Lesley Weidenbener, managing editor, The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – Republican gubernatorial hopeful Mike Pence is set to announce his running mate Monday – a pick that must be approved by delegates at the Indiana Republican State Convention in June – and the speculation has observers buzzing.

But while political junkies savor such moments, it’s not clear whether Hoosier voters care much who runs on the Republican and Democratic tickets for lieutenant governor.

“They’re not the determining factor for voters,” said Mike McDaniel, a former Republican state chairman who served as campaign manager and later chief of staff for former Lt. Gov. John Mutz. “People go in to vote thinking of the candidates at the top of the ticket.”

But that’s not to say that a candidate for lieutenant governor can’t help or hurt a gubernatorial campaign.

The right running mate may be able to help shore up support in an area where a candidate for governor is weaker. When Republican Steve Goldsmith of Indianapolis ran for governor in 1996, he let the convention delegates choose his running mate, which turned out to be conservative George Witwer. That gave Goldsmith more credibility with the evangelical wing of the party.

Some believe a lieutenant governor candidate can also be geographically appealing. Democrat Jill Long Thompson – who lives on a northern Indiana farm – picked state Rep. Dennie Oxley, D-English, in part because he had represented a broad district in Southern Indiana.

Former candidates for lieutenant governor have included the following: Top from left, former Gov. and Lt. Gov. Joe Kernan, Democrat; former Rep. Dennie Oxley, Democrat; and Lt. Gov. Becky Skillman, Republican. Second row, from left, former Lt. Gov. Kathy Davis, Democrat, and former Sen. Murray Clark, Republican.

And the wrong running mate can make a campaign look foolish. That matters especially because the lieutenant governor in Indiana has some real duties. Unlike other states where the lieutenant governor’s primary responsibility is taking over in case something happens to the governor, Indiana assigns its second in command to oversee agriculture, tourism, housing and energy agencies.

Also, Indiana’s lieutenant governor serves as president of the state Senate, where he or she can break tie votes.

But in the campaign, the most important thing a candidate for lieutenant governor can do is bring a ticket energy and stamina.

“You need someone who can stand up to the rigors of a statewide campaign, which is a lot harder than you think,” McDaniel said. “They have to have a lot of energy. They have to be good on their feet. And they have to not mess up – say something stupid or make a gaffe because they get too tired.”

A strong running mate will appear at hundreds of events during a campaign representing the gubernatorial hopeful – who has often opted to campaign somewhere else. And the candidate for lieutenant governor must make those supporters feel important, not neglected.

Joe Kernan – who served as Democrat Frank O’Bannon’s running mate – did just that. With his boundless energy and enthusiasm, Kernan’s appearances during the campaigns took on the feel of parties and rallies.

That energy seemed to lift the entire campaign, even as Kernan remained ever mindful that he was running for lieutenant governor and worked constantly to lift O’Bannon up as the top of the ticket.

It was Kernan, though, who eventually did have to fulfill the lieutenant governor’s most important role – taking over in the event of an emergency. O’Bannon suffered a stroke and died in the third year of his second term and, in a hasty and solemn ceremony, Kernan was sworn in as the state’s new governor.

It was a reminder that although political considerations are an important part of choosing a running mate, there are responsibilities that matter more.

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

By Lesley Weidenbener
The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – Private sector jobs have grown faster in Indiana in 2012 than in all but a few other states, helping to push unemployment among Hoosiers down to its lowest level since November 2008.

Indiana’s unemployment rate in April was 7.9 percent, which was lower than the national rate of 8.1 percent. It was the fifth straight month the state rate has declined.

Also, the state’s private sector – which excludes public employers such as governments, universities and public hospitals – added 15,400 new jobs in April. That led the nation.

For the year, Indiana’s private sector employment ranks 6^th in numbers of new jobs and 5^th in percentage of growth, according to the Indiana Department of Workforce Development.

“The Hoosier state has not seen economic growth on this level in a generation,” said DWD Commissioner Scott Sanders.

Indiana manufacturers added 6,200 jobs in April.

Other sectors with job gains included professional and business services, which added 3,900 jobs in April, as well as leisure and hospitality, which added 1,900 jobs.

Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels said the jobs trends are positive momentum for the state and the nation.

Indiana is “absolutely Indiana is winning the market share game because we’re now understood to be maybe the best state for business,” he said.

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

During the primary election season there was much discussion regarding whether bipartisanship is a positive or negative attribute as it relates to the work of the United States Congress. When I speak to students, I often mention the vital role of partisanship within the legislative branch of government. Since the majority party controls the legislative agenda, partisanship equates to being in a position of legislative leadership. But some – including former Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., and Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine – blame the increase in partisanship in Congress for the U.S. Senate becoming “dysfunctional.”

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller

The polarization of Congress also has spread to state capitols, with Indiana arguably starting to show some symptoms. While some believe this recent development is reflective of the current mood of the electorate, it should not be allowed to spill over into the other branches of government, particularly within our criminal justice system. Which brings me to an important point: while a certain amount of partisanship is intrinsic to the legislative branch of government, there is no room for partisanship in the work of the other branches, especially the judiciary.

There is an important difference between being nonpartisan and bipartisan. Judges, prosecutors, sheriffs and the attorney general – the position I hold – are elected trusts, but in order to gain and maintain public confidence, we must remain nonpartisan in the work we perform. The heated partisanship of an election cycle must cool down between the election and taking the oath of office to uphold the law. The credibility of our system of justice depends upon how well we rise above politics in carrying out the duties of our offices.

It is a very infrequent case – such as with former Secretary of State Charlie White – when appointing two special prosecutors, one from each party, might be necessary to ensure greater public confidence in the system of justice. In most instances, one elected prosecutor is sufficient and serves objectively. But we must never allow partisanship to infect the process with cynicism and raise public doubts about the impartial administration of justice inIndiana. Many men and women serve as law enforcement officers, prosecutors and judges. And though they might err, as is human, we should not cynically assume this is due to partisanship. The independence and integrity ofIndiana’s judicial system has a long and distinguished history. It is a precious heritage that we must preserve for future generations.

The American form of government works best when our criminal justice system operates in a nonpartisan atmosphere. The fact that we are a nation of laws with constitutional safeguards in place to protect the rights of the individual should give the public a certain level of confidence in the system of justice, even if people express strongly-held political views during election season. A robust and active democracy can and should coexist with a healthy respect for our institutions of law and order.

Greg Zoeller is attorney general of Indiana.

Imagine how your spouse might react if you said, “Hey, honey, did I mention that I just lost about 10 percent of our annual income at the track?  I’m not sure what went wrong because I put money on a whole bunch of horses so I could hedge my bets.  Go figure.”

You could defend yourself by pointing to J.P. Morgan Chase, one of the world’s best managed banks, who hedged risky investments and lost somewhere around $2 billion, which is an amount equal to 10 percent of their earnings for last year.  They are in a strong financial position and can withstand the loss, but I am guessing your spouse’s response to this defense wouldn’t be overly pleasant.  And there likely would be a

Jill Long Thompson is a former member of the U.S. House of Representatives and served as Under Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development in President Bill Clinton’s administration. She now serves on the board of the Farm Credit Administration and lives on a farm in Argos.

question about how you could allow such a thing to ever happen.

I think the problem in both cases could be summed up in two words – imprudent (de)regulation.  In the case of betting on the horses, families generally have an understanding about how much money can be spent on specific leisure activities.   And in the case of bank management, the laws and regulations that protect borrowers and depositors, as well as financial institutions, need to be sufficiently prudent to ensure safety and soundness in our financial markets.  Having recently gone through a meltdown in the banking industry, we might look to history for some meaningful lessons.

As the daughter of children of the Depression, I have been reminded, over and over again, of the wisdom of prudence when it comes to managing one’s money.  Leading up to the Great Depression, banks in the early 1900s branched out beyond conventional banking and began underwriting corporate stock issues.  In other words, they used depositors’ money to engage in investment banking, an activity that carries substantial risk.   After the 1929 market crash and in the midst of the Depression, Congress passed the Banking Act of 1933, also known as the Glass-Steagall Act.  Among other things, this legislation created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and prohibited commercial banks from engaging in investment banking.

The law worked pretty well: It allowed the banking industry to serve a critical role in growing the economy while remaining generally safe and sound.  I believe the strength of our banking system and overall economy in the decades following the passage of Glass-Steagall is, in part, a reflection of the law’s effectiveness.  As business and industry became more global and as banks became bigger, however, there was a clamor from the commercial banking sector, as well as from the broader financial services industry, to de-regulate and to reverse the key elements of the banking legislation passed during the Great Depression.   And that is exactly what Congress did when it passed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999.  In essence, they repealed Glass-Steagall.

Less than 10 years after Gramm-Leach-Bliley became law, we experienced the largest banking meltdown since the Great Depression.  And as before, Congress reacted by passing legislation to reform our nation’s banking laws.

Specifically, Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that included a provision called the Volcker Rule, named for the former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker.  Among other things, this provision requires bank regulators to implement regulations for banks to prohibit proprietary trading and investment in hedge funds and private equity funds.  These regulations are still in the process of being written and the regulators have some latitude in how strict the final rules will be.

As a prudential regulator, I continually strive to find the right balance in regulations.  To me, that means we must have the checks and balances that give businesses flexibility to adapt to market conditions without risking the safety and soundness critical to consumers and their deposits.  Such balance is important to growth and stability in the larger economy.   The recent losses at J.P. Morgan Chase suggest we need closer regulation of how banks invest their capital.  While J.P. Morgan is strong enough to sustain such a loss, many other banks could not.  That is why Wall Street reform and the new regulations being written under Dodd-Frank are so important.

Jill Long Thompson is a former member of the U.S. House of Representatives and served as Under Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development in President Bill Clinton’s administration. She now serves on the board of the Farm Credit Administration and lives on a farm in Argos. The views expressed here do not represent the Farm Credit Administration.

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller, Republican

Staff report
The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – Indiana Attorney Greg Zoeller plans to announce Friday that he will seek a second term, a candidacy that must be confirmed by Republicans at their state convention next month.

Zoeller plans to announce his campaign at an 11 a.m. Statehouse event that will include House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis.

The announcement comes three weeks before the Indiana Republican Convention, where delegates will choose nominees for attorney general and superintendent of public instruction. Four years ago, Zoeller faced a nomination contest against Republican Jon Costas.

This year, no other Republican has announced a plan to challenge Zoeller.

INDIANAPOLIS – The state will take steps to hire a private company to help run the Hoosier Lottery in an effort to make more money from the games – a step already taken by Illinois and under consideration in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and other states as well.

The Indiana State Lottery Commission voted 3-0 Wednesday to seek information from companies that would be willing to “perform a broad scope of services” for the lottery. Then in September, the state plans to accept actual bids.

“Gov. Mitch Daniels has consistently challenged all of us to identify and implement changes that promote more effective and more efficient state government,” said Hoosier Lottery Executive Director Karl Browning in a statement the agency issued Wednesday afternoon.

“The goal is to become more strategic in our business approach in an effort to increase revenue for the state of Indiana,” he said.

Through a spokeswoman, Daniels said Wednesday he supports the lottery commission’s efforts to “review of its business practices to determine if there are ways to improve operations and revenue.”

Indiana created its lottery in 1989 and the games – which include scratch-off tickets and number draws – have netted $4 billion for the state since then. During the last fiscal year, the state earned $188 million from the lottery, and in 2010 it earned $183,000, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

In 2010, Indiana’s per-capita take – at $28 – was far below the $57 national average. And while that national average hasn’t changed, the state’s profits have dropped.

In 2006, the state netted $218 million from the lottery. The per-capita profits were $35 per person.

The lottery commission’s new proposal comes as several states have launched efforts to put gambling online. Late last year, the U.S. Department of Justice reversed its position on such efforts.

It’s also about six months after Kathryn Densborn – then the executive director of the Hoosier Lottery – resigned the post amid accusations that the agency overspent on new offices and lavish furniture as it moved from one downtown Indianapolis location to another.

And it’s nearly four years after Daniels proposed leasing the state’s lottery to a private firm in exchange for an upfront cash payment that he wanted to use for college scholarships. That plan failed to gain much traction in the General Assembly and the U.S. Department of Justice also said then that the privatization would conflict with federal law.

However, the newest proposal would not likely run afoul of justice department regulations because the state would maintain control of lottery operations.

“This would continue to be a state agency,” said lottery spokesman Al Larsen. “There would be an executive director appointed by the governor.”

Senate Appropriations Chairman Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, said Wednesday he had not been briefed on the Hoosier Lottery’s proposal. But he said that if the commission is “going to retain all control over the thing and just do a management contract, that wouldn’t be any different than the prison system hiring a company to handle the kitchens or health care.”

But House Minority Leader Pat Bauer, D-South Bend, said the move a mistake.

“Those of us who have steadfastly fought against the move to privatize public services have been vindicated by the shoddy record of this administration’s efforts in this area, but that doesn’t appear to mean a thing to this governor as he lurches his way out of office,” Bauer said in a statement. “There will be vigilance over the attempted implementation of this proposal. We will make every effort to protect the public’s interests, a concern I am not sure is shared by this administration.”

With the General Assembly’s approval, Daniels leased the Indiana Toll Road to a private firm for 75 years and an upfront payment of $3.8 billion. Democrats generally opposed the move, which Daniels used to pay for road and bridge projects that were part of a 10-year transportation plan.

The Daniels administration has also privatized other state functions, including the eligibility system for welfare programs. That move – also roundly criticized by Democrats – hit problems that forced the state to redo the contract and then landed it in court.

“This governor and his administration will be long gone at the end of this year,” Bauer said. “They may claim the benefits from pursuing this course, but they won’t be around to pay the price for their decision-making when it goes wrong.”

But Christy Denault, a spokeswoman for Republican gubernatorial candidate Mike Pence, did not oppose the idea. “We should always listen to those who have ideas for making government operate more efficiently,” she said.

Democrat John Gregg’s campaign did not return a call seeking comment about the issue.

Already, a private manager has taken over lottery operations in Illinois. Northstar Lottery Group started running the Illinois games nearly one year ago under a 10-year contract and has made significant changes since then, including the launch of online ticket sales.

The Hoosier Lottery released what it called a “Request for Expression of Interest” on Wednesday, which lists areas of potential growth opportunities:

•             Reconfiguring the current retail and distribution network, potentially increasing its scope and reach;

•             Optimizing commission structure for retailers and other distributors;

•             Optimizing the gaming experience within the legal parameters of the United States and the State of Indiana;

•             Enhancing marketing activities;

•             Marketing the Lottery to new, infrequent and lapsed players to increase the breadth of its customer base

•             Implementing new technology platforms to enable more effective and efficient operations; and

•             Making improvements to the supply-chain.

Efforts to boost lottery sales – and therefore profits – could cause problems for the proposal at the legislature, Kenley said. Four years ago, several lawmakers objected to Daniels’ plan to privatize the lottery because it would likely have involved expanding its operations.

“This effort would probably be to market more sales of lottery tickets,” Kenley said. “About one third of the legislators (would oppose that) and so that’s going to be one issue that will pop up.”

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students. Reporter Samm Quinn contributed to this report.

The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – Democrat gubernatorial candidate John Gregg proposed a plan Wednesday to cut corporate tax and targeted tax credits for businesses headquartered in Indiana.

Gregg said his plan would create jobs and growth by leveling the playing field for homegrown businesses and companies that create job growth within the state.

Democrat John Gregg said Wednesday that - if elected - he would push to eliminate corporate income taxes for companies that are headquartered in Indiana. Photo by Samm Quinn, The Statehouse File.

The plan would eliminate the corporate income tax for Hoosier businesses headquartered in Indiana and companies that choose to relocate to Indiana, which will cost about $150 million each year.

It also would offer a set of targeted tax credits to companies that hire Hoosiers or make job creating investments in factories, equipment and research development, which would cost the state an estimate $2 million annually.

Gregg said these businesses would have high wages and high growth within the state and the plan would provide money to allow businesses to come here.

He said his plan would focus on helping Hoosiers across the state and it would make job creating investments.

“We’re targeting ours to strengthen people in Indiana,” he said. “We’re worried about Hoosiers.”

Gregg proposed paying for the $350 million endeavor by collecting online retail sales tax starting in January, closing what he calls an “Amazon loophole.”

It “closes the loophole,” he said and it will “put all businesses on an equal playing field.”

The state would pay for economic development by solving a problem, Gregg said.

Sen. Brandt Hershman, R-Buck Creek, the chair of the tax and fiscal policy committee, said he respects that the gubernatorial candidates are offering competitive ways to encourage job growth.

“The devil is very much in the details,” he said.

He said not all businesses are able to establish headquarters in Indiana. Recently, businesses like Subaru have created job opportunities for Hoosiers, but aren’t headquartered here.

He said he doesn’t want the “state to send a message that those jobs are not valued highly as companies with Indiana headquarters.”

Hershman also said the state already offers a tax credit for businesses located in Indiana, but Gregg said his plan is different.

“It is that, but different,” Gregg said without giving details on how. He did say his plan will work as a relocation negotiating tool.

“We proposed a way to pay for it,” Gregg said. “We are responsible.”

Samm Quinn is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – Hoosiers should beware of online classified ads for apartments and rental homes that could be scams meant to trick them out of money for deposits or other fees, the Indiana Attorney General’s office warned Wednesday.

The ads often provide information about real homes or apartments using data and photos hijacked from legitimate listings. But the individual who placed the ad is not the owner and is using the ad to scam users, said Attorney General Greg Zoeller.

