Senate Dems Post New Video

Give it a look here. Give our Democratic Senators a lot of points for sheer pluck. Never have we had the majority in the Senate in my lifetime but our people come up with some really good ideas.

Indiana Senate Democratic Caucus on Economic Recovery

I am just putting this out - if anyone is reading and wants to comment, then go for it.

Indiana Senate Democratic Caucus: Economic Recovery Package: Investing in Indiana's Industries and Businesses:

"Investing in Indiana's Industries and Businesses"

To maintain our current industrial base, help existing Indiana industries reduce production costs by providing funds for plant modernization, energy efficiencies, and other capital projects.

$50 million HR1 Fiscal Stabilization Fund

Action 2: Fully Fund "Innovation Alliance"
To become a global leader in research, innovation and biosciences job growth, invest in fundamental bioscience building blocks of university and corporate technology, developing and attracting talent and providing matching fund capital.

$70 million HR1 Fiscal Stabilization Fund

Action 3: Fully Fund "Nanotech Initiative"
To support the Midwest Academy of Nanoelectronics and Architecture and to make Indiana the nation's leader in nanotechnology research, increase the state's investment in this public/private partnership.

$10 million HR1 Fiscal Stabilization Fund

Action 5: Restore funding for "High Growth Fund"
To compete for expansion and attraction opportunities with companies that engage in technology-intensive, high value-added activities paying above average wages, restore appropriation.

$6 million State Funds

Action 6: Restore funding for "Tourism Promotion"
To replace funds cut from Governor's budget recommendation and to promote tourism as an important industry in Indiana, restore appropriation.

$10 million State Funds

Action 7: Expand Broadband to Rural and Unserved Areas
To deploy wireless and traditional broadband services for economic development purposes, direct the Office of Community and Rural Affairs to create a competitive grant program for small towns and rural communities. OCRA should seek funding from the $1.35 billion grant fund.

$20 million est. HR1 Broadband and Wireless Deployment Grant

Action 8: Adopt SB 448 (Charbonneau, Broden) IT Tax Credit
Creates personal property tax exemption for IT equipment for businesses with high wage jobs. Recommend the $30 million threshold be lowered to $10 million.

Action 9: Adopt HB 1434 (Yarde) New Business Recruitment Grants
To provide additional resources to local economic development organizations serving counties with an unemployment rate of greater than 8%, directs IEDC to establish a New Business Recruitment Grant Fund.

Action 10: Adopt SB 499 (Skinner) Preference to Green Industries
To expand Indiana's focus on environmentally-conscious industries, direct IEDC to give special emphasis to those businesses and manufacturers producing or using biofuels when considering incentive packages and grants.

Action 11: Adopt SB 300 (Merritt, Errington) Net Metering
To encourage the use of renewable energy sources and to keep the cost of electricity low in Indiana, adopt Net Metering for production of power by users that is sold back to the grid.

Action 12: Expand "Healthy Indiana Plan" to Small Businesses
To encourage small business owners to provide employee health insurance and to keep costs low, implement a small business buy-in plan and explore an expansion of HIP to more uninsured adults.

The references to federal stimulus funding are based on House Resolution 1, passed by the U.S. Representatives. The proposal is offered as a road map with the knowledge that the U.S. Senate version and the Conference Committee compromise will undoubtedly change funding amounts, formulas, and restrictions.

Indiana Senate Democratic Caucus: Economic Recovery Package: Investing in Indiana's Educational Modernization: "Investing in Indiana's Educational Modernization

Action 1: School Repair and Modernization Projects
To reduce carbon footprint of schools and to modernize/update classrooms, labs and equipment, direct the IDOE to immediately solicit proposals from Indiana schools to meet the 30-day deadline in the 'use it or lose it' grant program.

$248 million HR1 School R&R

Action 2: School Technology Investment Projects
Direct the DOE to create a grant program aimed at improving access to technology for Indiana schools with first half of the projects due on July 1, 2009.

$16 million HR 1 School Technology"

***

Action 4: Immediate Approval of University Building Projects
To create immediate jobs and much needed classroom improvements and to take advantage of very low interest rates, direct the Budget Agency to release all construction projects previously appropriated by the General Assembly.

