A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

Masson's Blog

Hinnefeld on HB 1005: School Voucher Expansion and Educational Savings Accounts

by 4 Comments

Steve Hinnefeld, who you should follow if you are interested in education matters, has a good run down of HB 1005, introduced by Rep. Behning — the primary architect of Indiana’s school privatization efforts over the last decade or more. The short version: a family of five making $172k or less could be eligible for school voucher money. Educational Savings Accounts would be permitted as a vehicle for certain classes of students — a limitation which probably doesn’t matter much, since we’ve seen the M.O. of school privatization in Indiana has been to get the camel’s nose under the tent in one session, then invite him in during the next — to get state funding and deposit tax advantaged donations for the purpose of paying for “private school tuition, mentoring and tutoring services, college and university fees, online courses, career education and other education-related costs.”

But, definitely go read Steve’s post for a better explanation.

Second Impeachment of Donald Trump

by 8 Comments

Donald Trump has become the first President to be impeached twice. As I write this, the vote appears to be 231 votes in favor of impeachment, including 10 Republicans versus 197 against (all Republican) and 5 not voting. Following is the text of the Impeachment Resolution:

Resolved, the Donald John Trump, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that the following article of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

Article of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

ARTICLE 1: INCITEMENT OF INSURRECTION

The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment” and that the President “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment, for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Further, section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits any person who has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the United States from “hold[ing] and office … under the United States.’ In his conduct while President of the United States — and in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, provide, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed — Donald John Trump engaged in high Crimes and Misdemeanors by inciting violence against the Government of the United States, in that:

President Trump’s conduct on January 6, 2021, followed his prior efforts to subvert and obstruct the certification of the results of the 2020 Presidential election. Those prior efforts included a phone call on January 2, 2021, during which President Trump urged the secretary of state of Georgia, Brad Raffensperger, to “find” enough votes to overturn the Georgia Presidential election results and threatened Secretary Raffensperger if he failed to do so.

In all this, President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of Government. He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of Government. He thereby betrayed his trust as President, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore, Donald John Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law. Donald John Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

It’s clear that the facts stated in bold are true and that they are impeachable offenses. Trump intentionally incited a mob, and it was entirely foreseeable that they would act violently.

 

SB 34: Unlawful Assembly, Rioting, Defunding Police

by 4 Comments

Sen. Tomes has introduced SB 34 which seems mostly to be a way for him to express his unhappiness with the Black Lives Matter protests this summer. It provides that the State and local unites of government may not hire and must fire someone convicted of rioting. “Rioting” is already on the books and is defined as, “A person who, being a member of an unlawful assembly, recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally engages in tumultuous conduct.” “Unlawful assembly” is currently defined as, “an assembly of five (5) or more persons whose common object is to commit an unlawful act, or a lawful act by unlawful means.” And, “tumultuous conduct” is defined as “conduct that results in, or is likely to result in, serious bodily injury to a person or substantial damage to property.”

SB 34 also provides that state and local government can’t provide a “state or local benefit” to someone who has been convicted of rioting. Such benefits are defined pretty broadly to include most public spending directed to an individual. However, the prohibition does not extend to, among other things, emergency medical treatment, assistance with vaccine, and short-term noncash emergency relief.

The normal protection given to law enforcement against civil liability for enforcing or failing to enforce a law would not extend to “failure to enforce a law in connection with an unlawful assembly” if such failure rose to the level of gross negligence. So, that would give law enforcement incentive to prioritize breaking up assemblies “of five or more people whose common object is to commit an unlawful act” since people who were harmed or had property damaged as a result of the assembly could look to local government to compensate them for the damage caused by the people assembling. Property used by a person to finance or facilitate a crime committed while the person was part of an unlawful assembly could be seized under the civil forfeiture statute. Someone charged with unlawful assembly could not be released on bail by the Sheriff according to a bail schedule. Rather, the statute would require a bail determination in court for such charges.

Finally, it prohibits a unit of local government from “defunding law enforcement” unless the reduction in funds can be shown to be a function of a decline in revenue for the unit, a decline in the crime rate, or the availability of other sources of funding. There’s a rebuttable presumption that defunding has happened if the funding available to the law enforcement agency has declined by 5%. If a court determines that defunding has happened, it is to order that funding be restored in the amount provided in the last fiscal year plus an additional amount to cover inflation.

The legislation would enhance penalties for the crimes of criminal mischief, obstruction of traffic, rioting, and/or disorderly conduct if committed in connection with unlawful assembly.

