EDITORIAL: Democrats need to share ideas to stay relevant

 IBJ Staff
April 2, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
IBJ Editorial

Indiana House Democrats congratulated each other for stopping anti-union legislation as they returned from self-imposed exile in Illinois on March 28, but they had no one but themselves to blame for the hiatus.

Had party leaders paid attention during last year’s election season, they wouldn’t have found their backs against the wall this year, compelled to make last-ditch efforts to stop right-to-work bills and other legislation they deemed unacceptable. If Democrats had put forth a compelling vision for the state, it might have given voters reason to send more of them to Indianapolis and prevented the lopsided Republican majorities.

Hoosier Democrats point to anti-Obama sentiment for losing a dozen seats in the Indiana House and four in the Senate in November, giving the Senate enough seats to pass laws without Democrats and leaving the House with a 40-to-60 minority.

Without a doubt, Obama was a factor. But the state party took few steps to counter GOP Gov. Mitch Daniels’ fundraising machine and the squadron of fresh candidates he recruited.

The bigger point, though, is that the party failed to articulate where it wanted to take the state. If Democrats had a vision for solving pressing issues like education parity, revenue shortfalls and international competition, they didn’t say much about it. Voters can be excused for missing the talking points.

Republicans have been the idea party since Daniels first campaigned for office in 2004. Democrats have opposed many of his goals, but they haven’t served up compelling alternatives.

When political parties fail to deliver attractive options, citizens lose. Republicans are similarly shorting the public at the national level by not offering a coherent, forward-looking agenda.

Let’s hope Indiana Democrats find their pulse soon.

Let’s focus on jobs

Maybe it’s naïve to hope for substantive politicking about job creation at a time when unemployment is high, but voters nevertheless should expect it from Republican Mayor Greg Ballard and his toughest Democratic opponent as they look toward the May primaries and the November general election.

Ballard is touting 8,702 job commitments in 2010 as a record for the decade, which includes his three years in office. Democratic challenger Melina Kennedy charges Ballard with opportunistically equating commitments with jobs actually created.

Kennedy is right that Ballard overplays his hand. Ballard, like most politicians who take credit for new jobs, hasn’t exactly gone out of his way to emphasize that the commitments are only best-case projections.

But Kennedy, who led economic development under Ballard predecessor Bart Peterson, is majoring in the minors.

As IBJ reporter Francesca Jarosz pointed out in a March 28 article, job commitments are notoriously difficult to track. While Kennedy has a point in calling for the city to better log which ones have been fulfilled, Ballard isn’t irresponsible for not doing so. After all, if no job is created, no incentives are granted.

Ballard should tone down his claims, and Kennedy should find a better reason to replace him.•


To comment on these editorials, write to ibjedit@ibj.com.


Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. PJ - Mall operators like Simon, and most developers/ land owners, establish individual legal entities for each property to avoid having a problem location sink the ship, or simply structure the note to exclude anything but the property acting as collateral. Usually both. The big banks that lend are big boys that know the risks and aren't mad at Simon for forking over the deed and walking away.

  2. Do any of the East side residence think that Macy, JC Penny's and the other national tenants would have letft the mall if they were making money?? I have read several post about how Simon neglected the property but it sounds like the Eastsiders stopped shopping at the mall even when it was full with all of the national retailers that you want to come back to the mall. I used to work at the Dick's at Washington Square and I know for a fact it's the worst performing Dick's in the Indianapolis market. You better start shopping there before it closes also.

  3. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  4. If you only knew....

  5. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.