Wednesday Wire Regarding Tuesday Tidbits
Here’s the long and short of some things to keep an eye on over the next few days that happened on Tuesday…
Indiana lawmakers are split over whether the state should opt out of the public option of the Obama administration’s health care reform plan. Governor Mitch Daniels’ office says they are studying the details in order to figure out the best course of action. House Speaker Pat Bauer says he supports the public option in principle. If Indiana did decide to opt out, it’s unclear exactly how that would occur. Right now the state can opt out of Medicaid-related programs by a decision from the Executive Branch, however under legislation offered by New York Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer, a state could only opt out if its legislature passed a bill and the Governor signed it. Stay tuned.
As soon as House Speaker Pat Bauer unveiled his ethics reform package Tuesday, Indiana Republicans were quick to jump on it and criticize the him. Bauer wants to eliminate campaign contributions by contractors who do business with the state, institute a year-long “cooling off” period where former lawmakers can’t lobby the state and require disclose of legislative gifts of $50 or more. State GOP officials say Bauer had several opportunities to accomplish these goals last session, but sent similar reform measures to die in the Rules Committee.
The Lawrence Township Board Tuesday night voted to cut its budget by $3 million to help close a near $6 million shortfall. The cuts mean the townships fire fighters will have to take a more than 10% pay cut. The Township is also borrowing $2 million in emergency loans from the State.
Health and Hospital CEO Matt Gutwein Tuesday took the case for the Wishard referendum to the Downtown Rotary club of Indianapolis. I’m fundamentally neutral on the proposal to build the new facility, but having heard him and the opposition speak on the issue, I tend to think Gutwein makes a much better case for the referendum than his opponents do against it.
Marion County Democratic Chairman Ed Treacy has filed an ethics complaint against the Mayor accusing him using government resources to help a political contributor. I guess Treacy is trying to endear himself to all but declared Mayoral candidate Melina Kennedy since it is common knowledge amongst Democratic circles that he wanted someone other than her to run for Mayor.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:01 am
Gutwein makes a better case than oppoinents of the referendum? Yeah, I guess if you like all the deceit H&H has used throughout this election cycle and if you like the fact that property taxes will be used to pay for the buildings contary to the lies they are spouting,
The referendum isn't about building a new hospital, which they can build now from H&H's income flow, without the referendum. The referendum is about using property taxes to pay for the new hospital. The odds that H&H will continue its nursing home Medicare reimbursement scam for the next 30 years, to quote Rex Early, is slim and none and slim left town. That means we taxpayers will pay.
Even if under the best case scenario, H&H were to be able to continue the nursing home income for the next 30 years, there is still absolutely nothing obligating them to pay for the hospital with H&H's income stream instead of property taxes. The only thing “obligating” H&H to pay for the hospital with the income flow is Gutwein's naked promise, backed by absolutely nothing.
Can you imagine advising a client about whether to accept a 30 year deal based solely on a promise not backed by anything in writing that was enforceable? I'm pretty sure that would be legal malpractice.
October 28th, 2009 at 7:37 am
Outside the blogoshpere (described by two journalism professors on this morning's Abdul show, as the “fifth estate”), reporting on the Wishard referendum by the fourth estate, has been sub standard (assuming the standard of disclosure & objectivity as expressed by the aforementioned guests, two journalism professionals).
Is anyone claiming that reporting on the Wishard referendum has been professional quality, award winning stuff? In the rearview mirror, blown coverage & upward pressure on tax rates fueling further devaluation, will appear much differently than now.
It may come as news to those who only hear the proponents side of things, that Methodist Hospital, a few blocks or short monorail ride from Wishard, is a level 1 trauma center with burn care (where several race drivers have been treated).
October 28th, 2009 at 8:47 am
Dave, Methodist is in fact the place where race drivers are taken almost exclusively.
Matt Gutwein is our Harold Hill. How appropriate that Wishard is situated as close to the City's river as it is!
October 28th, 2009 at 8:57 am
A Goodfellas reference? Wonderful.
I have heard Gutwein twice. He is an effective speaker and he has his selected facts to present. That is his job. It's the job of the opponents to secure accurate spokespersons who are articulate and accountable. That is not Carl Moldthan. Nice guy, but no traction.
I don't get the Bauer slam–did the Republicans introduce this kind of proposal in the last session? I looked over their legislative initiatives last spring, and didn't see these specific ideas among them. I could've missed them. Just asking…
Generally, our legislature needs a gigantic enema and sitz bath. It's an ethics cesspool. The conflicts of interest are rampant, and they govern their own lobbyists. The last Sec. of State who tried to reign in the lobbyists as statutes provided, was Joe Hogsett, appointed to fill out Evan Bayh's SOS term. As soon as Joe proposed tougher lobbyist registration and reporting, the legislative leaders, at the time Garton, Mills, Bauer, et al, yanked the lobbyist oversight from the SOS and gave it to a new commission. A commission whose members were entirely appointed by legislative leadership.
