IBJOpinion

FEIGENBAUM: Expect uncertainty in the 2010 General Assembly

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

One certainty about the 2010 session of the Indiana General Assembly: It will be over by mid-March.

That, however, may be the only predictable element of a session that convenes during the most turbulent and unpredictable economic times this state has endured in decades.

As a result, this gathering likely will prove to be a united and uncontroversial meeting of the minds—as both parties coalesce to pass politically popular proposals that will do no harm, postponing their tough decisions until after the election (while forcing the governor to be the bad guy). Or they will jump in and make difficult choices that will allow the state to survive the economic straits and preserve legislative prerogative in spending decisions.

Today, our money is on the former.

December offers a peek at promises and priorities as the legislative schedule again opens a month early. The agenda features a bevy of committee hearings in both the Senate and House of Representatives aimed at expediting packages considered sufficiently important that legislative leaders deem calendar creep essential.

Many Democrats finally seem to be warming—at least politically—to adding property tax caps to the Indiana Constitution, but seek protection against “assessment creep” in a trailer bill. Serving up too many restrictions on assessed values, however, also could pose constitutional problems and further hamper provision of local government services.

And while some business interests are softening their previous opposition to the tax caps, that sentiment is universal, and the state’s agricultural community remains largely averse to how application of the circuit breaker affects Hoosier ag.

Expect a few more prominent issues, some important to business, and some not, to be the subject of some debate—or debate over why they will not be debated.

While a legislative interim study committee completed its two-year review of the state’s alcoholic beverage laws and recommended adherence to the status quo, there remains considerable pent-up demand for some changes. Recent administrative and legal action may offer additional impetus.

The state’s casino industry—a direct employer of some 14,000 and a major contributor to state coffers—is at a crossroads, facing coming competition from Ohio and possibly Kentucky. The racinos seek tax relief; some casinos want tax incentives for non-gambling economic investments, income tax credits against the wagering tax, or tax deferral on some free-play offerings.

Another interim study committee examined gambling issues and found it difficult to achieve consensus on equitable assistance, as each property seems to face its individual challenges and would be affected differently by universal solutions. Tax breaks are not politically palatable, a casino move is a tough sell, and the only legislation that might emerge could center on allowing land-based gambling at current riverboat sites or simply eliminating maritime requirements and crews. However, any time a gambling issue comes to the floor, things become complicated.

Township-government reform efforts also will return.

Other emotional issues, such as smoking bans and prohibitions on texting while driving, will inevitably arise and distract lawmakers.

We’re just jaded enough to believe that much of the session’s direction will not be evident until close to Feb. 19, the deadline for filing for legislative office. The 2010 election for the Indiana House of Representatives is acknowledged to be the most important of the decade, because Democrats need to maintain their majority to affect the drawing of new district lines in 2011.

Both parties believe their respective ability to “draw the maps” will largely determine which party will be able to control the House majority for the succeeding 10 years (when Republicans drew the House maps in 1981, they held the majority for all but one election in that decade; likewise, Democrats were in charge of House mapmaking in 1991 and 2001 and maintained their majorities in all but one election in each of those two decades, to date).•

-------------------

Feigenbaum publishes Indiana Legislative Insight. Views expressed here are the writer’s.

ADVERTISEMENT

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. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT