middle of our economic development strategy, not as its pinnacle. Governor Daniels talks a good game about having a high tech vision for Indiana’s future, and perhaps he’ll deliver on some of that. But, from reading Kemplog’s excellent coverage of the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO) activity in Indiana, it seems the Daniels administration is all too successful in attracting businesses that will have our citizens and local governments wading through oceans of pig shit trying to make a buck.

As Mr. O’Malley suggests, our long term strategy needs to involve educating our children, making education a trait that is revered rather than something that is regarded as vaguely suspicious, and then keeping the educated children in Indiana to re-invest in the state.

It’s new law day!

by 5 Comments

Today is July 1, the day in which most of the legislation from the most recent session of the General Assembly goes into effect. Now, don’t you feel better now that all those new laws are in effect? Because clearly there was a shortage of laws before today.

Bye bye Toll Road

by 4 Comments

The Toll Road goes into private ownership today.

“There’s been a lot of talk and a lot of controversy about this,” said Sen. Thomas J. Wyss, R-Fort Wayne. “But I think history is going to prove, 10 years from now, that this was all a good idea.”

It’s not 10 years from now I’m worried about. If this were a 10 year deal, it would probably be a good one. It’s 20 and 30 and 40 and 50 and 60 and 70 and 75 years from now as the tolls increase a likely 2 to 4% per year that concern me.

The Indianapolis Star has an editorial on the subject where they make the somewhat ridiculous assertion:

Critics of the plan ultimately lost, however, because they lacked any rational arguments against the deal.

Well, no, critics of the plan ultimately lost because the deal came with enough pork for the Governor to spread around to get the deal passed; barely. There are plenty of rational arguments. Here are two: 1) It’s unfair for the motorists of northern Indiana to be the main source of taxes to build roads in other parts of the state; and 2) Toll Roads are not as conducive to economic development as are free roads.

The Star makes another argument:

Revenue from the lease will be used to substantially improve highways and bridges all over Indiana. And, as Honda Motor Co.’s announcement out of Greensburg on Wednesday illustrates, good roads are a prime resource in helping communities attract good jobs.
Does anyone believe Honda would be creating 2,000 jobs and investing $550 million in Greensburg if the city didn’t sit near I-74?

Here is the better question. Does anyone believe Honda would be locating in Greensburg if I-74 were a toll road? Maybe I’m wrong, but I seriously doubt that major manufacturers find toll highways as desirable as they do free highways. So, while we may have helped the rest of the state, we’ve condemned northern Indiana to an inferior economic development tool for the next 3 generations for the benefit of the rest of the state.

This is a great deal for folks who don’t drive the Toll Road like, presumably, the editors of the Indianapolis Star, but it’s a sacrifice we shouldn’t request of the folks who do.

National convoy stops in South Bend

by 1 Comment

The Indiana Department of Transportation issued a press release on the National Convoy’s trip across the United States to commemmorate Dwight D. Eisenhower’s historic 1919 trip across the country when he was a Lt. Colonel. The trip was historic because it was then he had a vision of what would become the Interstate Highway System.

The Indiana Dept. of Transportation annoyingly links this event with the Governor’s highway privatization plan which he calls Major Moves.

The press release states:

June 29, 1956 marks the day federal law brought America its unparalleled Interstate Highway System. Since that time the system has transformed our nation and economy. To this day the Interstate System remains one of the greatest public-works projects in history.

That’s accurate. What did the Interstate Highway System do? With tax dollars, it built a network of high quality roads available mostly for free to citizens. The roads contributed to an explosion in the economy that has more than made up for the tax dollars spent building those roads. That doesn’t sound at all like “Major Moves” to me.

Llamajockey and others around here have made the point that perhaps roads aren’t the best transportation tool available to us anymore given the increasing scarcity of oil and the diminishing returns of adding new roads to the existing ones. But still, to me the lesson of the Interstate Highway System is that government can use taxes to benefit society by building infrastructure that is accessible to all citizens.

Howey on Iraq

by 4 Comments

Brian Howey wrote a column that was published in the June 24, 2006 News and Tribune that follows upon a previous column he had written and also discusses how the issue is playing in the 9th District.

I did not see the initial column, but apparently it drew the ire of Rose-Hulman chemistry professor, Dan Jelski.

“Sorry, but I think you’ve got the Iraq thing all wrong. From your column you’d think absolutely nothing had changed in Iraq at all. But you’re wrong, wrong, wrong.” He sees a prospering Baghdad exploding with satellite dishes instead of bombs.

Jelski suggests that Howey is proud of the insurgency or at least has great faith in its powers. Howey responds by citing a number of statistics that show things are not as rosy in Iraq as Jelski seems to think: Oil production is down, electricity production is stagnant and well below demand, unemployment is rampant. Doctors are leaving the country when they’re not being murdered, fewer kids are in school, 2,500 members of the U.S. military are dead, 30 to 40 people are kidnapped daily, 788 bombings have killed 6,800 people, and 100,000 familes have been displaced.

