Most business in the House this week is taking place in the committees, as bills that have been sent over from the Senate are being considered.
Yesterday, the Environmental Affairs Committee unanimously passed two bills. SB 22 applies pipeline safety laws to hazardous liquids and carbon dioxide fluid, and SB 146 deals with property transfer disclosure forms.
A third bill, SB 234, was held over for a vote at the next committee meeting. The bill deals with several aspects of environmental rulemaking, but it needs a few technical amendments, and Chairman David Wolkins (R – Winona Lake) indicated he would like time to consider more possible amendments for the bill.
Today I will be working in two more committees. The Committee on Courts and Criminal Code has the following bills on the calendar:
SB 5 – Makes disorderly conduct within 500 feet of a funeral a Class D felony.
SB 6 – Modifies several sex offense provisions, including lifetime parole and GPS monitoring for some offenders.
SB 83 – Creates a mandatory D Felony for some classes of resisting law enforcement with a deadly weapon and some motor vehicle offenses resulting in death or injury.
SB 168 – Allows a county prosecutor to refer some Medicaid related crimes to the Attorney General for prosecution.
SB 246 – Expands definition of “sexually violent predator” among other issues. (This bill has been carried over from the last committee meeting and will be amended.)
Later in the afternoon, the Committee on Utilities and Energy will be considering these bills:
SB 69 – Changes governance provisions of rural telephone cooperatives.
SB 72 – Allows the IURC to meet in executive session in some instances.
SB 353 – Creates several incentives and deductions for biodiesel and ethanol.
Some of the bills listed above may end up being held over for additional consideration, pending the outcome of committee discussion.
February 15th, 2006
A bronze bust of former Governor Frank O’Bannon was officially dedicated today. It was placed in an alcove outside the Senate chamber on the thrid floor of the Statehouse.
O’Bannon, who passed away in 2003 midway through his second term in office, served eighteen years in the Senate, and then presided over the Senate chamber as Lieutenant Governor for eight years. His father Robert served in the Senate for twenty years before Frank.
The Indianapolis Star has a brief biography of the Governor available here.
February 13th, 2006
If you get the chance, take a minute to read Governor Daniels’ statement on the acceptance of Cintra-Maquerie’s bid to buy the Indiana Toll Road. Putting aside the substance of his remarks, the Governor’s exuberant tone and use of superlative is interesting:
After closing, we will deposit this astonishing sum, equaling more than a decade of new construction funding at the current level, into a new trust fund, to be invested as fast as legally and humanly possible in the biggest building program in state history. The Hoosier Heartland Corridor, a non-stop US 31, new Ohio River bridges, I-69, the Fort to Port highway, the Gary-Chicago Airport, and hundreds more projects will all change overnight from wishes to certainties. The money will be in the bank. At last, we can stop dreaming and start digging…
Today marks an extraordinary moment in state history. A breakthrough like this may come but once in a public service lifetime…
That speech reminded me of a much earlier period in Indiana history about which I recently read in the book, The Centennial History of the Indiana General Assembly¹. The book notes the dawn of a long-past era that began with a similar tone:
In March, 1827, Congress donated land (to Indiana) for a road from Lake Michigan to the Ohio River…
The gift led Governor James Brown Ray to try to inspire the 11th General Assembly with a sense of the momentousness of the opportunity. Ray… estimated the total worth of the land grant at $1.8 million. He told lawmakers in his message to the 1827-1828 session that not for another fifty years, “perhaps never,” would Indiana have such a chance to construct internal improvements on a scale capable of producing “a revenue that shall relieve our fellow citizens from taxation…” Lawmakers, sure to be interested in any scheme with such magical properties as to make taxes obsolete, accepted the grants… and committed to building the road…
According to the history, the General Assembly then helpfully proceeded with “three years of bitter debate,” which, of course, bled over into the political arena:
While no majority could be achieved regarding specifics until 1832, there was near unanimity that internal improvement projects should be undertaken. The mood that gripped citizens and politicians was reflected in a couplet used by the successful candidate for a House seat from Franklin County in 1828:
If internal improvements you’d wish to go on
You’ll be safe in electing old Daniel St. John.