According to the attorney general’s office, here’s an example of how the rental property scam works: You start emailing with the “owner” of an apartment or house that you would like to rent and the person says the place is yours if you wire money to cover an application fee or security deposit. You wire the money, and then never hear from the “owner” again.

Homeowners who have placed legitimate ads can also be the target of scams, the AG’s office said.

“If you are an owner with an online ad for an apartment, a ‘renter’ may contact you by email and then send you a check for a deposit,” the office said. “Later the ‘renter’ tells you they want to cancel and needs you to wire the money back. Unfortunately, victims wire the money before noticing the scammer’s check was a fake.”

Scammers prefer to use wire transfer companies like Western Union and MoneyGram because it’s like sending cash and they get the money quickly. Typically, there’s no way to reverse a transfer or trace the money, the attorney general said. Money wired to another country can be picked up at multiple locations, making it almost impossible to identify or track someone down.

The Attorney General’s office and the financial company Western Union provided the following tips for apartment seekers and owners:

• If the rental price sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Research average rental rates for similar properties in the area.
• If you’re communicating by email, check for common red flags like poor grammar, misspellings, character/spacing mistakes, and excessive capitalization.
• Most renters want to see the property before they commit; if they don’t, chances are you’re dealing with a scammer. Another red flag is if they have an unusually strong sense of urgency to get you to rent or rent your property to them very early in communications with them.
• Be cautious when dealing with people who say they currently live overseas or are out of the country on business. Scammers tell victims this to explain why they can’t meet in person. Be cautious also if they prefer to communicate via e-mail only.
• Don’t send money to anyone you don’t know and trust.
• Never agree to deposit a check from someone you don’t know and then wire money back. Remember you are responsible for the checks you deposit, so if a check turns out to be a fake, you owe the bank the money you withdrew.

John Krull, executive editor, The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – So, let me get this straight.

Some Republicans are miffed about a statement Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., made following his defeat in the primary by Treasurer Richard Mourdock. After conceding the defeat that ended his distinguished 36-year career in the Senate, Lugar said Mourdock wouldn’t be an effective senator if he didn’t learn to work with people who might disagree with him. And Lugar said both Democrats and Republicans were held hostage by entrenched and unyielding special interest groups.

Some Republicans – mostly the ones who supported Mourdock – accused Lugar of disloyalty.

These are the same Republicans who spent two years and millions of dollars telling Indiana voters that Dick Lugar wasn’t really a Republican and that they didn’t want him or anyone who thought like him to be part of their GOP.

Now, I am, admittedly, just a simple, unsophisticated Hoosier, but I tend to think that, after you have filed for divorce after 36 years of marriage and said all sorts of nasty things about your spouse to the judge and community in order to get that divorce, you pretty much lose the right to demand fidelity from the spouse you just jilted.

Let’s set that aside, though, and focus on something else – namely, the fact that much of what Lugar said was right on target.

Lugar’s criticisms of Mourdock’s less-than-senatorial stridency drew the most attention, but they didn’t represent the heart of his statement.

That heart began to beat when he talked about the forces that hold his beloved Senate captive:

“I don’t remember a time when so many topics have become politically unmentionable in one party or the other. Republicans cannot admit to any nuance in policy on climate change. Republican members are now expected to take pledges against any tax increases. For two consecutive presidential nomination cycles, GOP candidates competed with one another to express the most strident anti-immigration view, even at the risk of alienating a huge voting bloc. Similarly, most Democrats are constrained when talking about such issues as entitlement cuts, tort reform, and trade agreements. Our political system is losing its ability to even explore alternatives. If fealty to these pledges continues to expand, legislators may pledge their way into irrelevance. Voters will be electing a slate of inflexible positions rather than a leader.”

Amen.

I just wish Lugar had said that louder and more often during the campaign, instead of making futile attempts to get to the right of Mourdock. In an increasingly childish era in American politics – an era in which holding your breath and throwing a temper tantrum until you get your way is considered a strategy for growth on both sides of the divide – it would have been nice to know there was at least one adult on the ballot.

Lugar may not be to blame. When he did try to reason with others, he often wasn’t heard.

A couple of years ago, when Congress was enflamed with the debate over health care reform, Lugar came to Franklin College, where I teach, for a visit. I moderated a group discussion with him. During the conversation, I asked Lugar where he – a man who had brokered deals to get rid of nuclear arms – would look for common ground on health care reform.

Lugar said he would start with tort reform. I dismissed his point at the time, because tort reform represented at best 1 percent of the cost of the health care reform.

But I think I missed what Lugar was really saying. He wanted to see the Democrats – who were the overwhelming majority party at the time – challenge their base and sacrifice one of their sacred cows to give rational Republicans cover to do the same. The only way a bipartisan approach would work, Lugar argued, was if both parties challenged the special interests that dominate them at the same time. Democrats would have to take the lead on that because they were in power.

But that didn’t happen.

And now we’re looking at yet another campaign cycle in which both Democrats and Republicans compete to see who can express the most unbridled and irrational anger.

Another campaign season. Another series of temper tantrums by adults who should know better.

Oh joy.

John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits,” WFYI 90.1 FM Indianapolis and executive editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

Abdul Hakim-Shabazz is an attorney and the editor and publisher of IndyPoltics.Org.

I’ve always maintained that political purists who don’t like RINOs (Republicans in Name Only) or DINOs (Democrats in Name Only) may want to try winning a competitive election without them – because it’s not going to happen.

I bring this up because the table has now been set for the 2012 general election. State Treasurer Richard Mourdock will take on 2^nd District Congressman Joe Donnelly for the U.S. Senate and Former Speaker of the Indiana House John Gregg will meet 6^th District Congressman Mike Pence in the race for governor.

Each candidate brings a certain number of strengths and shortcomings to the race, which is not uncommon. However, the one who can win will be that candidate able to capture the middle.

Granted Donnelly and Gregg will have to bridge some divides with the more progressive wing of their party. But I don’t see anyone whose big issues are supporting abortion rights or gay marriage showing up at a Mourdock for Senate rally or making phone calls for Mike Pence. So with that said, we shoot for the voters who usually decide competitive races, those middle of the road moderates and independents.

As much as the purists may find this offensive, it is a fact of life.

I can point to numerous races where moderate voters made the difference. Barack Obama beat John McCain in 2008 by 29,000 votes. I don’t think those 29,000 people were flaming liberals or rabid conservatives.

At the same time Indiana voters were giving Barack Obama the presidency, they were also returning Mitch Daniels to the governor’s office with a 400,000-vote victory over Jill Long Thompson.

In 2011 Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard beat Democratic challenger Melina Kennedy 51-47 percent. Democrats walked into the election with a 10-point advantage with straight ticket voters. However, Ballard won by 4.

Once again, these are moderate, centrist voters who care about performance and issues, not ideology. They want solutions and lawmakers to work together to solve this nation’s problems regarding the economy and spending. They don’t want a lot of bickering and they don’t want to hear about divisive social issues that don’t create one job.

Now I know this may be heresy to the Tea Party crowd which is taking responsibility for Richard Mourdock’s victory. I submit to you that time did more to end Lugar’s career in the U.S. Senate than the Tea Party, especially given that other proclaimed Tea Party candidates across the state lost in places like the 6^th, 7^th and 8^th Congressional districts.

Anyone can win a primary running further to the right or to the left of his opponents. The problem is that you have to figure out a way to run back to the middle. And the issues that made you a rock star with the purists may not work so well with more thoughtful voters who are more concerned about getting problems solved.

So my advice to the big four – Donnelly, Mourdock, Pence, Gregg: I would head for the middle of the road right now. And for those who say the guy in the middle of the road becomes road kill, just make sure your political vehicle takes up all the lanes.

Abdul is an attorney and the editor and publisher of IndyPoltics.Org. He is also a frequent contributor to numerous Indiana media outlets. He can be reached at abdul@indypolitics.org.

INDIANAPOLIS – Brent Dickson, the longest serving member of the Indiana Supreme Court, is now its chief justice, a position in which he will serve no longer than about four years.

Newly appointed Indiana Chief Justice Brent Dickson said Tuesday he has no major changes planned for the court's administration. Dickson has been acting chief justice since Randall Shepard retired in March. Photo by Lesley Weidenbener, The Statehouse File.

Dickson, who faces a mandatory retirement from the five-member court in July 2016 when he turns 75, said he was urged by colleagues to consider serving as chief justice, in part to preserve some continuity in the state’s judicial system.

“We’re facing immense change in the personnel on the court,” Dickson said. “Our employees needed to know that stability was going to reign and the programs and personnel were not in jeopardy.”

Dickson has been serving as acting chief justice since the March retirement of Randall Shepard, who left the job after 25 years. Later this year, Gov. Mitch Daniels will appoint the court’s third new justice in five years.

Another justice – Robert Rucker – is also deciding whether to retire this year.

“Much has been accomplished in the last 25 years and there’s a lot resting on keeping it going,” Dickson said.

Justice Robert Rucker said told the Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission on Tuesday that all the current members of the Indiana Supreme Court would be up to the duties of chief justice. But he said only Justice Brent Dickson could provide the continuity the court needs now. Photo by Lesley Weidenbener, The Statehouse File.

The Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission voted unanimously Tuesday to give Dickson the job, although it was never a contest. “You’re the man,” commission member Fred McCashland of Indianapolis told Dickson when it was his turn to vote.

Earlier, the court’s four other justices addressed the commission and in direct and indirect ways urged them to pick Dickson, whom then-Gov. Robert Orr appointed to the court in 1986.

The commission asked Justice Steven David – whom Daniels appointed last year – what he’s looking for in the next chief justice. David looked right at Dickson and nodded. “My vote is for the chief,” he said.

Rucker told the judicial nominating commission that all the current members of the Indiana Supreme Court would be up to the duties of chief justice. But he said only Dickson could provide the continuity the court needs now.

“With so much uncertainty, with so much transition,” Dickson has provided a steady hand in his role as acting chief justice, Rucker said. “He’s done a magnificent job.”

Rucker compared the state’s judiciary to a company and the state’s Supreme Court to a board of directors. The chief justice, he said, serves as the chairman of that board, a position Dickson has been navigating well.

Members of the Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission listened Tuesday to comments from Justice Brent Dickson. The commission later voted unanimously to appoint Dickson as the next chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court. Photo by Lesley Weidenbener, The Statehouse File.

“As chairman of the board, he’s been leading us along,” Rucker said. “We couldn’t have a better person.”

A Gary native, Dickson worked 17 years in general practice in Lafayette before his appointment to the Indiana Supreme Court. He said Tuesday he has no plans for significant changes and will work to improve civility in the state’s courts.

Dickson said he did not know how long he would serve in the position but he would have no choice but to step down when he turned 75.

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – Republican Mike Pence has gone on the air with his first television ad of the general election season as his opponent in the governor’s race – Democrat John Gregg – continues his attacks on the outgoing administration.

Pence’s wife, Karen, narrates the biographical ad, which is the first from either candidate and comes just one week after Indiana’s primary. Campaign officials said only that it is running “on broadcast television stations and cable systems all across Indiana.”

Democrat John Gregg said Monday that the state needs an immediate, outside audit of all state agency receipts and spending in light of a television news report that the state has not repaid taxes to businesses that overpaid in 2010. Photo by Lesley Weidenbener, The Statehouse File.

“This is just another way for us to take our message directly to Hoosiers all across the state,” said Pence’s campaign manager, Kyle Robertson, in a statement.

Meanwhile, Gregg stood outside the Statehouse on Monday and called for an immediate audit of tax revenue and spending at all state government agencies.

Already, the State Budget Committee is preparing to hire an outside auditor to review $500 million in mistakes the Department of Revenue made in the way it accounted for corporate tax revenue and distributed local income tax receipts. But Gregg said on Monday that needs to happen even sooner and pointed to a WISH-TV Channel 8 report that accuses the state Department of Workforce Development of failing to refund money to some companies that overpaid unemployment taxes in 2010.

“Every dollar in a small business is precious,” Gregg said.

DWD spokesman Joe Frank disputed the WISH-TV report and Gregg’s assertion that the agency has done anything wrong.

Frank said companies are credited every penny they’ve paid. In cases in which a company overpays, it can apply the extra money to future bills, he said.

“It’s a self-reporting system,” Frank said. The department “has done nothing that could even be seen as illegal.” He said companies are sent quarterly updates about their tax rates and accounts to help them manage their taxes.

Still, Gregg – who stood holding an Accounting for Dummies book – was eager to exploit the story and add it to a list of what he calls four significant state financial errors. The first two were the mistakes made by the Department of Revenue that prompted the move for an outside audit.

The third was a clerical mistake made by State Auditor Tim Berry’s office. An employee there accidently sent excise tax distributions in March based on the numbers that were meant for the previous month. The employee realized her mistake immediately and the office corrected it.

Gregg also said Monday that if elected he would move to strengthen the state’s whistleblower law. The WISH-TV story was based on comments from a Department of Workforce Development employee.

Indiana does have a whistleblower law but critics have called it one of the weakest in the nation.

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – The state is working to boost the educational success of students in foster care with a new program that focuses case managers, family members and others on the issue.

The Indiana Department of Child Services announced Monday that it will base the new program – called FosterEd: Indiana – on a private, pilot program in use now in Marion County. Both efforts are part of a national initiative.

In Indiana, the Department of Child Services will spend roughly $900,000 to implement the new system, which includes money to hire 16 regional education specialists and a statewide manager. They will serve on case management teams for the state’s foster children and work with teachers, school administrators, foster parents, biological parents, relative caregivers and others to identify educational strengths and ensure educational needs are met.

Every foster child will also have an education case plan.

“It is important for us to support these children who, through no fault of their own, have found themselves removed from everything they know,” said DCS Director James Payne in a statement. “By making education a priority for these children, and providing access to the educational opportunities they need, they will have a better chance to achieve their goals and dreams.”

Foster children – many of whom have been abused or neglected – are frequently bounced from school to school and often lack an adult supporting their educational success, state officials said.

DCS officials said that nationally:

• 75 percent of foster children are behind at least one grade level.
• Foster children are twice as likely to drop out of school as their peers.
• Only 1.8 percent of former foster children get a college degree, compared to 24 percent of the general population.

FosterEd: Indiana will ensure that foster children need tutoring or other specialized help to turn around those statistics, said Stephanie McFarland, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Child Services.

Under the pilot in Marion County, foster families have been able to request assistance through the program and about 95 percent of the families seeking help have received some support services.

“In establishing this statewide program, Indiana has made an important commitment to Indiana’s foster children,” said Jesse Hahnel, director of the national FosterEd Initiative. “Foster children experience tragically poor educational outcomes, even compared to other disadvantaged youth. This program will ensure every foster child has an educational champion and a plan for educational success.”

FosterEd, launched in 2009, is a fledgling initiative of the National Center for Youth Law and is also in use in California. The Mind Trust, a nonprofit driving innovative K-12 education reform in Indianapolis, provided funding and support to bring the program to Marion County.

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

John Krull, executive editor, The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – President Barack Obama’s endorsement of gay marriage takes a page from Newt Gingrich’s play book.

Gingrich liked “wedge” issues that divided the country so that he and his party could pick up the bigger half. Obama has found a wedge issue that likely will work to his – and his party’s – benefit, but it is a dangerous wedge.

I know a little bit about this.

Nearly a decade ago, when I was the organization’s executive director, what was then called the Indiana Civil Liberties Union – now the ACLU of Indiana – challenged the state’s ban on same-sex unions.

I studied the polling data and focus group findings available and found the same thing that Obama and his team doubtless have discovered.

While the overall support for gay unions may fluctuate from place to place and vary depending upon how the concept is described, a couple of trends were unmistakable.

The first was that support for same-sex unions was growing. From the 1990s on, support for same-sex unions had more than tripled – and the numbers of people who were undecided had grown dramatically, too.

The second was that there was a clear generational divide. Support for same-sex unions reached 60 percent or more among people under age 30. The numbers were even higher among young women, many of whom see issues of personal autonomy and choice to be the most important ones.

Time and momentum are on the side of gay unions.

That would argue for the wisdom of Obama’s endorsement – and for Republicans and conservatives to drop their opposition, as some GOP strategists have argued.

Not exactly.

The other thing that the research shows is the depth of feeling among those who are opposed to same-sex unions.

The folks who are opposed to gay marriage aren’t just opposed to it. They are bitterly, unyieldingly, scorch-the-earth opposed to any union between two people of the same gender. They flat out hate the idea.

They hate it so much that they will sacrifice other dearly held principles to fight it.

The folks who are against gay unions may oppose government intervention in other areas, but they have no problem passing laws that say two people of the same gender cannot enter into a contract agreeing to provide love, support and care for each other. (In legal terms, that’s what a marriage or civil union is – a contract binding two people.)

Those opposed to gay marriage also say they support decision-making at the local and state levels and that they don’t want the federal government overreaching into their lives. But they’re more than willing to have the federal government pass laws that would override state laws that recognize same-sex unions.

And those opposed to same-sex unions say that they don’t want government controlling churches, but they are happy to have government tell churches that do recognize gay marriages that they just don’t have the right.

In many places, those opposed to same-sex unions have had success enshrining their opposition into law – and into state constitutions.

Fear of a similar backlash in Indiana made the ICLU suit controversial even among those who supported the idea of same-sex unions – and persuaded the plaintiffs to drop it before it reached the Indiana Supreme Court.

And now, of course, we face a battle over whether Indiana’s current legal ban on same-sex unions should be embedded in the state constitution.

At the heart of this struggle is a footrace. The folks who support same-sex unions know that the momentum of public support is on their side, but that momentum is slow and steady. The folks who oppose same-sex unions understand that and they’re working desperately to set up legal barricades that would make the shift in popular opinion irrelevant.

