A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

I found interesting this passage in an AP article by Mike Smith:

On the day that fiscal leaders for House and Senate Republicans struck a deal on a new, two-year state budget, it was obvious that it wasn’t quite good enough for Daniels. His press office issued a brief statement late that day that made little sense, except to suggest that the plan wasn’t quite up to the governor’s standards.

Legislative leaders said later, privately, that they reminded Daniels that he wasn’t the only branch of government. It was a reminder from Republicans in his own party, who work in the legislative branch, that there are no kings of Indiana.

The next day, Daniels was praising the budget as the most responsible state spending plan in a decade.

But he also said that Democrats had shown “zero interest” in budget negotiations, which angered Democrats so much that those in the Senate walked out, and some Democratic votes he was counting on for statewide daylight-saving time in the House were gone.

Daylight time passed, but his comments cost him some Democrat votes, and forced some Republicans in vulnerable districts to vote for the change even though most of their constituents were against it.

Make no mistake. The flip-flops some Republicans made on that issue could cost them their seats and put Democrats back in control of the House.

Daniels acknowledged that in the last days of a legislative session, when emotions are running high, “It’s a good idea not to say very much.”

The next day, Daniels was praising the budget as the most responsible state spending plan in a decade.

I saw that at least a couple of papers have pursued the Winners/Losers theme to wrap up the latest session of the General Assembly. The Indy Star’s version strikes me as slightly ridiculous in that it declares Mitch Daniels and the Republicans “winners” for getting their agenda through a General Assembly controlled entirely by the Republicans and declared Democratic Majority Leader Pat Bauer “a loser” for failing to successfully kill off Republican legislation. Then, without a hint of self-consciousness, it declares “bipartisanship” to be a loser. Well, gee. Maybe if we didn’t have editorial boards who tally wins and losses based whether or not the minority party could kill the majority party’s bills, bipartisanship would be a bit healthier.

The Indy Star also tells a whopper by saying that House Ways & Means Chairman Jeff Espich “showed he could pay the state’s bills without tax increases while at the same time fixing Indiana’s long-running structural deficit.” We’ll see about that when property taxes come due. The Star ought to know that the new budget is structured so that more property taxes will be paid to fund the government. I don’t know if that is a good thing or a bad thing, but the editorial board should be honest about the fact that higher property taxes will be paid under this budget and shouldn’t imply that Espich has figured out how to pay the bills without higher taxes. He has figured out how to hide the tax increases a bit, and maybe that bit of political cunning deserves some praise. In fact, later in the editorial, the Star contradicts the reason for praising Espich by confessing, “[The budget] sets up likely property tax increases for many homeowners.”

Niki Kelly, for the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette uses the unfortunate winners/losers theme, but does a much better job laying out the facts. She notes Gov. Daniels’ success but also points out that one party controlled the executive branch and both chambers of the legislative branch. If Daniels hadn’t gotten the job done under such favorable circumstances, his failure would have been remarkable. His skills won’t be particularly proven unless he comes to a point where he has to deal in a bipartisan fashion. I just wish he had been more successful and been able to bring Espich into line with Daniels’ desire for a balanced budget this year. And, I wish he’d been able to get Espich to balance the budget with a forthright short term tax on those making over $100,000 rather than an apparently permanent, albeit somewhat hidden, increase in property taxes.

She also points out at least one winner that the Indy Star neglected — religious and social conservatives. They got their anti-gay Constitutional amendment under way as well as additional government regulation impeding a woman’s right to choose to terminate a pregnancy. They also were able to successfully reduce the amount of time a school spends teaching children by requiring the time be taken to recite the Pledge of Allegiance and time for other kids to remain silent while their kids take the time to pray in school.

Neither of them specify Rep. Troy Woodruff as one of the losers in the session, but you’ve gotta think he is, given that his was the final vote that made Daylight Saving Time possible, even though mere weeks before casting that vote, he vowed to his constituents that he would vote against DST. “I realize the desire of my constituents is to defeat this bill and that is why I voted NO to Daylight Saving Time. I have and will continue to always vote against this controversial piece of legislation.” He originally won the seat by about 200 votes, so I wouldn’t think renegging on such a public promise would be helpful to him. But others could face problems if DST influences voting choices. In particular, Don Lehe (R-Brookston) was a primary vote that allowed DST to pass the House the first time; though he voted “no” on the final bill. And Sen. Allen Paul (R-Richmond) was the vote that allowed DST out of the Senate Rules committee, even though he voted against it on the floor.

Teachers: Educators gained little traction in the Republican-controlled
Statehouse in appealing for larger funding increases for public
schools. Administrators have warned that teacher layoffs are
inevitable, but skeptical lawmakers insist schools can save money by
operating more efficiently. The advocates for more money were visible
and vocal. The efficiency proponents, however, won the debate in the
end.

