The Public Safety Director for the city of Indianapolis says that it does make a difference whether Monday’s explosions at the Boston Marathon were the results of domestic or foreign terrorism.

So far, three people were killed and nearly 200 injured in two explosions at the Boston Marathon.  Federal authorities are investigating.

Troy Riggs explains  that if the acts were a result of foreign terrorism, the perpetrators may be trying to flee the country, whereas if they were domestic terrorists, there is a greater sense of urgency by law enforcement to find them.

In his 12-minute interview, Riggs also discusses the steps the city is taking to remain safe and he also talks about the impact of social media such as Twitter in breaking the news as well as how it can be used to help solve the crime.

Leon-Tailored Audio: Public Safety Director Troy Riggs

Last week, U.S. Sen. Joe Donnelly demonstrated a concept I have come to label as “enlightened self-interest.”

That means you do the right thing not only because it is the right thing to do, but you also get a benefit out of it. In Donnelly’s case it was coming out (pardon the pun) in favor of marriage equality, or in other terms, same-sex marriage.

Donnelly released the news via his Facebook page when he stated the following…

“In recent years, our country has been involved in an important discussion on the issue of marriage equality. While serving in the House of Representatives, I had the opportunity to act on a core belief of mine: we are a stronger country when we draw on the strengths of all Americans. I voted to repeal ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ and was an original supporter of the bill that would make it illegal to discriminate against someone in the workplace because of their sexual orientation. It is also for that reason that I oppose amending either Indiana’s or our nation’s constitution to enshrine in those documents an ‘us’ and a ‘them,’ instead of a ‘we.’ With the recent Supreme Court arguments and accompanying public discussion of same-sex marriage, I have been thinking about my past positions and votes. In doing so, I have concluded that the right thing to do is to support marriage equality for all.”

Donnelly in the past had opposed same-sex marriage and so this change was pretty big news across Indiana.

Now, some have argued that Donnelly was only doing this for political reasons and that he will pay a price when he is up for re-election – and by the way, that won’t be until 2018. That is the political genius of this move.

We all know attitudes have been changing at road runner speed on this issue over the last decade or so. When Gallup polled the issue back in 1996, only 27 percent of the public supported same-sex marriage while 68 percent opposed it.

I think it’s also worth a mention that 1996 was the year “The Birdcage” was released in movie theatres.

Fast forward to the most recent Gallup poll done in November of last year and you’ll see that 53 percent of the public favor of gay marriage and 46 percent are opposed. Break that number down even further by age group and you’ll see that 73 percent of Americans 18 to 29 think gay marriage should be legal, while 57 percent of those over 65 think it should be illegal.

I am willing to bet there will be more of 18-29-year olds around in 2018 than 65-plus. If these trends continue, and there is no reason to think that they won’t, time is definitely on Donnelly’s side. And I think it’s also worth a mention that in 1958, 94 percent of the public opposed interracial marriage. Today, it’s 11 percent.

This is why I have to give Joe credit where credit is due. He came down on the right side of this issue and it looks like the future will bear him out. There is no logical, rational reason that same-sex marriage should be illegal.

And for the people who stay up at night agonizing over this issue and how horrible it is, I suggest you seek out some therapy. And just so you know, the same people who weren’t going to vote for the senator over same-sex marriage likely weren’t going to vote for him anyway so he loses nothing in that department. If anything, it’s a net win as Donnelly has picked up support from the LGBT community which was tepid at best in some circles.

And at the end of the day, politics is about addition. And by supporting marriage equality, Joe Donnelly will definitely come out ahead on this one.

As someone who writes frequently about events over at the Indiana General Assembly, it is not uncommon to be in a situation where you have multiple events taking place at the same time and you are running back and forth between the two.  I found myself in that situation recently while trying to keep tabs on two pieces of legislation important to Indianapolis,  HB 1011, mass transit and SB 621, Marion County Government reform.  The Senate Tax & Fiscal Policy Committee was hearing the mass transit bill, while the House Local Government and Regulatory Reform Committee was hearing the Marion County bill.

And just to keep everyone up to speed the mass transit bill would have called for a referendum on a tax increase to fund the expansion of bus and rail service in Marion and Hamilton counties and it would have given the remaining donut counties the ability to opt-in.   The Marion County bill would, among other things given the Mayor more control over the entire city-county budget, as well as his appointments, and prior to the language being changed at the hearing, it would have eliminated the at-larges.  The bill was amended so the at-larges will now stay.

What struck me as most interesting was not only were both rooms packed but exactly who was doing the packing.  In the Senate hearing there were representatives from the business community, local government, faith community, etc.  It was a widespread, cross section of individuals all supporting mass transit.  Meanwhile, at the House hearing, it was mostly individuals connected in one capacity or another to the Marion County Democratic Party.  Now before I get the usual e-mails complaining that I am leaving out certain facts, please note I said “mostly”.  Also testifying against the bill was Republican City-County Councilwoman Christine Scales as well as a couple of representatives from some neighborhood groups.  And also there might have been fewer people in the room than I counted because “Black Pope Wannabe” Stephen Clay was there and he took up a few seats.

