A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

Masson's Blog

A little more national attention for Indiana

by 3 Comments

The Washington Post has an article on the vulnerability of GOP districts across the nation. Unsurprisingly, Indiana gets a mention:

Even more worrisome to the Republicans is Indiana, where three House incumbents — Reps. Chris Chocola, John N. Hostettler and Michael E. Sodrel — could fall to Democratic challengers. There, Bush’s weaknesses have been compounded by the problems of freshman Gov. Mitchell E. Daniels Jr. (R), who is in hot water over his decisions to switch some counties to new time zones and to lease the Indiana Toll Road to a foreign consortium.

I would be at least a little amused if Troy “I’ll never vote for it” Woodruff’s switch in time has the effect of changing the balance of power in the U.S. House of Representatives. Woodruff and Daniels get another mention in an Indy Star article on the Indiana campaigns. Daniels seems to be a political pariah, raising money for the candidates but otherwise staying out of view. Woodruff is a top target for the Democrats.

IN-02, IN-08, IN-09: Indiana is the Center of the Universe

by 12 Comments

In a story by Maureen Groppe in the Indy Star, Amy Walter of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, tracking U.S. House races said “Indiana is literally the center of the universe right now. To have three Republican incumbents in a very Republican state either tied or behind their Democratic opponents, what is that?”

What is that? It’s the Republicans, particularly on the federal level, betraying the people and the principles that got them there. The party of Eisenhower and Goldwater, the party of fiscal responsibility, foreign pragmatism, and small government has turned into a party of budget busting big government policies and impractical, ideological, ineffective foreign policy all mixed up with an Orwellian disregard for civil liberties  and catering to the impulses of Dominionist religious groups.

The article focuses on the shifting fortunes of Chris Chocola, who started the year seeming to be safe in his seat. Now he is at least slightly behind challenger Joe Donnelly in the polls. Courtesy of Gov. Daniels, Chocola has been slammed by a double whammy of local issues, important to his constituents in north central/western Indiana on which he has been silent: Daylight Saving Time and the Toll Road sale. Combine that with increasing voter dissatisfaction with national policy generally and President Bush particularly, and suddenly Chocola has a real challenge on his hands.

Meanwhile, in Indiana’s 8th and 9th Congressional races you have challenges that were always expected to be competitive. The re-rematch between Sodrel and Hill in the 9th effectively pits two incumbents against each other. And, in the 8th, you have a successful, fairly conservative, Democratic Sheriff, Brad Ellsworth, running against the always unconventional and anemic fund raiser, John Hostettler.

The Louisville Courier Press has the story on the debate in the 9th District last night between Hill, Sodrel, and Libertarian Eric Schansberg. Mike Sodrel says we have no energy policy crisis while Baron Hill says gasoline costs are causing great pain to the public and we need to take steps to wean ourselves off of oil dependence. Little is likely to be done, Hill says, under the current administration led by oil men, Cheney and Bush. Schansberg wants to let markets run their course, creating innovatie ways to produce energy and lower costs.

I particularly liked Schansberg’s quote on the financial implications of prosecuting the war in Iraq:

“The choice has been made, so far, to finance it with debt,” Schansberg said. If the government “has the courage to spend money,” it should have the courage to pay for it now rather than leave the bill for future generations.

Baron Hill had this to say:

Hill criticized the Republican-controlled government for cutting taxes for the wealthy and for oil companies while hundreds of billions of dollars are being spent on the war.

“It doesn’t make sense to people,” Hill said.

Sodrel responded with statements about the importance of liberty to the Iraqi people and claims that the cost of the War in Iraq is small compared to the costs of World War II. And there, we have more evidence that we’ve gone from a National Republican Party of fiscally responsible, hard-headedly practical foreign policy to one that supports a fiscally irresponsible approach to funding an ideological foreign policy.

Hoosiers, by and large, are practical people who do not love opening up their wallets. They expect the same from their government.

Daviess, Dubois, Knox, Martin, Pike, and Pulaski petition to change time zones again

by 37 Comments

Daviess, Dubois, Knox, Martin, and Pike Counties have filed a petition (pdf) with the United States Department of Transportation to move from the Central Time Zone into the Eastern Time Zone. Pulaski has also apparently filed a petition separately from the southwestern counties.

