Hope springs eternal.

If you do the math on the Democratic one-year budget, it is almost exactly one-half the total expenditure/revenue of the governor's plan.
Which, of course, is a biennial budget.

Doubling the Democratic 1-year budget requires $500,000,000 more than the 2-year governor's plan.

It's either the Republican's or Democrat's budget (not “Republic” or “Democratic”); spending plans the parties reconcile to unconstitutionally lavish but socially “excused” expense accounts. Where does that money come from anyway? Does milk come from the store?

Dave, you're incorrect about grammar and titles…but that's minor.

And unconstitutionally-lavish should be hyphenated. But what does the expense account thing mean? I don't udnerstand. Please explain. Thanks.

TA, a hyphen is ALWAYS omitted when the first word of the compound is an adverb ending in -ly. Also, Dave is absolutely correct about the use of “Republican's” and “Democrat's.” You are absolutely wrong.

You must be an IPS graduate.

attack: and from which Funk & Wagnell's text is your grammar?

The same one that allowed you to make something plural with an apostrophe? (“Democrat's”)

I'll stick with my understanding of grammar, via a couple off degrees and three decades of active use of same. Democrat or the “ic” suffix are correct; the suffix is preferred in this case.

Please think before you type. Nothing is ever made plural by adding an apostrophe. And hyphens are oft misused, but I didn't.

I love a good free-for-all.

I don't have any college degrees, but I'm pretty sure they're not using the apostrophe to make the words plural. I think they're referring to the budget belonging to (endorsed by) the democrat or republican.

But I don't get the deal about not using democratic. A democrat is a member of the Democratic Party, and a republican is a member of the Republican Party, right? Now, I do disagree with the idea that the Democratic Party has anything to do with being democratic, but my objection would be philosophical rather than grammatical :P

Ya know what, mom? I re-read the comment with the apostrophe, and I think you're right. Sorry for the mixup.

I'll stickup for the Democratic Party's philosophies in most cases; not sure I want to in this case. I have read the entire House-passed budget. I like it more than I hate it but I'd modify much. I like its term (one year), its gross expenditure (which is $200 million less than the erstwhile State Budget Agency director forecast), and a little more than half the GOP's two-year budget plan.

We have no business adopting a 24-month budget when we haven't accurately forecast next month's income for a year or more. It's a fool's errand. My agreement with a one-year budget is simply to allow for more historical data to be collected in this record-busting recession. I am not necessarily unhappy about the missed forecasts–there is no precedent for forecasts in this economic environment. So we're re-writing many economics textbooks these days.

I wish we could stand a two-year budget. If we must do one, I'd propose we cut spending another 20% in order to live within the income forecasts.

It would make re-opening the 2-yr. budget next year, a lot easier.

Just trying to be practical. It does us no good to mollify our warm fuzzies with a two-year budget that misses the chief component:income.

I know you are writing in English but I don't understand one thing you are trying to say even with the misused apostrophes.

When you realize that they (politicians) are all reprobates and liars, then they become slightly easier to deal with.

Not sure this special session is going to accomplish much other than having the legislature designate budget cuts instead of executive branch.

The most disappointing failure was the complete rejection of bipartisan Kernan Shepard local government reforms intended to provide accountability, transparency, efficiency, and cost savings.

The property tax caps intended to constrain spending will be eliminated next session, we will still have too many township assessors messing up assessments, and all we will be left with is an enormous sales tax increase and lots of new local option tax increases.

Oops, didn't mean to get all that going y'all, just trying to clarify a reference er two; those apostrophes being historic & possessive references to budgetary catastrophes. It seems there is no longer a Democrat (not Democratic) or Republican (not Republic) party; only a cocktail party.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I really don't get your position on calling it the “Democrat” party. Hasn't it always been the Democratic Party? If this is an old, worn-out topic, I do apologize. I'm unfamiliar with why we'd refer to the Democratic Party as anything other than what they call themselves. What am I missing?

Nick is right. The township folks have their claws deep into the legislature. But that isn't difficult: they're easily distracted by shiny objects.

I'm hoping that the budget mess and the overall economic fiasco, over-shadowed the Kernan-Shepherd reforms. And that they'll be able to focus on those in a short session next year.

Assessors went,and some fire departments have merged, and life went on. I use the assessor's office regularly, and I can tell you, it's already more-consistent.

We need to keep pressure on legislators to adopt Kernan-Shepherd next year. And not to be distracted with garbage like gay marriage and similar time-suckers.

Abbie, Here is some material for your show next week regarding Charter Schools.

Charter Schools Might Not Be Better
June 17, 2009 12:58 PM ET | Zach Miners

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/on-education/2009/0...

Yes, but this lumps all charter schools together, lumps all government schools together, and then compares the averages. That's an absurd way to compare them because a) only people who are unhappy with their government schools tend to seek out charter schools and b) charter schools are different from one another. Indianapolis a perfect example of this. The best and worst schools in the city are charter schools.

But more than anything, I object to the idea of U.S. News or CREDO or anyone else telling me they know better than I do about what's a good school for my kid. “You don't need choices, punkin', we got it all figured out. Just blindly give us your children and stay out of it. Oh, but if they don't succeed, it's your fault.”

Constitutionally, we're a democratic republic, where the two main parties (now seemingly more one ptomaine party), were Democrats & Republicans, who no longer embrace the principles upon which they were chartered; meaning their exclusive, club styled current forms don't rate the citizen centered “ic” suffix.

Nick is right. The township folks have their claws deep into the legislature. But that isn't difficult: they're easily distracted by shiny objects.

I'm hoping that the budget mess and the overall economic fiasco, over-shadowed the Kernan-Shepherd reforms. And that they'll be able to focus on those in a short session next year.

Assessors went,and some fire departments have merged, and life went on. I use the assessor's office regularly, and I can tell you, it's already more-consistent.

We need to keep pressure on legislators to adopt Kernan-Shepherd next year. And not to be distracted with garbage like gay marriage and similar time-suckers.

Abbie, Here is some material for your show next week regarding Charter Schools.

Charter Schools Might Not Be Better
June 17, 2009 12:58 PM ET | Zach Miners

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/on-education/2009/0...

Yes, but this lumps all charter schools together, lumps all government schools together, and then compares the averages. That's an absurd way to compare them because a) only people who are unhappy with their government schools tend to seek out charter schools and b) charter schools are different from one another. Indianapolis a perfect example of this. The best and worst schools in the city are charter schools.

But more than anything, I object to the idea of U.S. News or CREDO or anyone else telling me they know better than I do about what's a good school for my kid. “You don't need choices, punkin', we got it all figured out. Just blindly give us your children and stay out of it. Oh, but if they don't succeed, it's your fault.”

Constitutionally, we're a democratic republic, where the two main parties (now seemingly more one ptomaine party), were Democrats & Republicans, who no longer embrace the principles upon which they were chartered; meaning their exclusive, club styled current forms don't rate the citizen centered “ic” suffix.