$228.3 million State Debt Service

Pat Bauer Remains on the Loose

Pat Bauer spoke at last year's Democratic state convention. His speech - not so much the details - but for its style and energy. he overthrew all of my preconceptions abut him. Now, Pat is back doing his job. Or as the Indianapolis Business Journal puts it: House speaker not high on several hot issues.

"But there are a few hot topics that some legislators also want addressed this session. They include taking the next step toward amending caps on property tax bills into the state constitution, starting over on trying to put a ban on gay marriage in the constitution, and cracking down on illegal immigration.

Backers of those measures face a formidable barrier, however: Democratic House Speaker Patrick Bauer of South Bend, who wields tremendous power and is sour on dealing with such measures.

'I think when you have a patient that is very ill, which we do, which is called the fiscal body of this state, that is what the doctor should be administering,' Bauer said."

Bauer is a hands-on leader, keenly aware of what legislation is moving - or not moving - in Democrat-controlled House committees and in what forms. His committee chairs may have discretion, but it's no secret that Bauer has a tight rein on his caucus, and the buck stops with him.

He sometimes lets legislation he finds distasteful get to the House floor, only to ensure that changes are made that either make it too ugly to pass or work to achieve goals of the caucus he commands.

Given statements he's made so far, constitutional property tax caps, a gay marriage amendment measure and legislation on illegal immigration might not get anywhere in the House this year.

***

He said to take up the contentious issue this session would be a distraction from what he believes are the most pressing issues - creating jobs and enacting a two-year budget that ensures adequate funding for education.

Cracking down on illegal immigration was a hot issue last session, and could become so again this year. But Bauer thinks it's almost solely a federal issue, and taking it up on the state level would be a distraction from higher priorities.

I cannot disagree with Bauer's position on any of the above. I think the gay marriage ban silly on too many levels. With our current economy, the Republican focus on this issue seems surrealistic.

What most people in Indiana do not realize is that the House Speaker may be a hair more powerful than the Governor and a good bit more powerful than the Senate's President. From the House comes our money bills. The Speaker's job doe snot consist of playing dead for the Governor. Indiana's Constitution puts a premium on cooperation between the legislative and executive branches. As I see it, Bauer is doing his job in the way he is supposed to be doing that job.

Where Do The Republicans Go Now?

A question that has been on my mind since Bush kept Cheney on the ticket back in 2004 accelerated on election night and hit light speed with the failure of the automotive "bailout". Reading David Broder this morning and I see he has been thinking the same thing:

All the signs are that the stimulus spending will be opposed by congressional Republicans, whose shrunken ranks are increasingly dominated by right-wing Southerners who care not what their stance does to harm the party's national image.

Everything Bush did - for a while - indicated a firm belief that a 51% majority meant that it did not matter exactly who would follow him for they would be a Republican and do like he did. Even though The Nation raises the possibility that Obama shall be tempted by the powers created by Bush, I think knows history too well for this seduction.

Since learning that there would be no permanent majority for Republicans, Bush acted as if reality did not matter.

The phrase coming to my mind is cutting their nose off to spite their face.

Broder touches on Indiana.

Even though Bush later used his authority to provide the loan, the defeat of this legislation at Republican hands will not be forgotten when GOP senators run for reelection in 2010 in states such as Ohio and Pennsylvania. It will also echo in industrial states such as Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, Illinois, California, New York and New Jersey, when Republicans try to challenge for Senate and House seats.

Where now for Indiana Republicans? Are our Republicans to side with the ghosts of the Confederacy? Oliver P. Morton might just be hanging his head. Yet, our House Districts are so gerrymandered that I cannot see any danger to Dan Burton but what of Pence and Souder and Buyer?

But asking that question leads to an even more important question: what of Indiana's Democrats? Time for all those blue collar, Reagan Democrats to face up to the facts of what they helped create by crossing party lines but also time for the party to recognize the necessity of proving better candidates.

