IBJNews

Indiana governor hopefuls talk education, infrastructure

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Despite their political differences, the three men running for Indiana governor outlined similar outlooks for running the state during a forum Tuesday, from proposing improved job training to imposing tax cuts. But which taxes should be cut and when highlighted their differences.

Democrat John Gregg, Republican Mike Pence and Libertarian Rupert Boneham varied most on their tax plans during their discussion with retired Indiana Chief Justice Randall Shepard.

Gregg, a former state lawmaker, came across as knowledgeable and jovial as he reiterated his call for eliminating the sales tax on gasoline. Pence, a congressman, argued his proposal for cutting the state income tax by 10 percent, and held tightly to the script he has used throughout the campaign.

Boneham, a youth mentor, stumbled through general calls for lower taxes on business, though he was largely in agreement with Pence and Gregg on most issues.

The three spent close to a half hour each talking with Shepard at a forum hosted by Indiana University's Public Policy Institute in Indianapolis. The forum offered a preview of the debates each will participate in before the election day, though their messages could get drowned out by the massive on-air fight already under way between Pence and Gregg.

Gregg appeared most at ease in his conversation with Shepard, rattling off the names of businesses around the state and local officials he knew from the campaign trail, while riffing generally on Shepard's questions. Asked about education, he echoed remarks from Pence and Boneham that college education needs to be more affordable.

"We've done a great job in Indiana of making college accessible through our public universities," he said. "I think our challenge for the next governor and for all of us as a people is to make sure it's affordable."

Pence offered hints at some new ideas he'll be rolling out in the coming weeks. He proposed creating a blue-ribbon panel to examine the state's infrastructure needs. He said the lease of the Indiana Toll Road under current Gov. Mitch Daniels gave the state millions of dollars to begin infrastructure projects that had remained on drawing boards awaiting funding.

Since then, however, planning has dried up, and Indiana needs to find the best ways to build infrastructure to serve Indiana's strengths in manufacturing, agriculture and the life sciences.

"I think roads mean jobs," Pence said.

Pence and Gregg reiterated proposals to cut various taxes and try to increase vocational training. Boneham largely agreed on the broader points of cutting taxes and making college more affordable, but occasionally diverged from the group, throwing his support behind a mass-transit system in central Indiana at one point.

"That is a giant opportunity for us to encourage more work for Hoosiers," said Boneham, a former reality television star.

The three candidates expect to meet again for three debates hosted by the Indiana Debate Commission before November's election.

While the campaigns have released their own ideas about how they would run the state, they have yet to engage each other in any serious debate, directly or through press statements.

Gregg has gone after Pence throughout the campaign — at one point milling through Pence's congressional record and a 1991 collection of essays Pence edited at a conservative think tank to cobble together what he argued would be the "Pence Plan for Indiana."

But Pence, who has a massive fundraising lead, has largely ignored Gregg throughout the campaign focusing instead on a tightly written script about jobs and economic development.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • There are THREE candidates...
    While the IBJ obviously does nto want to paint a positive picture of the Libertarian conadiadte...maybe you should reference all THREE candidates next time you wish to offer a suggestion about this campaign!!!

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. First, the Athenaeum is going to have to get past the hurdle with the Lockerbie residents and the agreement that the parcel would be residential. Second, and in my opinion, this prime piece of property should include parking, PLUS, a black box theater(s), some market rate and affordable artist housing and a plan to renovate and reconfigure the second story theater. I would negotiate to add the DeHaan property surface parking lot into the development mix, place a one story surface parking garage on the DeHaan lot on the street level (for the Dehaan tenants use during the daytime) and add a second story to the garage that would become an addition to the current second story theater and then change the direction of the theater by moving the stage across the alley and on top of the DeHaan lot parking. You can add all the stage elements that are currently missing from the Athenaeum stage to make it more attractive for use by Ballet, Opera and traveling productions. Plus, the theater changes would probably help solve some of the soundproofing issues. Alas,it does not seem to be a part of the strategic plan to conduct a study to determine best use of the property. Seems like the current plan is a quick and easy move that ignores the property best use/potential and any strategic property planning for the effect on future generations.

  2. I recall that MSA's pilings are still in the ground and hard to remove. It’s not likely any proposal will include significant underground construction/parking because of this. Start adding 2 floors of retail, 8 floors of parking and 5-10 floors of possible hotel, and/or 10-20 floors of residential, and you are at 30 floors already with possible expansion of all the uses. But then again I could be wrong.

  3. Accoriding to their website there is no deadline to the Do Not Call list. What is this article referring to??

  4. On what planet are they entitled to this largesse from the stockholders? These people make multi-million dollar salaries: Pay for your own personal travel.

  5. It matters because they're already paid enormously fat salaries: Pay for your own personal travel. Being "taxed on it" isn't a valid excuse--so what? They're still being gifted a raft of luxury perks from somebody else's money on top of an enormous, lavish salary.

ADVERTISEMENT