I was not surprised to see the SB 621 hearing look like a Democratic slating convention.   Democrats also packed the room when the legislation was originally heard in the Senate.  What did shock me though as that when it came to the mass transit bill, the Democrats must have got off on another stop because they have pretty much been AWOL in that debate.  No, I take that back, State Senator Jean Breaux, who is living proof that competence is not a prerequisite for public office, threatened that Democrats would withhold support for mass transit if the Republicans went forward with SB 621.

Here is what was really going on.  Democrats have been more concerned about keeping four people employed (the at-larges) than employing the thousands of their constituents who would be helped by expanded bus service.  An informal count showed the number of elected Democratic officials who showed up to testify against SB 621, about a dozen or so.  The amount that showed up to testify on behalf of mass transit, zero.  Now, in all due fairness to the Marion County Prosecutor, Terry Curry did hold a news conference in support of mass transit, arguing that is a tool to help fight crime because it would help people get to work and become self-sufficient, but it would also get witnesses more access to the courts and criminal justice system.

Unfortunately, the rest of Curry’s party doesn’t seem to see things that way.  They have put self-interest ahead of the public’s interest.  I guess the good news for them is that the four at-larges got to keep their jobs.  Too bad their constituents won’t have mass transit so they can look for a job to keep.

Although his office has overspent his budget by more than $20 million over the past three years, Sheriff John Layton is doing his best to save his skin and avoid any fiscal oversight as called for in SB 621.   The embedded file below is a list of e-mails he has been sending out to department personnel.

If Marion County Democrats are hoping to change minds and influence the Legislature with this video regarding SB 621, then Indiana really should look at decriminalizing marijuana because apparently somebody was using a lot of it when they put this together.

We recently received data on Indiana’s unemployment rate. And, from what I can tell, the last person you want to be in the Hoosier state is a high school dropout who lives in Vermillion County. Here’s why. The overall data shows that the state’s unemployment rate inched up a bit from 8.6 percent in January to 8.7 percent in February, however that same data showed the state adding 5,800 jobs that month.

According to the Department of Workforce Development, sectors showing significant gains in February include: Manufacturing (3,400), Construction (2,700), Trade, Transportation & Utilities (1,400), and Financial Activities (1,100). Areas that showed a decrease in jobs were the Private Educational & Health Services (-1,000), and Leisure and Hospitality (-800) sectors.

With respect to counties, Vermillion County had the highest unemployment rate at 13.8 percent while Hamilton County had the lowest at 6.5 percent. Indianapolis’ unemployment rate was 9.4 percent. Now, here is where it gets interesting. If you are a college graduate in Indiana, the unemployment rate for your peers is 3.2 percent. If you didn’t finish high school, there’s a good chance that 19 percent of the people you hang out with have no job.

At the national level, the figures are quite telling. According the Bureau of Labor statistics here are the average unemployment rates in 2012 based on the level of education achieved:

Doctoral degree – 2.5 percent
Professional Degree – 2.1 percent
Master’s Degree – 3.5 percent
Bachelor’s Degree – 4.5 percent
Associate’s Degree – 6.2 percent
Some college – 7.7 percent
High School Diploma – 8.3 percent
Less than a High School Diploma – 12.4 percent

Now let’s throw in some more data for fun. Approximately 185,000 Hoosier kids are in schools labeled as D or F. There are close to 124,000 18-25 year olds without a high school diploma and another 574,000 25+ year olds without a high school diploma, meanwhile we have about 290,000 unemployed.

Okay, Abdul. What’s the moral of the story? The moral of the story is pretty simple. The better educated you are, the less likely you are to be out of work and on the government dole. And if we can get kids out of failing schools by whatever legal means necessary, they are less likely to be dropouts and less likely to be part of 290,000 people who are out of work.

Now, does a degree guarantee you won’t lose a job? Not at all. I am living proof of that when my former employer and I parted ways nearly two years ago. But I knew having a couple professional degrees under my belt as well as the drive and necessary survival skills to, as we used to say in old neighborhood in Chicago, get a good hustle going, would make life a lot easier. So if you have found yourself in the ranks of the unemployed, you might want to take a look at your education level and see if that’s part of what is keeping you there.

Indiana Senate Republicans this morning unveiled a budget plan that gives Governor Mike Pence a 3% tax cut, instead of the 10% cut he wanted.

Republican State Senator Luke Kenley says the proposal gives Hoosiers the tax relief the Governor wanted but also provides dollars for schools, infrastructure and keeps money in the bank in case of an economic downturn.