Consider the ironies of this election and the current position of the parties. The Democrats nominated an African-American paper when in 1860 they were the party identified with the slave power and after 1900 with the party of segregation. Meanwhile, the party recognized as opposing the slave party in 1860 now represents most of the Confederacy, two of the border states, and two Union states (Kansas and West Virginia). The Republicans ought to be asking themselves why a man who raised himself by his bootstraps, who is bi-racial, did not gravitate to the supposed party of self-reliance. to the party of Lincoln, but to the Democrats?

Remember The Indiana House is Also at Stake

Do we need to worry about Ron Herrell's seat? This is from The Kokomo Tribune - Miller to oppose Herrell:

"After months of searching for someone to oppose Ron Herrell for the District 30 seat in the Indiana House, the Howard County Republican Party has a candidate.

Jason C. Miller, 28, an assistant manager at the Kokomo Country Club, will challenge Herrell in the November general election.

During the last two election cycles, one of the most hotly contested races in Howard County was for the District 30 seat in the Indiana House."

Indiana State Democratic Convention

I was late. Sorry, Joh. I will write up what I did get to see tomorrow. Promise.

Meanwhile, I did meet - very briefly - Robert Rouse of Left of Centrist. He was blogging live and has plenty posted on his site. Give this and this and this a good read. He interviews our local Democratic candidate for Congress, Barry Welsh, here.

I also see that Left in Aboite posted on the convention.

Chrysler Strikes; Delaware County Dems angry; Backfround on Iraq

Sort of a slow day here. The weather cools down and I can breathe again and little going on.

The UAW walks out on Chrysler. The New York Times has this headline: Auto Union Workers Walk Out at Chrysler. The Kokomo Tribune has this early report:

Workers carrying picket signs gathered at the entrances of Kokomo Transmission Plant Wednesday afternoon as the United Auto Worker union strike of Chrysler continued.

Tens of thousands of Chrysler employees, including around 6,000 in Kokomo, went on strike at 11 a.m. today.

Shortly after 11 a.m., Kokomo police reported traffic congestion around U.S. 31 and Lincoln Road and Boulevard as many workers from Kokomo Transmission Plant and Kokomo Casting Plant were seen leaving the factories.

UPDATE 5: Chrysler workers strike.

Meanwhile, Delaware County Democrats are upset at the Republicans. From Anderson, it is hard to tell if this is Republican stupidity or something more sinister. The Star Press headlines the story as Democrats cry foul over local GOP envelope:

An envelope used for a recent Republican mailing had both parties crying politics on Tuesday.

The mailing, sent to city residents who applied this fall for absentee ballots, included campaign literature for Republicans running for city offices.

***

The envelope featured the words "IMPORTANT Absentee Ballot Information" underneath the return address, and did not identify the sender.

Inside the envelope was a form letter signed by mayoral candidate Sharon McShurley, city clerk candidate Kris Shroyer and city council candidates Basil Davis, Micah Maxwell, Mark Conatser, Dan Ridenour and Brad Polk, along with a sample ballot and flyers.

The form letter was on Republican Central Committee of Delaware County letterhead.

***

The election board voted to 2-1 dismiss Brown's complaint.

Republican members William Bruns and Karen Wenger voted in favor of dismissal while Democrat Steve Craycraft dissented.

"I don't see any violations of election laws," Bruns, an attorney, said.

Bruns said he believed the envelope was protected under a section of Indiana Code that states disclaimers need not appear on the front or cover page of a communication if the disclaimer appears within the communication.

Of course, I find something off-the wall to be a whole more interesting. I thought the conservatives did not like us liberals and Democrats because we were moral relativists; that we did not find anything absolutely true. Then I read these paragraphs in the Muncie Star-Press:

Speaking before the election board on Tuesday, Brown called the mailing -- postmarked Oct. 1, 2007 -- immoral.

***

In an interview with The Star Press after the meeting, Delaware County Republican Party vice-chairman Tom Bennington called the complaint political posturing.

"Morality happens to be a personal opinion," Bennington said, referring to Brown's comments. "I do not agree with his personal opinion."

Yeah, I italicized that part of the quote above.

