For Those Who Missed It

WTHR Reports:

SPEEDWAY, Ind. (WTHR) — A former town executive of Speedway is taking a plea deal after being accused of misusing the town's money.

Kenneth Scott Harris served as a redevelopment contractor and stepped down in 2015 after the start of a state inquiry.

He was accused of owing the state of Indiana nearly $20,000.

In 2017, he told Eyewitness News he had made some mistakes and would be able to clear it up.

Now he's agreed to plead guilty to counterfeiting for submitting an altered invoice to the Speedway Redevelopment Commission. It was for a payment for a service at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway.

The plea include no jail time according to court records obtained by Eyewitness News.

I have questions:

• Who put this guy in charge? I presume it was the Speedway Town Council; which of our current members were members when the decision to put him in charge was made? Who voted in favor of putting him in charge? I believe that an answer to these questions would allow me to make a determination as to the judgment of such Town Council members.
• He is only charged with wrongdoing from March - May of 2015; he is charged with forging invoices on behalf of the Redevelopment Commission. It was not until December of 2015 that he stepped down. Who on the Town Council knew of his actions and allowed him to remain in his position?
• What qualifications did Scott Harris present to the Speedway Town Council that would justify the trust they put in him?
• Were those qualifications ever vetted?
• To what degree was there any oversight exercised as to Mr. Harris' activities running the Redevelopment Commission?
• I have noticed that the Town of Speedway has an enormous environmental liability for land purchased from PraxAir during Mr. Harris' tenure; where was the oversight on that? Where was the Town Council?

It may seem as though I am being overly harsh on our Town Council. I certainly don't mean to be. I am a supporter of the Redevelopment Commission generally. However, actions like those of Scott Harris engender mistrust from the community and undermine the effort as a whole; officials who enabled such actions should be called to count for their acts and/or omissions. It is not lost on me that Town elections are coming up. These questions, and many more, should be presented to our incumbent Town Councilors who seek re-election. 

If they are worthy of our trust, then they owe it to us to answer these questions.

Election Eve Plea to the Baby Boomers

Our politics are different. I get it. I am a liberal progressive. You are staunchly conservative. I get it.

However, please think about your children, grandchildren, and parents when you pull the lever tomorrow. Remember that your parents stormed the beach in Normandy to defeat fascism. Remember that they stood down both communism and fascism in their lifetimes. Remember that you were raised in an era where what was best for the country dominated political discussion, not what would best stick it to the other side.

Remember that you were raised in an era when the "fairness doctrine" forced users of the public airwaves to provide equal time to opposing political viewpoints; as opposed to now, where you can listen to the radio in Indiana all day and, with the exception of Lake Co. where Chicago stations are available, you will never hear a spirited defense of liberalism; rather, you just listen to straw men being knocked down, day in and day out.

Remember that you were raised in an era when how well the working class was doing was more important than how well the financial markets were doing; we now live in a state that recently passed a Right to Work law.

Remember that you were raised in an era that had considerably less national wealth than now, yet managed to provide more and better public services. We now live in an era where college costs tens of thousands of dollars per year and cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are looming (to get the debt under control following the $1.5T tax-cutting orgy that has reduced my taxes by approximately $50).

Remember that, from George Washington through Jimmy Carter, we built up a national debt of $1T. That number is now nearly $22T. (And no, it wasn't all Obama's doing, either).

Remember that your kids had to incur debt approaching a mortgage to get that college education that you financed with a summer job. Remember that your kids have another mortgage payment to pay for health insurance, whereas when you had young kids health insurance was approximately as costly as county income taxes. Remember that your children, for all of their faults, are raising your grandchildren. Remember that your grandchildren will also need healthcare and an education, both of which are becoming increasingly unaffordable.

Remember that your generation was given much by its forebears; and its forebears was given much by theirs.

Remember, as we all do, that Bill Clinton lied when he claimed "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." Recall that Barack Obama needlessly exaggerated when he said "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan." (He should have qualified that with "For 90% of those affected" but the opportunity to do that has past). Recall, also, that these lies stick out because they were anomalous. Recall that, as of Friday, Donald Trump averaged 30 false or misleading claims per day

Recall that no previous president in your lifetime has gleefully promised to lock up his political opponents. No previous president in your lifetime has publicly declared that the media is the "enemy of the people."

Remember that the world as it is now is a result of your lifetime of choices, just as it used to be the way it was because of your parents' choices.

You did not vote for the policies that led to Vietnam or the Great Depression, but you did vote for the policies that led to Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Great Recession.

If you like the way the world has changed since the "good old days," then keep voting the way you have since the "good old days." If you think that your grandchildren are getting a worse deal than you did, perhaps you think about changing your voting behavior.

America will be here longer than you and/or I will be. When you vote, please think about the world you intend to leave behind.

The Tragedy of Student Loans

Part the millionth about how college students are essentially being screwed out of an opportunity to make a better life for themselves (and spare me the anecdotal evidence about film studies majors and rock climbing walls).

Well, the top student lender watchdog of the federal government (the guy whose job it is to make sure that student debtors' rights aren't violated by powerful financial institutions) just resigned from his job.

Why, you ask?