Time change is small price to pay

In this editorial, the Indy Star recognizes that Daylight Saving Time is unpopular with a large segment of Hoosiers. Their response? Screw ’em; “respected business leaders” say that this will lead to job creation. Guess what. Ken Lay was a “respected business leader.” “Respected business leaders” say a lot of stuff. Some of it is even true. The legislature should’ve put its money where it’s mouth was and installed a mechanism to revoke DST if it didn’t lead to significant job creation.

Come on. You won. Now shut up about the job creation and the economic benefits of DST. It’s hogwash. The Indy Star says:

“Will DST be an inconvenience? For some, perhaps. But a little inconvenience is a small price to pay for better jobs.”

There won’t be better jobs. Our good jobs went to Mexico and China. You think our “respected business leaders” care what time it is in those places?

The General Assembly has adjourned sine die.

The Legislative Services Agency has made a handy Enrolled Act Summary (PDF) available. It contains the Bill Number, the Action taken by the Governor, the Effective Date of the bill, and a short description.

Senate Bill 0218 So far, the conference committee version seems to have been passed by the Senate 36-13 but no action has been taken by the House.

Provides that evidence of failure to comply with the laws concerning safety belt use may be admitted as evidence in a civil action to reduce damages for injury to a person who is at least 15 years of age at the time of the accident, and may limit the liability of an insurer. Provides that the defendant has the burden of establishing that use of a safety belt would have reduced injuries. Provides that if evidence that the plaintiff failed to comply with the laws concerning seat belt safety is admitted in a civil action, a court shall admit evidence that: (1) a driver who is a defendant was intoxicated at the time of the accident; or (2) a defendant caused or contributed to the accident in violation of Indiana law. Requires certain expert testimony to establish that a plaintiff failed to comply with the safety belt law. Requires a defendant to plead an affirmative defense if the defendant asserts that a plaintiff failed to comply with the safety belt law. Permits damages to be reduced by not more than 4% arising from a cause of action involving an accident in which a plaintiff failed to comply with the safety belt law. Requires a court to issue certain instructions to a jury concerning damage reductions and to furnish a specific jury form if evidence was submitted to the jury to prove that a plaintiff failed to comply with the safety belt law.

Senate Bill 0049 This bill attempts to prohibit the use of spyware, and creates a civil cause of action against the person who committed the prohibited act. It also establishes venue for the criminal trial of someone who commits a criminal act involving the use of the Internet.

Senate Bill 0001 Tax incentives. Requires a personal property tax abatement filing to be accomplished by filing a schedule rather than an application; and states that the abatement applies in the amount claimed unless denied by the assessor. Changes the appeal procedure for a denied or altered deduction in an economic revitalization area (ERA). Changes the deadline for updating a statement of benefits for ERA deduction. Establishes a property tax investment deduction. Expands professional auto racing tax exemptions. Grants a number of research and development tax incentives. Increases venture capital investment tax credits.

House Bill 1365 Local Government. Specifies the conditions under which a county fiscal body can change the compensation for a newly elected county office holder. Allows township governments to merge upon the adoption of identical resolutions by the township boards (presented to the township boards by the township trustees) and an ordinance by the county legislative body. Allows merged township governments to dissolve the merged government and be reestablished as separate governments upon adoption of an ordinance by the county legislative body. Allows a Sheriff to charge a $200 administrative fee for conducting a Sheriff’s sale in foreclosure.

House Bill 1141 on Superior Courts passed. But the procedure seems a bit odd. The House passed a bill, the Senate amended it and passed that bill. The Senate version creates one new superior court in Dearborn County, DeKalb County, Hamilton County, Howard County, and Montgomery County and creates two new superior courts in Hendricks County. Adds an eighth judge to the Monroe circuit court on January 1, 2006 and a ninth judge to the Monroe circuit court on January 1, 2008. Hendricks County is permitted to add a magistrate.

The House dissented from the Senate amendments and threw it into Conference Committee. The Conference Committee report added provisions concerning aggressive driving and criminal recklessness. It also allowed a magistrate in Madison County and Perry County and added a fifth judge to the Vigo County superior court. The Senate passed the conference committee report 48-0 only to have the House change its mind about dissenting from the Senate’s amendments and the House went ahead and passed the bill as it came out of the Senate.

House Bill 1001

Looks like the Budget passed. Presumably along party lines (Senate 31 to 19 & House 52 to 46.)

The ginormous bill is available here.

Update 4/30/05 8:52 (HST): The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette has a fairly thorough summary of the budget here.