That’s the fire President Obama is playing with.

His support of same-sex unions will gain him and his party ground among younger voters, but at the risk of further energizing the people determined to keep those young people from getting what they want.

That’s the thing about fires.

They don’t always burn in the direction a person – even a president – wants.

John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits” WFYI 90.1 FM Indianapolis and executive editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – Incumbent U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar’s 20-point loss this week to state Treasurer Richard Mourdock in the state’s GOP primary was not nearly as surprising to his fellow Republicans as what he did next: Offer a public critique of Mourdock.

Lugar – who emailed the long statement to supporters and posted it on his campaign website – said Mordock’s “unrelenting partisan mindset” is not conducive to problem solving and governance. Lugar said that wants Mourdock to win and that he hopes he could be a good senator.

Lesley Weidenbener, managing editor, The Statehouse File

But Lugar said that will require the Republican to change.

“He will find that unless he modifies his approach, he will achieve little as a legislator,” Lugar wrote. “Worse, he will help delay solutions that are totally beyond the capacity of partisan majorities to achieve.”

Mourdock dismissed the statement essentially as the musings of a man who was hurt by his loss.

But Republican leaders knew that Democrats would immediately seize on the statement and use it to criticize Mourdock. And of course, Democrats did just that.

Now, some are questioning whether Lugar’s statement is a sign that the 36-year member of the Senate doesn’t actually support Mourdock at all and would happy to see Democrat Rep. Joe Donnelly defeat him.

What’s most fascinating, though, is that the treatise is so typical Lugar – and yet so atypical.

The Republican has always said what he believed. He has criticized Democrat and Republican lawmakers and presidents alike when he thought it important to do so. He’s delivered tough speeches about farm bills and foreign policy and energy that have made political observers take notice.

Lugar has been able to do that through the years because he has established tremendous credibility in those areas. And his willingness to work with members of both parties and develop compromise legislation and respect the ideas and views of those who disagree with him meant that others have listened when he had something to say.

But the post-primary statement – which went on to say that Mourdock would be part of a new generation of partisan lawmakers – is also not like Lugar.

If there seemed to be one thing that Lugar’s supporters and critics agreed on during these last months of vicious campaigning, it’s that the senator is a statesman – and has been throughout his career.

Now, some are questioning whether Lugar’s public discussion of what he considered to be Mourdock’s shortcomings is statesmanlike at all. Many Republicans are saying quietly – and some not so quietly – that Lugar’s comments came from a place of frustration and anger and were just inappropriate.

And even many of Lugar’s supporters say that at the very least, Lugar should have shared his concerns about Mourdock privately – rather than in an email sent to thousands of Republicans across the state.

Regardless, the comments are public now and will no doubt have an impact on the November election.

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

Stateline is a nonpartisan, nonprofit news service of the Pew Center on the States that provides daily reporting and analysis on trends in state policy.

INDIANAPOLIS – A high school junior from Madison and a team of seven Dearborn County students have won this year’s Hoosier Rising Star Awards.

Lt. Gov. Becky Skillman – who created the awards in 2007 – also named 10 Hoosier Rising Star Award runners up.

“Across Indiana there are incredible young Hoosiers, like this year’s winners, who are making a huge impact in their communities,” Skillman said in a statement. “As I travel the state, it is clear that age never prevents our young people from achieving amazing things.”

Noah Miller, a 17-year-old junior at Madison Consolidated High School, created an Eagle Scout project in honor of a teacher, Rosie Kelly, who was diagnosed with cancer.

Kelly frequently took her classes outside to teach in a wooded area.  When the outdoor space became overgrown, Noah restored it for the community and school as a tribute to Kelly, who continues to fight her illness.

“I am impressed with Noah’s hard work and serving spirit.  He not only recognized a beloved teacher, he created a space the entire community can enjoy,” Skillman said. “Noah’s nomination stood out.”

In Dearborn County, a Greendale Cemetery had been damaged by flooding and relocated. All known records of the individuals buried there were lost.

A team of seven fifth- sixth- and seventh-grade students, who attend Sunman-Dearborn Middle and Sunman-Dearborn Intermediate in Brookville, worked with local officials to research, identify graves and map the historic cemetery.

Zachary Cody, Jackie Ketcham, Trevor McClamroch, Chloe Rosenberger, Shelby Lutz, Alex Nishime and Chloe McCracken received Hoosier Rising Star Awards, the first time that this award has been presented to a team of students. The students are members of Destination ImagiNation, a nonprofit organization that encourages creativity, teamwork and problem solving.

“This group took on a difficult and not especially glamorous project,” Skillman said. “They identified a real need, then they reached out for help and met that need. I couldn’t be more impressed with their research and resourcefulness, not to mention the great contribution they have made to the history of their community and our state.”

Skillman created the Hoosier Rising Star Award in 2007. Any student enrolled in grades K-12 during the 2011-2012 school year was eligible to be nominated by a member of their community. Recipients of the Hoosier Rising Star Award received a trophy donated by Tic Toc Trophy Shop in Akron, Ind., to commemorate their achievements.

These are the runner ups:

Krystal Shirrell, Brownsburg

Jacob Steven Bowers, Evansville

Andrew Vince, Floyds Knobs

Natalie and Rosalie Shanks, Terre Haute

Abigail Moore, Veedersburg

Madeline Klauer, Hebron

Wylie Schweizer, Winchester

Aimee Allison Boyle, Fort Branch

Lauren Gibson, Carmel

INDIANAPOLIS – State officials have launched an online marketing campaign called 100 Reasons Indiana to tell industry executives why the state is a good place to do business.

The campaign by the Indiana Economic Development Corporation also asks Hoosiers to submit additional reasons to add to the list.

“Every state touts their top five or ten reasons they are great for business,” said Indiana Secretary of Commerce Dan Hasler, who serves as chief executive officer of the IEDC. “With Indiana’s nationally acclaimed business climate, we knew we could do much more than that.”

100ReasonsIndiana.com is the compilation of 100 of reasons submitted by business leaders and economic development leaders and selected by an external judging committee.

State officials said the list highlights nearly every geographical part of the state, Indiana industries and quality of life. It includes pro-business facts and figures and focuses on the state’s leadership in life sciences, agriculture, high-tech, manufacturing and logistics. The list also highlights Indiana’s art and cultural sectors, sports industry and top tier academic institutions.

“I learn something new every time I look at the list,” Hasler said in a statement. “For example, we lead the nation in duck production, have a legacy of NASA astronauts and Indiana is home to two Golf Digest top 100 public courses. And this list barely scratches the surface of what Indiana has to offer. We have a lot to be proud of.”

Local vendors developed the website. Downloadable components are offered to partners to cross-promote Indiana’s nationally recognized business climate.

The IEDC is encouraging viewers to interact by uploading pictures and leaving suggestions to add to the list.

Abdul Hakim-Shabazz is an attorney and the editor and publisher of IndyPoltics.Org.

INDIANAPOLIS – Although some may find it hard to believe, Richard Lugar’s main opponent this primary season wasn’t Richard Mourdock, the Tea Party, Club for Growth or FreedomWorks.

It was time.

This is not to say all those factors didn’t matter. Throw in millions of dollars in an air campaign, a feisty opponent with a lot of energy and a Republican Party that has become much more ideologically conservative than in years prior and they all are the right ingredients for defeat.

It also didn’t help that Lugar had spent two weeks dealing with a residency matter that should never have been an issue in the first place. However, the final addition to the mixture was time.

Richard Lugar had served, in my opinion honorably, for more than three decades. However, for the Republican voter, that was too long.
The Howey/DePauw Indiana Battleground Poll showed that most of the Republicans who were opposing Lugar weren’t necessarily big Mourdock supporters, but they had simply felt that Lugar had been there too long and it was time for a change.

When breaking down Mourdock’s support, 23 percent of voters said they were supporting him because they thought Lugar had been in office too long, 16 percent thought it was time for change, 10 percent said it was time for new blood and 6 percent thought Lugar should retire. Only 18 percent of Mourdock’s supporters cited ideology.

Even in anecdotal conversation with my gardener this morning, I asked who he was voting for. He told me that he thought Lugar was a good man, but he had just been there too long and it was time for a change.

Looking at the map of the electorate, it seems a lot of Republicans felt that way. Mourdock won in the rural areas and donut counties and he stayed competitive in Indianapolis. Mourdock won every donut county except Boone.

I had several GOP precinct committeemen call me over the course of the evening and the totals they were giving me showed a very close race in the city. When I heard Lugar on the Amos Brown radio program Tuesday afternoon appealing to African-American voters to pull a Republican ballot, I knew this was not going to end well. And it didn’t.

The good news for Lugar is that he can go back to the Senate and spend his final days being an advocate for Indiana. And he won’t be hurting for money; I can easily see him on a number of think tanks and speaking engagements.

Mourdock will have some challenges. The polls show him and Democratic challenger Joe Donnelly running a competitive race. And Mourdock will also have to do some outreach to The Indiana Republican establishment and business class.

I have already heard from Republicans who say they would not support Mourdock if Lugar lost. So while Mourdock may have gotten 60 percent of the Republican primary vote, he cannot win without a good chunk of that 40 percent that went for Lugar. However, those are issues to elaborate on for another day.
For now Lugar leaves national politics, the way he began, with a loss. To paraphrase the Rolling Stones: Time was not on his side.

Abdul is an attorney and the editor and publisher of IndyPoltics.Org. He is also a frequent contributor to numerous Indiana media outlets. He can be reached at abdul@indypolitics.org.

INDIANAPOLIS – One day after becoming their parties’ nominees in a race for U.S. Senate, Republican Richard Mourdock and Democrat Joe Donnelly reached out to the state’s moderate voters, each with an argument that he will best represent Indiana’s values.

The candidates are battling for the so-called Lugar voters – the moderate Republicans and Democrats who were for decades elected Sen. Richard Lugar, who Mourdock trounced Tuesday night in the GOP primary.

Democrat Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-2nd District, said Tuesday that his GOP opponent in the U.S. Senate race - state Treasurer Richard Mourdock - has extreme political views and doesn't represent Hoosiers. Photo by Lesley Weidenbener, The Statehouse File.

And the battle for those votes is likely to be brutal – similar to the GOP primary that led to Mourdock’s victory.

Already, the conservative Club for Growth – which backed Mourdock in the primary – has released an ad criticizing Donnelly for voting for Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the U.S. House. Meanwhile, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee posted online ads Wednesday that call Mourdock a “right wing extremist who is too far out of the mainstream for independent voters.”

Andrew Downs, director of the Mike Downs Center for Politics at Indiana-Purdue, Fort Wayne, said the candidates are battling for the political middle.

“Mourdock is a conservative Republican. Donnelly is a moderate Democrat,” Downs said. “In order to win, each will have to win independent voters and voters who have a weak affiliation to a political party.”

Robert Schmuhl, professor of American Studies at the University of Notre Dame, said he thinks Donnelly could have an advantage.

“Donnelly will probably pitch his campaign right down the center. The Republicans took a strong right turn Tuesday, and the base of the party will be energetic come Election Day,” Schmuhl said. “That’s already clear. But moderates and independents will be looking for the right alternative. That could benefit Donnelly.”

But standing at a “unity” event Wednesday morning with other statewide, GOP elected officials, Mourdock said he is not just a candidate of the tea party – which backed him in the primary – and predicted that Democrats’ attempts to paint him as a conservative fanatic will not be successful.

“The Democrats are very good at putting labels on people,” Mourdock said. “The one they’ve put on me is the ‘wild-eyed tea party guy.’ As Gov. Daniels said, I’ve been swimming in the Republican pool for a long time. If there is one label they can’t put on me, it’s being a newcomer to this party.”

An hour later, Donnelly – sitting in a corner at The Great Divide, an Indianapolis bar with a decidedly Democratic clientele – said his Republican opponent does offer extremist views that won’t sit well with mainstream Hoosiers. He said Mourdock is only for bipartisanship “when Republicans get what they want.”

“This is about bipartisanship and what is the role of a United States senator,” Donnelly said. “How are we going to solve the big problems facing our country – the deficit, the debt ceiling, making sure we have strong foreign policy – when your attitude is… ‘I’m going to Washington. If I don’t get my way, I’m not going to play.’”

Donnelly’s words all but echoed a written statement released by Lugar – who was defeated Tuesday by more than 20 points after 36 years serving in the Senate – that said Mourdock’s “unrelenting partisan mindset is irreconcilable with my philosophy of governance and my experience of what brings results for Hoosiers in the Senate.”

“His answer to the inevitable roadblocks he will encounter in Congress is merely to campaign for more Republicans who embrace the same partisan outlook,” Lugar wrote. “He has pledged his support to groups whose prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party of those who stray from orthodoxy as they see it.”

Democrats immediately began quoting the controversial missive as evidence that Mourdock is not the right candidate for Hoosiers.

But Mourdock dismissed Lugar’s criticism, saying that he understands “the disappointment the senator had last night” and the emotions of the moment. He said he’s confident he’ll win support of those Republicans who backed Lugar and pointed to his big statewide wins when he was elected treasurer.

Still, Democrats had widely viewed Mourdock as the easier of the two GOP primary candidates to beat. But political observers say that will largely depend on whether those Democrats – locally and nationally – are willing to invest the money necessary to compete.

In the primary alone, the GOP candidates and outside groups spent more than $13 million. Spending for the general election could exceed that amount.

“There is no doubt that Democrats should see this as a more winnable race now,” Downs said. “If Donnelly is able to show some traction, he will be able to draw some national attention. If he is able to continue to show some momentum, he will draw more attention. It is a long time until November and this could become a hotly contested race.”

Kyle Kondik, a political analyst at the University of Virginia Center for Politics, said the center’s Crystal Ball has categorized the race as “leans Republican,” meaning that Mourdock is favored but Donnelly is competitive.

He said the race would have been categorized as “safe Republican” had Lugar won.

“Democrats are ecstatic that Lugar lost because they had no chance to defeat him,” Kondik said. “Mourdock’s win puts the seat potentially in play. Democrats will make investments now and closely monitor the polling. They could be in for the long haul if the numbers look promising.”

Greg Margason is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

John Krull, executive editor, The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – Early in his speech acknowledging victory in Indiana’s Republican U.S. Senate primary race, Richard Mourdock paid tribute to the man he beat, Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind.

Mourdock needed to do that.

One of the questions of the fall campaign – perhaps the central question – is where Lugar’s voters will go. A lot of money and effort will go into answering that question.

A few days before Mourdock defeated Lugar, I interviewed former Indiana Democratic Party chair Kip Tew and former Indiana Republican Party chair Rex Early on a radio program I host.

Tew said that a Mourdock victory would encourage the national Democratic Party to pour massive resources into Indiana in an effort to pick up a U.S. Senate once presumed safely Republican. He also said that it might encourage President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign to think about making Indiana a priority again – which it currently isn’t.

Given that Tew chaired Obama’s campaign in Indiana in 2008, the first election in 44 years in which a Democratic presidential candidate carried Indiana, his words carry some weight.

Early dismissed Tew’s argument with little more than a shrug. Early said all Republicans would return to the fold and, come November, vote the party line.

I’m not so sure.

Mourdock seemed to recognize that Tuesday when he took pains to emphasize that Dick Lugar was not his “enemy,” but rather his “opponent” for the past 15 months. He said that his campaign had not been against Lugar as a person, but rather a campaign of ideas and principles. It was intended as an olive branch.

The thing is: I’m not sure that makes much of a difference.

Consider what Mourdock’s message has been during his campaign against Lugar.

If you do not agree with the most conservative elements of the Republican Party all the time, we don’t want you. You’re not really a conservative. You’re not really a Republican. Find another home.

That doesn’t give Lugar’s people a lot of incentive to link arms with the Republican victor.

And Lugar certainly didn’t give them much encouragement to do so. In an email he sent to supporters conceding defeat, Lugar refused to mention Mourdock by name. He congratulated “my opponent” and said that he hoped he would prevail in the November election. Lugar also said he personally would look for other opportunities to serve Indiana and its citizens.

Here’s where things could get interesting.

Four years ago, some senior people on Lugar’s team told me that a freshly elected President Obama quietly asked if Lugar would be willing to serve as secretary of state. Lugar issued a denial of interest very quickly and Obama chose vanquished Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton instead.

Four years later, Clinton intends to step down and Lugar now is without a job for the first time in 36 years.

Will Obama ask again? If he does, will Lugar say no again?

And what impact would such a request have not just on the races in Indiana, but across the country?

Kip Tew is right.

Richard Mourdock’s victory in the Indiana Senate primary now puts the Hoosier state on the map in national politics in a way that a Lugar victory would not have. There will be a lot of national money and talent from the Democratic Party landing in this state with one purpose in mind: Making Richard Mourdock the face of the Indiana Republican Party.

Mourdock has given them ammunition.

His statement to The Indianapolis Star’s editorial board that Congress’s problem isn’t that it’s too partisan, but rather that it’s not partisan enough will get replayed again and again and again between now and November.

And Mourdock’s opponent, Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., already has opened fire on Mourdock’s legal challenge to the Chrysler bailout by pointing out that both Donnelly and Lugar voted to save the auto industry and Hoosier jobs while Mourdock filed suit to kill the auto industry.

Donnelly’s invocation of Lugar’s name is significant, because Lugar’s voters are the prize both Donnelly and Mourdock will be fighting for.

And that puts Lugar in a fascinating position.

Even in defeat, Dick Lugar still might be the most important person in this year’s Senate race.