Well, he makes three major points about the leadership at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the agency for which he worked, now led by Mick Mulvaney):

• Leadership of the agency has undercut enforcement of the law
• Leadership of the agency has undermined the agency's independence
• Leadership of the agency actively shields bad actors from scrutiny

Now, I have a selfish interest in how the student debt industry operates, as I am a student debtor. I certainly hope that my parents (who paid for their entire respective educations with less than $10,000) care. I hope that my neighbors care, and I hope that the owner of Dawson's and the Union Jack care. After all, every dime that I send to an out-of-state student lender is a dime that I can't spend locally, and that hurts the local economy.

Anyway, if you're interested, here is the letter.

Facts, Pesky Little Things

"Truth isn't truth!"

In light of this weekend's utterly amazing disregard for actual facts, I thought I'd do a bit of research on what "facts" are being debated in the current race for a seat from IN in the federal Senate.

Note, this is simply me regurgitating what I've read, but I will source the conclusions:

• Joe Donnelly says that Mike Braun has supported two proposals and a lawsuit to end health insurance coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. MOSTLY TRUE
• Joe Donnelly states that 43 of his legislative proposals have become law, including 21 since Donald Trump took office. MOSTLY TRUE
• Senate Leadership Fund (a Republican Super PAC) says, "Sen. Donnelly's family got caught outsourcing jobs to Mexico, and 'Mexico Joe' profited $80,000. MOSTLY FALSE

The remainder of the quotes I saw "adjudicated" as above were from the primary. I have less than zero interest in discussing Todd Rokita.

Additionally, PolitiFact did a primer on Mike Braun's business practices. Note, this is not a partisan hit job on him but rather an analysis as to the claims being made by the Donnelly people. You can read the whole thing here. A few notable quotes:

Braun is the CEO and owner of Meyer Distributing, an auto parts distribution company, and Meyer Logistics, a trucking company, based in Jasper, Ind.

The U.S. Labor Department found Meyer Distributing violated the Fair Labor Standards Act 26 times. The violations were related to unpaid overtime work for 25 employees between December 2008 and December 2010. Meyer Distributing had to pay $39,402 in back wages. The company settled one lawsuit with a fired employee in 2009 related to the same issue.

I would point out that these back wages settlements amounted to a bit more than $1,500/worker. While this may not be much money to a multi-state trucking tycoon who can dump hundreds of thousands of dollars into his own political campaign, $1,500 may have been the difference between making bills for a quarter and losing the home for some of Mr. Braun's employees. I know no more than the allegation and the settlement, so I won't discuss the merits of the case. I do know that lawsuits like these often settle for one reason or another, and the settlement does not make Mr. Braun or his company guilty. 

Nonetheless, when you brand yourself the "champion of the little guy," it's a bad look to be stiffing your employees to the tune of 2-3 weeks' pay (maybe more, given their low wages).

Another point hit on in the piece was Donnelly's accusations about distributing parts made in China. I guess my point is: who cares? Most everything that gets sold has component parts made elsewhere. It's a modern economy.

What I do care about more than the original location of Mr. Braun's company's products is his legislative voting record. I found this to be interesting:

As a state legislator, Braun voted against an amendment that allowed local governments to take back property tax incentives from companies that relocate outside Indiana.

So, I may be thinking about this wrong, but my impression of this bill is that if, say, the Town of Speedway gives Allison Transmission tax incentives to stay where it is, and the incentives last 10 years, then Allison should at least be obligated not to relocate to Illinois or Ecuador for 10 years. Apparently Mr. Braun, as indicated by his own voting record, feels otherwise. Campaign rhetoric can spin one way or the other; the funny thing about votes is they speak for themselves. As I've argued during depositions (with a slight variation for the present circumstances), "We will stipulate that Mr. Braun's vote means what Mr. Braun's vote means."

There's also this about Joe Donnelly:

Braun rebutted with Donnelly’s own record. Donnelly profited from a family arts and crafts business that relied on cheap Mexican labor to produce dye for ink pads. Import Genius recorded 35 import shipments from China for the company between 2008 and 2018. Panjiva, a similar import tracking company, found 31 shipment imports since 2011.

Domila McFarlane, a manager at Panjiva, noted the company had likely received further shipments by air, but U.S. data only looks at maritime shipments.

Donnelly sold his stocks in the company following the AP report on ties to Mexico in July 2017. 

Apparently inscrutable behavior in search of politics is the new norm; either that, or utilizing a modern import/export system as designed is just what business people do. Perhaps the takeaway here is not that business actions in self interest are inherently good or evil but rather that the system we design to influence and/or regulate those decisions needs to be improved.

We could certainly go on, but then again, can't we always?

Milquetoast Joe Donnelly

To parrot what Sheila Kennedy wrote the other day, I think that Joe Donnelly is a horrible centrist sellout. I think that so many of his positions are cowardly, and I rank him down with Evan Bayh as a finger-in-the-air politico.

I will vote for him anyway, even if I have to hold my nose.

In light of that preface, I turn to a different but related topic: whether he should vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh.

I think that he should not.