Jelski responds with what he doubtless thinks is the coup de grace:

Jelski observed: “The problems with the Brookings data is that you’d have to believe that life under Saddam was better than life in Iraq today. There is NO evidence to support that contention at all.”

Howey says the demons have been traded. I am reminded of Hobbes Leviathan. Hobbes suggested that Man in the State of Nature — i.e. without government — would be the war of all against all and, in such a state, life would be “solitary, poor, nasty, and short.”

The social compact was an agreement whereby individuals traded a world of innumerable predators of various stature for one super-predator, the King. If the King came after you, you were screwed, and it wasn’t fair, especially, but in return most of the people got overlooked by the King and lived lives free of the petty predators they would face absent a King.

What we’re seeing in Iraq, essentially, is the aftermath of the local super-predator, Saddam Hussein. So, the people face a world filled with lesser monsters instead of a world with just the one. Neither state is particularly “good,” but depending how beneath the notice of Saddam you were under his reign, I can see where life could be worse today than it was under Hussein.

But, you may say, “why should the poor people of Iraq face either situation. Shouldn’t we give them a democracy that keeps them free of monsters both big and small?” To which I respond, “How much does it cost? and What’s in it for us?” I’m relatively selfish about how our government spends its money and am not a big fan of expensive humanitarian missions. This one has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives. I think we could get more bang for our blood and treasure here at home than trying to make the world nice for Iraqis.

As for the 9th District, apparently Hill is trying to get to the right of Sodrel, apparently calling for an indefinite U.S. presence in Iraq:

“He doesn’t believe a politically set withdrawal date is good public policy,” said Mike O’Connor, a lead consultant to Democrat Baron Hill, who is challenging U.S. Rep. Mike Sodrel. “We’re committed to a path in Iraq that we have to pursue until it is resolved. There would be consequences that would come out of our withdrawal from Iraq right now that would be negative in his eyes.”

Meanwhile, last week we were treated to the spectacle of the do-nothing Republican Congress engaging in a bit of wankery by debating a non-binding resolution that gave members of Congress the opportunity to make tough noises about how resolute we were in remaining stuck in the Iraqi quagmire.

Days after that resolution, we learn that:

The top American commander in Iraq has drafted a plan that projects sharp reductions in the United States military presence there by the end of 2007, with the first cuts coming this September, American officials say.

According to a classified briefing at the Pentagon this week by the commander, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the number of American combat brigades in Iraq is projected to decrease to 5 or 6 from the current level of 14 by December 2007.

The question appears to be not whether we will withdraw troops in the next year or two, but how this can be done without Bush looking weak or the Republicans looking like they were pushed into doing something the Democrats wanted to do.

Meanwhile, Senator Lugar, is skeptical that the conditions are right for a draw down of troops.

“Given current events in Baghdad, in particular, reported on every day quite apart from Anbar province, the violence is horrific,” he said on “Face the Nation.” “So getting to the plans either of General Casey or [Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-] Maliki are a broad sweep. But it is good news to know that there are contingency plans.”

This post has strayed a bit from its original focus. But now I’m left to ponder who to trust on the current state of Iraq: Senator Lugar or Professor Jelski.

Trails: INDOT awards money

by Leave a Comment

The Indiana Department of Transportation issued 11 press releases on June 23 announcing a little over $20 million in funding, mostly for trails.

Indianapolis: $4.8 million
Fort Wayne: $4 million
The Region: $3.5 million
South Bend: $2.8 million
Evansville: $1.5 million
Louisville: $1.4 million

About $1 million apiece was awarded for projects in Monroe County, Dubois County, and Lebanon to Lafayette. Dearborn County and  Richmond bring up the rear of the announcements at $673,000 and $600,000 respectively.

The awards generated several stories:

    • State workers’ Internet access restricted (Updated)

    by 3 Comments

    Elisabeth Beardsey, writing for the Louisville Courier Journal, reports that the State began limiting state workers’ Internet access yesterday. Governor Daniels supports the decision to filter what had previously been unfettered Internet access.

    Blogs have not yet been banned, but listening to Internet radio at work and watching videos unrelated to work will be blocked. Obviously pornography is not permitted and some employees have been fired or disciplined after evidence was found that child pornography was viewed from work computers.

    Update TPM Muckraker has been covering Kentucky’s implementation of Internet access restrictions and was alerted to Indiana’s implementation of filtering technology.

    During my conversation with the guy from Kentucky’s state tech office, he mentioned that the state of Indiana had just implemented their own filtering technology up there.

    Hmm. So have they chosen to block state employees from viewing blogs? I called up Mark Cotterill, General Counsel of Indiana’s Office of Technology.

    No. “I don’t see us going there.” Why? “We treat our state employees as professionals.”

    So what have they chosen to block? Two categories: general pornography and child pornography.

    “Our process is just different,” he said. Yep.