John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits” WFYI 90.1 FM Indianapolis and executive editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – The late British parliamentarian and writer Enoch Powell wrote Richard Lugar’s political epitaph a long time ago:

“All political lives, unless they are cut off in midstream at a happy juncture, end in failure, because that is the nature of politics and of human affairs.”

Powell’s wisdom doubtless is cold comfort to Lugar, R-Ind., who Tuesday lost the U.S. Senate seat he has held for 36 years to fellow Republican and Indiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock in the primary election.  Lugar’s loss means that, come January, Hoosiers will have someone other than him representing them in the Senate for the first time since the waning days of Gerald Ford’s presidency.

Lugar’s Senate career spanned seven presidencies.  He remained in office longer than any person in Indiana history.

That was part of his problem.

I interviewed him for the first time in 1976, the year he ran against and beat Sen. Vance Hartke, D-Ind., to win his first term in the Senate.  I was a high school senior at the time.  Lugar had come to speak to a convention of high school journalists.

The fact that Lugar had chosen to spend valuable campaign time talking to a group of people who weren’t old enough to vote demonstrates how different a politician he was.

I asked him in that first interview if he ever planned to run for president.

He said that he had no ambitions for anything other than serving in the Senate at that time.  But then he, patiently but not condescendingly, explained that running for any office was a big decision, because it demanded sacrifices not just from the candidate, but from the candidate’s family and friends.

I came away from that first interview with an impression that I’ve never altered – that Dick Lugar wasn’t just another politician.

Nearly 20 years later, I was at the City Market in Indianapolis when Lugar did announce his candidacy for president.  He had some of the worst luck in American political history.  Lugar’s announcement was scheduled for the morning that Timothy McVeigh blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City, killing more than 100 men, women and children.

That news was so big that Lugar just barely made it on to the front page of his hometown newspaper.  The story that the local guy was running for president got a couple of inches in the bottom right corner of the page.

His announcement speech that morning, though, was vintage Lugar.

He started by acknowledging the bombing in Oklahoma and then he gave his audience a civics lesson about the dangerous choices free people have to make in an uncertain world.

He sounded then like he always did – like the most reasonable person in the room.

The amazing thing is that Lugar accomplished that without uttering a single memorable phrase.

That, too, was typical of Lugar.

What made his political longevity even more remarkable was the fact that he had no gift for the currency of modern political parlance – the sound bite.  Generations of journalists have gnawed on their knuckles and torn out their hair trying to find a telling quote from a Lugar interview. (You will notice that I haven’t quoted him here.)

The man could not turn a phrase to save his life, but it didn’t matter.

Somehow – whether it involved persuading Ferdinand Marcos to surrender power in the Philippines or the Russians to give up their nuclear weapons – Lugar had a gift for making people see reason.  He always was willing to keep talking, to keep working, to keep searching for that elusive common ground that would bring about a solution.

In the end, in this relentlessly partisan and angry age, that is what cost him.  The Tea Party conservatives who provided the muscle for Mourdock’s challenge thought Lugar too reasonable and they rose up to cast him out.  It was Lugar’s fate to live into an era in which a significant number of voters preferred a fight to a solution.

Because of that, Dick Lugar lived long enough to fulfill Enoch Powell’s prediction and end his political career in failure.

But it was a glorious failure.

A memorable failure.

An honorable failure.

John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits” WFYI 90.1 FM Indianapolis and executive editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS –Former U.S. Attorney Susan Brooks and former GOP leader Luke Messer won closely watched Republican primaries in the state’s 5th and 6th Congressional districts Tuesday and are expected to win easily in November.

Meanwhile, incumbent Republican Rep. Larry Bucshon defeated a feisty challenger in the state’s 8th District GOP primary and Carlos May pulled out a win in the 7th District primary and will now take on incumbent Rep. Andre Carson, a Democrat.

An official endorsement by the Republican Party and Gov. Mitch Daniels was enough to push Messer to victory and give him the GOP nomination for the seat currently held by gubernatorial hopeful Mike Pence.

Only 90 minutes after the final polls closed, Messer’s lead was big enough for The Associated Press to call the race. Messer took 40 percent of the vote. His closest competitor was Travis Hankins, a real estate developer in Columbus, who came in second with 29 percent of the vote.

Messer will move on to face Democrat Bradley Bookout, who also won Tuesday night despite a crowded Democratic field. The 6th District is decidedly Republican and Messer is expected to win the general election.

“This is really going to be an uphill fight for any Democrat in this district,” said William Kubik, a political science professor from Hanover College. “Obama is particularly unpopular here and this is going to be a Republican year.”

Kubik said that he was mildly surprised by Messer’s win because he’d spent little time in the southern counties of Indiana.

In the 5th District, Brooks eked out a win over former congressman David McIntosh to gain the GOP nomination. Brooks will now take on state Rep. Scott Reske, who won the Democratic primary over Tony Long. But the district is heavily Republican and the race will likely be tough for Reske to win.

Brooks finished the eight-way contest with 30 percent of the vote. McIntosh had 29 percent, physician John McGoff had 23 percent and Marion Mayor Wayne Seybold had 11 percent. The other candidates finished in single digits.

Brooks said the results mean “a new day” for the 5th District

“Our message of jobs and getting people back to work, the economy and reducing the debt and wasteful spending, national security, and restoring confidence in Congress carried the day,” Brooks said. “”I will continue to drive those issues home and continued to listen to the voters. And I commit to listening to those voters who backed my opponents.”

It was a busy night elsewhere in Indiana as all of the state’s congressional districts had a primary in at least one of the parties. Indiana’s 1^st District still did not know who its Republican choice would be at 10:30 p.m. With 92 percent of the precincts in, Joel Phelps had a sizable lead over his opponent Dave Wenger. The winner will face incumbent Congressman Pete Visclosky in November.

In Indiana’s 2^nd District, Jackie Walorski defeated Greg Andrews for the Republican ticket and Bendan Mullen beat out Dan Morrison for the Democratic spot.

Democrat Kevin Boyd beat five other candidates handily to win the right to face Republican Rep. Marlin Stutzman in Indiana’s 3^rd District.

In the 4^th District, Tara Nelson won the Democratic race against Lester Moore by almost 20 percentage points. Nelson will face incumbent Rep. Todd Rokita in November’s general election.

In the 7^th District, May finished with 33 percent of the vote in the five-way race, according to the Secretary of State’s office. Cat Ping finished second with 30 percent of the vote. The winner will face Carson, who cruised to victory over three other challengers.

Buschon beat challenger Kristi Risk in the GOP race for the 8^th District. His opponent in November will be David Crooks, who beat Thomas Barnett and William Bryk in the Democratic primary.

Republican Todd Young, who ran unopposed in Indiana’s 9^th District, will have to beat Democratic Shelli Yoder if he wants to return to Washington. Yoder won her party’s primary easily despite running against four other opponents.

Zach Osowski is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – Treasurer Richard Mourdock has defeated incumbent Sen. Richard Lugar, ending a distinguished, 36-year career that earned the Republican accolades nationally and internationally but led to questions about whether he was out of touch with Hoosiers.

State Treasurer Richard Mourdock on Tuesday easily defeated incumbent Sen. Richard Lugar in the Republican primary. Mourdock painted Lugar as out of touch with Hoosiers during the campaign but lauded his service to the state and nation on Tuesday. Photo by Tim Cox, The Statehouse File.

Mourdock had a 20-point-lead in the GOP Senate primary with a third of the vote counted, which led The Associated Press to call the race just one hour after the polls closed in the state’s Central time zone.

The outcome was all but unthinkable a year ago. Mourdock was a little known state official who’d made his name primarily by suing the administration of President Barack Obama over the auto bailout and Lugar was an Indiana political icon once named by Time magazine as a Top 10 senator.

On Tuesday night, standing before hundreds of emotional supporters wearing red campaign t-shirts, Mourdock was quick to publically thank Lugar for his service. That’s praise he promised he’d give Lugar when he started the campaign.

“When I began this campaign Sen. Lugar was not my enemy,” Mourdock said. “He is not now my enemy. He will never be enemy. He was simply, over the last 15 months, my opponent.

“This race is not about animosity; it’s about ideas,” he said. “It’s about the direction of the Republican Party. It’s about the direction of our country.”

With the theme from the 1981 movie Chariots of Fire playing and his supporters cheering and crying, the incumbent senator emerged for his concession speech. Lugar gave his wife a kiss said Indiana voters had spoken.

U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind, gives his concession speech Tuesday at The Riverwalk in Broad Ripple. Photo by Tim Grimes, The Statehouse File

“Serving the people of Indiana has been the greatest honor of my public life,” Lugar said. “I am proud of the solutions we have brought to problems over the years and the initiatives we have undertaken to build Indiana and to protect our country.”

Lugar said he would spend the last eight months of his term working toward a federal farm bill that will “save taxpayers billions and give farmers a chance to prosper.”

Then, he said he will move on to “new opportunities to serve Indiana and serve my nation.”

On Tuesday night, Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller credited local party officials with helping Mourdock claim the unlikely victory. More than two-thirds of Republican county chairmen stood with Mourdock when he announced he’d challenge Lugar.

“I think a lot of people have taken the local party organizations for granted over the years,” Zoeller said. Mourdock “got a lot of support from the people who he’s been traveling to meet and visit with and a lot of those county organizations supported him from the very beginning.”

Lugar will likely be remembered most for the Nunn-Lugar Act, a program he passed with then-Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Ga., that has dismantled thousands of unsecure nuclear warheads and chemical and biological weapons.

He and Nunn have repeatedly been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts.

In Indiana, his legacy will likely be a move he made as mayor of Indianapolis that unified the city and county and is credited with strengthening local government as other big cities faltered. It also brought thousands of GOP voters into the city, securing Republican leadership for years until many of those voters migrated to ring counties and Democrats gained more power.

But Lugar’s campaign – out of practice after years without a strong opponent – seemed unable this spring to translate Lugar’s accomplishments and reputation into a cohesive message that could effectively combat criticism that he was too old and too out of touch to keep the job.

State Treasurer Richard Mourdock hugs his wife, Marilyn, on Tuesday as he prepares to deliver a victory speech. Mourdock defeated incumbent Sen. Richard Lugar by roughly 20 percentage points. Photo by Timothy Cox, The Statehouse File

Outside groups branded Lugar too liberal and pointed to votes for President Barack Obama’s nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court and an auto bailout bill as evidence that he was not conservative enough to represent Hoosiers.

Tea party groups – locally and nationally – endorsed Mourdock, who is serving his second term as state treasurer after an eight-year stint as a Vanderburgh County commissioner. They embraced his promises to vote against judicial nominees he considered to be too liberal and his action as state treasurer to sue the federal government to stop the bailout of Chrysler.

Mourdock, who is charged with investing state police pension funds, sued the Obama administration saying the bankruptcy deal would have cheated pension funds and other secured creditors. He took the case to the U.S. Supreme Court and accused Obama of trying to do an end run around federal bankruptcy laws.

That – and frustration with Lugar – got the attention of national organizations. The conservative political action committee FreedomWorks mailed 44-page books to conservative voters making the case against Lugar and free market advocates Club for Growth spent $1.7 million on television, mailings and other ads in the race.

Mourdock will take on Donnelly in a race that Democrats are now fired up that they can win.

But Donnelly said, “I think we would have done fine either way.”

Indiana Republican Chairman Eric Holcomb spoke to supporters at an Indiana Republican Party celebration Tuesday night. Photo by Ellie Price, The Statehouse File.

“I have enormous respect for Sen. Lugar; I couldn’t think more highly of a person,” he said. “Lugar and I both worked together to try and save the American auto industry. Richard Mourdock tried to destroy the auto industry.”

“I am very, very excited about the chance to continue to try to create jobs for every Hoosier,” he said. “On basics, I’m for the middle class and for job creation. I think that’s the message that Hoosiers want. This is about Hoosier common sense.”

Donnelly said he’ll spend the next six month spreading his message to working Hoosiers.

“There are many months of campaigning ahead, but I am prepared to work non-stop traveling the state talking about my plan to help Indiana businesses create Hoosier jobs,” he said. “While Richard Mourdock trumpets his tea party ideas and claims bipartisanship is a dirty word, I will be meeting with the hardworking men and women of this state talking about how we can get Hoosiers back to work.”

Even before the final votes were tallied Tuesday night, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee blasted out emails accusing Mourdock of being “too far out of the mainstream for independent voters.”

And Indiana Democratic Party Chairman Dan Parker said Donnelly “fits Indiana perfectly.”

“He’s right in the mainstream of the Hoosier electorate,” Parker said. “Richard Mourdock is the tea party candidate. He’s trying to shed that label but he is the tea party candidate. He ran hard right of Richard Lugar, who was also a mainstream Hoosier senator. You look in the past, we’ve always elected mainstream senators and that’s Joe Donnelly.”

Democrats were quick to remind Hoosier voters that Lugar last week called Mourdock “unqualified” for the Senate, even though he congratulated him Friday night and said he hopes he’ll prevail in November.

Even as hundreds partied at the Mourdock campaign headquarters, some Republicans were still trying to make sense of Lugar’s loss.

Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson, a Republican, said she doesn’t believe it was a result of his age or the questions about his residency.

Mourdock “ran a great ground campaign,” she said. “Honestly I don’t know why Mourdock won. I just think Mourdock ran a great campaign, and he had a groundswell of support.

But William Kubik, a political science professor at Hanover College, said the Mourdock campaign effectively painted Lugar as a politician who’d been in office too long and was out of touch with Hoosiers. He said that started with questions about Lugar’s residency and the fact that he lives in Virginia and stays in hotels when he comes to Indiana.

“I thought it was going to be a very close race,” Kubik said. “But I think it was the effect of all the ads, particularly at the end.”

Kubik said he won’t be surprised if Mourdock manages a 20-point win in November when he faces Joe Donnelly.

“It’s a really Republican year,” Kubik said. “He’s going to come out with more moderate Republican views and look more like Dan Coats. I don’t think Donnelly has a chance.”

But Andy Downs, director of the Mike Downs Center for Indiana Politics at Indiana-Purdue, Fort Wayne, said Mourdock’s win is the Democrats’ best shot at winning the seat in November.

Samm Quinn is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students. Timothy Cox, Tim Grimes and Ellie Price contributed to this report.

INDIANAPOLIS – Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney came to Indiana to raise money on the eve of a primary election he’s expected to win easily.

Romney spoke Monday night to roughly 200 people – most of whom paid from $2,500 to $50,000 to attend – at the JW Marriott hotel in downtown Indianapolis.

He told supporters that median incomes are down nationwide, that the American workforce has been shrinking and that President Barack Obama will lead the United States to be more like European countries “with jobs leaving and debts that are crippling.”

“We’ve got to get off that course he’s on and get on a course of fiscal solvency, of great schools, of pro-growth, of pro-job,” Romney said, according to a pool report from the event. “Part of my confidence in the future comes from my life experience with Americans, with just average families and the degree of sacrifice, service, patriotism that flows in the American heart and veins.”

Romney spoke on the eve of Indiana’s primary elections, which are meaningless in the presidential race. Romney has the nomination in hand and all his opponents except Texas Rep. Ron Paul have dropped out of the contest.

Still, Democrats on Monday criticized Romney’s visit. Indiana Democratic Chairman Dan Parker said Romney owes an apology to Indiana’s auto workers, whom he said were helped by the federal government’s bailout of car companies. Romney had earlier called the auto bailouts “crony capitalism.”

“Mitt Romney was wrong,” Parker said. “In fact, in Mitt Romney style, now he’s actually trying to take credit for the auto rescue plan, but the facts are these: He was wrong at the time. The president was right. And the auto rescue plan has been good for Indiana.”

On Monday night, the state’s top Republicans were among those who attended the Romney fundraiser. Gov. Mitch Daniels, Lt. Gov. Becky Skillman, Indiana Republican Chairman Eric Holcomb, Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma and others were in the crowd.

Daniels introduced Romney and told the crowd he knew “with complete conviction that this election is there to be won and we have the candidate who will win it.”

“His is going to be a successful and transformative president at a time our nation never needed it more,” Daniels said. “If – not if, when – it is President Romney who leads us, we will see a rebirth of freedom and the elements of prosperity, which have been snuffed out on too many occasions these last few years.”

(Mitt Romney photo by Gage Skidmore via Flickr.)

INDIANAPOLIS – Gov. Mitch Daniels presented 76 Governor’s Public Service Achievement Awards to state employees Monday.

He said the employees’ efforts resulted in more than $12 million in savings to Indiana.

“We started these awards with a sense of promise and a sense of hope that we were going to be able to not merely recognize the best among us in public service, but also over the years build a culture of customer service and high performance,” Daniels said in a statement.

“We are here to honor the very best from the last 12 months, but really we are honoring everybody in what is now provably, undeniably, statistically, factually by every conceivable measure the best and most productive group of state employees anywhere in America,” he said.

The employees represented 10 state agencies.

