Anyone who reads this blog knows I am a big believer in government consolidation, particularly when it comes to public safety.   I have supported fire consolidation when Bart Peterson was Mayor of Indianapolis,  I support it now that Greg Ballard is Mayor and I will support it regardless of who the next mayor is.

What I think is ironic is that some of the people who were strong advocates of consolidating the Indianapolis Fire Department with the township fire departments have suddenly had concerns about “diversity” and the racial make up of the department.    Call me crazy, but in an inferno I have a hard time making out the race of the firefighter through the flames and thick smoke.

What critics say is that as IFD continues to consolidate it becomes less diverse because there are fewer minority firefighters in the townships.  They argue that the percentage of minority firefighters should reflect the numbers in the city which is about 20-25%.  The problem with playing the numbers game is that it’s a double-edged sword.

For example IFD, post Lawrence Township merger, is 84% white and 14% black.  That number may seem small, however, when you look at the command structure, I could argue blacks are over-represented.  50% of the assistant chiefs are black.  66% of the division chiefs are black.  42% of IFD’s captains are black.  And 40% of the lieutenants are black.    So while critics argue consolidation dilutes minority representation on the fire department, they say nothing about how minorities are “overrepresented” in IFD’s command structure.

Of course this is a ridiculous statement to make, but that’s the problem when you start playing a pure numbers game; you go from the sublime to the ridiculous.   The city should strive for diversity in its ranks, but when all you look at is numbers, you’re asking for trouble.

Speaking of numbers,  blacks make up 27% of the City-County Council and 53% of the Democratic caucus.   If we’re going to play the numbers game it’s clear to see they are over-represented on the Council as well as the caucus.  So who should give up their seat so we have proportionate representation?  Where should I begin?

When I went to the City County building Monday night to cover the usual city hall stuff I wasn’t quite sure what I was going to write about.  I had a number of things on the agenda to pick from: police department reforms, the merger with the Lawrence Fire Department, the ban on the sale synthetic marijuana, i.e. “spice”.   I was particularly interested in whether most of the usual council partisan bickering over these issues would be cast aside for the greater policy debate, but it turns out the measures all passed overwhelmingly.

So what is a political pundit to write about, here’s one, getting cursed at by an elected official.  At the start of the meeting I was in the hallway and heading to get a copy of the Council agenda,  I ran into City-Council Member Bill Oliver, we did the polite head nod, when I asked him (apparently a big mistake on my part) whether he and his friends had found a job for Chantay Chandler, Brandon Johnson’s mother?   Brandon Johnson, as you recall, was the 15-year old victim of alleged police excessive force earlier this year.  His mother has been out of work for months and has gotten very little assistance from the people taking advantage of her son’s situation.

When I asked my question, I was expecting the usual polite dismissal.  Instead I get, “What the f**** are you talking about?! Are you trying to start something?!”  Wow!  It’s not everyday I get the f-bomb thrown at me by an elected official.  In fact, the last public official to call me up and curse me out was Democratic Chairman Ed Treacy.  That man sounded like a Redd Foxx record.

I’m not quite sure why Oliver got so upset.  All I did was ask a question.  A simple yes or no would have been sufficient.   But then again I could see if I was the one who had engaged in political posturing and tried to take advantage of a tragedy and score points because I haven’t offered a viable alternative vision for the city and I represented one of the most crime-ridden and economically depressed council districts in the city.

Well, come to think of it,  if I were Bill Oliver I’d curse a lot too, but it would be directed at myself.

With the election about a month away, I figured now would be as good a time as any to blog about the political lay of the land and what the world may look like on November 3.

These assessments are made on a number of factors (conversations with politicos from across the state, campaign people, news headlines, etc. etc.) and of course subject to change at a moment’s notice.

U.S. Senate – Moderately Leaning Dan Coats.  I think Brad Ellsworth has a better chance than he did a month ago.    His campaign has been hinting at some things coming into place real soon, however today’s political winds still favor Coats for now.   There’s also a question where Libertarian Rebecca Sink-Burris fits in all this.  I hear she’s polling about 10 percent.

2nd Congressional District – Slightly leaning Joe Donnelly.  Republican Jackie Warloski is a spitfire, but my sources in northeast Indiana tell me they expect Donnelly to pull this one off.