I want to recommend The New York Review of Books. They send out e-mail notices when a new issue appears and a lot of them are available online. Some of the articles are political or historical and the other are book reviews. I will warn you that these are essays and not short articles, and they do have a liberal bias. (It is interesting to read something unabashedly liberal and then look at what the conservatives whine about being liberal. My conclusion a long time ago was that they cried liberal bias whenever anything contradicted their worldview. Not unlike my six year old stepson in that respect).

While not in the latest issue but the last one before the current one, take a look at The Victor?. The article reviews Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States. One paragraph stood out for me:

The scale of the American miscalculation is striking. Before the Iraq war began, its neoconservative architects argued that conferring power on Iraq's Shiites would serve to undermine Iran because Iraq's Shiites, controlling the faith's two holiest cities, would, in the words of then Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, be "an independent source of authority for the Shia religion emerging in a country that is democratic and pro-Western." Further, they argued, Iran could never dominate Iraq, because the Iraqi Shiites are Arabs and the Iranian Shiites Persian. It was a theory that, unfortunately, had no connection to reality.

This story reinforces my belief that the neo-conservatives lacked any practical knowledge about Iraq or foreign policy. I have no idea why I keep[ running into these articles about neo-conservatives (see my earlier post Kind of a follow up on Neo-cons examining themselves). Nothing changes my opinion that idealists (in the philosophical sense) are too dangerous to the public welfare to have real power. Ideas are grand things but they need tested against reality, but then that is pragmatism and not idealism.

The article details how our government set itself up with a problematic Iran.

Those running for governor - Richard Young

I am not advocating anyone for governor - not yet. I heartily agree with something Hilary said the other night about a united Democratic Party in the Fall of 2008 and I hope whatever gubernatorial and presidential candidate we get next Fall is going to put up a good fight. All that said, here is a link to Senator Young's campaign website.

Why Anderson's Mayoral Race is so important

Anderson is the largest city with an incumbent Republican who is not in meltdown mode. The Republicans have no chance in beating Peterson down in Indianapolis. The Evansville and Fort Wayne Republican candidates seem headed for implosion and certainly have muddied the waters with their self-imposed embarrassments. Muncie and Kokomo have open races that could go either way but might tip towards Republicans more for reasons of local Democratic organization problems than Republican virtues.

Anderson has a strong local party organization. How strong and how organized will be tested this Fall. That makes the 2007 mayoral race important for us Democrats in Anderson.

Second what makes the race important for Indiana Democrats: a Democratic loss here will be used as Mitch Daniels as a sign that his agenda has a future in Indiana.

Talking about Daniels and next year's governor's race

Taking down Words wrote a post about how hard it will be to beat Daniels. Ok, this will not be easy and no reason to have false hopes. Hard work cannot be substituted for smooth phrases on blogs or the press. Whoever gets the Democratic nomination must be ready with three things: 1) better ideas than Mitch Daniels; and 2) a willingness to fight for those ideas, and 3) a party ready to back the nominee until the last vote is counted.

The Indianapolis Star wrote about Daniels' announcement and included this paragraph:

Daniels talked briefly about what he considered accomplishments so far, including erasing a big budget deficit, imposing higher ethical standards in state government, creating more jobs and paving the way for many new highway projects.

If these are his accomplishments, then let us hit him over the head with them until next November.

Indiana budget have always been a tricky thing to talk about. Even with our state constitution banning deficit spending, decades ago the General Assembly found ways to finance things off the budget so that the budget was balanced. Daniels' budget is probably no worse than any other - just as Kernan's was not any better than anyone else's.

What Daniels wanted to ignore in 2004 (and we Democrats failed to point out to him) was that any budget in Indiana has been a bipartisan budget - the Republicans have controlled Indiana's Senate most of my life. The Democrats get the House every so often.

Higher ethical standards? How many department heads have left for ethical reasons?

More highway projects? How many have been delayed even after Major Moves? People in Muncie might have a different opinion about more highway projects being completed?

