IBJNews

Deal allows Lugar to move Indiana voter registration

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar will switch his voter registration to his family farm in resolving a dispute with local election officials who ruled that he couldn't vote using the address of an Indianapolis home he sold in 1977.

The resolution that Lugar's lawyers reached Friday with the Marion County elections board headed off a court hearing on a challenge from Lugar.

The judge dismissed the case after the lawyers agreed Lugar could legally vote from the farm in southern Marion County that has been in Lugar's family for more than 80 years.

Lugar is facing one of his toughest election battles in the Republican primary against state Treasurer Richard Mourdock.

The elections board ruling gave fresh ammunition to critics argue Lugar is out of touch with the state.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Lugar lied to us
    He pretended to represent Indiana, but he wasn't even here to hear what Hoosiers were talking about. He represented no one but Lugar,
  • Good Call
    I support Dick Lugar and hope that the majority of Republicans will do the same on Tuesday. This matter was resolved 35 years ago, but some people failed to perform the research that would have addressed these false charges.
  • It's the Law
    The law and several opinions by the Indiana Attorney General say that Lugar had every right to vote as he did. The suggestions in some of these comments for additional requirements to vote would be fine, but you need to change the law first. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make it illegal. This seems to me like typical election year mud slinging over a made up issue.
  • His fundamental right to vote...
    Is where his residence is. Virginia. Not Indiana.
  • Even more Ironic
    Even better yet, how about voters are legal residents of the State they wish to vote in AND they have a valid State or Federal I.D. That sounds even better.
  • Ironic
    This is just great, Lugar will be able to vote without having a residence, in fact he lied about his home. However, our state and gov have installed the most restrictive voter id law in the country. Maybe a voter should have a real address, instead of an id.

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. It is nice and all that the developer grew up here and lives here, but do you think a company that builds and rehabs cottage-style homes has the chops to develop $150 Million of office, retail, and residential? I'm guessing they will quickly be over their skis and begging the city for even more help... This project should occur organically and be developed by those that can handle the size and scope of something like this as several other posters have mentioned.

  2. It amazes me how people with apparently zero knowledge of free markets or capitalism feel the need to read and post on a business journal website. Perhaps the Daily Worker would suit your interests better. It's definitely more sympathetic to your pro government theft views. It's too bad the Star is so awful as I'm sure you would find a much better home there.

  3. In other cities, expensive new construction projects are announced by real estate developers. In Carmel, they are announced by the local mayor. I am so, so glad I don't live in Carmel's taxbase--did you see that Carmel, a small Midwest suburb, has $500 million in debt?? That's unreal! The mayor thinks he's playing with Lego sets and Monopoly money here! Let these projects develop organically without government/taxpayer backing! Also, from a design standpoint, the whole town of Carmel looks comical. Grand, French-style buildings and promenades, sitting next to tire yards. Who do you guys think you are? Just my POV as a recent transplant to Indy.

  4. GeorgeP, you mention "necessities". Where in the announcement did it say anything about basic essentials like groceries? None of the plans and "vision" have basic essentials listed and nothing has been built. Traffic WILL be a nightmare. There is no east/west road capacity. GeorgeP, you also post on www.carmelchatter.com and your posts have repeatedly been proven wrong. You seem to have a fair amount of inside knowledge. Do you work on the third floor of Carmel City Hal?

  5. I don't know about the commuter buses...but it's a huge joke to see these IndyGo buses with just one or two passengers. Absolutely a disgusting waste of TAXPAYER money. Get some cojones and stop funding them. These (all of them) council members work for you. FIRE THEM!

ADVERTISEMENT