Unfortunately, despite the bold plans and campaign promises, the “improvements mania” era did not end well for Indiana:
…Speaker of the House Samuel Judah delivered the System’s epitaph in 1841: “Here then is the end of our golden dreams. Here the consummation of all those visionary schemes… developed in the Wabash and Erie Canal, expanded in the system of 1836, and… terminated in bankruptcy, dishonor, and disgrace.
Historical perspective can always be helpful when considering the issues of the present day.
The Centennial History of the Indiana General Assembly is no longer in print, but my wonderful wife managed to track down a copy for me as a gift. I am not finished reading it yet, but I highly recommend it to anyone interested in Indiana history.
¹Justin E. Walsh, The Centennial History of the Indiana General Assembly, 1816-1978 (Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Bureau, 1987), 28-35.
February 8th, 2006
I had the opportunity to appear with my fellow blogger State Representative Steve Heim (R-Culver) on the television show “Politically Speaking” this past Sunday.
The WNIT show is hosted by veteran South Bend Tribune columnist Jack Colwell, who spent all of Sunday’s episode discussing the “Major Moves” transportation plan with us.
Representative Heim and I disagree on the merits of the proposal, but I was glad to have a spirited discussion, and I think we both enjoyed the experience.
Meanwhile, the South Bend Tribune continues to weigh in on the controversial proposal:
It is hard to understand state Rep. Jackie Walorski’s explanation for why St. Joseph County was left out of the economic development area created by her amendment to House Bill 1008.
The Lakeville Republican blamed county officials for failing to engage her in discussions about joining an economic development area. County officials countered that there was no development area to discuss until Walorski introduced her amendment…
We continue to believe that authorization to lease the Toll Road should not be passed in this General Assembly session. More time is needed to properly understand this proposal. Walorski, who represents a portion of St. Joseph County in addition to a portion of Elkhart County, first had vowed that she would not vote for HB 1008. She was right to oppose the measure. But then she announced that she had changed her mind. We are sure that a great deal of pressure was applied in order to persuade her to vote for giving the governor authority to lease the Toll Road.
While the exclusion of St. Joseph County from an effort to make the switch more palatable was bad, one thing would be worse: leaving St. Joseph County out of the final version of the Toll Road bill.
February 7th, 2006
Thursday night was the deadline for final passage of House bills.
The next step in the legislative process is for Senate bills to be assigned to House committees, and House bills to be assigned to Senate committees.
Each chamber can choose to amend, pass or simply disregard the other chamber’s legislation. Typically, many bills are modified from their original form, and many never receive a hearing in the other chamber. Very few bills will move through the process unchanged.
The bill moving to the Senate with the most financial impact on our state is HB 1008, the authorizing legislation for the Governor’s “Major Moves” plan to sell the Indiana Toll Road, build the new I-69 as a private toll road, and authorization for even more as-yet-unknown privatization projects.
The House floor debate on the measure was said to be one of the longest in decades. However, the four hours spent on Wednesday was not nearly enough time.
As pointed out by the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, not even the bill’s author knows all the potential implications of the proposal:
Borror had trouble answering some of the questions during the debate and at one point had to concede he hadn’t read the entire operator’s contract.
I will provide a more detailed examination of the Toll Road contract and the authorizing legislation in a few days. Until then, you can read the latest news on the issue at www.tollroadforsale.com.
February 3rd, 2006
Yesterday was a marathon of second reading amendments in the House. With over 170 amendments on the calendar, the House convened at 10am and, aside from a short lunch break, stayed in session until almost 11pm.
Bills and amendments eligible for consideration are distributed to Members in their mailboxes just off the floor of the House. Below is a picture of a stack of just some of the amendments and bills that were on the calendar for Monday.
The deadline for filing amendments is just two hours before session convenes. So many amendments were being distributed after session had begun. This is one of the problems with the compressed schedule of the “short” session. Digesting all of the provisions in the amendments is a time consuming task, and the individual caucuses usually must recess for up to several hours just to be able to go over all of the provisions before we vote on them.
Around 7pm, we were able to take a twenty minute dinner break to line up for pizza that was brought in and stacked along the back of the chamber.