Here is how I see Daniels first term: suggests raises income tax, lets proposal die, sells of Toll Road, brings DST to Indiana, ignores mess created by DST, ignores complaints about DST and Toll Road, ethanol, lets House Republicans push anti-gay marriage amendment to state constitution, goes overseas to find jobs, Honda to build factory in Greensburg, gets Rolls Royce to stay put (or something like that), shoots off mouth about how minority Democrats are car bombers, proposes new toll roads, finds out Hoosier do not like paying tolls and taxes, keeps mouth shut for most of 2007 legislative session, and now is making television commercials about health and fitness.

Some more bits from the Indianapolis Star:

"You will hear straight talk," he said. "If our problems are severe, we will not sugarcoat them. If the solutions we believe are best for Indiana are controversial, we will not flinch in proposing them."

Straight talk? That would be interesting from this guy. He makes the decisions and tell us to take them. So far, he has not only flinched from his controversial solutions that might be best for Indiana. Those proposals were:

1. Reforming local government - getting rid of township government
   
2. A state constitutional convention - mentioned briefly in first campaign and disappeared.
3. Genuine property tax reform.

All these are controversial, all would mean using political capital, and none can be turned to a profit for a private entity. Governor Privatize seems a new nickname for Governor Daniels. Putting governor and privatize makes the point, I hope, that Daniel's does not know how to govern but only to sell off this state. I say his business acumen goes only to short term gains. God help him and his employees if he were ever let run a business on his own.

I want to add education to the list of proposals avoided by Mitch Daniels. Not that I think education is controversial and so it is not on the list above. It could be if Daniels (and our other state leaders did what I propose for Daniels) would use his pulpit as a bully pulpit for change in this state. Any real change in this state requires a change in how we view education. I see too many people still who think that a high school diploma suffices for good employment. Too many people who tell their children that a college education is good for nothing real.

Daniels could attack that thinking but has not. Why not? Is Hoosier culture really something too big for him to attack? Or is this outside of his definition of change? If so, then why is only privatization within that definition?

I do want to pick apart this paragraph:

Daniels said many Democrats had embraced his agenda of change, but Jennifer Wagner, spokeswoman for the state Democratic Party, said many had not.

If Daniels is saying that Democrats want a change in this state, then he is probably more correct than he usually is in his pronouncements. I am one Democrat who wants to see better jobs, a diversified economy, less of a brain drain and more encouraging of local talent, maybe an overhaul of state government from top to bottom so that it reflects 2007 more than 1851, and a Democrat as Governor in 2009. (I would also like to see the end of class basketball and those who dreamt up that idea cast out from Indiana forever, but I am not holding my breath on that.)

Since I doubt Daniels meant his pronouncement as I just interpreted it, he must think that Democrats adhere to his agenda. That is so outrageous to make me think one of these solution must be true: 1) Daniels does not read his poll numbers because he is an idiot; 2) knows The Truth from another source such as voices in his head which makes him as delusional as his former boss in Washington, or 3) he still is smoking pot. One more just can to my mind: the heat got to him.

I do not think that majority of Republicans like Daniels' agenda of change for change's sake, his belief that calling something change (or good or what positive term you can remember him using for errant nonsense if viewed objectively) makes it a change. I cannot believe that anyone can find a Democrat buying into Daniels' agenda. That is how I interpret, Jen Wagner's response - that we Democrats want change but not what Daniels' calls change.

Consider that the majority of voters here do not vote. We need to give them an alternative to Daniels. That alternative must b e something more than a Republican Lite. Yes, that worked for Evan Bayh but time has passed for being content with just being elected. That attitude encourages apathy when needing action.

We need better ideas expressed better than how Daniels expresses his ideas. Daniels can be beat. It just will take some work.

Indianapolis ask Five questions for B. Patrick Bauer

Here. The responses seem better than the questions, and I say that as a Democrat who has his reservations about the Speaker.

Former Markleville resident running for Speedway Town Council

I apologize for not writing this post before now. Traci Lipp (formerly Huddleston) is a candidate for Speedway Town Council. Another Madison County person doing well. I must admit that I have know Mrs. Lipp for about twenty years and Speedway would greatly benefit from a person of her talents, ambition, and sheer determination. Her website is: www.speedwayindiana.net.

