In the ongoing flooding across the state, communities along the Wabash and Tippecanoe Rivers have suffered the hardest. However, the South Bend region - from Elkhart to Plymouth to downtown South Bend is partly underwater as well.
Here is a photo of Howard Park - the line down the middle of the river is actually the balustrade that runs along the river walk in normal conditions.
(image from the South Bend Area Blog)
I took this photo on Friday night to try to show the huge volume of water going over the dam downtown.
Our house is right on the river across from Leeper Park (which also flooded) - but luckily, on our side the bank is a good ten to fifteen feet up and remained high and dry.
The South Bend Tribune has several image galleries of local flooding online: Gallery1, Gallery2, Gallery3.
January 14th, 2008
The legal challenge to the much-debated Indiana “Voter ID” law has finally been heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
An initial reaction from election law scholar Rick Hasen at Election Law Blog:
“If Justice Kennedy is indeed troubled by certain aspects of the Indiana law (such as the two-trip requirement for indigent voters), the best result from the point of view of discouraging election litigation is to strike down the law, pointing out the flaws with the law, and telling the Indiana legislature to pass a revised law without the objectionable portions. This is what happened, to some extent, with the Georgia voter id law. A court struck it down, pointing to its most vulnerable sections, and the Georgia legislature rewrote the law, making it somewhat less severe.
Some have called this case Bush v. Gore II because of the possible 5-4 split on the Court, with a 5 justice majority seen issuing an opinion that helps Republicans and harms Democrats. I see a different parallel: Just as Bush v. Gore has spawned a great deal of election law litigation (statistics in my earlier cited articles), Crawford too has that potential. It is not a result that would be good for the country.”
Much more commentary is appearing now that oral arguments have concluded. See SCOTUSBlog and Election Law @ Moritz.
January 9th, 2008
If you aren’t sure what exactly a CAFO is, or wonder what all the fuss about factory-scale farms is about, take a few minutes to read this new piece in Rolling Stone called “Pork’s Dirty Secret: The nation’s top hog producer is also one of America’s worst polluters”:
“Smithfield’s holding ponds — the company calls them lagoons — cover as much as 120,000 square feet. The area around a single slaughterhouse can contain hundreds of lagoons, some of which run thirty feet deep. The liquid in them is not brown. The interactions between the bacteria and blood and afterbirths and stillborn piglets and urine and excrement and chemicals and drugs turn the lagoons pink.”
The article goes into graphic detail, focusing on what the factory pork industry has done to the people of North Carolina:
“It was the biggest environmental spill in United States history, more than twice as big as the Exxon Valdez oil spill six years earlier. The sludge was so toxic it burned your skin if you touched it, and so dense it took almost two months to make its way sixteen miles downstream to the ocean. From the headwaters to the sea, every creature living in the river was killed. Fish died by the millions.”
Some of the most descriptive passages focus on the unique, toxic stench associated with large operations:
“I’ve probably smelled stronger odors in my life, but nothing so insidiously and instantaneously nauseating. It takes my mind a second or two to get through the odor’s first coat. The smell at its core has a frightening, uniquely enriched putridity, both deep-sweet and high-sour. I back away from it and walk back to the car but I remain sick — it’s a shivery, retchy kind of nausea — for a good five minutes.”
It’s important to recognize that the stench, pollution, and runoff from CAFO’s and similar industrial livestock operations are not the normal “farm smells” that most Hoosiers are very familiar with:
“We are used to farm odors,” says one local farmer. “These are not farm odors.” Sometimes the stink literally knocks people down: They walk out of the house to get something in the yard and become so nauseous they collapse. When they retain consciousness, they crawl back into the house.”
Governor Daniels has made development of factory farms in Indiana the centerpiece of his agricultural policy, and many communities across the state are struggling to cope with the science and politics of permitting new operations seeking to locate in their backyards.
The Indiana Department of Agriculture, with the Indiana Land Resouces Council, is currently conducting “listening sessions”to develop model local ordinances regarding land use and zoning to apply to factory farm operations, but the Department of Agriculture’s announcement of these meetings specifically points out that the “Indiana Land Resources Council will not consider a farmland preservation program or environmental regulations” as part of their recommendations.