8th Congressional District – Strongly leaning Larry Buschon.  Buschon is running a strong race poll wise; 15-points ahead in some.  Also Democrat Trent Van Haaften has not run the best campaign you would expect.

9th Congressional District – Toss Up.  The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is reportedly giving up on Baron Hill, however he still enjoys certain structural advantages that come with incumbency.  However, Todd Young has been pretty aggressive, so this is a race that could come down to the wire.

Secretary of State – Leans Charlie White.  Despite the recent controversy surrounding White’s voting issues, the story still strongly remains inside the political class.   If something happens with either the Secretary of State’s investigation or Hamilton County Prosecutor  Democrat Vop Osili might have some new ammunition, but he’ll need to spend a lot of money to do it.  I equate this story to North Korea having a nuclear bomb.  What good is a warhead if there’s no delivery system?

State Auditor and Treasurer – Strong Republican.  These races get lost in the shuffle and since it is a Republican year, unless some major shoes drop, they will fall in line with the national trends.

Indiana House of Representatives – Republican.  A number of conversations has the House going to the GOP.  Right now, my guess is the Republicans get a 54-53 seat majority.

Marion County Prosecutor – Toss up.   Republican Mark Massa has hit the airwaves, while the Curry people have not.  There had been some rumor about a split between the Curry camp and the local party, but so far that has been just talk.

Marion County Sheriff – Leaning John Layton.  Once again, while my sources say the internal polling shows the race competitive, this is still Marion County.

As I said, these “assessments” are all based on conversations and observations about the political landscape done over the last few days.  You are free to disagree.  I’ll be doing another one in about two weeks.

Normally I’d have a blog post today and tomorrow, but Indiana Barrister has to go dark for a couple days.  This may sound odd, but my wife’s dog, a Yorkie Terrier,  which she has had since 1993, died this Friday.

It’s been really rough on her and as the good husband, my job is to give her my complete attention.  She’s always been really bad at letting things go, which I guess is good for our marriage.

There will be plenty of time Sunday to talk about whether Brad Ellsworth can win or whether Charlie White will be able to stay in the game.  Who can win what will likely be a close race for Marion County Prosecutor and whether Mitch Daniels and Aiming Higher will get the Indian  House of Representatives.  But right now,  I’ve got take care of the lovely Mrs. Shabazz.

I’m sure you guys will find plenty of things to entertain yourselves and discuss.  I’ll be back Sunday with a few thoughts as we enter the 30-day stretch.

Sorry to post so late in the day, but I got tied up with a few things this morning.  Here’s the latest gossip, rumor and innuendo.  As always, take it for what it’s worth.

Good News and Bad news

The National Rifle Association has endorsed Democrat Brad Ellsworth in the race for the United States Senate.  In a release today the NRA  cited Ellsworth’s “pro-gun” record, including his signing of an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in the Heller case which upheld an individual right to bear arms.  The release did mention why the NRA did not endorse either of Ellsworth’s opponents, Republican Dan Coats or Libertarian Rebecca Sink-Burris.

Speaking of Ellsworth, the NRA endorsement has to be good news.  There are reports that the National Democratic Senate Campaign Committee is giving up on Indiana and not reserving time for television ads.    Ellsworth is hoping to tap into the African-American vote.  My sources tell me he’s slated to meet with a number of black-elected officials this weekend in Indianapolis during the Circle City Classic.

Tit for Tat

The back and forth between Republicans and Democrats continues over Secretary of State candidate Charlie White’s voting record.  Democrats accused White of fraud for voting from an address where he did not reside.  Republicans accused Democrats of playing politics.

Today Democratic candidate Vop Osili called on Hamilton County Prosecutor to open an investigation and appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the case.  Meanwhile, Republicans unveiled what they called Osili’s own “irregularities” in his campaign for Secretary of State which includes more than $70,000 in what they label as discrepancies in his campaign filings.  Republicans say that matter is exacerbated by the fact Osili is his own campaign treasurer.

On a more interesting note, I have been speaking this week to politicos from across the state asking if this story has gotten any legs outside of the political class.  Both Republican and Democrat alike have both said “no”.  While they all agree on the seriousness of the allegations, they all also agreed that unless Democrats are willing to spend the time and money to make this a major issue over the next five weeks, the story really won’t get much traction outside of the usual insiders.