Some thoughts for future campaigns

Already we are seeing the power of YouTube in the current presidential campaign. Last year Indiana saw an attempt to use YouTube against Brad Ellsworth. While I suspect the blogosphere's influence fails to match the belief of its influence, I do think that the Internet has the potential to create access for those candidates and parties who would otherwise lack access. Behind my assertion there lies the premise that the Internet continues to be a source of wonderment, bafflement and general oddness for the majority of the world and the traditional media will focus on the oddness of an Internet campaign but necessarily the message. I am not thinking exactly of viral marketing. What I am thinking is more akin to an Ebola outbreak than a virus.

The advantage lies with the underdog, the minority in the sort of campaign I am thinking of for that outsider status gives the campaign the very cachet that makes it worth a look by the traditional media. Some may object with great earnestness that such a focus detracts from the message. I would counter that such earnestness falls close to foolishness. An unheard message means nothing. Such a campaign must have the message clearly stated but look for any method of getting the message out - even if it means that the message is not the focus of the means by which it is disseminated.

Getting Sir Sean Connery to broadcast a message gets the attention of the traditional media that increases the audience for the message. From today's Sunday Herald (Scotland):

AN ONLINE television station will be launched tomorrow by legendary actor Sir Sean Connery on behalf of the Scottish National Party.

The Hollywood star will introduce the first programme on SNP TV, which is the latest attempt by the Nationalists to fuse campaigning with the digital revolution. Party strategists hope the venture - the first of its kind in Scotland - will help connect the SNP to younger voters.

The channel will go live at 9pm tomorrow with an exclusive film by Connery, in which he outlines his"hopes and aspirations" for Scotland. It will also feature interviews with SNP-supporting artists, including pop star Sandi Thom and actor Martin Compston.

Political figures such as former Nationalist president Winnie Ewing and trade unionist Jimmy Reid will also have slots on the channel, which is expected to broadcast around three hours of footage every night until the end of the campaign.

It will be fronted by Hannah Bardell, who joined the Nationalists from GMTV, and will include behind-the-scenes interviews with SNP candidates in constituencies around the country. Voters will be able to access the station from the SNP's website and will also be able to supply their own footage.

The project is far removed from the party's last attempt to bypass the mainstream media during an election campaign. In 1999, when the party was receiving daily humiliations from the print media, SNP leader Alex Salmond chose to launch a pro-independence newspaper, which was widely ridiculed.

However, the party seems to have given up on alternative newspapers and has instead chosen to embrace other means of contacting the electorate.

Considering how the Anderson Herald-Bulletin treated Robert Rock in the last mayoral race, I do not expect that Anderson Democrats, in particular, or Indiana Democrats, generally, can expect favorable treatment by most of our traditional media. Rather than have another interpret the ideas of our Democratic Party, the means exist for speaking directly with the public.

The Internet does not take kindly to fakers. Bill O'Reilly gets away with his no-spin zone while whirling like a dervish on speed. The Internet has less patience and more cruelty for this kind of nonsense. This means that more honesty than propaganda, humanity more than talking points, needs to be at the heart of the Internet campaign outlined above.

Locally, I would have added a blog to the website for the local party. Blogging provides a means to interact between the public and the party and/or candidate. Yes, expect trolls but that may not be such a bad thing. Reading the trolls leaving comments behind at Taking Down Words and I often wonder (among other things like some people's mental health) how they do their side no favors influencing any reader who is an independent voter.

I would also add video. We have the technology even if we do not have Lee Majors. (Okay, I am showing my age with that allusion). Here lies the chance to humanize the candidate and the party, to bring the ideas down to the public. I strongly believe that we have let others define the Democratic Party to the point that no one really knows what we stand for and we need to educate the public about the Democratic Party. We need to put a human face to the party instead of talking points and campaign rhetoric. The means exist for this kind of educational effort. We need to be using them.

Still getting the hang of this blogging thing

Until today I never thought about posting the site for the Indiana House Democrats. It might not make sense doing it now, but, hey, better late than never. Follow this link to the House Caucus page and this link to the Indiana Senate Democrats.

Not sure why the House Democrats do not have a link to the Senate Democrats or vice versa. Institutional competition or something like that? It would make a bit of time saver to links between them.

