One of the nice things about Organization Day is the chance to find out where lawmakers are on important issues.  While a lot of time has been consumed with the “right to work” debate, there appears to be real signs that something may happen with mass transit in Central Indiana.

From what I was able to gather from my conversations with Statehouse Republicans Tuesday there appears to be a real opportunity for mass transit to finally happen.  I will post my interviews next week, however in both the Indiana House and Senate attitudes appear to be changing.   I am told that House Ways and Means Chairman Jeff Espich, a long time skeptic of expanding mass transit, is open to the idea and wants to hear more this session from Central Indiana lawmakers.  On the Senate side, Republicans seem open to allowing the measure to move forward, but they want to see a more detailed plan.

If mass transit is going to happen in Central Indiana, then proponents are going to have to work like crazy to make it happen, because there will be no better time like there is right now.  One of the big hurdles will be how to pay for the expansion, by either an increase in the sales tax or local option income tax.  Another question will be how does that tax get levied?  Will it be a referendum by locals or a decision by local city or county councils?  Another hurdle will be getting buy-in from rural areas.   While someone one from Brownsburg, Zionsville or Danville might be open to a mass transit discussion, what about those folks in rural areas who would have to drive to get to any bus stop or train station.

However, perhaps the biggest hurdle for proponents will be how do they change the Hoosier mindset when it comes to the automobile.   From studying this issue for the past several years the problem is not the automobile, per se.  It is the freedom of mobility that comes with it.  That person from Greenwood or Greenfield may not want to give up their automobile if it complicates matters like picking up groceries on the way home or dropping off kids at school on the way to work.  Hoosiers like being able to have the freedom to come and go as they please and the automobile allows them to do that in a way a bus or train can’t.

While this may seem like a lot, and it is, this is a much better position for mass transit advocates to be in than at any other time.  At least they know at this point they may actually get a chance to answer and address those issues, because for the first time that I can recall, the train, or bus as the case may be, may finally get out of the station next session.

Although “right to work” dominated the talk around the State House Monday, Democratic Leader Pat Bauer got my attention when he unveiled the Democrats’ ‘Helping Hoosiers Now” plan.  The plan hits the usual Democratic themes of jobs, education and child protection services.  However what stopped me in my tracks was Bauer calling for vouchers for preschool.   Yes, in the same sentence I wrote “Bauer”, “voucher” and “preschool”.   You can pick your jaw up off the floor.

The same party that fled the state for five weeks, in part because of education reform is supporting vouchers, albeit for preschool.  But they are still supporting vouchers nonetheless.

Bauer said the voucher plan would be used to help promote early childhood education.  The vouchers would be used for low-income students to enroll in preschool education programs.  Bauer and the Democrats say the plan will help close the achievement gap by ensuring more Hoosier kids are prepared for kindergarten.  He says less than one-percent of Hoosier children are in state preschool.

Details on the program were scarce.  The Democratic Leader said the program would cost between $5 – $10 million annually and the money would come from the state surplus.  Bauer could not say whether the program would cover religious preschools or what other criteria would be used to determine eligibility.   But for now, that’s beside the point.

Democrats are on the record for supporting vouchers for low-income families to go toward education.  I am not sure how this conversion came about, but there are days when I don’t need to know why someone finally decided to come to the light.  I’m just glad they can finally see it.  Now if I could just get my Democratic friends to support vouchers for K-12 education, then we’ll be making progress.

The next thing you know they’ll be supporting right-to-work.

Indiana Statehouse Republicans Monday threw down the political gauntlet and said they were bringing “right to work” legislation to a vote and making it a priority this session. Democrats, as expected cried foul and said they will do whatever is necessary to stop the measure. Brian Bosma and David Long say they’re ready for Pat Bauer.    I’ve embedded audio from both sides so you can hear them in their own words.

Bosma and Long Announcement

Bosma and Long Q & A

Pat Bauer – Reporter Q & A is about 10 minutes into the audio

Jerry Torr

The nice thing about this is that it is going to make this session a lot of fun to blog about.

Over the weekend it was announced that Democrats had chosen District 7 City-County Councilor Maggie Lewis as President for next year.  Brian Mahern was chosen to fill the Vice-President slot and Vernon Brown will be the majority leader.  A couple of things.  First, if you subscribed to my political cheat sheet you already knew the day after the election that Lewis was going to be named Council President   You would have also known about the identity politics that had been going on behind the scenes.