I actually wrote to the Ft. Wayne Journal Gazette recently about this. My point, then and now, is that there is not a single Republican out there who is (a) aware of who Brett Kavanaugh is AND (b) will be swayed to vote for Joe Donnelly and against Mike Braun. Contrarily, I believe that there are plenty of progressives (whether they count themselves as Democrats or not) who will stay home if Sen. Donnelly votes to confirm Brett Kavanaugh. After all, if Sen. Donnelly votes like a Republican when it counts, why bother to campaign/canvass/fundraise for him? Why not just let the few remaining governing positions in Indiana go to Republicans if all of the Indiana Democrats are going to act like Republicans when the rubber hits the road anyway?

In light of that, I present this from Abdul Hakeem Shabaz (he used to be "Abdul in the Morning" but I think the plug got pulled on that):

A new poll of the U.S. Senate race gives Democrat Joe Donnelly a 12-point lead over Republican Mike Braun, but it changes depending on whether he votes to confirm Brett Cavanaugh for the U.S. Supreme Court.

The poll of more than 1,400 likely voters, conducted by The Trafalgar Group, gives Donnelly a lead of 50.8 to 38.6 over Braun.  Ten percent are undecided.

However, that lead drops to 39.4 to 38.5 if Donnelly votes for the confirmation.  And if Donnelly votes against the confirmation,  his lead only drops to 45-38.

The number of undecided voters also grows to 22 percent if Donnelly votes yes; 16 percent if he votes no.

The poll was taken from July 31 to August 7.

It has a margin of error of +/- 2.6 percent.

Of course, a poll taken 3+ months before an election, combined with $3, is worth approximately $3 (ask Hillary Clinton). Nonetheless, I note that Sen. Donnelly's lead over Mike Braun drops more if he votes to confirm Brett Kavanaugh than if he votes not to. (I also note that Abdul mis-spells Kavanaugh's name, but who really cares?)

So, to that end, Sen. Donnelly, I implore you to vote against Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation. I don't like that Supreme Court nominations are political. That doesn't mean that they aren't. Senators often have to take tough votes; sometimes right before an election. It seems to me that someone who represents me in a legislature should be willing to vote his conscience, even if it costs him an election.

About that Curtis Hill

Not only is he a creepy groper, drug warrior, and the worst kind of attorney (prosecutor), he also wastes our money on stupid partisan snipe hunts:

Last month, judge Sarah Evans Barker approved a consent decree reached by plaintiffs Common Cause Indiana and the Indianapolis NAACP and the defendant, the Marion County Election Board.

In a filing Tuesday, the attorney general argued that the consent decree cannot replace an election board's legal requirement to decide unanimously to create in-person early voting sites.

 For those following at home, the backdrop to this is that state law requires unanimity among the members of a county election board in order to open up new voting sites. The Marion County election board has consistently lacked such unanimity, as the Republican members of such board have repeatedly and consistently refused to agree to open new voting sites . . . seemingly part of the ongoing project to protect against voter fraud discourage voting.

Anyway, the county election board got sued. They eventually settled and agreed to put new voting sites in. Of course, Mr. AG had to come along and do anything he could to help his team distract from his own problems.

Marion County’s decision to open additional voting centers is being contested by Attorney General Curtis Hill, but the Marion County Election Board disputes his assertion that the agreement to offer more early voting sites is contrary to Indiana law or that the board lacked a unanimous vote.

A consent decree settling a lawsuit over access to early voting was approved by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana in mid-July in Common Cause Indiana et al. v. Marion County Election Board, 1:17-cv-1388.

Hill, on behalf of the state, is challenging the consent decree that opens additional satellite voting centers in Marion County for the 2018 general election. He filed a motion Tuesday asking the federal court to withdraw the agreement. The board last month announced six early-voting sites around Indianapolis would be open in time for November’s mid-term election.

OK. What is Mr. Hill's reasoning for bringing a lawsuit, paid for by the taxpayers of Indiana, whose general purpose is to prevent those same taxpayers from being able to vote (without waiting in line for what tends to be, by most estimates, "forever")?

Hill’s office also argued “it is not in the public interest for a federal court to enter, enforce, and monitor a consent decree that dictates the operation of state-run elections.” Further, the AG’s office said the public interest is “jeopardized by the removal of (Defendant Election Board’s) minority leverage in the political process.”

You know, the candor of that is quite surprising. What is the AG talking about when he mentions "minority leverage in the political process?" Well, that's just what was mentioned above: Republicans wanted to make sure that voting remained inconvenient in Indianapolis, presumably to drive down turnout of what is viewed as a "liberal" electorate. You will note that polling places in rural locales far outnumber, on a per-capita basis, those in liberal urban locales.

Anyway, as to the two objections, I will let the Article III Judge Sarah Evans Barker have the honors:

The State argues that the consent decree is contrary both to state law as well as the public interest. Neither objection has merit.

That is nice judge speak for, "Get the hell out of my courtroom you clown." However, at least we can rest assured that, at least for a few minutes, AG Hill wasn't ass-grabbing all over downtown, as is rumored to be his style.

 

NO COLLUSION

Collude (v): come to a secret understanding for a harmful purpose; conspire.

As we know, "collusion" is the noun form of the verb "collude." We also know that our president has insisted repeatedly that there was NO COLLUSION (he always seems to go all-caps for that assertion).