Several bills dealing with CAFO’s have been filed this session (inculding HB1197 and SB447 ), and the topic was raised with IDEM Commissioner Easterly at our last Environmental Affairs committee meeting. The Commissioner said IDEM would support a policy of requiring local approval of CAFOs before IDEM issues its permits. However, he also felt it was currently too difficult to discern what exactly would constitute official “local approval.” That may be an area we are able to do some work on this session.
For more information, see:
Kemplog - day-to-day coverage of CAFO issues in Indiana
Grace Factory Farm Project - anti-CAFO
Farm Bureau - generally pro-CAFO, or anti-regulation
Journal of Extension - generally neutral research into all sorts of agricultural issues
January 21st, 2007
The first week of session has ended after a typically slow start. The filing deadline for legislation in the House is next Tuesday, and many bills are still stuck in drafting or having fiscal impact statements prepared. The most up-to-date list of filed bills in both the House and Senate can be accessed here.
Since many bills have yet to be assigned to committees, legislators typically use the first week seeking co-sponsors for their bills and working to shore up support for their proposals. Once all the bills have been published, the committee schedules will rapidly fill up.
I have scheduled an organizational meeting for the Environmental Affairs Committee next Wednesday. Commissioner Tom Easterly of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management has agreed to appear and update the committee members on current IDEM projects, rulemaking, and legislative requests. The meeting will be broadcast live on the internet on Wednesday, January 17, 2006 at 10:30am. You will be able to access the webcast here (click on “Watch video from House Committee Room 156c”).
Let me know if you have any questions you would like the Committee to ask Commissioner Easterly.
January 11th, 2007
The 115th General Assembly is now officially underway.
I know I have been bad about updating here over the interim, but will try to get back into regular posting during the session.
The first few days of session are mostly administrative. The bill filing deadline for the House is not until the fourth meeting day in January – which I believe is next Monday. So committee chairs do not have much to work with yet as far as scheduling goes.
The House committee chairs met today upon adjournment to discuss general committee policy for the session. The main point of agreement was in re-establishing an orderly business schedule. Last session got a little out of control – bills piled up on the calendar in a spectacular heap that resulted in massive backlogs at various deadline days. Many bills died due to lack of time, in spite of regular late-night session days.
At the committee level, we will likely implement a policy of scheduling committees several days ahead of time to avoid much of the last-minute rush. For example, I am Chairman of the House Environmental Affairs Committee, which meets on Wednesdays. I will be turning in my schedule request by the end of Thursday so members can be notified and bill packets can be prepared on Monday, and the meeting can be announced publicly at least 24 hours ahead of time on Tuesday morning.
The administrative side of the Legislature is not particularly exciting, but a well-run Legislature generally results in better legislation, so I hope some of the changes and tweaks we are making will be effective.
Feel free to leave a comment if there is anything in particular you would like me to post about as the session progresses.
January 8th, 2007
I know that things have been slow here at ryandvorak.com lately, but real-life has kept me somewhat busy and away from the computer.
Like Doug over at Masson’s Blog, Angie and I recently bought a house. It’s a 101 year-old beauty right on the St. Joseph River in downtown South Bend. Buying the house, moving in, unpacking, and generally futzing around with the place has absorbed a great deal of my spare time.
Now that we are nicely settled in, we finally have time to take our belated honeymoon. Almost eight months after the wedding, Angie and I are going on our long-planned trip to Europe for two weeks – so I will not be updating here again until August.
In the meantime, if you need any assistance, please feel free to contact my office while I am away.
I hope everyone is enjoying their summer!
July 19th, 2006
The Muncie Star Press is reporting that Gov. Daniels will be “re-populating” the Indiana Land Resources Council sometime in August of this year:
The state will re-establish the Indiana Land Resources Council (ILRC) and take other steps to preserve Indiana’s farm land, including drafting a model zoning ordinance for local governments.
Sarah Simpson, manager of regulatory affairs for the Indiana State Department of Agriculture (ISDA), announced the administration’s plans to save farm land during a recent videoconference broadcast to 25 locations throughout Indiana.
