Sunday Morning Posts
My wife and I are about to enjoy a quiet Sunday morning together so here are a few things to ponder…
Statehouse Stuff
- House Speaker Pat Bauer says he may look at government reform involving township trustees when lawmakers come back in January. With the problems regarding FSSA and delivery of services, Bauer says there needs to be an appropriate back up system in place to deliver services to the poor. Bauer says that might involve some reform of the township trustee structure.
- Bauer also tells me he won’t block a vote on property tax caps, however he wants to make sure there are more reforms and safeguards for the taxpayers. One area the Speaker is looking at is assessments. He says caps won’t do taxpayers any good if there aren’t some limits on how much assessments can increase. Stay tuned.
- Interesting note, although Indiana lost $46 million in revenue, there was one bright spot. Gambling revenue was up five percent. I guess now we know what people do when they have no job.
- An in case you were wondering, lawmakers are back November 17 for Organization Day.
Smoking Ban
- If you’re a fan of the smoking ban, good luck in getting it on the agenda Monday. From what I hear there aren’t enough votes to get it on the agenda. And even if it were, there aren’t enough to pass it so it may die on the vine. There is some question as to if a measure is tabled at the Council level whether it would die if not brought back by the next meeting. From my understanding of Council rules I know motions that fail to pass the full body can come back, I’m not sure about ones that are tabled by the full body. I’ll do some checking on this one.
- Speaking of Smoke Free Indy. In their push for a smoking ban, they may be crossing the line by engaging in what looks like political activity instead of advocacy. Smoke Free Indy is funded by the Academy of Family Physicians, which gets money from the Marion County Health Department. Smoke Free Indy isn’t a not-for-profit or registered lobbying group. However it has used its Facebook page to attack Mayor Greg Ballard and it’s blog page to go after the Libertarian Party. Smoke Free Indy will say it’s just engaging in advocacy, but you know what they say, where’s smoke…
Final Word on Wishard
- Despite the fact the Wishard referendum passed with more than 80-percent voter approval, opponents are now starting to allege fraud. They say there is no way the referendum could have won by unanimous vote in precincts so they are speculating some kind of sinister ballot box stuffing. They’ve even taken their theory to Star hoping to get media attention. If they keep this up they’ll get attention, just probably not the kind they want, but the kind they’re used to getting.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:14 am
Gee, Abdul, it's good to see you don't let facts get in the way of your allegations. I guess the latter item is a reference to my inquiries about 42 unanimous precincts in favor of the Wishard, 71 total that had one vote or less providing a 3671-29, an astonishing 99.2% to .8% victory. If you knew anything about analyzing precinct election results, which I believe you do, those precincts results would certainly raise an eyebrow.
I most certainly did not make any suggestions of “sinister ballot box stuffing.” Absolutely not. What I said was that there could be a disconnect between the actual paper ballots and what was reported. In a paper ballot election, the Clerk totally depends on the totals reported by the people who work the polls. I have never once claimed there might be “ballot box stuffing” going on or some sort of organized “fraud.” I don't for a second think that happened. Nor have I claimed it was some sort of organized effort – just possibly some local poll workers not reporting results in their precincts 100% accurately. Contrary to the implication in your post, that is something we should be careful about as it could impact future paper ballot elections.
You can't tell me that those results I reported wouldn't cause you to be somewhat skeptical. Of course though you have an agenda and you are not about to allow legitimate questions to interfere with it.
The notion I have taken my theory to the Star to get media attention is also a lie. The Star has refused to even cover basic facts behind the Wishard referendum and looked the other way repeatedly on the underhanded tactics the Wishard folks. Why in the world would they look into this? My mention of the unanimous precincts was in response to an email exchange when a Star editor who mentioned how overwhelming the measure passed. The notion I was fishing for the Star to cover the issue is ridiculous. The Star has for several months made it perfectly clear they are not going to cover anything that puts the Wishard referendum in a bad light.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:20 am
Would these be the same precincts that Wilson wrote about here a few days ago? Were these the same voters who, year after year, overwhelmingly voted for Julia Carson? Ballot box stuffing in these precincts? Hmmmmm…..?
November 8th, 2009 at 9:25 am
No, Rico, I think you can discount so-called “ballot box stuffing.” I don't see any evidence of that. The turnout numbers don't seem off kilter. And I don't have problems with “overwhelming” vote in favor of the Wishard project in those precincts. What I'm saying is that precicnts like the 179-0 precinct, might have actually been something like 174-5. All the unanimous precincts raises flags whether the results were reported accurately.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:34 am
For the Black, stable, home-owning, always-voting folk that always turn out for every election (with an unbroken string of “D” in the Primaries) the referendum on Wishard was as dumb as asking for a referendum on leprosy. Years of racial segregation produced a number of precincts that are still almost entirely populated by African-Americans. These are the precincts that voted almost unanimously FOR Wishard. A turnout by “casual voters” would have produced a few more NO votes.