Because I can't get the tweet to properly embed, I will just quote it:

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

Fake News reporting, a complete fabrication, that I am concerned about the meeting my wonderful son, Donald, had in Trump Tower. This was a meeting to get information on an opponent, totally legal and done all the time in politics - and it went nowhere. I did not know about it!

OK. Let's back up a bit.

I thought the first line was "the meeting never happened." Let's just take a look at the timeline and the shifting company storyline:

• July 8, 2017 -  The meeting was about adopting Russian Children
• July 9, 2017 - OK, so they suggested to us that maybe they had some information implying that Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party were being funded by Russia; nothing came of it and the suggestion was vague all along
• July 12, 2017 - Jay Sekulow (one of the most despicable people in America, he also happens to be one of Trump's lawyers), responding to a story from the day before that President Trump had signed off on the July 8 statement, categorically denies that President Trump had anything to do with the original statement. Sekulow repeats this claim on July 16, 2017, on Meet the Press.
• July 31, 2017 - Washington Post reports that President Trump personally dictated the July 8 statement
• August 1, 2017 - President Trump (via his Press Secretary) concedes that President Trump "weighed in" on the statement but did not dictate it
• January 29, 2018 - Jay Sekulow admits in a letter to Special Counsel Robert Mueller that President Trump did dictate Don Jr.'s statement
• June 2, 2018 - The NY Times publishes the January 29 letter
• June 3, 2018 - Rudy Giuliani (a walking disaster of a "lawyer" if ever there was one) claims that Sekulow was uninformed in June 2017 when he claimed that the President was uninvolved in Don Jr.'s initial statement
• June 4, 2018 - President Trump's Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders refuses to answer questions as to whether he dictated the letter
• July 26, 2018 - Michael Cohen (President Trump's longtime personal attorney and notorious liar) claims that the President had foreknowledge of the meeting and signed off on it
• August 5, 2018 - "My son went to this meeting to receive intelligence on Hillary Clinton."

So, in sum, we know the following about the infamous Russia Meeting:

1. They knew they would be meeting with representatives of the Russian state
2. They knew they were being offered Russian state intelligence
3. They intended to use Russian intelligence offered by Russian agents against an American opponent
4. They did not alert the FBI to any of this

Look, I'm not an expert in national security law by any means and I'm trying really hard not to just be a partisan liberal here. However, I think that maybe we just need to step back and ask ourselves whether we've gone through the looking glass here. I mean, do we really have to ask whether aiding and abetting foreign meddling in American elections is OK?

Those Pence Brothers . . . They're Just so Nice!

Ugh! I think I need to go punch myself in the face just for writing that headline! Hopefully anyone who has ever read this blog recognizes the sarcasm in the title.

Anyway, this recently came to my attention:

Vice President Mike Pence turns nostalgic when he talks about growing up in small-town Columbus, Indiana, where his father helped build a Midwestern empire of more than 200 gas stations that provided an upbringing on the “front row of the American dream.”

The collapse of Kiel Bros. Oil Co. in 2004 was widely publicized. Less known is that the state of Indiana — and, to a smaller extent, Kentucky and Illinois — are still on the hook for millions of dollars to clean up more than 85 contaminated sites across the three states, including underground tanks that leaked toxic chemicals into soil, streams and wells.

Indiana alone has spent at least $21 million on the cleanup thus far, or an average of about $500,000 per site, according to an analysis of records by The Associated Press. And the work is nowhere near complete.

Well, I mean, what's $21m when you're a "christian first, conservative second, and Republican third" here in Indiana? It's not like you're some selfish school kid who wants to, you know, eat lunch or something. Million-dollar pollution problem? Great! Poor kids want lunch? Feed 'em to Rokita!

Kiel Bros. has paid for only a fraction of the overall effort.

OK. So here we are, the Pence family business has imposed tens of millions of dollars on us, the taxpayers, and people are still willing to believe in his so-called "fiscal conservatism." I tell you what, next time I'm looking for someone to get my spending under control, I'm not just going to let him (or her) do my spending for me!

In a statement, Pence’s older brother Greg Pence — who was president of Kiel Bros. when it went bankrupt and is now running for Congress as a Republican — distanced himself from the cleanup costs.

“Greg Pence has had nothing to do with Kiel Bros since 2004. This is another attempt by the liberal media to rehash old, baseless attacks,” campaign spokeswoman Molly Gillaspie said. 

A few things: first off, I forgot that the Pence brothers were multiplying . . . God help us! 

Second, Ms. Gillaspie, perhaps you weren't aware that underground pollution plumes take decades to develop. In fact, I'll bet that someone on one of the Pence teams has already acknowledged this:

Pence spokeswoman Alyssa Farah called the findings “a years old issue” that the vice president has addressed before. She did not elaborate.

So, what is it? Did the pollution occur during the Pence family's "stewardship" of Kiel Bros. or did it occur after? Maybe before? All I've seen is blah blah blah liberal media blah blah blah old blah blah blah liberal media blah blah baseless.

The fact that the company stuck taxpayers with the lion’s share of the cleanup bill rankles some observers, especially in light of the family’s reputation as budget hawks critical of government spending.

You don't say. It's like I've seen this tragicomedy before.

 Greg Pence, who is seeking the vice president’s old congressional seat, has total assets worth $5.7 to $26 million.