I got some flack Tuesday for a blog post I wrote regarding the rocket scientists over at the GM stamping plant who voted themselves out of a job.  I had a number of people ask me what would I do if my employer wanted me to take a 50-percent wage cut?

I can answer that question pretty easily because I had a similar situation occur back in 2003.  My boss had run for Governor of Illinois and lost so a lot of us ended up losing our jobs.   I was let go.  Luckily I had savings and paid off some debt to make it for the next few months.   Three months later I got offered a job playing morning radio talk show host.  It was a great opportunity, but it only paid 65-percent of my former salary.  So what did I do?  I took it.

I did it in part because it was something I always wanted to do and secondly, it was steady pay.   I knew had to make up the difference in pay, so I used the part-time and freelance jobs that I had picked up over the past three months to supplement my income.  And by the time it was said and done,  I was making more than I did with my old job.  It just took some ingenuity and some creativity instead of whining and engaging in self-destructive behavior.

Now I will freely admit my situation is a little different than most people.  A single guy in his late 20s and early 30s probably has a few more options than someone in their 50s with a family.  However,  how we deal with adversity is the true testament of our character.   We can whine and shutdown or stand-up and take on the challenge head on.

Obviously, the workers at GM who voted themselves out of job decided that they would rather face unemployment.

I’ve got teaching obligations this afternoon, so I’ll make this quick.  Indiana Democrats are calling for the Secretary of State to investigate what they claim is voter fraud on behalf of Republican candidate Charlie White.  I’ve pasted their news release in this blog post.

Today, Indiana Democratic Party Chair Dan Parker held a press conference and outlined a detailed timeline of significant voter registration irregularities undertaken by Mr. White. In the last week, several irregularities have become public concerning the timing of Mr. White’s residency at two separate addresses as it relates to his eligibility to vote within the Delaware 12 precinct of Fishers, Indiana in the 2010 May primary. Despite Mr. White’s knowledge of the voting laws of the State of Indiana he knowingly voted illegally in the Delaware 12 precinct.

In response to these repeated discrepancies and offenses by Mr. White, Dan Parker issued the following statement:

“Charlie White clearly has some explaining to do to the people of Indiana. The events from January 2007 up to September 2010 clearly show that Mr. White had sufficient time to realize his mistake and take appropriate steps to change his voter registration address. However, Mr. White did not do this.”

Since Mr. White knowingly provided false addresses and voted in the wrong precinct in the May primary, it is my belief he has violated Indiana Election code – potentially carrying serious consequences. How can someone seeking the office of Secretary of State – the chief elections officer of the state — be trusted to hold such a position yet lack the ability to follow and understand the laws he is expected to uphold?”

3-14-2-11 Voting in other precincts Sec. 11. Except as provided by IC 3-10-10, IC 3-10-11, or IC 3-10-12, a person who knowingly votes or offers to vote in a precinct except the one in which the person is registered and resides commits a Class D felony.

“It’s unfortunate that a set of personal and family-related circumstances created this scenario, but the simple fact is that Charlie was entitled under law to vote one last time at his old polling location.  The only issue here pertains to filing a change of address for his voter registration form, an oversight that has been previously brought up and already fixed.  Charlie has repeatedly taken full responsibility for any mistakes he may have made and has taken all the steps necessary to correct them.”

I can’t think of a more appropriate blog title for the decision by an overwhelmingly majority of local union workers to literally put themselves out of a job.

You know the story, Illinois-based J.D. Norman Industries wanted to come in an buy the GM stamping plant in Indianapolis.   In order for the transfer to go through the Union had to sign off on a number of concessions, and after a few twists and turns, the membership overwhelmingly voted against the transfer.

What this means, despite the union rhetorical claptrap, is that these workers are now out of a job.   Despite any misguided belief that they can simply be transferred to another plant, here’s a newsflash:  GM is on track to close down a number of stamping plants, so my question is where are these guys gonna go?!  How are they going to sell their homes in this climate to relocate?  Are these guys capable of thinking.  Apparently not.

In this economy, with unemployment hovering around ten percent, you would think these guys would be a little more agreeable.  Everyone has to make tough choices.  And the last time I checked, even with a wage cut, 60-70 percent of something is still a lot better than 100-percent of nothing.