Governor Daniels has written a letter (pdf) supporting the joint petition. The letter contains a few whoppers worth noting:

For the vast majority of the 76 Indiana counties that joined the world of Daylight Saving Time, the selection of time zone was not difficult.
Well, no it wasn’t. Because nobody bothered to ask them. How many counties even had their commissioners take up the issue? I’ll bet considerably less than half.

The law passed in 2005 that put Indiana on DST also specifically encouraged each individual county to assert its own view on the choice of time zone, and bound the state to support that view.
Yes and no. SEA 127-2005 specifically directed the Governor to provide the USDOT with any documentation necessary to have the USDOT initiate hearings on the proper boundary between the Eastern and Central Time Zones. He did not provide any documentation to the USDOT with respect to the convenience of commerce in the state. He did nothing more than provide the USDOT with a copy of the legislation. Gov. Daniels is, however, correct that the State was bound to support any county that petitioned for a change in time zone. He actively chose to break that law by requesting the Secretary of Transportation to reject the request of the Commissioners of St. Joseph County. At the time, he put forth some disingenuous nonsense about how the legislation required him only to support the process by which the Commissioners reached a determination, not the decision itself. Now that it suits him, he acknowledges that the state is bound to support the choice of the County Commissioners.

As governor, my longstanding position has been that local preference should be respected as much as possible.
Nothing about the Governor’s many, many positions on time zones can be regarded as “long standing.” First Central Time was most desirable. Then, once he was elected, he seemed to have no position on time zones. Then he was in favor of state wide hearings. Then he was in favor of decision making by county commissioners. Then he didn’t favor the St. Joseph County Commissioners decisions. Then he favored the Southwestern region of Indiana around Evansville being on Central Time. Now he favors much of that region being on Eastern Time.

It is important to note that during the initial petition process, the counties in these affected regions were forced to make their petitions not knowing for certain which time zone their neighbor counties would land in.
That wasn’t a problem just for the affected regions. That was a problem everywhere. That is the main reason why a county-by-county solution is a Bad Idea.

Also, as Jim pointed out in the comments, the Governor’s current position is, surprise surprise, at odds with his past position with respect to southwestern Indiana. November 29, 2005 (pdf):

Second, in Southwest Indiana your proposed rule would divide a multi-county region that, through your public hearing process, has expressed a clear argument and desire to be placed together on Central time. The Department proposal correctly added three counties (Perry, Knox, and Pike) to the five existing Central Time Zone counties in Southwest Indiana. However, to fully preserve the unity of this region it is essential that you grant the petitions of the three remaining counties in this corner of the state (Daviess, Dubois, and Martin).

Contrast that with his August 14, 2006 position:

Daviess, Dubious [sic], Knox, Martin, and Pike Counties in Southwest Indiana belong in the Eastern Standard [sic] time zone.

(Governor, we all belong on Eastern Standard Time; which is where we were year round before you and Troy “I’ll never vote for it” Woodruff put us on Eastern Daylight Time.)

Below is a map showing the affected areas. My thanks to my wife, Amy, for touching up the map a bit. This is the 8th map iteration and frankly, the map was getting a little dog-eared with all the changes.

Chicago Tribune on IN-02, IN-08, IN-09

by 1 Comment

Jeff Zeleny, writing for the Chicago Tribune, has an article on Indiana’s 3 closest Congressional races: IN-02, IN-08, and IN-09. He focuses on the fact that Indiana Democrats are more conservative than Democrats nationally and that Ellsworth, Hill, and Donnelly are trying to persuade voters who may have voted for President Bush in 2004 that they share similar policy preferences. Meanwhile, their opponents are desperate to paint them as “San Francisco liberals.”

Voters aren’t as concerned with the labels as they are with basic questions about government:

People have questions about the price of energy–why is it so high and what are we doing about it? The war in Iraq–what’s the plan? The rising cost of health care–what have we done? And they have questions about immigration–are we going to get a bill?

It looks like the national campaign committees, Republican and Democratic, will be pouring money into Indiana. Control of Congress may be determined by Hoosiers.