Nearly a decade after going under, Kiel Bros. sites still ranked among the top 10 recipients of state money for such cleanups in Indiana in 2013, the last year for which the petroleum industry has reliable spending data for the company. That was out of more than 230 companies seeking cleanup money that year, including major gas station chains with a substantially larger presence in the state.
Founded as an oil distributor by businessman Carl Kiel in 1960, the company expanded into the gas station business. Pence’s father, Edward, joined in the early years and, by the mid-1970s, rose to corporate vice president.
Mike Pence says he worked for the business — which mostly operated under the name Tobacco Road — starting at age 14. But it was his brother who took over after Edward Pence’s 1988 death and eventually became president.

Just so we're clear: the Pence family made a ton of money running this company. This company cut costs by polluting our air and water. Now we get to pay to not be poisoned while the Pence family gets to go and bring their special sauce to the nation as a whole.

 When an underground tank leaks, companies are liable for the damage, but Indiana has been especially amenable to using public money to pay for heavily contaminated soil to be excavated and for high-powered pumps to suck toxic liquid and vapor from the soil.

The state’s payout limit was $2 million per site until Mike Pence signed a 2016 law as governor, increasing it to $2.5 million. In 2016, Indiana paid out nearly two-and-a-half times the national average per incident, according to records.

I for one can't imagine why the state can't afford to do such trivial things as reform its child welfare issues, after a mere 15 years of studying the issue.

Pence 2018: Starve the kids and poison the water!

"Majority Rule"

Interesting Data Point #1: By this fall, four of the nine Supreme Court justices will have been appointed by presidents who entered office after having lost the popular vote.

Interesting Data Point #2: To take control of the U.S. House of Representatives, Democrats will have to win the national popular vote by 11% (55.5% to 44.5%).

Democracy: a government by the people; rule of the majority

These data points don't fit too well with the definition of democracy; it all leads to a very depressing conclusion.

On Todd Rokita . . . the worst kind of "lawyer" there is

The kind that likes to call himself a "small-government conservative" yet has been on the government gravy train for essentially his entire career. From his own web site:

ROKITA, Todd, a Representative from Indiana; born in Chicago, Cook County, Ill., February 9, 1970; graduated from Munster High School, Munster, Ind., 1988; B.A., Wabash College, Crawfordsville, Ind., 1992; J.D., Robert H. McKinney School of Law, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Ind., 1995; lawyer, private practice; general counsel, Indiana state secretary of state’s office, 1997-2000; Indiana state deputy secretary of state, 2000-2002; Indiana state secretary of state, 2002-2010; elected as a Republican to the One Hundred Twelfth and to the three succeeding Congresses (January 3, 2011-present).

So, to be clear, he went straight through from Kindergarten through Law School, graduating in 1995 (I wonder what kind of grades he had? I note he doesn't brag about them . . .). He claims he was in private practice, but his first job appears to have been for the State of Indiana. He then went to work for the federal government.

I'm confused. How stupid does Todd Rokita think we are? He hates government, but has worked in government his entire career? Huh.

I also note that, even though he says he was a "lawyer, private practice," I can't find a single case in which he has appeared. Now, of course, it is possible that he did practice but didn't do litigation. However, I get the feeling that the more accurate story about him is that he clerked for the Secretary of State until a position opened up for him there, so that he could pursue political ambitions.

In other words, Mr. Rokita is a professional politician. One might even say he is a "swamp creature," if one were inclined to use such terms.

What an a$$hat. And don't even get me going on this, a bush-league stunt that any first-month law student should know better than to try, let alone someone who actually bears the moniker "Lawyer."

For What it's Worth

Has anyone seen the latest hit job on Joe Donnelly? The one that purports to feature a local "small businesswoman" who really needs those tax cuts to "invest in her business" because she really wants to "help people."

Pardon me, I just barfed in my trash can.

For starters, if your business needs tax cuts to survive, you have a business model problem, not a taxation problem.

Further, what business person started a business primarily to help people? NOBODY! You start a business so that you can make money and support yourself and your family. Helping people is an added bonus and is only the goal if it is accompanied with the business person getting paid. Ken Nunn wants to help his clients, but that's presumably because he collects between 33% and 40% of the "help" that he provides. Do you think he gives a damn about his clients?

Finally, I can't help but notice that this small businesswoman, who so desperately needs those tax cuts in order for her business to thrive, is never identified. Who is she? What is this business of hers? Methinks that perhaps she's an actress paid by some outside advocacy group?

Here is the ad:

Who is "Cathy"? Anyone know? I can't help but notice that they don't use the name of her business or her last name. Methinks she is a "fictional character."

Russian Update

No collusion! No collusion! (Kind of makes you wonder whether the people yelling "no collusion" understand what the term "collusion" actually means, but nonetheless).

Here is an interesting update on the Mueller Russian Investigation:

Thirteen Russians and three Russian entities were charged Friday with an elaborate plot to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, federal prosecutors announced Friday.

The indictment, brought by the office of special counsel Robert Mueller, alleges that Russians used bogus social media postings and advertisements fraudulently purchased in the name of Americans to sway political opinion during the race between Republican Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent.

The charges are the most direct allegation to date of illegal Russian meddling in the election.

The goal, the indictment says, was to “sow discord in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 presidential election.” 