Some of the accomplishments include:

• The Department of Child Services replaced equipment and consolidated all 92 county AS/400 machines into one server at the central office, saving $268,520 in vendor fees.
• The Indiana Department of Administration and the Department of Natural Resources repurposed three Federal Emergency Management Agency trailers into state-owned modular offices at three DNR properties, saving $41,260.
• The Department of Corrections’ Putnamville Correctional Facility instituted Green Indiana Conservation practices to create a cleaner, safer and more efficient correctional facility and saving $2.64 million in the process.
• The Indiana School for the Blind and Visually Impaired and DOC created the Miami Accessible Media Project to create an in-state vendor of media materials for the blind and visually impaired. This initiative has resulted in a $953,000 savings in purchasing costs, national recognition for innovation, jobs for offenders and potential to bring additional funds to the state through national distribution.
• The Family and Social Services Administration created a database to track non-waiver consumer incidents, and developed a claims tracking and processing system to more efficiently monitor claims and grant fund spending, resulting in an initial savings of $35,000 and $36,000 annually.
• The Indiana Department of Environment Management created and led a new team tasked with conduction reviews and claims for repairing underground storage tanks, resulting in savings of $3 million.
• The DOC built an operations center to streamline emergency information to a central location for quick and effective responses. The new central location has handled 1,870 calls and e-mails since implementation 8 months ago.
• The Indiana Department of Transportation implemented Damage Wise, a more effective way to track damage of state property at crash scenes and more efficiently bill and collect from motorists’ insurance. Resources returned improved by $2.5 million over 2010.

Samm Quinn is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.  

John Krull, executive editor, The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – Boy, those school voucher advocates can be touchy.

A few days ago, I wrote a column expressing skepticism that vouchers would solve all of the problems confronting education in America. I pointed out the market forces that voucher advocates view with dewy-eyed giddiness as the savior of the educational system also had helped to put that system under severe strain by disrupting established neighborhoods, undermining tax bases and, in many cases, tearing apart families. I also noted that a free market, by definition, doesn’t have a conscience – that’s the part we, as human beings, are supposed to supply.

And I said that I halfway hoped Indiana’s sweeping voucher law would stand, because testing vouchers in practice instead of arguing about them in theory seemed to be the only way we were going to get out of a deadlock.

Many voucher advocates reacted as if I’d stolen their last cupcake when they were in the midst of a massive sugar binge.

They sent me notes and emails accusing me of being a Socialist (although they spelled that word in many different ways), of being a union stooge and of not understanding history. They told me, repeatedly, that the idea of using the power of government to serve as a buffer for the worst effects of a free market was the invention of Lenin.

My favorite of these missives came from a gentleman who told me that my eyes would be opened if I just read Sinclair Lewis’s classic novel “Animal Farm.”

I wrote him back saying that I had read George Orwell’s “Animal Farm.” If Sinclair Lewis wrote a book by that title, too, then I’ll read it, but so far I haven’t found it. The gentleman discontinued our correspondence at that point.

I particularly enjoyed the argument that the idea of using government as a protector of the public trust originated with the Soviet Union.

Here in America, the first and most forceful champion for such thoughts was an obscure Republican president of the United States named Theodore Roosevelt, who left office nearly a decade before the Communists came to power in Russia.

TR made two arguments for using government to check some of the market’s worst effects.

The first was an appeal to conscience. He said it was immoral to allow people to suffer when we, as a society, had the means to ease that suffering. There was a reason his campaign theme song was “Onward, Christian Soldiers.”

Today, of course, many of the folks who march to that song march in the opposite direction.

The second was a conservative political argument. Roosevelt believed that businesses performed best in stable societies and stability could be achieved best by preventing economic disparities that could lead to revolution. Using the power of government to guarantee a Square Deal was the best way to protect businesses big and small.

The tea party would string him up for saying such things now – and, frankly, it got him into trouble even in his era.

Despite racking up the biggest Republican triumph in history up to that time, the big business interests pretty much drove him out of the GOP when he left office. He spent much of the last decade of his life a man without a party.

A lot of us feel that way now.

At this moment in Indiana’s history, we’re going back to a time and philosophy that predates Theodore Roosevelt in regard to education. We’re saying that individuals can do better in the education market on their own than with government support.

Fair enough.

Vouchers now are the law and they probably will stay that way. The people who championed vouchers attacked public education on issues of accountability – for not providing enough student achievement and for not containing costs well enough.

Vouchers, they said, would unleash the power of market forces and provide better test scores at lower costs.

The voucher advocates got their way and now have no else to blame for any failures.

The challenge before them can be summed up in two words.

Prove it.

John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits” WFYI 90.1 FM Indianapolis and executive editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – As the 2012 primary race comes to a close, Hoosier voters are headed to the polls Tuesday to nominate their parties’ candidates for president, senator, governor and a host of legislative and county offices.

Neither Republican nor Democratic voters will have a real say in the presidential nominations. President Barack Obama is unopposed in his quest for a second term.

And while the Republican contest had initially looked like it might still be in play, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has now all but locked up the GOP nomination.

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Texas Rep. Ron Paul are all on the Indiana ballot but only the latter is still actively seeking the nomination.

Hoosiers are instead looking closely at the GOP Senate primary. After an estimated $13 million in spending on the race by the campaigns and special interest groups, polls show state Treasurer Richard Mourdock is leading incumbent Sen. Richard Lugar.

But Lugar has called on all voters – not just Republicans – to come to his aid on Tuesday.

Robert Schmuhl, professor of American studies at the University of Notre Dame, said he expects the Senate race is likely to “propel Hoosiers to the polls.”

“The outcome of that race will help people in Indiana and across the country better understand the political forces at play this year and whether Republicans decide to move more to the right in the run-up to the general election,” he said.

Mourdock planned to spend Monday night campaigning in West Lafayette. He’s scheduled to spend Election Day visiting the 4-H Auditorium in Evansville before going to Kingsway Christian Church in Avon and then landing at his post-election party at the Indy West Conference Center on High School Road.

Lugar planned to spend Monday afternoon with Tipton Mayor Don Havens and then with a coalition of mayors at the Elks Club in Tipton.

On Election Day, Lugar will be having breakfast at Jonathan Byrd’s Cafeteria in Greenwood before visiting St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Catholic Church in Carmel. Lunch will be at Buffalo Wild Wings on Guilford Avenue in Indianapolis

Then he will return to his election night headquarters on Westfield Boulevard around 7 p.m. after the polls close in the state’s Central time zone areas.

Other big races include the Republican primaries in the 6^th and 5^th Congressional districts.

In the 6^th – the district now represented by Republican Mike Pence, who is running for governor – GOP party pick Luke Messer is facing a stiff challenge from conservative Travis Hankins and several other candidates.

In the 5^th District – now represented by retiring Republican Dan Burton – former congressman David McIntosh, former U.S. Attorney Susan Brooks, Marion Mayor Wayne Seybold and former Marion County Coroner John McGoff are battling for the nomination.

The candidates for governor – Pence and Democrat John Gregg – are unopposed in their primaries but are still campaigning.

Pence has yet to release his schedule.

But Gregg will start his Election Day in his hometown of Sandborn where he’ll watch his youngest son, Hunter, vote for the first time. After that, he plans to visit polling locations in Indianapolis before heading to the Marion County Democratic Party’s primary celebration.

The polls will open at 6 a.m. Tuesday and close at 6 p.m. To find out if you have registered to vote, retrieve your voting information, check to see if you have the proper ID, or get a list of candidates, or to get a provisional ballot, head to the Secretary of State’s website, www.in.gov/sos/.

To file a complaint, report possible fraudulent activities, or find out about your polling place’s accessibility, call this toll-free number: 866-IN1-VOTE (866-461-8683). Election staff from Help America Vote Act (HAVA) will be on hand to answer calls from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Tuesday.

Greg Margason is a reporter with TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

Lesley Weidenbener, managing editor, The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – Just one day before a new poll showed that state Treasurer Richard Mourdock had opened a double digit lead on incumbent Sen. Richard Lugar, I was part of a panel on the Indianapolis public radio show No Limits discussing the race.

Even at that point, we all agreed that Lugar – a six-term senator who has gained national and international respect for his work on nuclear proliferation issues – was in trouble.

Voters seem concerned that he’s spent more than 35 years in Washington D.C., that he’s 80 years old, and that he had supported two of President Barack Obama’s nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Frankly, even Lugar acknowledged later he wasn’t surprised that the survey – the Howey/DePauw Indiana Battleground Poll – had found him behind.

What I think surprised us all was the margin: 10 percentage points.

The poll had Mourdock’s support at 48 percent (including those leaning toward him) and Lugar at 38 percent. It was a huge turnaround from just a month before when a Howey/DePauw poll had Lugar up by 7 points.

But one thing that the poll might not have been able to measure was the impact that Democrats could have on the race if they decide to cross over and vote in the GOP primary.

Such action is not unprecedented. Four years ago when Indiana was the focus of attention in the Democratic primary battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, thousands of Hoosiers who normally ask for GOP ballots were thought to have switched over to the Democratic primary to participate.

Kip Tew, a former state Democratic chairman who was on that radio panel with me, said there’s no way to know how many Republican voters made the switch. That’s in part because in Indiana, voters don’t register as Democrats or Republicans. They simply show up at the polls and tell the folks working there which ballot they want.

So there’s no true number of Republicans or Democrats in the state and therefore no way to count who switched ballots.

But Tew, who also headed up Obama’s campaign efforts in Indiana four years ago, said Democrats have since tried to connect with many of the new 2008 Democrat primary voters, only to be rebuffed. He presumes that’s because they’re really Republicans.

Tew believes similar crossover could occur in Tuesday’s primary, as Democrats who have supported Lugar in past general elections take a GOP ballot to try to prevent Mourdock – a tea party favorite – from gaining the nomination and perhaps ultimately the seat.

In fact, Tew said that if Lugar wins on Tuesday, he will have Democrats to thank.

Indeed, the Howey/DePauw Indiana Battleground Poll found that self-described conservative voters were far more likely to support Mourdock than they were Lugar. Moderate GOP voters, on the other hand, were more likely to support Lugar.

That means Lugar needs more moderates to show up on Tuesday to have any chance of winning.

But there are only a couple places to find more moderates – from independents who don’t normally vote in the primary and from conservative Democrats willing to cross over.

Unfortunately for Lugar – if the Howey/DePauw poll is to be believed – droves of Democrats will have to cross over to make up for Mourdock’s 10 percentage point lead.

And while Democrats have few interesting races on their primary ballot, it still seems unlikely that a Senate race – especially one so filled with negative campaigning – will inspire thousands of Democrats to pull GOP ballots.

But it’s possible. And on Friday, Lugar was essentially encouraging folks to do just that. He called on farmers and minority Hoosiers and women to show up at the polls on Tuesday and help him to victory.

Should he pull it out, I think I agree with Kip Tew: He’ll have Democrats to thank.

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – State tax collections in April were 25 percent higher than during the same month one year ago, but Gov. Mitch Daniels cautioned against too much celebration, saying the increase was due in part to the faster processing of income tax returns.

Gov. Mitch Daniels on Friday cautioned against too much optimism based on higher-than-expected tax receives in April. He said the Department of Revenue has been procesing returns faster than usual, which has distorted the revenue results. Photo by Lesley Weidenbener, The Statehoues File.

“A lot of that is going to reverse in May,” Daniels said. “Let’s wait and see how it smoothes out.”

Still, the governor said it appears the state is on track to meet or exceed projections for the fiscal year that ends on June 30, even as spending is below appropriations. That means the state should end the fiscal year with more than $1.5 billion in the bank, enough to provide taxpayer refunds of some $60 or more per person.

Total collections for April were nearly $1.85 billion – or about $159 million more than projected. That included higher sales and income tax collections.

That brings the state’s revenue for the current fiscal year to $329 million more than lawmakers projected when they wrote the current budget.

But because the higher income tax payments made up such a significant part of the increase, state officials said it’s too soon to know how much of the boost is simply the result of income tax filing and processing.

“Both refunds and payments are being processed faster than ever,” State Budget Director Adam Horst wrote in a memo about the revenue numbers.

The Department of Revenue processed roughly 260,000 more individual income tax returns – with $160 million more individual income tax payments received – in April 2012 than it did in April 2011, Horst said.

“While some of this increase reflects organic growth,” Horst said, “it is likely that May revenues will decline because there are fewer payments remaining to be processed.”

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

Purdue Student Body President Brett Highley said Friday that his organization plans a marketing campaign to let students know about a new law meant to get help for those who drink too much. Photo by Lesley Weidenbener, The Statehouse File.

INDIANAPOLIS – College leaders said Friday they are spreading the word about a new law that will grant limited immunity to minors who call 911 to help a friend who’s had too much to drink – and Gov. Mitch Daniels said state government may help out.

Daniels hosted student leaders and lawmakers in his office Friday for a ceremonial signing of Senate Bill 275, which will now be known as the Lifelife Law.

The governor actually signed the bill in March, shortly after lawmakers approved it, but the ceremony gave him the opportunity to recognize those who helped pass it.

Daniels called the law “common sense” but said the idea “needed to be explained, it needed to be argued for and advocated effectively” and the student leaders did that so well that the measure passed easily in both the House and Senate.

The students have already launched www.IndianaLifeline.org to educate students and others about the law. And student leaders said they are working through existing college programs to spread the word.

Indiana University Student Body President Justin Kingsolver explained Friday why the state needed a law to grant limited immunity to students willing to call 911 to help a friend who has had too much to drink. Gov. Mitch Daniels had a ceremonial signing of the bill Friday, although he'd acted to make it law earlier this year. Photo by Lesley Weidenbener, The Statehouse File.

Brett Highley, the student body president at Purdue University, said 10,000 students are participating in an online alcohol education program where the new law will be promoted. And, he said, Purdue’s student government has other plans as well.

“We’ve already allocated some of our budget in student government specifically for educational efforts, a marketing campaign so students know this is out there and can factor this into their decision making,” Highley said.

Daniels said he hopes that state agencies will also be participating in the education effort.

“You can never take for granted that things that are well known here – well known to those of you who cover events – have really percolated and permeated” in the public, Daniels said. “So we will work on that.”

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels said Friday that college student leaders are the reason the legislature passed a law meant to help students who drink so much they need emergency help. Photo by Lesley Weidenbener, The Statehouse File.

The law grants limited immunity to so-called good Samaritans – but not to the minors who may have become sick from drinking to excess or using drugs.

The law means that an individual who calls 911 or assists with emergency help could not be prosecuted for minor consumption, public intoxication or consumption in a car, bus or other transportation. However, it would not provide immunity to minors for more serious crimes, such as drunk driving or possession of drugs.

“In too many cases – and one would be too many – students were hesitant to come to the aid or summon aid to a friend who had over-indulged in alcohol, sometimes with tragic consequences,” Daniels said Friday. “They hesitated because they were afraid of bringing trouble down on themselves.”

Several of Indiana’s universities have implemented similar policies that provide immunity from campus penalties to those who call for help for a friend.

At Indiana University and Purdue, those policies have been in place for one school year and Highley said they’ve been used six or seven times.

“It’s not incredibly rampant but the stakes are very high in those situations so it’s very important,” Highley said. “As we continue to be able to educate on it, I think we’ll see it used more.”

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – An animated Sen. Richard Lugar called Friday on all Hoosier voters – not just Republicans – to cast ballots in Tuesday’s GOP primary and save him from defeat at the hands of challenger Richard Mourdock, who appears to have opened up double-digit lead in the race.

The Howey/DePauw Indiana Battleground Poll – released Friday, just four days before the primary –found that 48 percent of GOP voters plan to support or are leaning toward Mourdock, the state’s treasurer, while only 38 percent support Lugar.

“I believe that right now, if a majority of Hoosiers were to vote in an election – that is all Hoosiers, regardless of party, Republicans, independents, Democrats – I would win,” said Lugar, who has served in the Senate for more than 35 years. “I think I have majority support in our state. The question is how to have that majority support sufficiently (in the primary) so we get to a general election.”

But Mourdock spokesman Chris Conner said the poll only verifies what “we have been hearing across Indiana.”

“Hoosiers are tired of Sen. Lugar’s willingness to support liberal causes in Washington,” Conner said. “They feel he is out of touch with the values they hold dear and they firmly believe it is time for a change.”

Mourdock’s 10-point lead is a dramatic turnaround from just a month ago, when a poll by the same group showed the challenger down 7 points. Those results include what the pollsters call “leaners” who could change the minds. But even without those voters, Mourdock still leads by 8 percentage points, the poll found.

The winner of the Republican primary will face Democratic Rep. Joe Donnelly in the general election. Donnelly is unopposed in Tuesday’s primary.

U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar appealed to all Hoosiers to come to vote in the GOP primary Tuesday to save him from defeat. A new poll shows challenger Richard Mourdock has a 10-point lead over Lugar. Photo by Lesley Weidenbener, The Statehouse File.

Lugar said he was not surprised the poll found him behind and attributed Mourdock’s lead to national, special interest groups and the millions of dollars they’ve spent on advertising that criticize him. But the poll also found that voters were moved by endorsements of Mourdock by the National Rifle Association and Right to Life as well as Lugar’s six terms in office and his age. Lugar is 80 and would be 86 at the end of a seventh term if he wins this year; Mourdock is 60.

“While the tea party and other national groups got into this race because of what they consider to be Lugar’s liberal transgressions, it appears that a bigger issue for GOP primary voters is simply his longevity,” said Christine Matthews of Bellwether Research, one of the pollsters who conducted the survey. “It is a very difficult environment to be running as a 35 year incumbent.”

But standing in his headquarters Friday with volunteers making calls to voters in the background, Lugar said his experience is a plus, not a minus. He cited a list of a accomplishments that should lead farmers, union workers, veterans, Jews, women, blacks and Hispanics as people to “come forward and visibly give their support” in the campaign’s closing days.

“We’re trying to translate the support from each of the groups I have mentioned into a primary victory, appreciating that the negative advertising has raised our negatives,” Lugar said. “But I would simply say I am hopeful that people will begin to think about positives.”

Lugar refused Friday to say whether he would support Mourdock if the challenger wins the primary, saying that he focused instead on finding a way to win on Tuesday. The key, he said, is making Hoosiers aware that he is the only candidate with the experience and contacts necessary to represent Indiana nationally and internationally.