Apparently the contest for President came down to Lewis and Mahern, the Blacks were supporting Lewis, most of the whites supporting Mahern.   Marion County Democratic Chairman Ed Treacy was reportedly backing Mahern for the spot, which is interesting since he was quick to call incumbent Mayor Greg Ballard a racist during the last campaign.  In addition, Angela Mansfield was not big on Brown being named for Majority Leader.  It’s no big secret that those two have hated each other for quite a while.

I was somewhat surprised that Brown was going for Majority Leader because all prior indicators were pointing to him running for Bill Crawford’s seat next year.   Something must have happened to change that, because Brown recently told a group of local pastors that he felt “he could best serve his constituents on the Council as opposed to the Statehouse”.  That’s political code speak for “this was going to be tougher than I anticipated”.

Back to Lewis.

I think she will be a good pick for the Democrats, not because of “history”, but  mostly because she is reasonable.  Lewis is not necessarily the most policy-driven member of the Council, but she has a good group of Councilors from whom she can draw some expertise. As I mentioned before,  Mary Moriarty Adams is good on budgets and public safety, Vop Osili on economic development and John Barth when it comes to neighborhoods.   The exodus of Jackie Nytes and Joanne Sanders is leaving a major policy and intellectual void on the Democrats’ side of the chamber.

One Lewis’ first tasks will be to manage who the Democrats will appoint as Council attorney.  Aaron Haith had the job last time and there are some white Democrats who had problems with him and don’t want him back.   Haith also burned some bridges when he attacked former Trustee Carl Drummer for taking a picture with Greg Ballard and accusing Drummer of disloyalty.   It turned out the photo was a couple years old; remind me to show you the e-mail exchange one day.    I would not be surprised if former city-controller and Lt. Governor Kathy Davis is appointed their Chief Fiscal officer.  Davis was at the last Council meeting and has resurfaced more frequently at a couple events.

Lewis will have a full plate of issues to address when she takes over in January.  Mayoral appointments, such as the Public Safety Director, expansion of charter schools, which many members of her party have opposed on philosophical grounds out of some misplaced support of Indianapolis Public Schools, redistricting (what more needs to be said), and the 800 lb gorilla in the room will be the anticipated $15 million decrease in declining city revenues which is expected to hit next year.  During the last budget cycle, Democrats called for cuts in the public safety budget to use for other city departments.  Next year there should be plenty of moaning and gnashing of political teeth to go around.

Perhaps the biggest challenge for Lewis will be to hold her caucus together for the next four years.  While most Council proposals routinely pass by 20-something votes, there are the occasional party-line measures.   Assuming the Republicans stick together on major issues Lewis will need to hold all 16 members of her caucus together.  That can be more difficult to do when the other party holds the Mayor’s office and can dangle a carrot or stick in front of one or two members.  And with the exception of removal from a committee there is not much a Council President can do to punish that member, when they don’t have the Mayor’s office to back them up.

I think Lewis’ strongest asset will be her demeanor.  If she can present herself as a reasonable voice on the Council she should represent her party well.  Unlike a Brian Mahern who never met a television camera or political posture he didn’t like or Monroe Gray who never met an ethical lapse he couldn’t avoid, Lewis does provide a fresh face for the Democrats.  And who knows, if she does a good enough job managing the Council, maybe she can make history in 4 years after Greg Ballard finishes his second term when other Democrats couldn’t.

Good luck, Madame President.

As Indiana lawmakers get ready to return to the Statehouse for Organization Day this Tuesday,  the big 800 lb. gorilla in the room is “right to work” (RTW).  Speculations and rumors have run amok over whether Republicans will take up the measure this session and whether Democrats will try to use every procedure in the rule book to stop it from seeing the light of day.  (This is the point where I shamelessly plug a subscription to my political “Cheat Sheet” for the latest inside gossip and rumor regarding the Statehouse.)