IN-03: Souder & term limits

by 8 Comments

Mark Souder is a self-serving, oath-breaking schmuck. Sylvia Smith has a long article in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette on the subject of Mark Souder’s pledge to serve no more than 6 terms as a Congressman. He made that pledge in 1994 and is now running for his 7th term. Ms. Smith diplomatically calls Souder’s position on term limits “versatile.”

In 1994, he ranked term limits as the second most important plank in his platform. Souder’s pretext for being forsworn on his pledge? Redistricting. After the decennial redistricting in which his district gained heavily Republican Kosciusko County and part of Elkhart County, Souder deemed his promises in 1994 “no longer operative.”

With that kind of logic, if Hayhurst succeeds in ousting Souder, I think Souder has a big future managing airline pensions.

The problem is not with Souder’s “new thinking” on term limits. There are very good reasons not to impose limits. The problem is with Souder’s decision to chuck a promise when it becomes inconvenient. Politicians who are serious about promoting “values” in this country have to know that value #1 is being true to one’s word. If you can’t keep a promise, you shouldn’t make it; and you certainly shouldn’t make it the second most important plank of your campaign. And the pretexts he comes up with to justify breaking his promise are so transparent as to be insulting. I’d almost respect him more if he just came out and said, “I just made up that term limit nonsense to get elected. Now that I’ve been elected, I want to stay in office as long as I possibly can.”

The article has the text of a September 1994 campaign commercial:
September 1994 radio commercial:

“Hi, I’m Mark Souder. This election isn’t about who’s the nicest or who smiles the best. It’s about our children’s future and about ideas. Ideas like the government not taking over health care. It’s about not sending troops into somewhere like Haiti unless our national security’s at stake. It’s about changing the way Congress works through term limits. Jill Long voted to support military intervention in Haiti. She sponsored the Clinton health plan and opposes term limits. Jill Long doesn’t vote with us in northeast Indiana anymore. I will. Now it’s your turn to vote.”

I have mixed feelings about health care, but I’m certainly on board with a politician who opposes sending troops where our national security is not involved. In that regard, I’ll take a dozen Haitis over one Iraq.

Pension problems loom for Indiana cities

by 6 Comments

Dan Stockman has an informative article in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette on a big problem looming for some of Indiana’s cities involving pension obligations for police and firefighters hired before 1977.

Every unit of local government that hired police or firefighters before 1977 already owes millions of dollars under an old pension plan to their retirees, and the amount they owe will double in less than three years when the state stops paying its share of the expense.

The old pension plan was required by state law, but the state only picked up half the tab, and even that contribution will end in 2009. The State also limits the ability of municipalities to raise taxes, so there looks to be no way to pay for the pensions other than to cut other city services. The City of Fort Wayne’s overall obligation will be about $241 million, the equivalent of about 3 years’ worth of property taxes.

Holiday weekend

by 3 Comments

Rep. Heim has an entry recapping the life of a candidate during the 4th of July weekend. I’m a little tired just reading it: parades, pancake breakfasts, ice cream socials, and, just to keep things busy, a family reunion.

That may be too much of a good thing. My family went to the Town of Wolcott’s 4th of July festival. That’s a pretty good time for a young family. As my wife has noticed, I have a real thing for “booth food.” I’m kind of a skinny guy for whom food is not necessarily a priority. But if I go to a fair or festival or something similar where they’re selling pork or rib-eye sandwiches, watch out. Anyway, Wolcott had the pork sandwiches and some of the little traveling carnival rides. My two year old boy *loved* the rides. My wife Amy thought maybe he’d be scared. That boy? No way. He has such a love of being spun and tumbled. The real problem was getting him off the ride. He doesn’t really understand the concept of “pay, ride a little while, get off.” You’ve never seen such sorrow. Aside from that, there was a live band and just a bunch of people enjoying the day. There is something about Indiana festivals I just love.

But I digress.

Senior care focus shifting from nursing homes to assisted living

by 3 Comments

Niki Kelly has a good story for the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette entitled Senior care focus shifting: State pushing service delivery as alternative to nursing homes.”

State officials are doing more than just trying to pay Medicaid bills. They are transforming the long-term care model for seniors in Indiana, including a strong push to reduce the number of people living in nursing homes.

Specifically, there is a focus on making it easier for seniors to choose community-based and home-based alternatives.