Fervent Trump Supporters Behind Violent Invasion of Capitol Building to Overthrow Democratic Election Results

by 4 Comments

I feel a little awkward writing such an alarmist headline. But the facts on the ground justify the alarm. I’m reminded of William Lloyd Garrison:

I am aware that many object to the severity of my language; but is there not cause for severity? I will be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice. On this subject, I do not wish to think, or to speak, or write, with moderation. No! no! Tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of the ravisher; tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen; — but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present.

There is a temptation to dismiss Trump as a buffoon and his followers’ rhetoric as just so much shit-posting on the Internet. But, there they were on January 6th, killing a police officer, carrying zip ties, bent on mayhem, en route to block certification of electoral votes duly cast after a free and fair election. Despite no evidence of irregularities that would have come anywhere close to altering the election results, and despite losing dozens of legal challenges on the subject, Trump urged them on and they followed – seeking to keep Trump as President despite Joe Biden’s having been elected to the office.

The Associated Press documents what was apparent at the time: “The insurrectionist mob that showed up at the president’s behest and stormed the U.S. Capitol was overwhelmingly made up of longtime Trump supporters, including Republican Party officials, GOP political donors, far-right militants, white supremacists, members of the military and adherents of the QAnon myth that the government is secretly controlled by a cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophile cannibals.” Unsurprisingly, Matt Gaetz (R-Florida) was lying when he tried to say that this attack came from somewhere other than Trump supporters. These people called for the execution of Mike Pence. These Trump supporting conspiracy theorists made death threats against Nancy Pelosi. They brought assault rifles, homemade napalm, and pipe bombs. Per the AP:

“Fight like hell,” Trump exhorted his partisans at the staging rally. “Let’s have trial by combat,” implored his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, whose attempt to throw out election results in trial by courtroom failed. It’s time to “start taking down names and kicking ass,” said Republican Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama.

Unsurprisingly, participants in this mob have created an internal narrative where they are the heroes of the story: important people in unique times, acting violently against cartoon-level evil. These are not emotionally  mature people, willing to live humbly for a cause in a vast universe of which they are very small pieces. Rather than abide by the often unsatisfactory outcomes of the democratic process, Trump urged them to embrace the more emotionally pleasing notion that only a shadowy kind of supervillainy could have short-circuited their righteous cause and that it was a moral imperative that they violently impose their preferences on the country. Not only was their tantrum permitted — it was imperative!

These are people who get their guidance from the likes of Trump, Alex Jones, QAnon boards, Roger Stone, and others who feed the masses garbage for fun, profit, power, prestige, and to own the libs. It’s all fun and games until people die and our democratic institutions are threatened. I think we’re there.

2020: Exercise and Books

by 7 Comments

Not that the world particularly needs to know, but with this blog post maybe I’ll remind you of a simpler time – when the Internet was full of posts about cats and what people had for lunch. Sure, self-indulgent and vacuous, but still better than the rage-addiction delivery system it’s become.

While it sucked in a lot of ways, 2020 was a good time to exercise and read. In terms of exercise, I started making more time for it when we were in lockdown. I was working out of my storage room. Turns out it was pretty easy for me to keep up with my workload if I stumbled down to the storage room in my jammies at 7:30 or 8, worked for a couple of hours, then went for a run or put on a workout video before taking a quick shower, grabbing some lunch, and getting back to work. Not driving to and from work or messing with professional attire really saves time. Anyway, setting aside time turned into a streak, and at the moment, I’ve done at least a half hour of exercise – usually more – every day since March 27. Included in that was a round of P90x, a half marathon, and quite a bit of cycling.

I also managed to keep a list of the books I read in 2020:

  1. Jan. 29th – SPQR – Mary Beard.
  2. Feb. 6th – Queenslayer (Spellslinger 5) – Sebastien de Castell
  3. Feb. 11th – Humans: A Brief History of How We F*cked It All Up – Tom Phillips
  4. Feb. 15th – Crownbreaker (Spellslinger 6) – Sebastien de Castell
  5. Feb. 25th – Running with Sherman – Christopher McDougall
  6. Mar. 14th – The South versus the South – William Freehling
  7. Apr. 24th – The Stand – Stephen King
  8. May 6th – Lawrence in Arabia – Scott Anderson
  9. May 10th – Only Human – Sylvain Neuvel
  10. June 7th – At Home – Bill Bryson
  11. June 26th – Upheaval – Jared Diamond
  12. July 5th – Seveneves – Neal Stephenson
  13. Aug. 2nd – How to Hide an Empire – Daniel Immerwahr
  14. Aug. 8th – The Guardians – John Grisham
  15. Aug. 15th – Longitude – Dava Sobel
  16. Aug. 30th – Runes of the Earth – Stephen R. Donaldson
  17. Sept. 29th – Fatal Revenant – Stephen R. Donaldson
  18. Oct. 24th – Against All Things Ending – Stephen R. Donaldson
  19. Nov. 14th – The Final Dark – Stephen R. Donaldson
  20. Nov. 29th – Indiana: An Interpretation – John Bartlow Martin
  21. Dec. 5th – Traitor’s Blade (Greatcoats #1) – Sebastien de Castell
  22. Dec. 25th – Knight’s Shadow (Greatcoats #2) – Sebastien de Castell
  23. Dec. 29th – Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid – Bill Bryson

So, the year wasn’t totally wasted. Though, I have to say, the Stephen R. Donaldson series (The Last Chronicles of Thomas Covenant) from August through November was a bit of a slog. There was some good stuff here and there in the series, but mainly I was reading it because the First Chronicles meant so much to me when I read it as a kid.

HJR 3: Indiana Permanent Fund

by 2 Comments

Rep. Dvorak has proposed House Joint Resolution 3 which would add language to the state constitution creating an “Indiana Permanent Fund” which would ultimately be used to pay annual dividends to Indiana citizens.

The way it’s structured, any year in which the State realized a budget surplus, half of that surplus would be placed in the Permanent Fund. (The state would have the discretion to put such additional money in there as it saw fit.) The principal of the fund would be invested in income producing investments designated by law. For the first twenty years, the fund would simply be allowed to grow. After that, an increasing percentage of the income earned on the principal could be distributed to eligible recipients. In years 20-40, it would be up to 5%; years 41-60 it would be up to 10%; years 61-80 it would be up to 15%; and in years 81-100 it would be up to 20%. After a century, the amount would jump and be up to 95%. (Kind of the big thinking about our tricentennial I mentioned a few years ago!)  To be an eligible recipient, a person “must have voted in the most 27 recent general election in which the person was eligible to vote 28 occurring before the payment of the dividend.”

My initial impulse is to like the idea. But I doubt I’ve really wrapped my head around the collateral consequences of this sort of program. By locking up the surplus, the State wouldn’t have as much flexibility in dealing with short term problems. Maybe it would discourage saving because lawmakers wouldn’t have as much of a slush fund for their short term priorities? Obviously long term planning is a hard sell. None of us will be around in a century, and five percent in 20 years isn’t a huge carrot. On the other hand, we’re going to need to figure out some way of funding people’s needs that doesn’t necessarily rely on having a job, because the robots are coming. That’s great for the people who own the robots, but the people whose livelihoods are displaced by automation still need to live; preferably good lives.

 

Indiana Members of Congress Who Support Efforts to Subvert the Election

by 6 Comments

Just for posterity, I thought I’d note the Indiana members of Congress who supported the efforts to subvert the election by baselessly objecting to certification of the electoral votes:

  • Jim Baird
  • Jim Banks
  • Greg Pence
  • Jackie Walorski
  • Mike Braun (Senate)*

*Braun withdrew his objection after the Trumpist mob stormed the Capitol in an effort to stop formal recognition of the Presidential election results.

This vote was always symbolic. There was no chance that the election results were going to be reversed, there is no evidence justifying any doubt that the People of the United States elected Joe Biden as President.  The symbolism was ugly even before the right-wing mob forced its way into the Capitol.  But it got an order of magnitude uglier after that happened. Braun, to give him the minimal credit that’s due, tapped out after the mob did its work. Baird, Banks, Pence, and Walorski had the chance to bail at that point, but they have decided to tie their names to this ugly piece of history. As Senator Romney put it:

We gather today due to a selfish man’s injured pride and the outrage of his supporters whom he has deliberately misinformed for the past two months and stirred to action this very morning. What happened here today was an insurrection, incited by the President of the United States. Those who choose to continue to support his dangerous gambit by objecting to the results of a legitimate, democratic election will forever be seen as being complicit in an unprecedented attack against our democracy. They will be remembered for their role in this shameful episode in American history. That will be their legacy.