One of the big criticisms of RTW has been that it has been labelled as “right to work for less”, with the argument being that wages in right to work states are less than those in states that don’t have RTW laws.  That is one of those statements that is not entirely true.  Allow me to explain.*

The average weekly wages in RTW states is about $776.  In non-RTW states that amount is $908.  This the part where the anti-RTW crowd yells and screams about how RTW is a race to the bottom.  However when we make adjustments for Cost of Living (food, housing, utilities, health care, transportation and other goods and services), the weekly salary in RTW states is $822 a week and $821 in non-RTW states.  Part of this is based on cost of living.   On the surface, salaries in non-RTW states like California, New Jersey and Illinois are higher than Mississippi, South Carlina and Georgia, but those states also have much high costs of living.  There is a big world of difference between living on  $50,000 annually in Los Angeles versus living in Charleston, SC.  The data also shows that the top 3 states for growth in personal income from 1999 – 2009 were RTW states: Wyoming, North Dakota and Louisiana.   Michigan, a non-RTW state was at the bottom of the list.

I have never believed anyone should be forced to join a union as a condition of their employment.  If  a union is providing a quality service, then members should voluntarily sign up for it.   That aside, that was not the motivation for my writing this blog post. My motivation was the argument that RTW drives down wages and costs of living.   I don’t know if you’ve been to Texas or Florida, but those places aren’t cheap to live and they are also RTW states. The point of RTW is not to return to the days of sweat shops, it is to create jobs and economic development.   If lawmakers fail to pass RTW that’s one thing, but at the very least, we should have the vote and be done with this issue once and for all.  However, in a world of 9% unemployment, we should be doing everything possible to create jobs.

* The basis for my research are: “Rich States, Poor States”, ALEC, 4th Edition,  http://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/cost_of_living/index.stm
Average Weekly Wages – http://www.bls.gov/sae/home.htm

The usual problem with zealotry is its inability to compromise, especially when it is getting 90-percent of what it wants.  Most reasonable people understand that in politics, when you are working toward a goal there comes a point where what you get is as good as it will get so you take it and move on.  The anti-smoking Indianapolis crowd is at that point.

They were politically out-foxed this week when outgoing Indianapolis City-Council President Ryan Vaughn introduced an ordinance that would ban smoking in all bar and taverns in the city, with the exception of hookah bars, tobacco shops, private clubs and cigar bars (full disclosure, I love those places).

By introducing his ordinance, Vaughn has not only taken the number of smoking establishments in the city down to about 60, but he has also boxed in his opponents by offering up the only measure that the Mayor will sign.  The anti-smoking crowd was not ready for that.  In fact, they weren’t expecting Greg Ballard to win re-election. (See my latest political cheat sheet for details and how politics can make for interesting political bedfellows).

Another way I can tell the anti-smoking crowd was caught off guard is that the usual political arrogance that comes with their position was notably missing from their news conference.  My theory is that they don’t have the votes to override a Mayoral veto.   Under Council rules you need a 2/3rds majority to override a veto, or 20 votes, and they don’t have them.   If they had the votes, they would have gone ahead as if nothing was happening.

The only bright spot for the anti-smoking zealots is that the group, Indiana Bar Owners, is supporting their position for a total ban.  Their logic is that if they can’t be grandfathered into any new proposal then they would rather not see smoking anywhere in the city.  Not a ringing endorsement of the smoke-free folks, but an example of of someone expecting the political reality on the day.

If the anti-smoking people are smart, they will take the Vaughn-Ballard proposal and smile and shut up.  They’re getting 90-percent of what they want.  And unless they go into a hookah bar, cigar bar, private club or tobacco shop will never have to worry about being exposed to secondhand smoke and they will also know the only people being exposed to secondhand smoke are doing it by choice.

They couldn’t take the hint earlier this year at the Indiana Statehouse because they couldn’t compromise so they walked away with nothing.  Hopefully this time around they can take a hint and realize this proposal is as good as it is going to get.   They love to talk about how a smoking ban will save lives, I think they should recognize that they have one, and move on with theirs.

As State officials get ready to remove the remaining Occupy Indy protestors from the Statehouse grounds, audio obtained by Indiana Barrister & IndyPolitics.Org  shows a group that is disorganized and realizes it poses a threat to public safety and security, even though only a handful of protestors occupy the south side of the Capitol.

According to state officials a pregnant woman was injured at a recently rally and authorities had remove a generator and several gas containers.

This problem is stemming from the fact that Occupy Indy has invited  homeless people to participate in their movement and stand in for protestors when the weather was warm to help boost their numbers, but now that temperatures have cooled, the organization isn’t quite sure what to do.

IndyPolitics.Org has obtained audio from a November 9th webinar of a conversation between the Occupy Indy protestors and their “home base”.