But based on the vote by the local UAW, math, like common sense, probably isn’t their strong point.

Indiana Democrats have called a news conference for Tuesday morning regarding Republican Secretary of State candidate Charlie White.  The release reads as follows…

In response to recent revelations concerning discrepancies in Secretary of State candidate Charlie White’s voter registration, residency in Fishers and service on the Fishers Town Council, Indiana Democratic Party Chair Dan Parker will hold a press conference tomorrow morning to discuss the official actions the Indiana Democratic Party will be taking.

Meanwhile,  Hamilton County Democrat Greg Pervis is calling for a grand jury investigation into White.

Today, Fishers attorney Greg Purvis has formally asked the Hamilton County Prosecutor to convene a Grand Jury and seek the appointment of a Special Prosecutor to investigate the actions of Republican Secretary of State candidate Charlie White, who last week admitted voting from an address where he did not reside, and resigned his position on the Fishers Town Council.  A copy of the submission to the Prosecutor is attached.

Purvis, who last week held a press conference revealing his investigation into White’s move outside of his council district and revealing that White appeared to have broken Indiana election law while at the same time seeking the highest office in Indiana which enforces election law, had called for White to step down from the Secretary of State race.  White has refused to do so.

Purvis also claims White paid cash for his property in Fishers.  White tells me there is a mortgage on the property and paperwork to back it up.

Here’s White’s campaign response…

“The accusations made against me from partisan sources have gone from distortions of the truth to outright lies.  I have repeatedly taken full responsibility for the mistakes I made earlier this year and I have taken all the steps necessary to correct them.  The claim that I paid for my condominium with cash is categorically false, as my loan paperwork clearly shows.  It is an ugly, desperate political ploy that serves only to breed cynicism among the voters.”

The Vop Osili campaign has put out a fund raising letter on White’s issues.

And before I forget, there was also a question about whether White’s votes on the Fisher’s Town Council were valid once he moved out of the district.    Here’s the law, courtesy the Indiana Secretary of State’s Office…

When an official takes office by claim of right (like when they are elected) but there is some subsequent event that puts their continued right to legally hold office in question then all actions take by that official (even if it were later proven in court that the officer illegally held office for a time) would be legal actions, or valid votes, as the case may be.

The courts term the officer holder’s status as de facto (under claim of right) even if the officer was not one who held office de jure (legally).  This concept has deep and ancient roots in Indiana jurisprudence and is based upon the public policy that the public should suffer no harm if it is ultimately determined an officer may have had defective title to office. See, for example, State ex rel. Bishop v. Crowe, (Ind. 1898).50 N.E. 471, 473-74 and State v. Sutherlin, (Ind. 1905) 75 N.E. 642, 646.

I think I got everybody on this one.  See you in the morning.

As the city of  Indianapolis looks deals with budget shortfalls,  a few million dollars could be just a couple of clicks away.  A number of municipalities have filed suit against on-line hotel booking companies for failure to pay the correct amount of taxes and have come up successful.

For example, in November of last year a federal jury awarded the city of San Antonio and 172 other Texas cities more than $20 million in a verdict against Expedia, Orbitz and Travelocity and eight other on-line booking companies.

The crux of the lawsuit was that when the on-line companies would book hotels, they would charge customers a sales tax rate based on the retail price of the hotel, but only remit taxes to the city at the wholesale price.  The companies would argue the mark up was a service fee, and therefore they were not obligated to pay the higher tax to the city of San Antonio. A jury didn’t buy it.

And it’s not Texas where this is happening.  The on-line travel companies were also ordered to pay Anaheim, California $21 million in back taxes.  Columbus, Georgia recently reached a settlement.  However the California case is still pending after a judge rolled back the initial ruling.

And here in Indiana the State Department of Revenue sued several on-line hotel booking companies for more than $2 million in loss revenue.    The state won an administrative hearing, but the matter is on appeal at the Tax Court level.   A spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office says Indiana’s  litigation would not prohibit municipalities from pursuing their own lawsuits.

Indianapolis makes quite a bit of money on the convention business and raises quite a bit of revenue from hotel/motel taxes.   If there is money to be found because the on-line booking agencies haven’t been good actors then the city should definitely look into pursuing that litigation.  Such dollars could go a long way to funding the Capital Improvement Board as well as the Convention and Visitors Bureau.