Charges include conspiracy, wire fraud, bank fraud and aggravated identity theft.

The charges arise from Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the election and whether there was improper coordination between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

Before Friday, four people, including Trump’s former national security adviser and former campaign chairman, had been charged in Mueller’s investigation.

The White House had no immediate response to the indictment.

I have nothing to add; just wanted to share the information.

More Feeding at the Trough

Senator Brandt Hershman (R-Buck Creek) is leaving the Indiana legislature to go to work as an "attorney" in Barnes and Thornburg's Washington, D.C. office.

A quick look through Sen. Hershman's biography  reveals a man who was first elected to the Indiana legislature in 2000. Thereafter, and while serving in the state legislature, Sen. Hershman advocated for small government all the while attending law school on the government's dime (Todd Young, anyone?). Apparently, small government and self reliance is good for all of us "little people," but when it comes to getting perks from the government, Sen. Hershman exempts himself from his pious urgings regarding self reliance.

Now, of course, having spent nearly two decades in the Indiana statehouse, building connections with the largest law firms in the state (including but not limited to Barnes & Thornburg); after using the state government to pay for his law school (a nice $75,000 gift); after repeatedly cutting taxes on large law firms' corporate clients; after piously proclaiming that he works "for the people," "doing the people's business" for all of these years, he takes a job at one of said large law firms' D.C. office.

Does Sen. Hershman have any experience actually practicing law, as opposed to writing it?

Does Sen. Hershman have any reason why he should practice law in D.C.?

Is Sen. Hershman actually going to practice law in D.C. as opposed to doing that other thing that nobody likes to say out loud (psst, "lobby")?

When will we wake up and realize that these so-called "conservative" lawmakers that we routinely send to our state legislature are serving nobody's interests except their own and their corporate masters'? Don't get me wrong, I have no problems with someone making a living; however, when he makes his living in a manner that is absolutely counter to his public proclamations, it's the hypocrisy of the whole thing that irks me so much.

For anyone interested to know who has bought Sen. Hershman, and for how much, the list of his donors is here. It would be interesting to see how his donor list overlaps with his future lobbying activities, wouldn't it?

He Spent YOUR Money on WHAT?

I am sure that I am not the first person to see this:

A former Speedway official is accused of misappropriating thousands of dollars’ worth of city funds.

A special investigation report filed Monday by the state cites dozens of instances between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2015, where Kenneth Harris had used or not correctly recorded the use of city funds. 

According to the audit, Harris owes the city of Speedway almost $20,000 for undocumented purchases, cell phone bills and other expenses. Harris is also being charged for the cost of the investigation into his charges.  

The report includes undocumented credit card purchases cell phone, travel and reimbursement expenses and over-contributions to his Health Spending Account. 

I have heard general rumors regarding Mr. Harris before, though I have refrained from discussing them on this blog for a variety of reasons. First, I do not know Mr. Harris; I've never met him; I've never had any dealings with him; I don't know much of anything about his policies. I am absolutely willing to trash an elected (or appointed) official because of his/her policies. I am absolutely willing to trash someone because of his/her behavior. I try not to trash people based on rumors I have heard about them. So, I have refrained discussing Mr. Harris' doings on this blog.

Additionally, while I had heard about this particular at least a year ago, I know that accusing someone of illegal activity is defamation per se, and the last thing I need is the Speedway Old Boys Network (TM) reigning misery down on me in the form of a lawsuit.

Credit

Thank you to the astute commenter who pointed this out. The people of this Town need to know what is being done in their name, and what those who purport to act in their name are doing. This is your tax money that they are spending, whether it is on "undocumented and unsupported credit card purchases," large pieces of property near Crawfordsville Rd. and I-465, or parking garages that they finance for wealthy developers.

While I have significant differences with the publishers of the Speedway Town Press, I applaud their efforts to engage people in Speedway politics. As I've said before, when we mindlessly vote our national party preference in local elections, we wind up with "representatives" who could, literally, not care less about what we as voters think; our "representatives" only care about what the party insiders and donors think. While I don't know this for a fact, I presume that Mr. Harris maintains some pull around Speedway; I believe his wife is the head of the Speedway Chamber of Commerce. I can't help but speculate as to the level of influence he continues to exert on our public policy in Speedway.

As a final note, I have heard additional musings regarding Mr. Harris' past dealings. I will not, however, divulge what I have heard, as it is no more than a rumor. See above.

"Charitable" Donations and Tax Deductions

I understand why I would get a tax deduction if I donated, say, $500 to the Speedway Drama Dept. Like all drama/arts/music programs, it is a worthy cause and generally does not get the support that, say, the football team does (though I would still get the tax deduction if I donated to the Speedway football team).

It makes sense from a policy standpoint that we would want to encourage private actors to donate to charity. Tax deductions are a well-accepted mechanism whereby the government encourages such donations. So, if I donate $500 to the Speedway Drama Dept., I can deduct $500 from my taxable income at the end of the year. Stated another way, I don't have to pay taxes on that $500.

What if, however, my better angels were not controlling.

What if, to take a single example, I wanted to donate my $500 to "Americans for Tort Reform," a "non-profit" 501(c)(3) group that advocates for easier access to the courts in personal injury cases. As both readers of this blog know, I am a litigator. I litigate personal injury cases, generally from either side of the "v," though more often than not on the defense side.