Occupy Indy #1

• 1:19 – Homeless described as “not nice” and not feeling safe around them.
• 1:52 – Occupy Indy admits they have homeless people working their “operation”
• 3:45 – Occupy Indy admits how disorganized they are and claims things have fallen apart.
• 6:45 – Occupy Indy calls the homeless their “billboard”
• 12:15 – Occupy Indy talks about occupy Lucas Oil Stadium on Super Bowl Sunday

Occupy Indy #2

• 3:05 – Occupy Indy organizers accuse homeless of not communicating that they were hungry or cold.
• 4:50 – Occupy Indy calls the homeless “rogue players” in the movement
• 7:05 – Occupy Indy organizers tell homeless why they can’t physically be there 24 hours a day/7 days a week.
• 11:00 – Occupy Indy organizers admit to their complete disorganization and effectiveness.

Occupy Indy #3

• 0:38 – Occupy Indy admits their battle slogan is not solidarity, but “great divide” and that they are way off course.
• 2:40 – Occupy Indy acknowledges it has created a dangerous situation by bringing in the homeless.

Outgoing City-County Council President says he will introduce a smoking ban ordinance that Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard will sign.  The proposal bans smoking in bars and taverns but leaves exemptions for cigar bars, tobacco shops, hookah bars and private clubs.

More importantly he ordinance can be passed in time for the Super Bowl.  Under Indiana law there is a waiting period for ordinances that go into effect which have a penalty attached to them.  Vaughn says this one will meet that requirement.

You can hear Vaughn’s comments here.

Vaughn says the proposal can pass if Democrats are on board. Smoke Free Indy advocates have been pushing for a total smoking ban in all Indianapolis establishments.

Indianapolis homeless advocates are pushing for a sales tax increase for programs they say will help combat the problem.  In a draft copy of a report slated t to be released this week, the Coalition for Homelessness Intervention and Prevention (CHIP) says a one-eighth percent increase in the Marion County’s sales tax would generate $9.6 million to combat homelessness annually and a .25 percent increase of one cent would generate $19.3 million annually. They says the sales tax increase would cost the average consumer between $11.78 to $23.57 a year.

CHIP argues the money raised from the tax increase could be used to pay for more case workers, housing for the mentally ill and provide stable housing for homeless families.  City officials and state officials seemed cool to the idea of any possible tax increase in the current economic environment.

In its program CHIP also suggests going after township trustee surplus funds, which reportedly is in the $25 million range.  CHIP argues that trustees routinely deny benefits to the homeless because they have no address and can’t prove they live in the township.

CHIP estimates there are approximately 1,600 homeless individuals in Indianapolis.

Now that the election is over we move into the speculative phase of what’s next for the Indianapolis City-County Council.  Democrats are getting ready to assume control of the body come January 1, and while they have a 16-13 majority, they do not control the Mayor’s office which will make their agenda tough to push through.

For example, there may be enough votes on the Council for an expanded smoking ban, no one is quite sure exactly how expanded that smoking ban will be.  I think it’s fair to say cigar bars, private clubs, hookah bars and tobacco shops will be excluded in any new proposal, but will all other bars and taverns be included immediately or will they be phased in over time?

On the more concrete issue of the budget, some in-coming Councilors have talked about re-opening the budget and moving money around.  Good luck with that one.  They may not be aware of the fact that most of the Council’s budget passed with at 20 votes from Republicans and Democrats, so the will may not be there to go back and revisit certain items.

I can see a big fight developing over redistricting.  The Council was compelled by law to draw new precinct maps to fit the new U.S. House and State Legislative Districts.  However, the question is will new maps be approved prior to the end of the year.  If Democrats redraw the maps for next year, will Mayor Greg Ballard sign them?  And life gets even more interesting in the fact that if you take out the at-large council seats, Republicans actually have a 13-12 majority on the Council.

But while there is potential for a lot of contention on the Council, I do think there is a lot of room for compromise and key people the administration can work with:  Mary Moriarty Adams when it comes to public safety,  Vop Osili when it comes to economic development and John Barth on neighborhoods.  I think we can expect some fireworks from time to time, which will make life interesting; especially for people like me who follow and write about this stuff every day.

And a friendly reminder for all parties;  no matter what the make-up is of a legislative branch, if the Chief Executive Officer puts a target on your back, it’s best to make immediate haste.