In general, this seems like a positive development, both because the alternatives to nursing homes are generally less expensive over all and because they generally provide a better quality of life to the senior. (Or at least, so I’ve been told; I don’t have any expertise or direct experience myself.)

The devil, as always, is in the details. I suspect if the government were so inclined, it would be easier to shave services and costs at the expense of the senior in a way which is less noticeable under the alternate models than under the nursing home model.

For those who are interested, there are other angles to the story and details in Ms. Kelly’s article.

Firedoglake on America’s Public Employees

by 2 Comments

Jordan Barab at Firedoglake has a compelling post entitled “America’s Public Employees: Live Like Slaves, Die Like Dogs” in which Mitch Daniels gets special mention for dissolving public employee collective bargaining rights as one of his first acts as Governor.

Barab describes what these folks do for us:

But why should public employees have the same rights that private sector employees have? Aren’t they pretty much just bureaucrats who work in nice clean offices with cushy benefits?

Hardly.

I ran the health and safety program for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) for 16 years, which means I became quite knowledgeable about what public employees actually do every day. And most of it ain’t pretty (nor is it well paying, especially where there’s no union): wading knee-deep through asphyxiating raw sewage in rat-infested sewers and wastewater treatment plants; taking care of our mentally ill in understaffed, under equipped, overcrowded violent institutions, teaching and driving buses in underfunded, crumbling inner-city schools; guarding the imprisoned refuse of society that most people didn’t even want to think about in understaffed, overcrowded prisons; laboring on the roads in the dead of night, mere inches away from speeding, hostile drivers; dealing with angry social service clients in understaffed, under funded agencies; dealing with the parents of abused children or inspecting housing in neighborhoods that armed police are reluctant to enter; taking care of this society’s poorest, sickest populations in understaffed, overcrowded public hospitals, — in other words, doing the invisible jobs that this society demands to maintain the comfortable style of living that most of us take for granted.

Barab then goes on to tell us why we should care, describing the “liberal” reaction to the New York City transit strike where many supported the strikers “in principle” but were nonetheless put out by having to be inconvenienced during the Christmas season. In addition, there was the resentment that organized public employees often have better pay and benefits than many public sector employees who are “better educated.”

People fell into the trap of assuming that because most workers these days get less than the transit workers in terms of pay and benefits (thanks Wal-Mart), that the transit workers should face reality, settle for less and just be happy they still have jobs. But they forget the important lesson of this globalized world: in a race to the bottom, there’s no finish line.

FWJG: On Gambling

by 4 Comments

The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette has an article on the State’s reliance on gambling revenue to subsidize taxes. The editorial commends the state on funding a treatment program with some of the proceeds but notes that the necessity of such a program is caused or exacerbated by the State’s legalization of gambling.

For my part, I think if the State is in for a penny, it should go in for a pound. Why be content to merely take a rake off the casino profits — why not have the State run the casinos directly and take the whole pie, reducing taxes accordingly? Normally you don’t want state run businesses — you want the private sector to be as innovative and efficient as possible. But I don’t think those policy goals really apply to gambling. I don’t think, as a State, we ought to be particularly enthusiastic about a booming gambling business that draws in more and more customers and convinces them to spend more and more of their money.  So, I don’t think the normal free-market concerns about state-run businessess apply to gambling even though I’ll concede that private businesses would almost certainly deliver a better product more efficiently.

As for the moral concern, I’m reminded of the joke that ends with the punchline, “We’ve established what you are, ma’am; now we’re just haggling over the price.” We’re not somehow morally superior because the State doesn’t run the casinos and other gambling concerns directly. We’re just suckers for letting private business keep the lion’s share of the profit on this particular enterprise.

I should note that this analysis assumes that gambling is morally tainted activity but that we’re willing to allow it because of its value in defraying our tax burden. If it’s morally equivalent to other services, then obviously the State has no business creating a monopoly for itself; but then, if that were true, the State would have no business taxing gambling concerns more heavily than other service providers.

State run casinos would just be a way to make some citizens happier to pay higher taxes. Give them some razzle dazzle and some minimal chance of making  a profit and the citizens will gladly put a little  extra money in the State’s coffers.  Charge an extra $20 on their property taxes, and they’ll be reaching for the torches and pitchforks. It’s not, apparently, that these particular citizens mind being parted from their money; they just want a little entertainment for their dollar.