IBJNews

Daniels still waiting on lobbying decision

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels still is waiting to find out whether he'll be able to lobby the state Legislature next year when he takes over as president of Purdue University.

The Journal & Courier reports that the state inspector general had not ruled as of Friday whether Daniels will be covered by Indiana's "revolving door" law. Jane Jankowski, the governor's spokeswoman, said earlier this week that she was unaware of any report on the issue from Inspector General David Thomas, who was appointed by Daniels in 2005.

Thomas' office does not comment or confirm ongoing investigations.

State ethics rules require a one-year "cool down" for public officials after leaving office. The rule is intended to keep former public employees from working as lobbyists for a year after leaving a job in state government.

But Daniels signed an executive order that differs with the state ethics code on whether the rule relates to lobbying of the Legislature or the executive branch. The governor's general counsel has said the law won't affect Daniels as president.

Daniels said if the law is unclear, he would "lean" against lobbying in his first year at Purdue. If the law does apply to him, he said he would appoint another Purdue official to lobby in his place next year.

The upcoming legislative session will be critical for university leaders as lawmakers craft the state's next two-year budget. Indiana's public universities have struggled with state funding cuts and rising tuition costs. Since 2009, Daniels has ordered more than $150 million in cuts to public education--about $30 million to Purdue.

But there likely will be more money to dole out to cash-starved programs next year. The state's collection of taxes has improved, Daniels amassed a cash savings of roughly $1.8 billion, and a massive error in collecting corporate income taxes resulted in roughly $100 million more annually becoming available to the state.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Trust in Gov't
    It's not hard to see why so few trust government. Daniels makes a rule, but in the name of self-interest, he seeks an exception, for himself.
  • Cronyism at its worstt
    Daniels appointed 8 of the 10 Purdue trustees. It's cronyism at its worst. As Daniel Garza said: "The practice of favoritism based on relationships and connections - rather than someone who demonstrates top credentials and well-suited experience – ultimately results in vastly inferior government service to the public." It's Purdue's shame that Indiana's little Putin will be their next president.
  • Ridiculous
    I like Daniels as a governor. But the fact that he appointed 8 of the 10 Purdue Trustees, who then turned around and gave him a contract worth millions should have people up in arms. Ethics 101, anyone? But I suppose if that's not an ethical issue, then giving him an exception to let him lobby will be a no-brainer.
  • Why Not?
    Why should Daniels have to start complying with any ethics rules that obviously would only apply to others. Why should he change? Also if Purdue has $ issues, it will not be long before the buildings and parking lots will be leased or sold to others. No more budget issues until Purdue wants them back.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. So the Mayor adds another non value added layer to having a vehicle towed? Whereby the City Government RECIEVES AN ILLEGAL KICKBACK FROM A LGOISTICS COMPANY THAT SUBS THE WORK TO LOCAL TOW COMPANIES? What is the service the City performs for receiving the "tribute"? This is RICO!!!!! What a corrupt and unnecessary layer. What a dirtbag Mayor and his cronies.

  2. Owner occupied housing. Clear enough?

  3. So people think I am paranoid. It's from experience in dealing with puds requested by developers who make major donations themselves to representatives, have nice fund raisers for those running for office and hide through pac's. then there are the public relation firms. You will note some pr comments below. You there Clyde Lee? My opinion. Commercial along 421, great. Multifamily housing, terrible idea that will change the town. Senior condos or zero lot line homes west, great. I suggest keeping all entries to commercial areas at 421. All entries to owner occupied on sycamore. Will keep the traffic on sycamore down some. Two other things. You can't trust what will be there in 10 years. Steve builds quality stuff, but areas change over time. Look at the changes at the wall mart center at 86th and 421 over the last 10 years. Look at the apartments and neighborhoods behind St Vincent's. Raintree properties WILL decrease in value if commercial and multifamily goes in near. It has already been happening around the bridges area. The houses that have been sold recently are way below market. Several deals not closed due to the Illinois construction and the whole unsurety of the bridges. It's pretty simple, Zionsville will approve the whole thing because the city council has been groomed over a LONG period of time for this. I might even suggest some are in their position as a result of this.

  4. Esta, do you have a dog in this fight? You seem to really want to knock anyone against this project. No, I didn't move to Indiana for the architecture. I moved here for that red barn in the field. The horses and fields of corn. A place that is NOT overdeveloped. There are plenty of nearby places in Indianapolis that could be REDEVELOPED instead.

  5. RKW - OK, we get it, you're paranoid. The question is, are you paranoid enough? Greg - Yes, Pittman(s) is (are) at it again. They are developers, they build things. It's what they do. So when you go to work tomorrow, Greg, you're at it again too. Cliff - Really? You moved to Indiana for its progressive architecture? That's like moving to England for the cuisine. Zionsvillain - The house you moved to was once a field or woods. I'm willing to bet folks were upset when that ground was plowed under and a house was built. But I guess now that you are in, everything should stop? "My house was OK, but the next one is sprawl." SE Guy - Please don't paint us with such a wide brush. Most reasonable Zionsville residents welcome planned, measured development.

ADVERTISEMENT