Before the eternally-ignorant start screaming CENTER TOWNSHIP, CENTER TOWNSHIP, CENTER TOWNSHIP Pogden will confirm many of these nearly-unanimous precincts are outside of Center. So chill out!
Simple-minded charges of “ballot-stuffing” reflect a profound ignorance of voters choices. It's a comforting myth to explain away the dismal failure to attract sufficient votes by losing politicians…
November 8th, 2009 at 10:00 am
No, Wilson, profound ignorance is what got the referendum passed. And it is what got Julia elected time after time. An informed electorate is the liberal's worst friend.
Julia was great at fostering dependence among her constituents. Naturally, they would vote for Wishard so they could use the fancy new emergency room for free primary care.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:09 am
Rico: Your ugly, ignorant stereotyping would be called racist by some. The folk that turned out to vote for this special election are the hard-working, decent, regular tax-paying, home-owning citizens with health insurance of some kind. True, in many precincts they were also the core vote for Julia Carson.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:42 am
And I suppose it's stereotyping to suggest that the illegal immigrants in this city will also use that same fancy emergency room for their primary care…….? It's just an observation, Wilson. Wake up and smell the piping-hot cup of reality!
November 8th, 2009 at 10:48 am
Immigration issues are a quite different cup of tea than “stuffing ballots”. Nobody is charging undocumented workers swung the election in the nearly-unanimous precincts.
Most Hoosiers are Christians (or some other belief) and don't believe in letting the sick die in the gutter. Rico disagrees. Oh well…
November 8th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
An alternative to smoking bans
If the public was honestly and truthfully informed about the effects of second-hand smoke, there would be fewer no-smoking laws in this country.
A little smoke from a handful of crushed leaves and some paper that is mixed with the air of a decently ventilated venue is going to harm or kill you?
There has never been a single study showing that exposure to the low levels of smoke found in bars and restaurants with decent modern ventilation and filtration systems kills or harms anyone.
As to the annoyance of smoking, a compromise between smokers and non-smokers can be reached, through setting a quality standard and the use of modern ventilation technology.
Air ventilation can easily create a comfortable environment that removes not just passive smoke, but also and especially the potentially serious contaminants that are independent from smoking.
Thomas Laprade
Thunder Bay, Ont.
November 8th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
As to the Wishard vote, I would concur that it is probably an error in reporting rather than ballot stuffing. It is nearly impossible to get 100% for any issue, at the very least one would expect a 1-2% error rate.
With respect to 80% voter approval, that is a mandate in apathy, 12% voted and 80% of 12% voted yes. By my math less than 10% of the available voters choose Wishdard.
November 8th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Wishard yes or no—not the point at all—Wishard being able to write a referendum question to vote on whether you like or do not like Wishard with no mention of any funding, facts as to the impact on your property taxes, etc. is the point! No one can say this referendum question could be legal in any sense. They should be challenged on that basis alone. If not, imagine what will come to you in the future.
November 8th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Surprise, a supposedly non-partisan organization is actually engaging in partisan politics. I've pretty much given up on caring about this. It's done with Eric Miller's Advance America organization as well, and dozens of others.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
The point I was attempting to make is that stereotypes often ring true. And I don't give a damn how politically-correct it is to speak the true. Political correctness just got 13 soldiers killed two days ago because someone didn't want to stereotype and profile. So screw you and your PC BS.
I am a Christian and I don't believe in letting the sick 'die in the gutter'. Of course, that's not happening now. But you know that. That's just how libs use scare tactics to push their government healthcare agenda. Isn't it Wilson?
November 8th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Glad to hear it, Matt. Eric was always a goof anyway.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Conspiracy theories abound. Like that one about Abdul being behind IndyUndercover blog . Yeah, no way that could be true. Some regular old cop wrote that in his squad car. That makes as much sense as a whole bunch of precincts having a statistical anomaly.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
Melyssa,
You need to get back in the game. These people have run your revolution into the ground.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:01 am
Elections are open and the results should be monitored or reviewed by anyone who thinks it's necessary.
It was a stunning victory for the Wishard folks. Those who opposed it probably had no idea it'd be this lop-sided. Losing isn't fun. They're still entitled to any review they wish. But I was an Inspector for two large precincts last Tuesday, and I can tell you this:
Like it or loathe it, the folks who voted last Tuesday were there out of deep respect for Wishard's mission. There were no massive errors. It was a long day, and the counting was more difficult than a typical election.