The Governor effectively dissolved the board in January of 2005 by asking for the resignations of its staff and members just before it was to present recommendations on planning policy to Lt. Governor Skillman.
In 1999, the Legislature established the Council (IC 15-7-9) to study and make recommendations on land use and planning issues. After it was dissolved, I introduced legislation to establish a new “Growth and Development Task Force” (HB 1242) to re-establish a working group in this important field. HB 1242 did not pass, but its goals included making several policy recommendations that could be picked up by the ILRC:
(1) Ensuring a process for making development decisions that are predictable, fair, and cost effective.
(2) Establishing ways to direct development toward existing communities and existing infrastructure.
(3) Integrating fiscal, transportation, energy, and environmental policies with land use planning.
(4) Encouraging the preservation of farmland, open space, and critical environmental areas.
I hope the new ILRC looks to an integrated planning approach that not only creates quality development, but also helps keep taxes down by fully utilizing our existing infrastructure.
The initial comments on the goals of the new ILRC are encouraging:
“We have some exciting objectives for the council, (including) state incentives … and providing a model ordinance and land-use tools to local government,” Simpson said. “We have a very aggressive initiative for that council when they are reconvened.”
Indiana needs a land-use strategy because the rapid loss of prime agricultural land to development compromises the future ability to feed the nation; reduces open space, wildlife habitat and groundwater recharge; creates rural-suburban conflicts; and requires the costly extension of roads, sewers and other infrastructure, Simpson said.
I look forward to following the Council’s progress. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments about the ILRC or land use policy in general.
June 21st, 2006
The Legislative Council is a joint committee made up of members of both the House and Senate. It serves primarily as a basic administrative committee for the Legislative branch – addressing things like personnel, space utilization, and data processing issues. Another function of the Council is to establish the Interim Study Committees that hold hearings after the Legislature has technically adjourned.
Some of these committees are created by the Legislative Council in response to requests by members or to address pressing policy issues. Other committees have already been established by statute and vary in number from year to year.
Though it is not yet fully up to date for 2006, information on all interim committee membership and schedules can be accessed here.
This week, Legislative Council met to establish a new set of study committees and ask for recommendations from statutory committees. These committees will be meeting throughout the summer and fall this year. The resolution passed by the Council does not appear to be online yet, so I have compiled a list of new topics assigned to the various committees from the printed material that I have:
Interim Committees
Interim Study Committee on Public Health and Safety Matters
-Railroad labor camps
-Coal mine safety
-Smoke detectors and sprinklers in health facilities
-Food handling regulations for tax-exempt organizations
Interim Study Committee on Government Administration and Regulatory Matters
-Impact of privatization of non-health related services performed or administered by state agencies
-Impact of privatization on state employees who have been laid off
-License branch operations and closings
-Eminent domain issues (including the use by small, private utilities)
-Various matters involving non-profit entities
Interim Study Committee on Criminal Justice Matters
-Rights of “next of kin” in situations involving criminal activity
-Improvements to Indiana’s background check system
-Coroner qualification issues
Interim Study Committee on Children’s Issues
-Child labor
-Children’s health issues with emphasis on diabetes and obesity
Interim Study Committee on Alcoholic Beverage Issues
-Alcoholic beverage display requirements
-Clerk licensure and training
-Other various issues that were not resolved during the last session
Statutory Committees
Code Revision Commission
-Using respectful language when referring to people with disabilities in code
Counterterrorism and Security Council
-Security at ports, freight yards, and rail yards
Commission on Courts
-Appelate issues
-Establishment of a dedicated fund for court fees
-Establishment of a court with exclusive jurisdiction over commercial driver’s license cases
Indiana Economic Development Corporation
-Whether to develop incentives to encourage film, television, and new media production
Environmental Quality Service Council
-Indiana’s impact on Lake Michigan water quality and participation in the Great Lakes Protection Fund
-Regional sewer districts
Health Finance Commission
-Cost of delivering health care to diabetics
-Health coverage systems used in other jurisdictions
-Monitor and report on the impact of the privatization of health services performed or administered by state agencies (including the impact on laid off employees)
-Advisability of a certification program for surgical technicians
Health Policy Advisory Committee
-Restraint of trade issues associated with contact lenses
-Advisability of consolidating all the various health-related study committees
Select Joint Commission on Medicaid Oversight
-Medicaid reimbursement rates
Commission on Mental Health
-Social, emotional, and behavioral health screening of children
Natural Resources Study Committee
-Park issues, including development of Rail/Trail corridors
Pension Management Oversight Commission
-Police and fire pensions
-Factors used to compute public employee pensions
-Funding sources for pension relief for municipalities
-Issues related to the 1977 Police and Fire pension and disability fund
Regulatory Flexibility Committee
-Renewable energy development
Sentencing Policy Study Committee
-Impact of sealing and expunging criminal arrest and adjudication records, including the impact on employment and recidivism rates
Commission on State Tax and Financing Policy
-Eligibility for certain military benefits
-Expanding eligibility for the property tax deduction for low-income senior citizens by removing AV criteria
-Child welfare system funding
-Issues pertaining to public transportation and commerce
For the statutory committees, the above list summarizes new issues assigned for sudy. The Interim Study Committee page (assuming it is updated at some point) has a list of all the committees, with reference to their statutory authorization which details their full scope.