He called Mourdock “unqualified” for the office.

But Conner said Mourdock just disagrees with Lugar on a host of issues and said Lugar’s negative campaign that has not convinced voters that he should be reelected.

“After a long and distinguished career, Sen. Lugar has by all accounts run a very negative and personal campaign,” Conner said. “Choosing to rely on attacking Richard Mourdock’s character rather than discussing his own record of supporting Obama’s liberal Supreme Court justices, earmarks and bailouts and even amnesty for illegal immigrants.”

The Howey/DePauw Indiana Battleground Poll found that voters who identified as “very conservative” were far more likely to favor Mourdock, who also had a slight lead among those voters somewhat less conservative.

Lugar only led among those Republican voters who considered themselves moderates.

The poll was conducted by Matthews, a Republican, and Democratic pollster Fred Yang of Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group and sponsored by Howey Politics Indiana and DePauw University. It is based on 700 likely voters with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

If family feuds make you squirm, you’ll be glad when this primary’s over. While Democrats across Indiana have lain low, infighting among Republicans has rivaled that of Cain and Abel.

Dick Lugar — “Obama’s favorite Republican.”

“Treasurer Richard Mourdock’s got problems.”

“We can’t trust David McIntosh as our congressman.” Etc., etc.

In close primary races, such as the Lugar-Mourdock battle, and with an open House seat at stake, as in the heavily Republican 5th District, the heated rhetoric is no surprise. The concern for Republicans is that they will end up self-destructing. Aren’t they handing Democrats on a silver platter some of the most potent arguments to be used against them in the fall?

Nobody knows.

Conventional wisdom holds that there’s a “divisive primary effect.” The bloodier a primary, the less likely the winner will prevail in the general election.

The theory is based on several assumptions: 1. That the candidate will emerge so bruised from the primary that he can’t recover. 2. That followers of the losing candidate will not wholeheartedly support their party’s nominee, and 3. That to win a divisive primary a candidate must cater to a more extreme wing of the party, which will hurt him/her in the November election when voters value moderation.

Pundits have been championing this theory for decades, yet it’s been studied by dozens of political scientists, and they’ve all reached different conclusions.

A 2005 article in Legislative Studies Quarterly noted, “Some studies have found that divisive primaries hurt candidates in the general election; others have found a mixed relationship or none at all. Recent scholarship has even begun to turn the common wisdom on its head, finding that divisive primaries actually help U.S. House challengers.”

The 2008 primary between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton provided another case study. Republican John McCain clinched the GOP nomination by early March; Democrats battled until June when Clinton finally conceded there was no way for her to win the delegate count at the Democratic National Convention.

One researcher found that Obama’s general election vote totals were higher in the most competitive primary states. Another concluded that the divisive primary suppressed turnout among some voters and caused more defections to John McCain and the Republicans. Either way, Obama won the popular vote with a whopping six-point margin.

Although it’s dated, a major 1984 study by Patrick Kenney and Tom Rice examined the relationship between primary divisiveness and general election results in gubernatorial and senatorial elections. Its conclusion: “A divisive primary adversely affects a party’s chance for general election victory.” Curiously, the study found that divisive primaries hurt Senate candidates more than governor candidates and Democrats more than Republicans. Subsequent studies have challenged these findings.

Equally curious, when it comes to state legislative races, the divisive primary effect does not seem to apply.

Researchers analyzed legislative campaigns in nine states during the 1994 and 1996 election cycles. “Greater divisiveness in a candidate’s primary leads to a higher vote share in the general election. Similarly, greater divisiveness in a general election opponent’s primary leads to a candidate receiving a lower vote share. Simply the presence of a primary challenge is found to exert a substantial positive influence for a candidate in the general election, particularly in open seat contests.”

Of course, in heavily partisan districts, the divisive primary effect is irrelevant. The eight-way Republican primary battle to replace retiring 15-term Rep. Dan Burton is so heated because it will determine the general election winner. Democrats don’t stand a chance in the 5th District.

The Lugar-Mourdock primary is a different matter. A Howey-DePauw Indiana Battleground Poll indicates Lugar would trounce the lesser-known Democratic contender, Joe Donnelly, while Mourdock and Donnelly are tied at 35 percent.

The outcome of this family feud will not only provide fodder for political scientists studying the divisive primary effect, it could have disastrous consequences for Republicans come November.

Andrea Neal is adjunct scholar with the Indiana Policy Review Foundation. Contact her at aneal@inpolicy.org.

INDIANAPOLIS – Indiana’s state parks and reservoirs have a full schedule of activities from Friday through Sunday for what the Indiana Department of Natural Resources calls Welcome Back Weekend.

“We roll out the red carpet to old friends and people who’ve never visited or haven’t visited recently,” said Ginger Murphy, assistant director for stewardship for the DNR Division of State Parks & Reservoirs. “We show off what’s new and remind our veteran guests what’s so cool about the old standards.”

Welcome Back Weekend events include:

• Morel Mushroom Festival at Brown County State Park
• Geocaching events at Harmonie State Park
• Goat milking, leather working and more at the Hoosier Homestead Gathering at Salamonie Lake
• A dog walk at Fort Harrison State Park
• Spring hikes at Shades, Turkey Run, Prophetstown, Indiana Dunes and Chain O’Lakes state parks and Raccoon State Recreation Area
• Folk Arts Festival at Patoka Lake
• Evening campfires at Mounds and Whitewater state parks
• A cornhole tournament at Summit Lake State Park
• Fitness walks at Hardy Lake and Mounds and Tippecanoe River state parks
• Canoe paddles at Whitewater Memorial State Park and Monroe Lake

For a complete list and details, see www.in.gov/dnr/parklake/5882.htm.

All fees will be in effect during Welcome Back Weekend. Gate fees for most properties are $5 per in-state vehicle and $7 per out-of-state vehicle.

An annual entrance pass, which can be purchased at each property at the gate, costs $36 for a state resident and $18 for state residents ages 65 and older. Special SPR Go! Value Packages that include annual entrance passes and other offerings can be purchased online at www.innsgifts.com. An out-of-state pass costs $46.

John Krull, executive editor, The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – Just in the past few days, my mailbox has been stuffed with campaign pieces in the race for Indiana’s 5^th Congressional District Republican nomination that proclaim that one candidate is corrupt and a liar and another is a secret abortionist.

And those are the nice ones.

That race, like so many others, has gotten increasingly nasty and negative not because the candidates disagree on the issues but because they agree on the big questions. The two leading candidates – former Rep. David McIntosh, R-Ind., and former U.S. Attorney Susan Brooks – both want to roll back health care reform. Both are staunchly anti-abortion. Both have vowed to fight President Obama at every turn.

When there are no real philosophic differences between candidates for the same office, they have nothing left to argue about but questions of personality and character.

That’s when tempers get short and campaigns get ugly.

And trivial.

Really, really trivial.

It will get worse as this election year goes on.

Consider the presidential election.

The biggest issue dividing Republicans and Democrats is the passage of health care reform. The adoption of those reforms served as the midwife to the tea party movement that has both energized and destabilized the GOP. It became one of the dividing lines in American politics.

For different reasons, though, both Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Mitt Romney will be reluctant to talk a lot about health care reform on the campaign trail.

Obama’s reluctance stems from the fact that prolonging the discussion about health care reform gains him nothing. He got the measures passed and, unless the U.S. Supreme Court strikes it down, it is law now. All the people who supported the reforms already are voting for him – and he doesn’t want to do more to motivate the people who disagreed with it because he’s not likely to get their votes.

Ever.

Romney’s situation is a bit more complex. Obama’s plan closely resemble one Romney championed and got adopted as state law in Massachusetts when he was governor there. Because of that, Romney will have a hard time taking potshots at “Obamacare” without shooting in his own record. Worse, the longer Romney stretches outs that debate the more he risks alienating a key portion of the Republican base – the portion that provides most of the energy for the GOP right now.

So, instead of a spirited discussion about the issue most important to voters, we’re likely to get an inspiring debate about the elevator Mitt Romney wants to build in his garage to move his cars from floor to floor or the precise form in which Barack Obama’s birth certificate appears, right down to a detailed analysis of the ink smudge in the lower left corner. When those substantial topics are exhausted, we doubtless will get treated to more dissertations on dogs – the story that Mitt Romney transported his dog in a carrier strapped to the top of the car and the tale that Barack Obama once ate dog meat while overseas.

Heady stuff, huh?

And then it will get ugly.

Democrats will try to paint Romney as a latter-day robber baron, a man who laughs at the misery of people who lost their jobs in the economic downturn and cares only about other plutocrats. There will be accusations – most barely founded in fact – about how he acquired his wealth and suggestions that he is not honest.

Republicans will accuse Obama of being a tyrant and a socialist. They again will raise questions – again, with little basis in fact – about his church and argue that he is not an American.

The sad thing is this all will work.

Because more and more politically engaged Americans identify themselves as partisans of one stripe or another, politicians don’t see much benefit in persuasion. Without a movable middle to appeal to, campaigns figure that the candidate with the most motivated base will win.

Nothing in politics motivates as well as anger, so the focus will be on demonizing the other candidate.

That means that, between now and November, my mailbox – and yours – will continue to collect a lot of garbage.

John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits” WFYI 90.1 FM Indianapolis and executive editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – The state Judicial Nominating Commission will select Indiana’s next chief justice at a 10 a.m. public meeting May 15 at the Statehouse.

The group – which also recruits candidates for the state’s appellate courts – will choose a chief justice from among four current members of the court. The fifth – Justice Frank Sullivan – will retire from the bench this summer.

The new chief justice will replace Randall Shepard, who retired from the bench this spring. Since then, Justice Brent Dickson – the senior-most judge on the five member court – has been serving as acting chief justice.

Indiana’s selection process is unusual. Indiana is the only state to use a commission to select its chief justice, according to Indiana Court Times magazine. In most states, voters elect their chief justices, the court chooses its leader or the governor appoints a chief justice.

The Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission is made up of seven members, who are selected from three districts that represent roughly northern, central and southern Indiana. Attorneys in each region select a lawyer to sit on the commission and the governor selects a non-attorney from each region. The state’s chief justice – or acting chief justice – also serves on the commission.

The commission is scheduled to meet from 10 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. in Room 319, where it is expected to interview the current members of the Indiana Supreme Court. The commission has asked the justices to speak about the qualities and attributes important in a chief justice.

At 11:30 a.m. the commission is expected to go into executive session for discussion. Following the executive session, the commission will convene in a public to vote on its selection.

INDIANAPOLIS – The crowd at the Washington Township GOP Lincoln Day dinner last week offered Sen. Richard Lugar a standing ovation, a tribute to 35 years of serving the state of Indiana and his stature as a national and international leader.

But outside the dinner, those same three decades in the U.S. Senate are not serving Lugar so well. His primary opponent, state Treasurer Richard Mourdock, and several outside interest groups are using his long tenure in Congress against him, running television ads that portray Lugar as having stayed in Washington D.C. too long.

U.S. Senate candidates running in the GOP primary, Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind. and Richard Mourdock participate in a debate April 11 in Indianapolis. (AP Photo/Darron Cummings, Pool)

Lugar shrugs off such criticism.

“I’ve served the best of my ability for all 35 years and four months, and I think it’s been productive service on behalf of our state,” Lugar said.

He is proud of his work representing Indiana and has refused to hide from it, despite his biggest political challenge since his election in 1976. In fact, with the primary just days away, Lugar has continued his work in the Senate, even as it has cost him opportunities to campaign.

He said he’s been present for every Senate roll call throughout the campaign season. That’s what Hoosiers elected him to do, he said.

“Indiana has been there for each of these debates and each of these decisions, and I can be relied upon as somebody who is trustworthy in fulfilling my responsibilities and – going beyond that – in terms of original thought,” he said.

Lugar, 80, was mayor of Indianapolis when he first ran for a Senate seat in 1974 and lost to Democrat Birch Bayh. Two years later, he defeated Democrat Vance Hartke for the state’s other Senate seat.

Today – as he seeks a seventh term – he’s the Senate’s most senior Republican and the longest serving member of Congress in Indiana history.

That tenure has led him into leadership and he’s currently chairing the Foreign Relations Committee and is the former chairman of the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee.

Those are also the issues that have defined Lugar’s career and put him in a position to shape national farm policy and advise presidents on international issues, including U.S. policies on North Korea, South Africa, Iraq and Burma.

In 1986, he led the Senate effort to pass the Anti-Apartheid Act, which imposed economic and political sanctions on South Africa. He has worked to lessen the United States dependence on foreign oil with an emphasis on corn-based ethanol, a move that has been lauded and ridiculed. And he is perhaps best known for a program he launched with then-Sen. Sam Nunn, a Georgia Democrat, to eliminate nuclear weapons.

But as he’s stayed focused on key national and international issues, some political leaders and voters have wondered if Lugar has lost touch with his home state. Lugar still operates a farm in Indiana, although his home is now in Virginia and he stays in hotels while visiting the state.

“If in fact you send somebody to Washington to do the very best he or she can on behalf of your interest, ideally you want that person on the job,” Lugar said. “So I would say respectively, I am a Hoosier, I’ve always been a Hoosier and I’ll always be a Hoosier, and I’m grateful for that opportunity.”

Lugar’s appearances at Republican events over his Senate career have been less common, though he is making the rounds now.

Last weekend at the Washington Township GOP Club Lincoln Day Dinner in Indianapolis, he was the keynote speaker. Lugar used the opportunity to tout his work in foreign affairs, but he also mingled, meeting and talking with voters.

Lugar was approachable, even to those who appeared to support his opponent. He signed an autograph for one little girl who wore a Mourdock pin and spent some of the evening taking pictures with guests.

Andy Downs, director of the Mike Downs Center for Indiana Politics at Indiana-Purdue, Fort Wayne, said that personality trait serves Lugar well.

“Richard Lugar is a nice person and is quite approachable,” Downs said. “There are people across the state who think they know him because of one casual interaction with him.”

In his keynote address, Lugar urged Republicans to get out and vote in this year’s primaries and election. But he focused less on his own race and more on the importance of electing a Republican president.

Lugar said Republicans ought to be heading for the polls, because “this is our year.”

He had no harsh words for Mourdock. Instead, that fight is taking place largely on the airwaves and in direct mail pieces, where Lugar’s campaign has said Mourdock “can’t be trusted to fight for us in Washington.”

Abdul Hakim-Shabazz, a Republican commentator, introduced Lugar at last week’s event and said it was vital for guests to remember they are all Republicans, even throughout campaigns.

“Always believe the things that unite us will always be bigger than the things that divide us,” Hakim-Shabazz said. “And nobody understands that better” than Lugar.

But Lugar’s GOP critics say he’s not conservative enough for the Republican Party. They have condemned his votes for President Barack Obama’s nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court, which Lugar said he has supported because they were judicially qualified.

And they dislike votes he cast for bailouts that Lugar said were necessary to protect the nation’s economy.

The national, conservative Club for Growth has endorsed Mourdock in the race and spent millions of dollars trying to defeat Lugar.

“We need a more fiscally conservative direction,” said the group’s president, Chris Chocola. “There is no reason to believe that six more years from Richard Lugar in Washington will be different from the past 35 years.”

But Downs said Lugar understands that many issues facing the nation are dealt with over the span of years or decades and not just in a few weeks or months.

Lugar “has worked for slow incremental change in policies and this has paid off for him,” Downs said.

Nowhere is that more evident than in his work with Nunn to rid the world of nuclear weapons. Lugar has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize multiple times for that work.

In 1991, the senators authored the Nunn-Lugar act which provided U.S. support and expertise to aid Russia in dismantling and safeguarding its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.

In 2003, Congress voted to approve the Nunn-Lugar Expansion Act, which allowed the program to reach outside the former Soviet Union.

Lugar said the program helped to make Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus free of nuclear weapons, which were the third, fourth and eighth largest nuclear weapons powers in the world.

“I believe the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program will be the item that people will most write and talk about and it’s a continuing program,” Lugar said.

Lugar said if he wins another term, he would continue that work.

But Lugar said his international influence doesn’t end with weapons. He said he’s built important relationships with world leaders who now trust him.

“This is something that can’t be replaced very rapidly. By visiting with at least two of these world leaders every week for a long time we’ve built up some very important relationships,” he said.

And Lugar dismisses criticism that his foreign policy work means he’s not in touch with Hoosiers. During the race’s only debate, Lugar talked about his family farm and a business where he worked with his grandfather to “create new jobs, create new products, create new markets abroad and hire new people.”

He emphasized ethanol, which has raised prices for corn and for farmland in Indiana. And he peppered his remarks with references to Indiana communities and landmarks.

“Working on issues important to Hoosiers has helped him develop a good reputation at home,” Downs said. “Working on issues important to the country and world has helped him develop a good reputation more broadly.”

Lugar has relied in part on popular Gov. Mitch Daniels to share the message that he remains relevant to Indiana. The campaign is airing two commercials featuring Daniels and in one the governor said he couldn’t “think of anyone so reflective of the thinking, principles and ideals of our state.”

Outside the commercial, Daniels – who worked for Lugar when he was mayor of Indianapolis – sounds just as supportive.

“I think he’s a remarkable asset to this state,” Daniels said. “I can’t omit to mention that he gave me my start and he was my first boss. He’s the godfather of one of my children. I have a very strong personal loyalty to him.”

Daniels said it’s a loyalty he could not ignore.

“I’ll enthusiastically support whoever wins,” he said. “But on the day Richard (Mourdock) decided to run, I told him I have a personal association with the senator that goes back a long time and I cannot walk away from that.”