The Pence tax cut was not included in the House version of the budget.  Instead lawmakers in that chamber chose to speed up the phase out of the state’s inheritance tax.   Under the Senate plan he income tax rate goes from 3.4% to 3.3%.  The Governor’s proposal would have taken it to 3.04%.

Kenley says although they are only cutting income taxes by three percent there is nearly $500 million in total tax relief due to cuts in the corporate income tax, next year’s phase out of the inheritance tax and the cut in the financial institutions tax.

The plan also creates reserve funds for future road projects and the medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act.

Below is a breakdown of the main points what all three parties are proposing.

Overall spending

• Pence  – Approximately $29.2 billion over the biennium
• HRs – Approximately $30.076 billion over the biennium
• SRs – Approximate $29.7 billion over the biennium.

Reserves

• Pence – Capped at 12.5% for the biennium
• HRs – $1.9 Bil (12.6% in FY 2014), $2.1 Bil (13.9% in FY 2015)
• SRs –  $1.6 Bil (11.1% in FY 2014), $1.5 Bil (9.8% in FY 2015)

Tax cuts

• Pence – 10% cut in income tax
• HRs – Speed up phase out of inheritance tax to January 1, 2018 instead of January 1, 2022.
• SRs – 3% income tax cut.  Inheritance tax repealed January 1, 2013.  Continued reductions in corporate income tax and cut in Financial Institutions tax.

Education

• Pence – 2% potential increase, automatic 1% increase in first year, year two increase based on performance
• HRs – 3.3% total increase  ($344 million total), 2% increase in first year, 1% increase in year two.  Also an additional $16.7 mil to reward performance
• SRs –  3% total increase.  2% in year one, 1% in year 2.  $25 million in performance based funding.
• Both House and Governor’s plans fund Full-Day Kindergarten.

Roads

• Pence – One-time $347 million increase, from the surplus that would have gone to non pre-1996 teacher pensions.
• HRs –  $250 million permanent  increase by shifting dollars from state sales tax on gasoline
• SRs – $203 annual increase in roads.  $112 million for the state.  $101 million to locals provided they pass a wheel tax.

DCS

• Pence – $35 million more for caseworkers, supervisors and child protection hotline
• HRs – $40 million increase.
• SRs – $30 million increase.

You can see more details on the Senate budget here and here.

It speaks for itself.

Whenever the government tries to do anything that looks like it might tread into First Amendment territory, I tend to get a little concerned.  As someone who talks and writes for a living, that whole free speech concept is pretty important to me.  So my eyebrows arched a little when I started turning my attention away from the budget and toward Senate Bill 373, which would make it a crime to take videos or photos on a business or farm without permission if your intent is to defame or to directly or indirectly harm the business relationship between an agricultural or industrial operation and its customers.

Supporters of the measure say it is necessary to stop individuals from defaming farms and businesses with misleading videos and photographs.   Under SB 373, a person who took a photo or video of the farm/industrial operation with the property owner’s written consent would be eligible for a Class A misdemeanor and get up to a year in jail and hit with a $5,000 fine.  The penalty can avoided if the footage is turned over to law enforcement or a regulatory agency with 48 hours.

The legislation also creates the new crime of employment application fraud.  It would be a Class A misdemeanor for lying on a job application, if your intent is to defame the employer or harm his or her business relationships.

This legislation has constitutional challenge written all over it.

As my friends at Cornell University will tell you, “The most basic component of freedom of expression is the right of freedom of speech. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without interference or constraint by the government. The Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification for the interference with the right of free speech where it attempts to regulate the content of the speech.”

SB 373 is clearly content driven.   In addition, unlike other states that have criminal libel statutes in which the libel must have been proven, this legislation appears to go to the intent to commit libel or defamation.  To prove libel you have to show the information was not only false, but the defendant knew it was false and it was done with the intent to harm the plaintiff.   However, here is the catch: truth shall always be an adequate defense against libel and defamation.   In addition, there are what’s known as conditional privileges against libel such as statements made for the protection of the interests of a third person or statements made for the protection of common interest.

And if you didn’t think that wast complicated enough, here’s some more legal food for thought.  Some other defenses against libel and defamation include what’s called “substantial truth”.  Under that doctrine, not everything the defendant said must be true.  According to the digital media project, “minor factual inaccuracies will be ignored so long as the inaccuracies do not materially alter the substance or impact of what is being communicated. In other words, only the ‘gist’ or ‘sting’ of a statement must be correct.”    In other words, if I say farmer Dave beat his animals with a steel rod, but he actually used a wooden rod, I can beat (pardon the pun) the libel accusation.

This is just a real quick primer, libel and defamation themselves are pretty complicated, adding “attempted libel and defamation” is going to be a real big mess that will eventually end up in court and someone is going to end up with slop on their face,  and I am willing to bet the farm it won’t be the defendant.