The calendar for today is at least as long as yesterday’s, and the Speaker has said we will move on to bills eligible for third reading (final passage) if we finish all of the amendments. So another late night is likely.
One of the most important provisions under consideration will be HB 1008, the Governor’s “Major Moves” plan (which I have discussed earlier here and here). Almost 40 amendments have already been filed for that bill alone. One of those is a controversial amendment that seeks to establish a “Regional Development Authority” in northern Indiana that would exclude St. Joseph County:
“My hope was when I read it, there was a misprint. I really couldn’t believe one could be proposed without St. Joseph County being part of it,” said Mark Egan of the St. Joseph County Chamber of Commerce.
You can watch or listen to the Legislature over the internet while we are in session here.
January 31st, 2006
The Governor’s “Major Moves” plan to sell off the Indiana Toll Road (and potentially other roads, rail lines, ports, airports, etc.) is moving into a critical period.
The authorizing legislation, HB 1008, is now eligible for second reading amendments in the House of Representatives. The bill could be considered as soon as Monday morning.
Representative Jackie Walorski (R-Lakeville) has announced she will be filing several amendments – including the establishment of a new Regional Development Authority for Elkhart, Steuben, and LaGrange counties, and some type of a guarantee that road projects in her district will be prioritized.
Representative Walorski, who previously was opposed to the Governor’s plan, changed her position this weekend, and now supports the proposal.
I think it is disappointing this debate has become a political fight instead of the policy discussion it should be. I continue to believe it is bad public policy to sell off an important public asset for a fraction of its value.
Three Indiana newspapers have put together an excellent online resource for information related to this proposal. Some of their collected articles are available here.
January 29th, 2006
The extremely high volume of work during session – especially as we approach deadlines in the House calendar - results in Members spending long hours in close quarters with colleagues.
On Wednesday, committees met to consider bills until around 5:00pm. After that, the caucuses met to go over amendments, and then the House went into session - staying there until midnight.
Below is a picture of Members at their desks eating the box lunches that were ordered in so we would not have to break for dinner.
Some of the important bills that were amended on second reading were HB1001 (dealing with many different tax and assessment matters), HB 1010 (eminent domain), and HB1279 (telecommunications).
We also debated and voted on the committee report to HB1008 – the “Major Moves” road privatization bill. The committee report passed by a vote of 50-46, but that was only a preliminary vote. It now moves on to the second reading calendar where it is open to amendment.
The House Democratic caucus also presented an alternative plan to fund highway projects that would raise money without selling off our state assets to foreign investors.
The calendar for Thursday, January 26th is available here.
January 26th, 2006
Representative Steve Heim (R-Culver) has posted a link to an article that Representative Win Moses (D-Fort Wayne) handed out to everyone on the House floor today.
The article, entitled, “A Shocker: Partisan Thought Is Unconscious,” starts off by stating:
Liberals and conservatives can become equally bug-eyed and irrational when talking politics, especially when they are on the defensive.
Self-identified politically partisan test subjects at Emory University were presented with contradictory statements from candidates they supported and candidates they opposed. MRI brain scans taken of the subjects showed that their evaluations of the statements did not rely on “cold reasoning,” but rather on the centers of the brain associated with emotion, forgiveness, relief, and reward.
It is possible to override these biases, Dr. Westen said, “but you have to engage in ruthless self reflection, to say, ‘All right, I know what I want to believe, but I have to be honest.’ ”
He added, “It speaks to the character of the discourse that this quality is rarely talked about in politics.”
I was glad Representative Moses took the time to pass the article around today, and I am glad Representative Heim reminded me of it.
January 24th, 2006
A bill that could replace the entire judicial branch of government jumped into the mix yesterday.
The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette reports:
Six House Republicans on Monday passed a bill that some judges likened to a political coup…
“It’s hard to see this as anything other than a potential naked use of political power to remove five justices from the Court of Appeals and one justice from the Indiana Supreme Court,” said Court of Appeals Judge John T. Sharpnack.
What the bill (HB 1419 – not updated as of this posting) essentially does is replace the current members of the Judicial Nominating Commission with new, partisan members. These new members would then vote on retention recommendations – and their recommendations would actually show on a ballot that Hoosiers would vote on.