June 15th, 2006
Back in December, I wrote about the emerging emerald ash borer infestation in Indiana, and how almost 10 million ash trees in Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio had already been destroyed by the insects.
Unfortunately, the South Bend Tribune is reporting that ash borers have now shown up in St. Joseph County:
The Indiana Department of Natural Resources announced at a news conference Monday that the insects have been found in Granger… the preliminary estimate is the insects have been at that site for three to five years.
If you have ash trees in your area that you would like to save, make sure your neighbors are aware of the potential options for treating trees that are still healthy. The image below is linked to an aerial map of the one-mile zone around the latest infestation in Granger:
The Tribune article describes how preventative treatment can be an option for some trees:
Jodie Ellis, exotic insects education coordinator for Purdue University, said there is a chance that if an infestation is caught early, treatment with insecticides that contain imidacloprid can stop the damage.
“But if it (a tree) is already infested heavily, it probably will not survive,” she said.
It’s also up to homeowners to decide if they want to take their chances with a healthy ash tree, use insecticides to protect it or cut it down. Protecting a tree with insecticides can cost from about $50 to $200 a year.
To help stop the spread of this insect, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio have created a joint website to disseminate more information about the threat at: www.emeraldashborer.info.
Additional information is available below:
Indiana DNR Division of Entomology and Plant Pathology
Purdue Entomology Extension Inormation
National Invasive Species Council
The Global Invasive Species Initiative
June 13th, 2006
On April 27, 2006, the Environmental Crimes Task Force conducted its third meeting. The Task Force was created to re-draft Indiana’s current environmental crimes statute (IC 13-30-6-1), which simply creates a D felony for any knowing, intentional, or reckless violation of any Indiana environmental law.
As I mentioned in my discussion on the Task Force’s first meeting last year:
The concern is that the statute is so overly broad that it could be found unconstitutional under the void for vagueness doctrine, the rule of lenity, and the fair notice requirement of due process.
In 2002, the Indiana Supreme Court in Healthscript, Inc. v. State (770 N.E.2d 810) found a Medicaid fraud statute unconstitutional on similar grounds. In fact, the environmental crimes statute would probably be considered even more broad and vague than the Medicaid statute that was overturned in Healthscript.
In fact, Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) Commissioner Tom Easterly has now reported that those very issues have been raised by the defense in the Department’s two most recent attempts to prosecute environmental crimes.
The Task Force’s second meeting last year was mainly occupied with a review of Indiana criminal law for members who were not familiar with it, and a comprehensive look at other states’ environmental crimes statutes. You can read more about that meeting here.
Our third meeting was another opportunity for the Task Force to narrow down our options and take a more specific direction.
The issue of prosecutorial authority came up again at this meeting. Currently, elected prosecutors have primary jurisdiction to prosecute all criminal offenses. In some instances, other offices can provide assistance – such as Secretary of State help with securities fraud cases, and Attorney General assistance with Medicaid fraud.