This incestuous nonsense will only stop when we demand that it stop. It happens on both sides of the aisle. Many of the lobbyists who whore around outside the House and Senate, pal around with legislators 365-24-7. Everyone knows it. Nobody seems to be outraged, which is troubling.
Bauer's proposals make sense, and in fact, they should be stronger. If he ignored similar attempts last session, shame on him. That doesn't mean we should ignore his proposal now.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:47 am
TA, shouldn't Gutwein be “accountable.” That's the whole problem. There is absolutely nothing requiring H&H to pay for Wishard out of their income stream rather than property taxes. I might well have supported a new hospital if the H&H people would have approached this issue honestly.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:00 am
Gutwein should absolutely be responsible, Paul. I've heard his pitch, and read the documents. I think he is being accountable. We'll have to disagree about the financing method. But that's OK.
I hahve this funny little voice inside me wondering if Gutwein, a Peterson holdover, is actually a Trojan horse, left there to poison Ballard's well. H&H isn't exactly a mayoral domain, but…Gutwein was put there by the mayor, and the 25th floor has to sign off on all things H&H.
Election is less than tow weeks away. Prediction, Paul? I think the referendum will succeed 55-45.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Goodfellas? That would be “Henry Hill” there, professor.
“Harold Hill” was the con man character in the stage musical The Music Man.
How is my English today?
October 28th, 2009 at 11:19 am
Accountable? Responsible? Let's suppose Mr. Gutwein et al are lying out their ying yangs. What happens and when does it happen if the supposition proves to be correct? In the old days there was tar and feather and a rail to ride out of town. In slightly older days there was a post in front of a wall. Really back in the day the oriental leaders had interesting methods to send an erring public servant on to the hereafter. But, all we have is the loss of a cushy job and the taxpayers holding another very large lien on their properties.
October 28th, 2009 at 11:44 am
Thanks, Rocker….had my Hills confused. Both good movies, though. But we've got trouble right here in River City.
Yes, Pascal, I've read the facts, and I think Mr. Gutwein is being accountable and responsible.
October 28th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Wouldn't that be Henry Hill?
October 28th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
55-45? Not a chance. It's a special election with nothing else on the ballot. I'll be surprised if 30% vote to oppose it.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
It'll be a small turnout, Matt. That will drive anti-bond folks. Moreso than pro-bond folks. Still, almost 350 folks voted early last weekend. That's a huge number in a one-horse contest.
I think this is a first in Marion County, so itl'l be itneresting to see the turnout.
And what the anti-folks haven't counted on, is that a LOT of people have been treated or visited patient-family at Wishard over the years. Wishard has a soft place in many hearts, regardless whether this bond issue is deserved or not.
October 28th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
It's Wishard's treatment of taxpayers that's of concern here. One sided drafting of referenda is the wrong script, it's representative malpractice. A good faith effort would include disclosure & balanced drafting of the referenda; vs. subsidized nondisclosure & advocacy in the form of a “referen-do.”
It's not whether proponents are doing the job of selling? Who is doing the job of representing THE PEOPLE? Public service is supposed to be a public trust. The Wishard issue is the very half-pregnant “logic” or pretense of government “in business,” without the burden or risk or appropriate disclosure; by force of taxation, money taken from the people.
Appropriate funding for projects like Wishard is charitable giving, which is discouraged by the gluttony of “bigger is better” government & hyper-taxation.
October 28th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Bauer, Long, and Bosma Want Ethics Reform?
Appears some politicians are going to be charged with something soon. Too Late to Cover Your Ass Fellas.
Truth be Told about Casino Money and Politicians?
State Supreme Court Hears East Chicago Case Tomorrow.
Oral arguments of the Indiana Supreme Court are Webcast live, as well as archived on the court's Web site for later viewing.
The East Chicago case will be heard from 8:45 to 9:25 a.m. Thursday.
The video can be viewed at: mycourts.in.gov/arguments/default.aspx?court=sup
October 28th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Very useful link to the live court feed! Thanks!
October 28th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
How in the world is Gutwein going to be held accountable if they do dip into property taxes to pay for Wishard? There is absolutely nothing stopping them from doing that.
TA, no you're wrong. The Wishard referendum will pass 70-30. In a regular election your nuimbers of 55-45 would be close, a little on the low side with 55, but close. A low turnout election skews the numbers greatly in favor of the proposal.
October 28th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
The small turnout is exactly what'll drive proponents of it. People are less likely to turn out for an anti-vote when it's not surrounded by a hot-topic wedge issue (IE gay marriage, abortion, immigration…that's about it).
The lack of an organization in the anti-referendum in comparison to the PACs, multiple politicians, etc…endorsing and promoting the referendum is why I think the vote will be extremely in favor of Wishard. As you point out yourself, it has a sentimental value to many. The people most motivated for this vote will be the employees of Wishard, friends and family of them, and those who personally benefit from it like the construction companies.
If this was held in a regular election, this could be grouped into a more taxes pitch. But in a special election (where many, in my anecdotal experience, aren't even aware there's an election), it's going to be lopsided to the proponents.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
Ballard's country-club political buddy Dave Bego (who got the police car for a month) also seems to be a buddy of Abdul's. Remember this? http://www.indianabarrister.com/archives/2009/1...