Oh, yeah, here is the general link for Indiana's General Assembly here.

Pat Bauer on Senate Property Tax Proposal

For those that may not know, the Indiana Senate has been under Republican control for as long as I can remember. Probably since the days that Richard Nixon was President, if not since the days of Grant. Think of it like this: Indiana Senate = Republican. So think of Bauer as saying some of the Republicans have done a good job.

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana House Speaker B. Patrick Bauer (D-South Bend) today issued the following statement after Indiana Senate Republicans revealed details of a plan to provide property tax relief for Hoosiers in 2007:

"The program announced today by Sen. Luke Kenley (R-Noblesville) offers many elements of the plan advocated by Indiana House Democrats in House Bill 1007 from earlier this session.

"Both proposals would have the state assume a greater share of costs for child welfare levies. Local units of government would have greater ability to use local option income taxes in order to reduce dependence on property taxes. Local units would have a way to pay for critical public safety services like police and fire protection. Finally, both proposals provide a way to better prioritize local capital construction projects.

"And just like House Democrats, Senate Republicans understand the need to provide property tax relief right now, since it is expected that property taxes will go up by as much as 15 to 20 percent in 2007.

Bauer goes on to say that there are also concerns for House Democrats.

"Elimination of the property tax replacement credit represents a major change in the way property tax relief has been handled in Indiana since Gov. Bowen in the 1970s. There are questions about how the particulars of this plan will benefit businesses versus homeowners, and how it will affect urban counties versus rural areas.

"In addition, there are questions about the long-range impact of changing the way we finance schools in Indiana. We want to make sure that public education in our state is funded equitably and that our schools have a stable source of funding.

Since House Republicans failed to step up to the plate on property tax reform, Bauer suggested that the Governor needs to do something, too.

"The real question is whether the governor feels that way. Permanent property tax relief can happen this session, but this governor has to step up to the plate and convince the members of his own party that something more than a 'band-aid' has to be done this year.

Mitch Daniels changes this session from Governor Mouth to The Silence of The Governor. Taking Down Words has a post with a wonderful cartoon from the Indianapolis Star on the Governor's silence. The Fort Wayner Journal Gazette reported on the governor's silence with the headline Daniels plays treat the press: To quiet time.

The full press release can be found at this link. For a bit more background on the Senate proposal see my post at this link.

Pat Bauer saveth the Republicans - so sayeth Nuvo

Nuvo's editorial this week bore the title of Taking back Indiana’s Republican Party. The writer, David Hoppe, finds hope for salvaging Indiana's Republicans in the defeat of the same-sex marriage amendment. The person performing the salvage? Pat Bauer.

I find myself agreeing with Hoppe's description of Hoosier Democrats and Republicans. Actually, Hoppe's description was once nothing but conventional wisdom - there was broad agreement between Hoosier Democrats and Republicans; on party just emphasized certain points more than others.

This doesn’t mean that some local brand of liberalism is in flower. All Pat Bauer did was to put the brakes on a runaway train. He did for a lot of Republicans what they have been unable to do themselves.

Indiana Republicanism used to be different. This was once a party exemplified by politicians like Robert Orr and John Mutz. These were pragmatic managers who stood for fair play and minding your own business. Their interests were more in line with the haves than the have-nots, but that was because many of them really believed prosperity at the top of society eventually benefited everyone to some degree.

The trouble is in Indiana you can describe Democrats pretty much the same way. To this day, Evan Bayh brags about his success at getting elected in what he calls a Republican state. He tried to use this as a way of selling himself as potential presidential material. But Bayh’s electability here doesn’t make him a new kind of Democrat; it makes him a successful Hoosier politician, a Republicrat. He governed by assiduously protecting the affluent, while convincing many of the rest of us that Indiana didn’t have a problem lower taxes wouldn’t fix. In 1988, he went so far as to hammer John Mutz for being a tax and spender.

Bayh’s success — and his ability to bring much of the state’s Democratic Party with him — pulled the rug out from under Orr/Mutz Republicans by completely blurring the differences between the two parties.

