A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

Mary Beth Schneider has an article entitled Latest tax plan promises deeper cuts which discusses Rep. David Orentlicher’s plan to raise income and sales taxes higher than some other plans in order to further reduce property taxes.

This got me thinking about whether in addition to shifts between businesses and residential property owners whether these proposals might result in regional shifts. I don’t know the system well enough to know how things are collected and then distributed. It’s pretty clear where property is located and, therefore, where the tax revenue for the property should be distributed. Income and sales taxes may be less clear. For example, if an individual owned a lot of property in counties other than where the individual resides, the property taxes go down, and the income taxes go up, would that then result in a shift in revenue from the counties where the individual owned property to the counties where the individual resides? Same issue with sales taxes if the person travels away from the county where he or she owns property to do his or her shopping?

Also – and I fully admit that this might merely be the natural suspicion the rest of the State has toward Indianapolis and Marion County – I can’t help but feeling like these plans will some how result in the good folks of Tippecanoe County (and elsewhere) subsidizing mismanagement and procrastination in Marion County. I know that the property tax increases in Tippecanoe County have not been anywhere near as severe as those in Marion County. And, in fact, for whatever reason, my residential property taxes went *down*. Nevertheless, Tippecanoe County will face as much of an increase in sales and income taxes as the citizens of Marion County.

In any event, I suspect that Orentlicher’s plan makes sense for Orentlicher’s constituents. Hopefully representatives from other areas of the State will be vigilant in making sure that whatever plan is finally adopted makes sense for their constituents as well.

The Evansville Courier Press had an editorial on legislative prayer. Let’s take a look:

The serial drama of prayer — sectarian or not — at the Indiana Legislature continues its run through the courts.

It was sectarian. Non-sectarian prayer isn’t and hasn’t been a problem.

To review: All heck broke loose in April 2005 when a minister invited to the Indiana House to give the daily opening prayer crossed the line that some believe separates church and state.

Some, like the Founders and the Supreme Court.

Before it was over, the minister, from the House speaker’s podium, was leading legislators and others in standing, clapping and singing “Just a Little Talk With Jesus.” It prompted some legislators to leave the session.

Good. This kind of revival-style Christian prayer is not appropriate as official business of the Indiana House of Representatives. Instead of announcing to the chamber that the minister would be leading a nice little song, Speaker Bosma should have asked the minister for something a little more ecumenical.

As a result of the controversy started from this event, a group of taxpayers sued to prohibit sectarian prayers from the speaker’s podium.

It was successful.

Federal Judge David Hamilton agreed with them, telling the House it could not open its sessions from the speaker’s podium with prayers that endorse any particular religion.

Again, non-sectarian prayer was fine. Always has been, always will be.

The story continues.

Last month, a federal appeals court dismissed the suit, saying the taxpayers who originally challenged sectarian prayers did not have legal standing to bring the suit.

And now, reports The Associated Press, the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana has asked the federal appeals court to reconsider this latest decision.

And the beat goes on.

We have a suggestion. We understand that the Legislature is going to be busy with the big property tax issue, beginning in November when it gets organized for the coming session in January.

But why don’t Republican and Democratic leaders or their representatives take just a little time and try to talk this out.

See if there isn’t common ground where they could agree on what does and what does not constitute an acceptable prayer to open legislative session.

This wasn’t such a big issue until that day in April 2005 when lawmakers were brought to their feet with that rousing hymn.

Go back to before that day and find out what worked.

Few Hoosiers would object to a thoughtful prayer that is inclusive to all, and does not cross any lines, constitutional or otherwise.

Work it out, and end the court case.

Right, non-sectarian prayer is fine. Always has been, always will be. Sectarian prayer that isn’t part of the House’s official business is also A-OK. But, when a particular religious sect attempts to mark the House of Representatives as its territory, we have a problem. But this isn’t a matter of House Republicans and House Democrats working it out. Both Republican leadership and Democratic leadership feign ignorance of what was wrong with the sectarian prayer. This is a dispute between citizens of differing faiths and their Representatives, not between Republicans and Democrats.

Niki Kelly, writing for the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, has an article on the General Assembly’s interim study committees. By and large (and with definite exceptions), these committees do not provide a lot of direct benefits. They tend to be a useful graveyard for ideas meeting resistance in the General Assembly. You can refer the idea to a study committee and you’ve successfully stopped the idea from becoming law while appearing to be doing something about the issue. Legislators get a per diem for attending the study committees during the summer, supplementing their income.

On the other hand, the study commissions do provide opportunities for legislators to become better informed about issues. When I was working for the legislature, my sense was that lobbyists had undue influence because of the information they had, not because of any ill intent or corruption on the part of the legislator. These representatives are confronted with a barrage of legislation on an incredibly wide spectrum of issues, and the landscape changes in a hurry during the legislative session. It’s very convenient to turn to a lobbyist known to the representative who has expertise on the particular matter. The more educated a lawmaker is, the less dependent on lobbyists they will hopefully be.

An index of the summer study committees is available here.