FEIGENBAUM: Passage of Daniels' agenda will spawn sweeping change

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

You shouldn’t have much trouble discerning the immediate winners from the 2011 session of the Indiana General Assembly.

Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels received virtually everything he asked for, winning historic victories on virtually every big-picture agenda item he sought and falling short only on more marginal matters such as sentencing reform and some extant government anachronism he sought to reform.

House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, showed he learned much about leadership from his 2005-2006 speakership stint. Bosma avoided antagonizing Democrats and poisoning the well from the outset, refusing to be baited by Democrats who sought to turn him into the legislative ogre.

His measured rhetoric and formal floor responses to the Democratic walkout allowed business to be conducted without rancor when Democrats returned. That allowed the full Republican agenda to be enacted.

Bosma’s willingness—and the willingness of the governor and Senate President Pro Tem David Long, R-Fort Wayne—to shift Right to Work to a summer study panel defused a potentially unresolvable situation, and also showed the freshman bloc that just because they could do something didn’t mean they should do it.

Long also offered steady direction in the upper chamber—ensuring adult leadership when Bosma was without a quorum—and Daniels chose to avoid employing the bully pulpit.

But beyond the political winners, the policy that prevailed clearly stole the show.

Indiana Democrats cast the GOP as an out-of-control juggernaut as legislators passed education reforms—including student vouchers, charter school expansion, teacher evaluations and collective-bargaining restrictions; cut corporate income taxes; reduced worker benefits for the unemployed; imposed far-reaching abortion restrictions; defunded Planned Parenthood; and expanded gun-owner rights.

It was the same tactic national Republicans had employed against the Nancy Pelosi-led Democratic Congress that passed health care reform and assorted bailouts and stimulus programs.

Just as those measures were nation-changing initiatives—whether you believed them to be positive or negative—the legislation passed by the GOP-controlled General Assembly will have sweeping implications in Indiana.

Not since the mid-1930s, when Democrat Paul McNutt was governor, has the state arguably seen such important, high-profile and potentially society-changing initiatives approved in such a short time.

One interesting consequence of this sea change is that it will result in a huge wave of state regulations promulgated to implement the new laws. The large bloc of freshmen lawmakers may not have intended this, but it is a consequence, nonetheless.

And speaking of those freshmen, we cautioned you up front this session that they would find themselves philosophically conflicted on a number of issues, and they were.

The House (and its 19 GOP freshmen) approved restrictions on assorted freedoms, including texting while driving, cigarette smoking in public places (which ultimately did not become law), drug-testing for some seeking unemployment assistance, relationships between women seeking certain health care services and their physicians, and even diluting home rule for local government units.

Casinos fared well with the Republican Legislature, avoiding a smoking ban, garnering savings from elimination of outdated maritime regulations, and winning the ability to host larger card tournaments.

Banks were able to persuade lawmakers to turn aside the governor’s attempt to appropriate the $200 million-plus Public Deposit Insurance Fund for other purposes. They eventually acceded to an extension of repayment on a decade-old $50 million PDIF loan, but bankers took a hit for not agreeing to forgive it; they were not included in the corporate income tax reduction.

Agriculture interests won preliminary approval for a “freedom-to-farm” constitutional amendment they believe will protect livestock breeders from animal rights activists. They also won key exemptions from the immigration bill, and some short-term concessions for Indiana’s mint-growing industry.

Summer study committees will tackle the Right to Work conundrum, which threatens to overshadow the next session and 2012 election.

But elections have consequences, as we’ve told you all year, and those consequences then set the stage for the next election.

See you in 2012!•


Feigenbaum publishes Indiana Legislative Insight. His column appears weekly while the Indiana General Assembly is in session. He can be reached at edf@ingrouponline.com.


  • Daniels a Rhino? I don't think so!
    He leads the Republican party to massive gains in the 2010 Legislative elections, giving them control of both houses of the legislature.

    Leads them in formulating an agenda for the 2011 session that promises to be eye-opening.

    He proceeds to lead them as they work this Conservative Agenda through to passage.

    The result: Historic Education reform....Tax cuts for business....Tighter regulations on Unemployment Benefits....Stricter Abortion controls....Defunding of Planned Parenthood....Expansion of Gun ownership rights....and on and on!

    Conservatives across this country could only dream of these kind of changes for their states, yet we have these 'no-nothing' commentators saying Gov Daniels is a Rhino!

    What a joke.....really

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. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.