The serpent entered our Hoosier paradise in the form of Eric Miller. Well, I guess he personifies locally what was going on nationally.

After the preceding quote and before the following quote, Hoppe takes to task Miller and Governor Daniels and all is worth reading in full. I do very much like his conclusion:

Ironically, it took a Democrat, Pat Bauer, to reach out to the heads of the state’s largest employers — Lilly, Dow AgroSciences, Emmis Communications, Cummins and WellPoint. Once upon a time this would have been considered the heart of the state’s Republican batting order. One after another, these corporations came forward and testified that writing gay bashing into the Constitution would hurt their ability to compete in a global marketplace.

If the defeat of the constitutional amendment seems a victory for Democrats, it’s really a return to the conservative common sense associated with the middle ground where most of Indiana finds itself most of the time. Thanks to the political cover provided by Pat Bauer, it’s also a chance for old guard Republicans to regroup and take their party’s agenda back. Somewhere, Bob Orr might be smiling.

And the national Democrats move forward on oru 50 state canvass

The national committee moves forward in organizing at the grassroots throughout the country.

On April 28, 2007, Democrats across the country will come together to continue their work of the past two years. After sweeping Democratic victories across the country, we're hitting the streets again to talk with our neighbors about the difference a Democratic congress has already made, and how they can get involved in electing a Democratic president in 2008.

To get involved, consider hosting an event in your neighborhood. We'll make sure you have everything you need to run a successful event. If you can't commit to hosting, sign up to attend an event in your area -- thousands of Democrats in every community will be coming together to reach out to their neighbors.

I do not have enough room here to do something like this but why should we not something like this locally?

2007 Jefferson-Jackson Dinner

I get e-mail notices from the Indiana Democratic Party. The latest announces the 2007 Jefferson-Jackson dinner. I have not looked at the county site to see if we got a local one planned and I need to do that. As for the State dinner, it looks interesting:

Indiana Democratic Party's 2007 Jefferson-Jackson Day Dinner

With Special Guest & Keynote Speaker

Congressman Steny H. Hoyer
House Majority Leader

with our Indiana Special Guests

Senator Evan Bayh

Speaker B. Patrick Bauer

Saturday, May 5, 2007
7:00PM

Kudos to Mrs. Austin

SJR - 7 died last night. Whether the movement for enshrining fear and bigotry in Indiana's Constitution also died is an open question. For now, let us thank Terri Austin for her speech and her vote.

The decision was highlighted by an emotional speech from Rep. Terri J. Austin, D-Anderson, who voted against the amendment.

"I have cried over this. I have prayed over this. I have sought advice from everyone I know to try and come to the right decision in my heart," Austin said, her voice quivering, her eyes filled with tears.

"I know some people will be disappointed in me, but I'll have to live with that."

Like most other members of the committee, Austin said she supported the amendment's first sentence, which defines marriage as the union between a man and a woman.

But, like other Democrats, her support for the amendment's first section was outweighed by concerns over its second phrase, which said state law "may not be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."

Some LGBT activists may be unhappy about such a speech (such as some of the commentators here at Advance Indiana), but everyone who does not think the first words from Indiana's Bill of Rights are a joke should be happy. I also think those same people ought to take to heart these words from Bilerico:

It's rare in politics to find even one politician who will stand up to overwhelming adversity and do the right thing. Here, we have five. These five outstanding Democrats heard the myriad concerns about SJR-7 - the Marriage Discrimination Amendment - and simply said, "No" to the untold damage that poorly-drafted resolution would have caused.

Send them your thanks. Let them know they did the right thing by voting down SJR-7 in committee.

By the way, these words start Indiana's Bill of Rights:

WE DECLARE, That all people are created equal; that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...

State Party

The state Democratic Party has e-mail alerts. The following is from the latest one I got:

Accordingly, if you have friends who already receive or would like to receive printed correspondence from the Indiana Democratic Party, please have them send an e-mail to jwagner@indems.org with their name, street address and e-mail address. We'll take care of the rest!

Our second major administrative goal is to revamp and redesign our online presence, www.indems.org, to be more user-friendly and to include more relevant information. But we can't do that without your help!

The site for the state party is here.