Others have come to Lugar’s aid as well. Organizations representing key GOP constituencies – including the Indiana Chamber of Commerce and Indiana Manufacturers Association – have endorsed Lugar, in part for his willingness to work across party lines to find solutions to problems.

“In a time when congressional approval levels are at record lows and partisanship is all too common, Sen. Lugar should be applauded for his ability to reach across the aisle and work with members of both parties,” said Indiana Chamber President Kevin Brinegar. “We believe Hoosiers strongly benefit from his expertise and experience.”

And Lugar said he believes his views still represent the majority of Republicans in Indiana.

“I accepted and sought the opportunity to serve Indiana in the United States Senate and that means to represent Indiana, not leave Indiana,” Lugar said. “I’ve tried to do that diligently.”

Samm Quinn is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – State Treasurer Richard Mourdock will tell you it’s unlikely a geologist with a degree from Ball State University would someday run for U.S. Senate.

But less than one week before the primary election, Mourdock, 60, is not only running – he’s on the cusp of a major upset in a race that once seemed foolhardy, a challenge to incumbent Sen. Richard Lugar, the longest serving senator in Indiana history.

U.S. Senate candidates running in the GOP primary, Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind. and Richard Mourdock participate in a debate April 11 in Indianapolis. (AP Photo/Darron Cummings, Pool)

Lugar is “in deep trouble,” Mourdock said last week after participating in a Federalist Society event in Indianapolis.

“There is a tremendous resentment toward Congress right now,” Mourdock said. “Because Sen. Lugar has been there for 36 years, many see him as a big part of the problem, not the solution.”

Mourdock reached this place after a career in the energy industry.

After graduating from Ball State in 1975, Mourdock took a field geologist position with AMAX Coal Company.  He left in 1979 to work for Standard Oil Company in Ohio and followed with a post at Koester Companies in Evansville, where he served as vice president of the company’s coal subsidiary and eventually became vice president of business development for the parent company.

Then in 2000, Mourdock founded a successful environmental consulting business.

But after three decades in the energy business, Mourdock felt a new pull. He assigned himself a goal: Read 10 pages of American history every night.

After several books, Mourdock said, “I got really interested in different aspects of government, and that is what ultimately led me here.”

“Here” is an intense fight – laced with brutal television ads, mailers and voter calls – for a seat in the U.S. Senate.

It has been a race that has been gentlemanly in person, where Mourdock in particular has been complementary of Lugar’s career even as he has advocated that voters should have a choice.

But the race has been vicious on the air as the campaigns – as well as outside interest groups – have weighed in to try to bolster one candidate while tearing down the other. Mourdock and his supporters have criticized Lugar’s long political career – which also included a stint as mayor of Indianapolis – and accused him of abandoning Indiana by living in a home in Virginia. The senator stays in hotels when he visits Indiana.

“The U.S. Constitution says when elected, you must be an inhabitant of that state,” Mourdock said. “He is clearly not, and that issue will not just go away.”

Even as Mourdock is talking about Lugar, though, he is exposing a possible weakness. The race has become a referendum on Lugar and less a choice between the incumbent and Mourdock.

Outside groups appear to be supporting the challenger more because of their dislike of Lugar than their admiration for Mourdock.

Right to Life backed Mourdock because the group is frustrated by Lugar’s votes in favor of President Barack Obama’s nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court. The National Rifle Association endorsed Mourdock in part because it didn’t like Lugar’s vote for a temporary semi-automatic weapons ban.

Club for Growth, an independent conservative group, has backed Mourdock because the group believes Lugar is too moderate.

Robert Dion, professor of political science at the University of Evansville, said it’s possible some Hoosiers may vote against Mourdock for the same reason he believes he will get votes.

“Most voters have a strong sense of what they think about Dick Lugar, but they don’t know much about Richard Mourdock at all,” said Dion, “Since there was only one debate before the primary, most of the real action in this campaign is going to take place on the air through paid advertising that gets repeated endlessly.”

Still, Mourdock is not without his own resume.

He gained national attention – and tea party kudos – as a man who stood up to President Barack Obama during the federal government’s bailout of Chrysler. Mourdock, who is charged with investing state police pension funds, said he sued and took the case to the U.S. Supreme Court because the Obama administration was trying to do an end run around federal bankruptcy laws meant to protect investors including the pension funds.

Mourdock will smile and tell you it humbles him to hear that he’s admired for the controversial move – one that critics say put Indiana jobs at risk – but you can tell he is proud of his maverick approach.

“It really was about that old pesky document, the American Constitution,” Mourdock said.

The U.S. Constitution created bankruptcy laws defining two types of creditors: Secured and non-secured. Secured credits are to get their money back “in the event of a nightmare. The secured creditors always got the money first,” he said.

“This changed with the Chrysler bailout,” he said. “Secured creditors were told they would be at the bottom, while the government chose which of their friends got to be at the top.”

Mourdock said government “should not have the right to pick winners and losers in industry, immigration, law, or banking.”

Mourdock ultimately lost his fight but gained a reputation as a constitutional conservative, someone willing to take on a tough fight to protect his ideas. Still, back in Indiana, the state treasurer remained largely unknown.

Initial polls showed Mourdock with low identification, especially compared with Lugar, who has become nearly a household name.

But as the campaign season has worn on, Mourdock has gained and polls have shown the race is tight. The last independent poll in the race – now one month old – showed Lugar with a lead, although it was within the survey’s margin of error.

Another poll – released more recently by a Mourdock-aligned group – showed Mourdock with a lead, again within the margin of error. That poll also showed Lugar’s favorability among Republicans had fallen.

“Richard Mourdock has really taken the initiative in the campaign and launched a viable challenge to Sen. Lugar by focusing on populist themes such as Lugar’s residency,” said Bill Kubik, a professor of political science at Hanover College. “Mourdock still needs to show that he can hold his own on major domestic and foreign policy issues.”

Mourdock admits that it hasn’t been easy “getting people ready to think we should have another senator.” But he believes “Republicans are about ready to say ‘It’s time’ on May 8th.”

Last week, Mourdock participated in the Federalist Society candidate forum in the London Room of the Conrad Hotel. Before sitting down for a meal, he shook hands and talked with those who attended.

He was light-hearted and laughed while eating and talking to others his table before getting down to business.

After lunch, Mourdock debated Obama’s Supreme Court nominees – Elena Kagen and Sonia Sotomayor – with Asheesh Agarwal, a Lugar representative who was standing in for the senator while Congress was in session in Washington D.C.

Lugar voted for both of the nominees, who ultimately were confirmed.

Mourdock said he would be much more conservative about Supreme Court nominees than Lugar. Agarwal relayed, based on past quotations from the senator, that Lugar voted to approve the two justices because the next candidate would be much more liberal.

“Had I been there, then I would have voted ‘no’ on that person as well,” Mourdock said.

After the event, Mourdock talked about how young Americans should be preparing for their careers.

“If I were a student today and I was really looking to have a bright future with a lot of opportunities, I’d be working to get better in engineering and the sciences,” Mourdock said. Then he added, “I always tell young people, ‘Please, please, please, whatever you do, do not work for government.’”

It was a sign of Mourdock’s small government leanings. The Republican advocates eliminating huge parts of the federal government – including the education, commerce and environmental protection agencies.

It’s the type of position that has won him favor among tea party voters and those in the Republican Party who are more conservative.

Mourdock said college graduates should go out and get some private sector experience for 25 or 30 years before turning to government.

“I really see so many young people today who want to go to government because it’s about security,” Mourdock said. “The government never fires anybody. I tell young people that job security is greatly overrated. Risk, however, is a good thing. It makes you a rounded, more capable person.”

That describes Mourdock, a man who fought the unions at the coal mines, who took on Obama and the Chrysler bailout and who now is working to defeat an Indiana political icon.

“It is scary at times,” Mourdock said of risk. “But it is a good thing.”

Greg Margason is a reporter with TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

An investigation of the Marion County Small Claims Courts has found serious problems with the management and procedures of the township-based judicial system.

A task force created by the Indiana Supreme Court released a report Tuesday following a four-month investigation of the practices inside the courtrooms.

The report included three plans to fix the problems with a goal of making the court system more just and fair to citizens in the county.

“The problems presented by the Marion County Small Claims Courts have been evident for many years and need to be addressed now,” wrote Indiana Appeals Court judges John Baker and Betty Barteau, who oversaw the investigation. “We hope this report will not only stimulate creative discussions but lead quickly to aggressive reforms.”

The Indiana Supreme Court earlier this year directed the task force to look into allegations of forum shopping and lack of judicial independence in small claims courts that are located in each of Marion County’s nine townships.

After conducting three public hearings in the county and gathering a wide variety of information on the court system, the task force found a range of serious issues in the courts that prevent litigants from receiving equal treatment.

The findings show that the small claims courts often lack transparency in their finances and sometimes fail to properly report and manage their funding.  The township governments’ records showed contradictions with the reports sent to the Indiana Supreme Court.

The report also suggests that some of the small claims courts appear to be an arm of debt collectors by allowing closed door settlement meetings in cubicles between the creditors’ attorneys and the defendant – often with no judge present or even in the same building.

“Debtor-defendants have complained that they were not informed upon arrival at a township court that they have a right to have their cases heard by the judge,” the report said. “Therefore, many defendant-debtors believe that they are required to negotiate and settle with creditors’ attorneys.”

Also non-English speaking litigants faced obstacles with none of the literature available in other languages.

The task force discovered problems with the venues for the small claims courts that led to forum shopping, a process where debt-collectors can take their claim to the township in the county that was most “collector-friendly”.

This shopping by the collectors resulted in transportation problems for litigants and financial obstacles for judges who make efforts to be fair and review settlement agreements, the report said.

The task force offered three plans to change the systems.

The first option would remove small claims courts from township government and incorporate them into the Marion Superior Court. The plan would create a small claims division.

The second option would reform the existing system by allowing the townships courts to remain independent but would require the General Assembly to let them set their own budgets and send appeals of their decisions to state appeals courts.

The second option also calls for the funding of a small claims court administrator for oversight as well as new rules to end forum-shopping within the courts.

The third option is a complementary plan of reforms to address each of the problems cited in the report by the task force. It would be implemented in addition to either the first or second options.

Among the proposed changes in option three: Judges would be required to inform litigants of their rights and approve all settlement agreements.

The task force acknowledged that the township court system is sometimes the only contact citizens have with the judicial system and there it should be effective and accessible.

“Caseloads are high and continue to grow every year,” the report concludes. “Nevertheless, changes are necessary to ensure that all litigants receive equal treatment and that large-volume case filers do not appear to have special access to the courts.”

Lauren Casey is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – Student leaders from at least seven colleges and universities in Indiana have signed a letter urging Congress and President Barack Obama to act quickly to prevent student loan interest rates from increasing – and take other action to stem rising student debt.

The young leaders are among 200 student body presidents representing more than 2.5 million college students nationally to sign the letter, which was organized by the National Campus Leadership Council.

The letter addresses the interest rate on subsidized Stafford student loans, which are set to double this summer. The leadership council estimates that for every year Congress fails to act to keep interest rates lower, college students will incur roughly $1,000 more in debt over the lifetime of a loan.

“I truly do believe that the federal government needs to address the problem of student interest rates,” Mike Keller, president of the Butler University student body, said Tuesday. “This is a situation where the government can’t just do nothing without people getting hurt.”

Keller and student leaders from Ball State University, Indiana University-Bloomington, Purdue University-West Lafayette, University of Notre Dame, Purdue University-Calumet and the University of Southern Indiana signed the letter.

The interest rate on Stafford student loans is to increase from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent on July 1. The White House estimates that about 7 million undergraduate students will be affected by the increase.

Obama has been touring colleges in North Carolina, Colorado and Iowa to talk about the issue and urge Congress to act. At the University of Iowa last week, the president told students that tuition and fees at the nation’s colleges have doubled in most of their lifetimes.

“That forces students like you to take out more loans and rack up more debt. The average student who borrows to pay for college now graduates with about $25,000 in student loan debt,” Obama said. “Americans now owe more on their student loans than they owe on credit cards.”

Presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney also has said he supports keeping the interest rate steady.

But doing so will cost about $6 billion annually. That has the GOP-led Congress looking for ways to keep the interest rate lower while maintaining promises to cut the federal deficit. Three Republican senators have proposed extending the 3.4 percent interest rate for one year with plans to pay for it by closing what they call a business tax loophole.

“With today’s tough economy, especially the high unemployment rate among young Americans, it is unacceptable to ask middle-class students and families to shoulder sharply higher student loan interest payments,” said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who chairs the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.  “We are offering a pragmatic and fiscally responsible solution to this problem.”

Andy MacCracken, associate director of the National Campus Leadership Council, said the issue matters because “it’s about young consumers.”

“The amount of debt we’re accumulating just to get through school seriously threatens our generation’s prosperity,” he said.

Congress is facing the issue because five years ago, President George W. Bush signed into law a bill – crafted by Democrats but approved with bipartisan majorities – that lowered the Stafford loan interest rates to the current 3.4 percent. But the law returns the rate to the original 6.8 percent this summer.

The higher rate will only affect student loans issued after July 1.

That’s why Keller, the Butler student president, said action is needed so urgently. But he said Congress must do more than simply address the Stafford loan interest rate.

“We should all be concerned about college debt. I’m not an economics major but even I can clearly see that it is the next big bubble that will shatter the American economy when it busts,” Keller said. “Long-term solutions need to be established so that college can be an affordable option for any student who is worthy to attend.”

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – Racecar drivers, corporate and government leaders – including Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller  joined together Tuesday for the first ever nationwide Stop the Texts Day.

Stop the Texts Day is part of an Ad Council campaign called “Stop the Texts. Stop the Wrecks.” The public service announcement campaign is meant to prevent texting and driving, which is already banned by Indiana law.

“I am glad that I was able to be a part of this project. The Ad Council folks do a good job of bringing awareness to causes such as this,” NASCAR driver Kasey Kahne said in a statement. “Hopefully this will help people realize how dangerous texting while driving can be.”

The public service announcements featuring Kahne were unveiled Tuesday as part of Stop the Texts Day. It is also the beginning of National Youth Traffic Safety Month.

The advertising agency RPA created the television, radio and digital public service announcements to encourage drivers, especially young drivers, to keep their attention on the road and not on the phone.

The ads direct viewers to www.stopthetextsstopthewrecks.org, a website that reinforces the importance of attentive driving with tips and statistics. Viewers are also invited to share status updates from the campaign’s Facebook and Twitter pages.

“Our latest research shows that young adult drivers continue to text and drive even with the knowledge that the act can seriously injure or kill others or themselves,” said Peggy Conlon, president of the Ad Council. “With the help of NASCAR driver Kasey Kahne, we are sending a wake-up call to young adult drivers that if you take your eyes off the road to read or respond to text messages there can be unfortunate consequences. We would encourage everyone to participate in Stop the Text Day to help us end the dangerous act of texting and driving.”

The Ad Council released a national survey May 1 that found that texting while driving remains common. About 60 percent of respondents said they have texted while behind the wheel.

The survey also found that 44 percent of young adult drivers are most influenced by their friends when it comes to encouraging safe driving habits. Parents follow that statistic at 33 percent.

Furthermore, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration cited 3,000 deaths and 416,000 injuries in 2010 caused by distracted driving, which includes texting while behind the wheel. The NHTSA also said distracted driving is the number one killer of American teenagers.

Indiana has a law against texting while driving, but it often goes on without punishment.

“Distracted driving is dangerous no matter what level of experience you have behind the wheel,” Zoeller said. “Many motorists drive distracted despite Indiana’s texting and emailing while driving ban. Stop the Texts Day gives us an opportunity to share with our friends and family the need to stop the texts and save lives.”

Jacie Shoaf is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller on Tuesday warned consumers not to respond to text messages claiming they have won free gift cards.

Since January, the attorney general’s office has received 76 consumer complaints about text messages claiming to be from Walmart. One example of the messages reads: You have been selected for a FREE $1,000 Walmart gift card! Enter code: “FREE317” at www.walmart.com.wlrt.biz to get yours now. Only 124 left! Txt OUT to remove.

Consumers who follow the message are asked to enter personal information which could lead to additional unwanted solicitations or to identity or credit card fraud. Replying to remove your number may only confirm the phone number is working and can lead to additional texts.

Walmart stores issued a consumer alert on the scam and said the text messages and the sites being used are not associated with the company.

This year the office has received 61 complaints regarding scam text messages claiming to be from Apple offering free iPhones or iPads. Consumers have also reported receiving fake Best Buy gift card offers.

Zoeller said consumers should resist responding to spam text messages or click on any links. Consumers can report and block spam text messages through their wireless service providers.

Consumers can also sign-up for Indiana’s Do Not Call list to block sales calls and text messages. The next quarterly deadline for signups is May 15. Register your residential landline, cell, voice over internet, or prepaid wireless numbers. To sign up or to confirm a number is already on the list, visit www.IndianaConsumer.com or call 888-834-9969.

Abdul Hakim-Shabazz is an attorney and the editor and publisher of IndyPoltics.Org.

As I watch the current political landscape and the harshness and coarseness of today’s political dialogue, I have to ask two questions: When did disagreement turn into disagreeable? And when did moderation become a vice instead of a virtue?

Just look at the race for the United States Senate.

Incumbent Richard Lugar is in the fight of his political life in the personification of challenger state Treasurer Richard Mourdock. Lugar’s supporters tend to be more establishment/traditional Republicans, while Mourdock has the backing of the more ideological/tea party-based Republicans.