If I am encouraging legislation, through my non-profit donation, that aids my bottom line, is that really charity? Or is that simply self-interested lobbying?

While we're at it, recall that political donations are NOT tax deductible. So, if (when) I decide to donate money to the "Re-Elect Gary Raikes for Speedway Town Council Fund," I have to pay taxes on that money. Both dollars (Sorry Gary, they haven't passed the "make it easier to sue people, rendering defense attorneys more valuable Act of 2017" yet) are taxable.

I suppose the point of this blog is that not all "charitable donations" are created equally. That is one of the problems we run into when we equate money with speech. Is some speech more "worthy" than other speech? Probably. Is the government empowered to make that determination? Maybe. Should the government make that determination. You tell me.

Gerrymandering

This is what partisan gerrymandering looks like, and it is wrong on both sides. Please take special note of the vote totals, particularly in the presidential years of 2008 and 2012.

There is a case before the Supreme Court right now asking whether this is (a) constitutional and (b) justiciable. I suppose we'll see what Justice Kennedy has to say (because Roberts, Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch will uphold the district lines, guaranteed; Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Breyer will likely vote to strike them down . . . that leaves Kennedy).

Elections Count

As Barack Obama so famously said, "Elections have consequences." Indeed they do. If they didn't, then we would have no Affordable Care Act. If they didn't, we would have Justice Garland instead of Justice Gorsuch.

Elections matter.

Unfortunately, the rave these days is to make it harder, not easier, to vote. However, at least Indiana has a system where you can check to see if your registration is up to date.

Here is the link.

Please forward this to your friends and have them ensure that they are properly registered to vote. Politicians care about what their voters think about issues; they don't care nearly as much about what their constituents writ large think about issues. It makes sense: If I represented 1,000 people but only 5 of them voted, I would only need to make 3 of them happy enough to vote for me again.

A Detour on Taxes - Why I Don't Feel Represented

This debate on taxes is so frustrating for me (as evidenced by the volume of posts on the subject) because I do not feel represented. The debate does not purport to address any of my concerns, yet somehow risks making them more grave.

Inequality of Wealth
I don't really care that some people make more than I do. That's to be expected and applauded. Similarly, I make more than some others. That too is to be expected and applauded. However, like most things, when taken to an extreme, inequality is bad for our society. Taken to extremes, extreme wealth inequality generally leads to a police state (see Saudi Arabia) or a violent revolution (see the French Revolution). I don't much like the idea of either one.

We are at a time in American history where the inequality of wealth between a tiny sliver of the population and, almost literally, everyone else is at historical levels. The wealthiest 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90%.

As the graph shows, we have not had wealth inequality like the present in nearly a century, and I think we all know how well that worked out. Note also that this graph stops four years ago, in 2013. Who thinks that this 40-year trend in wealth inequality has reversed in the past four years?

Given these facts, why is it that the entirety of the debate is on lowering the top bracket, lowering the corporate rate, and eliminating the inheritance tax? As discussed previously, the inheritance tax doesn't even kick in until one person has $5.5m to devise; it seems to me, based on the graph above, that someone who stands to inherit the first $5.5m is doing pretty well and does not need an extra helping hand from the government; there are plenty of other causes that could use the extra money, and a trust fund baby doesn't top my list.

"Pro-Growth" Tax Reform

Mike Pence, Paul Ryan, and Co. like to label their tax cuts for the wealthy as "pro-growth." Taking them at their word (a dubious assertion, given that there is precisely zero evidence that cutting taxes at the margins spurs long-term growth in any way . . . more on that below), I am still skeptical of their plans.

Since the Great Recession, 85% of this nation's economic growth has accrued to 1% of the population. If the vast majority of this growth is going to go to the very wealthy, the vast majority of the benefits of this tax plan are going to go to the very wealthy, and the middle class (i.e. $50,000 - $150,000/year/family) is going to pick up the tab, someone please explain why I would support this plan.

Further, these claims of "unleashing" the economy are highly dubious. The Reagan wannabes (looking at you VP Pence and Speaker Ryan) assure us that if they only get to cut taxes for the wealthy, those wealthy people will invest in the economy, thereby juicing the economy and leading to increased rewards for everyone. While we're at it, I've got a great piece of beach-front property in Nevada I'd like to sell you.

If cutting taxes worked so well to boost the economy, why doesn't Mike Pence talk about the economic boom we had following W's tax cuts in the early '00s? Why do they have to resort to the early 1980s to find an example that supposedly "worked"?  The simple answer to this is:

Thus, there is little evidence to support that the Bush tax cuts had a significant effect on growth. In addition, contrary to the argument that the tax cuts would pay for themselves being made at the time the tax cuts were enacted, the deficit ballooned as a result of the tax cuts.

Pressing Needs

This country has them. Lots of them.

Let's start with education.

Public education is chronically underfunded, notwithstanding some people's insistence that school teachers are some kind of "Lucky Ducky" getting over on taxpayers, with a cushy job, short hours, and long vacations. I can speak of my own teaching experience and point out that this characterization is wholly inaccurate. Most teachers I know work no fewer than 10-12 hours/day (in line with most professionals). Further, that they only have 185 "work" (contract) days per year probably understates the number of weekends they work and certainly overlooks the fact that they are laid off every summer. Incidentally, I would note that construction workers are able to collect unemployment when they get laid off in the winter; teachers are not able to collect it when they are laid off in the summer. Interpret that as you will. Nonetheless, public education is chronically underfunded.

