GRAIN OF SALT: Indiana General Assembly's agenda greatly flawed

One of the best parts of my college career was the internship I landed a year ago. I was accepted into the 2009 internship program at the Indiana House of Representatives. I made several great friends, including students, staff and legislators, and got some great experience and insight into what really goes on at the statehouse, most of which you'll never be made aware of by your local news channels or newspapers.

Unlike the United States Congress, the Indiana General Assembly is only a part-time legislature, so they only meet at the beginning of the year. This year the House of Representatives and the Senate will gather until March 14 to tackle the issues they decide are important.

Last year they addressed controversial issues such as puppy mills, unemployment, abortion and the state budget. In order to provide a primer for this year, I talked to some of the connections I made about what to expect. The session, from what I learned, will come down to two issues – property tax caps and ethics reform.

As some of you may remember, property taxes skyrocketed in 2007 as property all over the state was reassessed after years of faulty methods, eventually costing popular Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson his job. In response, the state legislature passed a law capping the annual property tax rates for homes, farm land and businesses at 1 percent, 2 percent and 3 percent, respectively.

This year, the legislature has the chance to make the tax caps part of the Constitution by passing legislation that will put the issue to a statewide voter referendum for the 2010 elections. I spoke with a couple legislators, and we talked about how putting this on the ballot may be good politics, but it's terrible policy.

For one, the property tax caps are already law, so there's no reason to put it in Indiana's Constitution. Also, local governments and schools are dependent on property tax revenue, so capping them at a time when Gov. Mitch Daniels has already announced steep cuts in education funding for schools is senseless.

While it's bad policy, voter referendums are also lazy governing. The very idea of our system of government is to elect officials to represent us and vote for our interests. If they're going to pass policy decisions down to us, what's the point in electing them in the first place?

By all indications, the legislation to put the caps on the ballot is going to pass overwhelmingly, as every Republican and most Democrats in the statehouse show more willingness to sacrifice responsible long-term policy for the sake of popular short-term politics.

In addition, Democrats in the House of Representatives are likely to introduce ethics reform legislation. Indiana has very weak rules regarding ethical behavior of public officials. Among other rules, there is no requirement on the part of lobbyists or legislators to report any kind of non-cash gift if the gift is $100 or less.

Normally, I'd suggest stronger ethics rules generally are a good thing. The timing, however, couldn't be worse for those introducing the legislation.

It's a good idea to enforce some strict rules on the conduct of public officials and lobbyists, or at least make ethics rules similar to federal standards. However, voters are likely to find any level of ethics reform pretty weak tea considering that the most recent data shows that 34 counties in Indiana are still struggling with 10 percent unemployment or higher.

Last year David Niezgodski, a South Bend Democrat, led a heroic effort in the House of Representatives to address problems that had arisen regarding unemployment, at a time when neighboring Elkhart had the highest unemployment rate in the country.

One year later, the more populous counties of the state are still struggling with high unemployment, yet a representative told me that the General Assembly will ignore this issue that still plagues so many Hoosiers.

If the General Assembly is indeed going to split town after they approve a bad referendum on property tax caps and basic ethics reform, they should be prepared for angry jobless voters to decide to vote for someone more in touch with their concerns.

Write to Michael at mgkarafin@bsu.edu.


More from The Daily




Sponsored Stories



Loading Recent Classifieds...