Although there were some suggestions to give primary prosecutorial authority on environmental cases to some statewide office, in the end the Task Force seemed to agree that local prosecutors should retain their existing authority. We may end up recommending that attorneys or investigators from IDEM should be allowed to be deputized by local prosecutors that request their assistance in cases.
The Task Force also came to a consensus that the environmental crimes portion of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/Tit. XII) could serve as a decent model for our work. It is drafted as a modern criminal statue – spelling out the elements of specific crimes, and differentiating between levels of intent.
However, Illinois only focuses on hazardous waste issues. We have found that most state statutes in this area are fairly limited in scope – usually addressing only one or two types of possible environmental crimes. This is probably because these statutes are usually drafted in response to some particularly outrageous incident, involving one type of crime (like toxic waste dumping).
Since we are looking at creating our statute from scratch, Indiana has the opportunity to create one of the most modern and comprehensive environmental crimes statutes in the country. Task Force member Sue Shadley suggested enumerating specific crimes in categories that correspond to existing Indiana environmental law, such as air, water, solid waste, etc. Commissioner easterly suggested possibly including a separate category for drinking water to correspond with the Safe Drinking Water Act.
My focus thus far has been in trying to make sure our statute adheres to the elements of Indiana criminal law. Unlike other states, Indiana does not have any “negligent” crimes – only those that are knowing, intentional, or reckless.
It is important that we structure the statute to conform with existing criminal law – both to encourage prosecutors to make use of the statute, and to create a clear framework for the public to understand.
The Task Force’s next meeting is scheduled for June 22, 2006. At that time we will hear feedback from Illinois officials on how they feel about enforcement of their statute. We will also begin applying the basic framework of the Illinois statute to Indiana code, and adopt more specific elements of environmental crimes.
Feel free to let me know if you have any questions or input on the Task Force’s progress.
June 9th, 2006
Over the last few weeks, I took a short break from updating the website, but I am ready to get back to more regular postings.
One of the things I enjoy doing once session has adjourned is visiting schools to talk to classes about state government. A particularly impressive class of 4th graders at St. Monica’s School in Mishawaka has even gone so far as to create their own detailed constitution.
They were a great group with many questions, and their constitution is quite a detailed document. You can read the St. Monica’s 4th Grade Constitution here.
Another fun event recently was the annual Achievement Forum Roast in South Bend. I had the (mis)fortune of being subjected to a roasting by my own father, St. Joseph County Prosecutor Michael Dvorak. Luckily, I wasn’t the only one on the menu – even former Governor Joe Kernan got his share that night.
Angie and I are also in the process of buying a new house, and we are both excited to move in toward the end on the month.
Official business does continue during the summer months, however, and the Environmental Crimes Task Force has already held its first meeting of the interim. I will be posting an update on the progress made at that meeting sometime this week.
In the meantime, please continue to let me know if I can be of any assistance.
June 6th, 2006
The 2006 Indiana primary elections are now over, and I am happy to report that I prevailed in my own contest with 92% of the vote.
The South Bend Tribune writes:
Receiving an overwhelming majority of the vote, Ryan Dvorak said he was pleased with his results in Tuesday’s primary election.
“I thought we’d leave it up to the voters,” he said. “I think if you communicate with the voters in your district, they will make the right decisions.”
He handily won the Democratic nomination to retain his seat as District 8 state representative…
The Tribune also published the picture below of me and County Council president Rafael Morton chatting at the West Side Democratic Club after the polls had closed.
Full coverage of my 8th House District Democratic primary race can be found at:
Dvorak defeats Snyder – South Bend Tribune
Dvorak Wins in Democratic Primary for 8th District Rep. – WSBT-TV (with video)
Dvorak Wins Primary Challenge – Fox 28-TV
Election follies in Roseland – WNDU-TV (toward the end, with video)
For additional election results, the South Bend Tribune has a full list of local returns available here, and the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette has a listing of statewide contested primaries in Congressional and State Legislative races available here.
May 3rd, 2006
Previous Posts
Welcome! I created this website to communicate with my constituents on developments with issues important to Indiana…