Next, lets talk about higher education. The UNCF was spot on when they said that a mind is a terrible thing to waste. Well, we are now in a situation where plenty of capable young people are unable to get the education that will enable them to thrive economically later in their lives. This is classic "penny wise and pound foolish" behavior. How much possible economic growth are we foregoing? Further, how much social solidarity are we destroying by increasingly making college the purview of the born-wealthy few? Do we really want a society where the only people who can ever afford to become doctors and lawyers are those born into wealthy families? Also, what about the social solidarity, economic opportunities, and societal opportunities that are lost when we saddle our young people with mortgage-sized student loans? All of the anecdotal evidence in the world doesn't change the fact that college could be paid for with a summer job for my parents' generation; a summer job, school year job, and modest loan for my generation; and now requires a veritable mortgage, regardless of how much you work.

When we discuss the issues with education, I think it is a fair question to ask whether giving a tax break to the wealthy, who (as illustrated above) are doing better than ever in America, is a good priority. I think it isn't. I'm not an elected official.

Readers of this blog also know my feelings about healthcare. It is unbelievably expensive and out of reach for more and more people. I understand that hospitals don't turn people away if they need emergency care. What is often left out of that discussion is what is done for people with chronic symptoms, not acute problems. Also, what are the financial consequences of that "willingness" of hospitals to provide emergency care to the acutely in need?

Bankruptcy.

Here is an interesting graphic:

Two things stand out on this chart for me. The first is the sharp drop in bankruptcies in 2005. I believe the Bankruptcy Abuse and Consumer Protection Law of 2005 is responsible for that. An abjectly terrible law, in my opinion, but not relevant to today's discussion. Notice also the change in roughly 2010. Certainly the downward graph reflects our tepid recovery from the Great Recession, but I also think that it reflects the effects of Obamacare.

I could go on and on, but I believe my point has been made. This talk of cutting taxes on the high-end of the socioeconomic scale is simply indefensible, for reasons both practical and moral. That is why I do not feel as though I am well represented in this debate.

What do these people do?

I recently came to realize that in 2018 the people of Indiana will elect a State Auditor, State Treasurer, and Secretary of State.

Without looking it up, can you honestly say (a) who the current holder of any of these offices is; and (b) what the responsibilities of said office are?

If the answer is no, perhaps we should be asking ourselves why we are tasked with selecting who holds such office.

Be The Change

I attended the meeting of Concerned Citizens and Business Owners of Speedway at the American Legion on Georgetown Rd. yesterday. I'm not sure what to say about it. Karlee Macer was there. She's nice I guess, though I could have done without her comment about how she is a Democrat, but she has common sense. Uhhh. What about being a Democrat necessarily implies that you don't have common sense, and what about being a Republican necessarily implies that you do?

Anyway.

I noticed that there was a lot of general griping about how people don't feel as though they are being properly respected by their town councilors. (I do note that one gentleman, to his credit, had a specific complaint about the town council's procedures).

I would say two separate things about this:

First, if your town councilor does not pay you the mind or attention that you think s/he ought to, unseat him/her. It's really that simple. If your ideas/demeanor/instincts are superior, you should be able to defeat your town councilor. Take a page from the Tea Party and get people together to protest. Hang out in front of Kroger on Saturday afternoon and at Charlie Brown's on Saturday morning and talk to people.

Be the change.

Second, as to the gentleman's (very well done) criticism regarding the town council's procedure, that too is a political problem that is to be solved with political means. The gentleman asked Rep. Macer if there was some sort of state law that could be passed to require that town council meetings be conducted a certain way, and I couldn't disagree with that approach more. I don't want some know-nothing state representative from Fort Wayne or Buck Creek coming into Speedway and telling us how to run our community. I do, however, want to see a competitive political environment in Speedway.

Be the change.

I've written before, and I will reiterate, that we get the political representation we deserve. If 51% of Speedway's voters automatically vote for the Republican on the ballot, regardless of who it is or what they know about that person's past, agenda, etc., then the Republican candidate will win, regardless. If the Republican candidate only has to ensure that she stays in the good graces of a half dozen Marion County Republican Party officials, then she could not care less (literally) about what the people of Speedway think. After all, why should she? As long as she gets on the ballot with an R next to her name, she is guaranteed victory. Everyone else can go pound sand.

If you don't approve of the way that Speedway is run, be the change. Talk to the candidates. Talk to your neighbors. Protest the town council, if you want. They have publicly noticed meetings. Conduct a protest march down Main St. if you want.

As a final note, to all those who talk about their disapproval of the Redevelopment Commission . . . if you feel that nobody listens to your complaints about the Redevelopment Commission, and you feel like it is going to do what it wants to do despite popular opinion, then perhaps you are misreading public sentiment. Perhaps the Redevelopment Commission is doing what it does because of popular opinion. My general impression is that people support the Redevelopment Commission's (imperfect) efforts. If they didn't, the SRC would not have the mandate that it does.