October 28th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
If this is rendered moot by a more exhaustive entry I posted earlier- I apologize. I'm not a fan of this Disqus business- or whatever's been going wrong.
1) TA, I owe you a retort on torts. I haven't forgotten.
2) God bless the Indiana Democratic Party on October 28th, 2009. Within one day, I'm reading of Speaker Bauer espousing ethics reform and Senator Bayh reembracing fiscal frugality and the possiblity of voting against health care “reform”. For all I know, cats will be mating with dogs in the streets tomorrow, UFOs landing, and planetary crusts sheared across the globe- but for today, they are the party of common sense.
3)That means, DO NOT GIVE UP! Weeks ago, MSDWT Superintendent Mervilde was to get a 7% raise and four years bought-out – the people responded and it became a 2% raise. Months ago people stomped around the statehouse and subsequent rallies, belly-aching about a legislature that wouldn't pursue Kernan-Shepard, property taxes, redistricting, illegal hiring, township gov't or ethics reform. Out of the sky, we (at least preliminarily) have Secretary Rokita pursuing redistricting and Speaker Bauer on ethics reform.
I don't care what the paper, news, internet, television, or your neighbor says- you keep calling, writing, emailing, calling talk shows, voting, and doing everything to keep our country fiscally intact for our kids and old age. I suggest start with Senator Bayh. If he keeps it up, he may influence others: 554-0750, or Senator.Bayh@address-verify.com, or Senator Evan Bayh, 463 Russell Bldg., United States Senate, Washington D.C. 20510
October 28th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
What's your point Wilson? Is there something wrong with Abdul and Ballard knowing the same person? Jezz get a life,…quit lurking in the shadows like a ghoul.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:44 am
I don't know why Bayh's fiscal attitudes are new to anyone, Taxpayer. As governor he cut budgets, delayed school payments, and did anything possible to spend less.
Sometimes, at the cost of programs that badly needed more money, not less.
This is not new on his part. He's cheap.
I had forgotten about the school superintendent's raise getting cut back. That was a triumph of citizen backlash.
October 29th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
We need a public option, and here is my message for Evan Bayh:
I was disgusted to hear that you were willing to support a filibuster against the Democratic Health Care Bill because of your opposition to the Public Option. Considering the fact that your wife sits on the board of Wellpoint and your own political contributions from the industry, you can no longer be trusted to represent the people of Indiana. I am looking forward to voting for your Democratic Primary challenger in 2010.
October 29th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
We need a public option, and here is my message for Sen. Bayh:
I was disgusted to hear that you were willing to support a filibuster against the Democratic Health Care Bill because of your opposition to the Public Option. Considering the fact that your wife sits on the board of Wellpoint and your own political contributions from the industry, you can no longer be trusted to represent the people of Indiana. I am looking forward to voting for your Democratic Primary challenger in 2010.
October 30th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Depite numerous votes to spend money we don't have (along with most of the rest of Congress), I remain pleased that at least Bayh's paid lip service to frugality. A couple of summers ago he probably took a hit for it when a Star letter as he was under VP consideration. Another piece was in the Wall Street Journal this past Sept. The paper again ran something on pg 2 a couple of days ago. At least that's more attention to the topic than I read from our Republican senator.
.
However, there's also customer service. Maybe it's just his machine or staff, but I can NEVER leave a message on his local 554-0750. I'm sure there are plenty of Hoosiers, whether Josh on one end of the spectrum, or myself, that would like to share our view of the health care bill, on any and every medium available.
I'm with Josh on health care reform. I'm opposed to the Public Option because: 1) We can't afford ANY expanded gov't spending, certainly not without equal spending cuts up front. 2) We haven't funded the future obligations of the health care programs we already have. 3) We have to put in better tracking of waste, fraud, abuse, and means testing to maximize the precious dollars already in. 4) The wait increases and research decreases without genuine competition, which shouldn't happen with gov't “competition”. 5) The free market HAS to come-up with up front pricing and genuine competition that crosses state lines without gov't mandates- or it's no less rigged. I “recuse” on the tort/mapractice issue for now.
October 31st, 2009 at 6:31 am
Before there should ever be any discussion of a public option there should first be a massive undertaking to extricate government from the health care industry so that the cost can come down about 50% … then you can start saying things like …
“Oh, woe is me, health insurance (which covers the cost of health care) is sooooo expensive, please make somebody else pay for mine.”
Health Care reform is definitely important, but not the way most people are thinking.
http://shepardpolitics.blogspot.com/2009/08/hea...
October 31st, 2009 at 11:31 am
Before there should ever be any discussion of a public option there should first be a massive undertaking to extricate government from the health care industry so that the cost can come down about 50% … then you can start saying things like …
“Oh, woe is me, health insurance (which covers the cost of health care) is sooooo expensive, please make somebody else pay for mine.”
Health Care reform is definitely important, but not the way most people are thinking.
http://shepardpolitics.blogspot.com/2009/08/hea...