Conspiracy theories won't help change this single fact: voters spoke, loudly. I think they won every single precinct in the county.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:15 am
“Like it or loathe it, the folks who voted last Tuesday were there out of deep respect for Wishard's mission.”
Ugh, not really. More like that the folks who had a vested, personal interest (most likely a paycheck from Wishard, or free healthcare from Wishard) voted to keep that interest alive and well. What the property tax issue showed me was that most folks won't complain or stop government until _after_ they get screwed. It took $11K/year property tax bills to finally get people, who likely lean left themselves, to go downtown and bitch at government.
This will end up exactly the same. If enough taxing units get their pass on the caps, and those costs end up needing property taxes, then folks will once again get massive bills and start complaining about government…a government _they_ voted for.
November 9th, 2009 at 7:38 am
John, I worked at the npolls all day last Tuesday. The referendum passed overwhelmingly in both precincts where I worked.
I paid close attention to voters: mostly middle-class or upper-middle-class folks, northern side of town, retired or gainfully employed, almost all, I'd guess, had their own private health insurance. So your observation isn't correct. But overwhelmingly sterotypical and uninformed.
Here's the rub: most of those voters were only one generation (or less) removed from Wishard as the only health care choice for their family, friends, neighborhood, etc.
And they had another overwhelming message: there, but for the grace of God, go I. We could all be a Wishard poor patient tomorrow.
Take the blinders off. Pay attention. Anti-referendum folks did not make their case. It's that simple.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:41 am
“I paid close attention to voters: mostly middle-class or upper-middle-class folks, northern side of town, retired or gainfully employed, almost all, I'd guess, had their own private health insurance. So your observation isn't correct. But overwhelmingly sterotypical and uninformed.”
Well, the self-interest might not be direct. How many of these folks are retired from IU? How many work at IU? How many work at Marion, U of I, and Butler in the nursing or other medical fields? How many have kids who use Wishard for free health care for themselves and their five born out-of-wedlock, no dad around kids?
I still hold that the vast majority of people who voted for Wishard did so because of some self-interest. Hell, that self-interest may have even been to keep blacks and Hispanics out of the surrounding hospitals.
I really hope you are correct, in that these people voted for Wishard because they wanted it. I also hope that all of those types understand that I don't want to hear one complaint about property taxes going up because of Wishard. I don't want to hear “We were lied too!” or “They said it would be paid w/o property taxes.” If they were really that supportive of the Wishard mission in general, then that means they are willing to pay for it out of their own pocket.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:51 am
Anti-theft isn't necessarily anti-referenda or anti-Wishard. Nor do victims fail to make any sort of “case,” where “law enforcement” is complicit in burglary.
What quality of government, ENDORSES Wishard styled referendum language?
November 9th, 2009 at 8:59 am
It's a near impossible challenge to make the case when both political parties, a municipal corporation with two employees basically dedicating themselves full time for it, the mayor and Chancellor of IUPUI promoting it via public resources, and the media putting minimal effort in doing real reporting.
Give me a muncipal corporation, a salary so I can quit my job, and a few million funnelled in via PACs and I'm sure the opponents of the referendum could've made the case just as well as HHC did.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
Abdul,
You better count you votes on the council again. Looks like Indianapolis will be smoke-free on Nov. 30.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Below is a copy of the legislature approved & therefore endorsed, Wishard Referendum language. Exempt from tax “caps,” the estimated cost is somewhere in the $750M+ range. Is this good government & oversight?
“Shall the Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County, Indiana, issue bonds or enter into a lease to finance safe, efficient and functional facilities for the Wishard Hospital project:
1. to allow Wishard to provide access to care for all residents of Marion County, including people who are seniors, poor uninsured or vulnerable regardless of their ability to pay; and
2. to allow Wishard to provide specialized care, including to victims suffering from traumatic injuries or severe burns; and
3. to allow Wishard to work with colleges and universities including Indiana University School of Medicine, Ivy Tech Community College, and the Purdue School of Pharmacy, to teach future doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals in Indiana?”
November 10th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Below is a copy of the legislature approved & therefore endorsed, Wishard Referendum language. Exempt from tax “caps,” the estimated cost is somewhere in the $750M+ range. Is this good government & oversight?
“Shall the Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County, Indiana, issue bonds or enter into a lease to finance safe, efficient and functional facilities for the Wishard Hospital project:
1. to allow Wishard to provide access to care for all residents of Marion County, including people who are seniors, poor uninsured or vulnerable regardless of their ability to pay; and
2. to allow Wishard to provide specialized care, including to victims suffering from traumatic injuries or severe burns; and
3. to allow Wishard to work with colleges and universities including Indiana University School of Medicine, Ivy Tech Community College, and the Purdue School of Pharmacy, to teach future doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals in Indiana?”