The objectors have claimed they are doing so on behalf of the voters. Have an audit, they say, to satisfy the many people who believe that the election was stolen. Please! No Congressional led audit will ever convince those voters, particularly when the President will continue to claim that the election was stolen. The best way we can show respect for the voters who are upset is by telling them the truth. That is the burden, and the duty, of leadership. The truth is that President-elect Biden won this election. President Trump lost. Scores of courts, the President’s own Attorney General, and state election officials both Republican and Democrat have reached this unequivocal decision.

We must not be intimidated or prevented from fulfilling our constitutional duty. We must continue with the count of electoral college votes. In light of today’s sad circumstances, I ask my colleagues: Do we weigh our own political fortunes more heavily than we weigh the strength of our Republic, the strength of our democracy, and the cause of freedom?

A disturbing percentage of Indiana’s delegation to Washington are dedicated to their own political fortunes and are absolutely not inclined to respect voters with the truth.

 

Trumpist Mob Attempts to Subvert Democracy

by 2 Comments

Just saw a CNN report (I’m sure it’s everywhere) that a Trumpist mob in D.C. has stormed the Capitol Building to try to prevent Congressional acceptance of the electoral vote. This is appalling and should be dealt with in the harshest possible manner. I’m not a fan of violence in the ordinary course of things or in the course of protests. (I’m not one to embrace the idea that “violence is the language of the oppressed” or similar apologies.) But regardless of how you feel about violence in those contexts, this is about as bad as it gets. If you want to enjoy the benefits of law, you have to acquiesce to the political machinery that legitimizes it. For all the happy talk about “natural rights,” without law, there are no rights. There are just a series of opinions about who gets to do what to whom, the persuasive effect of which rests on the ability of the opinion-holder to deploy violence in support of that opinion.

We’ve had an election where, fevered and fantastic claims to the contrary, there is no doubt about the outcome. These people who have brought weapons to Capitol Hill are doing so in the hopes that they can prevent Congress from doing its duty and formalizing the transfer of power from one elected President to the next. These people stand for the principle that their personal preferences should take priority regardless of the election outcome. Not to put too fine a point on it, that’s fucking dangerous.

People who know better are endlessly shitting on the value of government. This is a logical consequence.

HB 1128: Mental Health Assessment of Law Enforcement Officers

by Leave a Comment

Rep. Jackson has introduced HB 1128 concerning mental health assessment of law enforcement officers. It requires the law enforcement training board to come up with procedures for mental health assessments. It sets out a number of factors that should be considered with the assessments. Among them are things like frequency of personnel complaints against the officer, an abrupt change in behavior, irrational verbal conduct, suicidal statements, unexplained fatigue or hyperactivity, sudden weight gain or loss, a pattern of conduct suggesting an inability to defuse or a desire to aggravate, and dramatic negative changes in personal hygiene.

I can’t quite figure out if the assessments are limited to the following situations, the procedures are to be designed for assessments after “a return from military deployment, an exposure to a bloodborne pathogen, or the discharge of any firearm by a law enforcement officer during the course of a use of force incident.” The discharge of a firearm during a use of force incident doesn’t surprise me, but the military deployment and bloodborne pathogen scenarios strike me as oddly specific. Not that I can’t see the need after these situations, but it’s one of those underinclusive/overinclusive thing: lots of other scenarios where you’d probably want to conduct assessments and lots of people returning from military deployments or subject to bloodborne pathogens who don’t particularly need assessments. I don’t have any particular background here, so maybe there is something specific that makes these three scenarios the triple crown.

The legislation also provides for the assessments to be confidential, limits the purposes for which assessments may be used, and requires reasonable accommodations where the person is deemed not psychologically fit for duty.

 

HB 1107 – Collaborative Response Graphics System

by 1 Comment

I’ll admit that I looked at this bill primarily because I had no idea what a “Collaborative Response Graphics System” was. Fortunately the bill provides a definition:

“Collaborative response graphics system” refers to a mapping solution that includes standardized, site-specific, and geo-rectified common operating pictures that combine facility floor plans and high resolution imagery with a grid overlay into one (1) map that will be used by law enforcement agencies in the area of a school building in a life threatening emergency.

(I’m picturing the prosecuting attorney from “My Cousin Vinny” saying “geo – [claps hands and spreads them]- RECTIFIED.”)

The bill generally provides that schools (including charters and nonpublic schools) along with their county Sheriff  may apply for a grant from the Indiana secured school fund for the initial set up costs for a collaborative response graphics system. Requires guidelines published by the department of homeland security to include information about implementing access to the collaborative graphics mapping solutions to be used in an emergency situation.