I’ve known Richard Mourdock for a while and have known him to be engaging with a good dry sense of humor and also very passionate about the future of the country. I’ve also known Lugar to be thoughtful, a man who pays great attention to detail and has the ability to see the big picture.

I like both men personally, which is why this column isn’t so much about them as it is the tea party folks who don’t think Lugar is “conservative” enough and too much of a moderate. With all due respect, they must be smoking crack. Lugar is a Ronald Reagan Republican, who has a bad habit of thinking about an issue before making a decision.

Lugar’s dilemma is symptomatic of a nationwide dilemma. Moderate liberals and conservatives are a dying breed just as more Americans are declaring themselves political independents.

A recent study showed that out of 435 House seats, less than 100 are truly competitive. This is the result of gerrymandering, where districts are drawn to protect incumbents and political parties. While that may give you the short term benefit of holding on to power, it also means that races are won or lost in primaries and the only way to win a primary is to run either further to the right or to the left of your opponent.

That means when individuals make it to the legislature, they come from more polarized positions than their political predecessors. This happens at the state level and also at the national level. Thus we get our current political system. And the moderates that you need to solve the big problems like budget deficits and health care reform don’t exist.

We end up with a legislature that gets nothing done.

In addition, we get a situation in which any effort to compromise is seen as weakness and a bad idea. This strikes me as odd because compromise is the foundation of American society. We would not have had the Constitution without it. And ask any married couple about compromise.

Back in the old days of politics, boll weevils and gypsy moths were labels for conservative southern Democrats and moderate northeastern Republicans. Today they are considered pesky insects because to compromise in our politics is a bad idea.

Moderation is a vice. And reason is a scarce commodity.

God save the Republic, because I am starting to think that at this point, he may be the only who can.

Abdul is an attorney and the editor and publisher of IndyPoltics.Org. He is also a frequent contributor to numerous Indiana media outlets. He can be reached at abdul@indypolitics.org.

Sen. Majority Floor Leader Brandt Hershman, R-Buck Creek

INDIANAPOLIS – Senate President Pro Tem David Long, R-Fort Wayne, announced Monday that he has appointed Sen. Brandt Hershman, R-Buck Creek, to serve as the new majority floor leader, a key position in the caucus and the highest post appointed by the Long.

Hershman, who will continue to serve as chairman of the Senate Tax and Fiscal Policy Committee, replaces Connie Lawson, who left the Senate in March to become the Indiana Secretary of State. He will serve as a senior adviser to Long and in a variety of roles including administrative management, oversight of the Senate floor and development of legislative priorities.

“Brandt has repeatedly proven to be a strong leader, both as the chair of the Tax and Fiscal Policy Committee as well as in the position of majority whip,” Long said in a written statement. “He brings valuable experience and perspective to the role of majority floor leader and I am confident that he will do an excellent job for us.”

Sen. Ryan Mishler, R-Bremen, will replace Hershman as majority whip, which will require him to rally votes for caucus positions.

Senate Local Government Chairman Randy Head, R-Logansport

Sen. Randy Head, R-Logansport, will replace Lawson as chairman of the Senate Committee on Local Government.

“Connie Lawson did an outstanding job as chair of the Senate Local Government Committee, so the bar is set very high,” Long said. “However, I believe Randy Head is up to the task, with his strong background in county government and as a prosecuting

attorney.”

The appointments were effective immediately.

INDIANAPOLIS — License branches will be open next Monday and for extended hours on Election Day on May 8 for voters who need to obtain state ID cards and driver’s licenses to vote.

Indiana law requires voters to show a government-issued, photo ID – such as a driver’s license or passport – to cast a ballot.

To accommodate the law, Bureau of Motor Vehicles officials said branches will be open on May 7 from 8:30 a.m. to 8 p.m. and on May 8 from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. There is one exception. The Mount Vernon license branch will be open 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on  May 7 and May 8.

To insure voters have immediate access to services, license branches will only process ID cards, driver’s licenses and learner permits, providing testing is not required.

Aside from disability placards, the branches will not perform any other BMV services.

The Indiana BMV provides free, state-issued ID cards for voting purposes to any unlicensed Hoosier, as long as he or she can provide proper documentation and will be old enough to vote in the general election. The following documents are required to obtain a new state ID card or driver’s license (a complete list can be found at www.mybmv.IN.gov).

• Proof of identity document, such as a birth certificate or passport.
• Proof of Social Security document, such as a Social Security card, pay stub or W-2.
• Proof of lawful status, such as a birth certificate or passport.
• Proof of residency, two documents such as a voter registration card, utility bill or bank statement.

All license branches will resume normal business hours on May 9. Branches normally closed on Wednesdays will re-open May 10.

Lawmakers in Indiana and across the nation are studying whether to require drug tests of welfare and food stamp recipients, even though there are questions about the constitutionality of the move.

This year, legislators in at least 25 states proposed bills to implement some sort of drug testing system for a variety of welfare programs, most commonly Temporary Assistance for Needy Families but also Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program, which used to be called food stamps.

“Public welfare programs are definitely being looked at more closely,” said Rochelle Finzel, a researcher for the National Conference of State Legislatures. “Lawmakers want to make sure those benefits are being used appropriately.”

Some of those lawmakers see drug testing as another of the activities that are required for the privilege of receiving benefits, similar to the work participation requirements for many programs, Finzel said.

“It’s about making sure the dollars are used effectively,” she said.

But it’s not clear the courts will agree.

Laws that drug test welfare recipients can lead to a legal quagmire and have involved lengthy legal court battles. Proponents of drug testing have yet to successfully defend a law.

The first such case came in Michigan, where the state implemented drug tests for some welfare benefits. The American Civil Liberties Union sued and a Michigan appeals court ruled the tests violated the U.S. Constitution’s fourth amendment.

But in recent months, officials at the Michigan Department of Human Services have taken steps to bring the testing back using a different system.

And in Florida, Gov. Rick Scott last year suspended a law that required drug testing of some welfare recipients after the ACLU filed a lawsuit there – despite claims that it saved the state $1.8 million while in place.

In Indiana, state Rep. Jud McMillin, R-Brookville, proposed a drug-testing bill for Hoosiers who receive Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, a federally-funded welfare program known as TANF.

The bill would have implemented a two-year pilot program to require drug tests in three counties. At its completion, state officials would assess the effectiveness of the program.

The bill did not specify the counties that would have been included but the goal was to test about 2,000 recipients. The legislation died after it was amended to require lawmakers undergo drug tests as well, but lawmakers sent the issue to a summer committee for further study.

Although McMillin’s bill was similar to others proposed in state legislatures across the country, its impact would have been fairly small in scale.

In Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, Kentucky, South Carolina and South Dakota, the proposed bills would have required drug testing not only of those receiving TANF, but also food stamps. Bills in Georgia, Kentucky and South Carolina would have drug tested recipients of TANF and Medicaid.

Last month, Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal signed a drug testing bill into law.

“This program is intended as a safety net, and this requirement guarantees that the benefits are used for their intended purposes — to care for children and assist with job preparation,” Deal said.

But Liz Schott, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said the way states are currently going about the issue of drug testing welfare recipients is wrong. She thinks more focus should be put on treatment, rather than testing.

“It’s not that drug testing never has a role,” Schott said. “But it doesn’t have a universal role as the first place to start. It’s not legal, it’s not smart policy and it’s not cost effective. And, it doesn’t do anything to address the problem.

“It just makes it all about testing, not about treatment and responding to people who are actually in need of some attention on their substance abuse issues,” said Schott.

In Indiana, McMillin said his legislation aims to avoid constitutional issues by creating a two-tiered system. Essentially, individuals who apply to receive TANF benefits can elect whether to take the drug test. If they take the test and pass, they will receive benefits. However, McMillin said, refusal to take the test will be viewed as reasonable suspicion and those applicants will then be required to take the test anyway.

Schott is skeptical of this reasoning. She said it’s up to a court to decide what’s “reasonable suspicion” and therefore constitutional.

“They arbitrarily identify things as reasonable suspicion, but that, in my view, wouldn’t solve the problem,” Schott said.

Nevertheless, McMillin intends to introduce the bill – little changed from last year – when the session starts in January.

“Quite frankly,” he said, “it’s one of my top priorities.”

Tim Grimes is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

John Krull, executive editor, The Statehouse File

INDIANAPOLIS – As the bitter primary battle between Richard Lugar and Richard Mourdock for the GOP nomination for Indiana’s U.S. Senate seat, a lot of Democrats and Republicans have the same word in mind.

Nevada.

In 2010, the same Tea Party types who have provided the muscle for Mourdock’s campaign pushed Sharron Angle into the Republican nomination for Nevada’s U.S. Senate seat. In Angle, the Tea Party found perhaps the only Republican in the state of Nevada that Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., could have beaten.

And Reid, whose public approval ratings at the time had reached heights normally reserved for the common cold and personal bankruptcy, did beat her. Frightened by Angle’s extremist rhetoric, Nevada’s independent and moderate voters – and more than a few traditional conservatives – cast their ballots for Reid, albeit without much enthusiasm.

The Tea Party, through sheer obstinacy, seized defeat from the jaws of victory for the Nevada GOP.

Others around the country took note.

Including here in Indiana.

That is why, for the past few months, we have been treated to the odd spectacle of seeing Hoosier Democrats all but openly support Mourdock’s extremely conservative candidacy. Whenever Mourdock and his legitimate supporters have sounded a theme – such as the attacks on Lugar’s residency – Democrats have stepped in right behind as a chorus. The result has been a kind of strange echo effect.

Democrats aren’t doing this because they agree with Mourdock, who has pledged to do away with almost all of government’s regulatory functions and return America to the happy care-free days of the early Industrial Revolution, when work weeks of seven days and 100 hours were the norm.

No, Democrats are helping Mourdock because they don’t want to run against Lugar. Democrats thought their chances of beating Lugar in a general election were so good last time around that they didn’t even bother to run a sacrificial lamb against him. Lugar ran unopposed because he scared Democrats.

And Mourdock?

Well, that’s a different story. If Democrats could conjure up a dream candidate to run against, he or she would look an awful lot like Richard Mourdock.

First, there’s the fact that Mourdock filed suit against the Chrysler bailout, spending tax money and imperiling Hoosier jobs in the process. If there’s a better way to fire up the dispirited part of the Democratic base that is organized labor, Democrats haven’t found it. That issue alone could have a spill-over effect and persuade disgruntled progressives in the state to support not just the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate, Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., but also the party’s gubernatorial candidate, former Indiana House Speaker John Gregg. Donnelly and Gregg are conservative Democrats who aren’t likely to be able to make liberal hearts flutter without help.

Second, there’s the fact that a half-billion dollars in state funds keeps doing a disappearing/reappearing act. That probably isn’t Mourdock’s fault, but it doesn’t look good that it’s happening on his watch. If the state’s treasurer isn’t supposed to keep track of the state’s assets, then what’s he doing with his time?

Third, there’s Mourdock’s habit of auctioning himself off to every out-of-state conservative advocacy group there is. Again, part of this is not Mourdock’s fault. Because he hasn’t served in any legislative or truly executive capacity in government, he doesn’t have a record to point to. So, he has to make pledges to these groups in order to gain their support – and the advertising dollars that have driven his campaign. The impression this has left, though, is that of a guy willing to bargain away his independence for campaign cash.

Come fall, if Mourdock is the GOP nominee, expect Democrats to conjure up a caricature of him that resembles the late country comedienne Minnie Pearl – with price tags attached to every article of his clothing and a bar code stamped on his forehead.

That may be the reason the American Action Network, one of the top Republican spending groups, pulled its spending on Lugar’s behalf at the end of last week. If Mourdock beats Lugar, then Republicans face a much tougher fight in the fall than they anticipated or are used to. Republicans don’t want Mourdock to be any more vulnerable than he already is.

It could be like Nevada all over again – with the Tea Party once more seizing defeat from the jaws of victory.

John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits” WFYI 90.1 FM Indianapolis and executive editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS – When Democrat John Gregg announced this week he would push for the elimination of the sales tax on gas – and fund the plan by eliminating more than $500 million in spending elsewhere in state government – I flashed back to a tax cut plan he’d proposed more than a decade before.

It was 1998 and Gregg – then speaker of the Indiana House – was cruising around an independently-owned grocery store pushing a cart alongside a mother, helping the woman load it up with $100 worth of groceries.

That was when the state had a cash surplus of more than $2 billion and voters – and

Lesley Weidenbener, managing editor, The Statehouse File

many lawmakers – were calling for tax cuts. Republicans were pushing for changes in several income tax deductions and credits that would help lots of Hoosiers a little every year.

Gregg and House Democrats, meanwhile, proposed a $100 refund for every Hoosier. Ironically, it would have cost the state $500 million – one time.

Back then, the Democrats’ idea seemed a little silly – or at the very least an election year ploy. But years later, when we all looked back, that idea appeared pretty wise.

The following year, Republicans essentially won the day and lawmakers implemented a bunch of tax cuts that helped to wipe out the surplus – and reduced the state’s revenue stream on an ongoing basis.

Hoosiers barely noticed. Because most of the money was spent increasing a deduction here and a credit there, the impact just got mixed in with the complexity of income tax returns and most workers never realized they had actually paid the state less.

Meanwhile, as the economy worsened, the state had less money coming in and constituents were musing about where that surplus went. Lawmakers were frustrated and still talk about it today.

Maybe that’s why Gov. Mitch Daniels last year proposed one-time rebates for taxpayers anytime the state builds more in its checking account and reserves than is needed to fund the next year’s budget. Maybe Daniels learned a little something from the Democrat’s long-ago $100 refund proposal – something that Gregg appears to have forgotten.

Gregg’s new plan to cut the sales tax on gasoline is far more like that plan the GOP successfully implemented 13 years ago.

If gas is $3.40 a gallon (that’s before 36.5 cents in state and federal excise taxes are added), Gregg’s plan would save a driver roughly 24 cents per gallon or roughly $2.85 for a 12-gallon fill up.

That seems pretty substantial. But with gas prices continually fluctuating, the cut has the potential to get lost and quickly forgotten by voters – just like those cuts years ago.

In the meantime, the state would have some $500 million less to spend – not once but every year.

Gregg said he knows where to find the money. He wants to implement performance audits at state agencies to root out inefficiencies and savings.

But Democrats already have been howling at many of the cuts Daniels has been making in agency spending. And because Gregg said education won’t be subject to cuts, he’d have to find even bigger savings elsewhere.

It’s important to point out that Gregg is not alone in his plans to reduce revenue to state government. His GOP opponent – Mike Pence – wants to overhaul the state’s tax system with an eye toward cuts as well.

I suspect Daniels would tell them both he’s wrung just about every dollar out of state government he can. After all, he’s promised voters one of those taxpayer refunds at the end of this year and the more he saves, the bigger those refunds.

Fortunately for the next governor, though, those refunds won’t reduce tax receipts on an ongoing basis. But it sounds like whoever wins in November – whether it’s Gregg or Pence – might try to go even further.

Lesley Weidenbener is managing editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

INDIANAPOLIS — Lt. Gov. Becky Skillman is accepting nominations for the 2012 Golden Hoosier Award.

The award, created by Skillman in 2008, acknowledges Hoosier seniors for a lifetime of service and a commitment to helping improve the quality of life in their communities.

Hoosiers are encouraged to nominate outstanding seniors who are 65 years of age or older and have volunteered at least three years. Guidelines and the nomination form are available at www.lg.in.gov.

A completed nomination form is required. All application materials should be submitted together and must be postmarked by June 15, 2012.

The Golden Hoosier Award is presented in collaboration with the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration’s Division of Aging. For more information on the award and nomination process, call 317-232-1700 or email GoldenHoosier@fssa.IN.gov.

The awards will be presented on Aug. 14 at the Indiana State Fairgrounds.

INDIANAPOLIS – Gov. Mitch Daniels planted a bur oak on the Statehouse lawn Thursday, an effort to revive a tradition that ended with former Gov. Otis Bowen in 1977.

The bur oak, a species native to Indiana, is now growing on the west lawn of the Statehouse.

“We’re resurrecting this program of tree planting after many years and it couldn’t fit more perfectly with our efforts to protect, conserve and add to Indiana’s natural beauty,” Daniels said in a statement. “Indiana is now a national leader in conservation so it’s fitting to bring back the tradition Olive Inez Downing set so many decades ago.”

Indiana author Olive Inez Downing encouraged Gov. M. Clifford Townsend to begin the program in 1939. Downing’s idea was for each Indiana governor to plant a tree during his term. Members of Downing’s family – including niece-in-law Mary Jane Downing and grand nephew John Downing and his wife Nadine-  participated with Daniels in Thursday’s event.

Six Indiana governors and one lieutenant governor have planted nine trees on the Statehouse lawn. Bowen planted the last tree, which was grown from seeds carried to the moon on Apollo 14 by astronaut Stuart A. Roosa.

Other governors who planted trees were:

•             April 14, 1939: Gov. M. Clifford Townsend

•             April 14, 1944: Gov. Henry F. Schricker (1st term)

•             April 26, 1946: Gov. Ralph F. Gates

•             April 29, 1949: Gov. Henry F. Schricker (2nd term)

•             April 12, 1957: Gov. Harold W. Handley

•             April 10, 1959: Lt. Gov. Crawford F. Parker

•             April 14, 1961: Gov. Matthew E. Welsh

•             April 9, 1971: Gov. Otis R. Bowen (1st term)

•             April 19, 1977: Gov. Otis R. Bowen (2nd term – moon tree)

The bur oak tree planted by Daniels was donated by Cardno JFNew, an environmental and ecological solutions company headquartered in Walkerton and home to one of the country’s largest native plant nurseries.