Setting aside the ridiculous notion that partisan “recommendations” could be allowed to appear on an actual voting ballot – this bill actually would throw out the existing judicial branch and replace them with Daniels appointees.
Seriously.
Can you imagine the uproar if a President of the United States tried to remove the all justices of the Supreme Court, as well as all of the federal appellate judges in order to replace them with his own nominees? Any President - Democrat or Republican – would be mercilessly pilloried.
In addition to the Journal Gazette, there was a brief mention in the Indianapolis Star, as well as mentions in the Indiana Law Blog and TDW. But no one else appears to be covering the issue yet.
Let me know if you have any feelings about this bill.
January 24th, 2006
On Sunday, I joined Representative John Ulmer (R-Goshen) on the WNIT television show Politically Speaking, hosted by South Bend Tribune columnist Jack Colwell.
The show is a weekly roundup of political and government news and usually features elected officials from across northern Indiana. This week, the main topic of discussion was the Governor’s proposed sale/lease of the Indiana Toll Road.
An excellent source of information on the proposed sale of our state’s main east-west interstate highway has been put together by three Indiana newspapers (the South Bend Tribune, the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, and the Times of Northwest Indiana). You can visit the site at www.tollroadforsale.com. It has a great photo gallery, and a section of charts that highlights potential foreign bidders – from Spain to China.
The South Bend Tribune’s individual collection of comprehensive articles on the subject can be accessed here.
I am very impressed to see these three papers joining together to create a central clearinghouse for information on the sale of the toll road on the internet. I feel this is an integral part of journalism today, and shows that newspapers can still be relevant and even ahead of the curve on substantive news coverage.
Selling (or leasing for up to 99 years) the Indiana Toll Road is simply bad public policy. To do so would be selling off billions of dollars in future revenue for a fraction of its actual value. Toll collections over the next 70 years are expected to reach, by some estimates, over $20 billion – assuming regular toll increases over that time period. Meanwhile, the potential bids on the deal are expected to fetch only between $2 billion and $6 billion.
Even if the Governor received a $10 billion bid, Indiana taxpayers would still be forfeiting billions of dollars over the next several generations to some foreign conglomerate.
Building Indiana’s transportation infrastructure is definitely a critical priority for our economic future. But there are other, more responsible, tools at our disposal to raise funds when money is tight.
GARVEE bonds, asset securitization, and even reworking existing road plans should all be considered. One of the lowest-hanging fruits could be saving almost a billion dollars by pursuing an upgrade to existing roads to complete the Evansville to Indianapolis I-69 extension (rather than build a new-terrain route).
Details of the bids received by the state should be made public on Monday. Please let me know if you have an opinion you would like to share on this issue.
January 23rd, 2006
The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) has handed down its final decision on time zone boundaries, and St. Joseph County was denied its petiton to be moved into the Central time zone.
Mike Smith of the AP reports:
Gov. Mitch Daniels said repeatedly during his 2004 campaign that it made best sense for most of Indiana to be on Central time but backed off that stance after being elected, saying it should be a local decision.
Daniels, however, in November recommended to federal officials that St. Joseph County remain on Eastern time, saying that it and Elkhart County formed one economic, cultural and social region and should not be split. Elkhart County commissioners decided to remain in the Eastern zone.
Masson’s Blog has in-depth coverage of the issue and the history of the debate. He also produced this map showing the new time zone boundaries in the state (pink areas = Central, gray areas = Eastern):
The complete USDOT decision can be read here (pdf - 61 pages).
For more coverage, see below:
The ruling is in: DOT puts St. Joseph on Eastern time - South Bend Tribune
St. Joseph County will stay on Eastern Time - WNDU-TV
Local Lawmakers React to Time Zone Decision - WSBT-TV (on the video, Representative Craig Fry (D-Mishawaka) suggests St. Joseph County could simply ignore the ruling and observe Central time if it so chooses)
January 18th, 2006
Next Posts
Previous Posts
Welcome! I created this website to communicate with my constituents on developments with issues important to Indiana…