Indiana House Republicans have approved $1,000-a-day fines against Democratic legislators who are boycotting over a right-to-work
bill.
The Republicans approved the fines in a voice vote Wednesday morning as most of the Democratic representatives gathered in
the Statehouse Rotunda for what they called an open caucus meeting to discuss the bill to ban employment contracts with mandatory
union fees.
The Democrats began their meeting surrounded by hundreds of union supporters, with more watching from the balconies above.
Republican Speaker Brian Bosma had demanded that Democrats end their boycott and give the House enough members present to
begin work.
Bosma had hoped to begin voting Tuesday on proposed amendments to the right-to-work bill, but most Democrats resumed their
walkout after questions arose about the constitutionality of the statewide referendum they're seeking on the proposal.
Democratic leader Patrick Bauer said his members will stay out as long as it takes lawyers to review the proposed referendum.
Bauer said he found out late Monday that state lawyers had raised questions about the constitutionality of such a measure.
He called it a trick Bosma was using to give Republicans cover to vote against the referendum proposal.
"The same continuing pattern is they do not want the public to legitimately and constitutionally have the referendum,"
Bauer said. "That's part of their pattern. Keep the public out and go after the representatives who demand that the
public be let in."
Bosma said he wouldn't tolerate further stalling by Democrats.
"I think he sees ghosts behind every door," Bosma said about Bauer and his allegations.
Lawyers for the non-partisan Legislative Services Agency, the state agency that drafts bills for lawmakers and provides legal
advice, wrote in a Jan. 13 memo that the Indiana constitution "does not include a referendum option" and said it
is "unlikely" voters could have the final say on statewide legislation.
Legislators in recent years have permitted local referendums on whether to allow casinos, approval of school construction
projects, additional property taxes for school and elimination of township assessors. State records show the only statewide
referendum questions in several decades have been on whether to approve amendments to the state constitution — not approving
state laws.
"There are referendums on everything under the sun," Bauer said. "We didn't need to be blindsided by that
person (Bosma) up there."
- Home
- NEWS
- REGIONAL
- THIS WEEK'S PAPER
- BLOGS
- Multimedia
- OPINION
- A&E
- LISTS
- PEOPLE
- EVENTS
- Classifieds
- Subscribe
IBJNews
Indiana Republicans approve fines on House boycotters
Associated Press
January 18, 2012
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
 Follow IBJ's Tweets on these topics: |
||
| @IBJNews | @Propertylines | @IBJTheScore |
| @IBJArts | @IBJHealthcare | @IBJDining |
| @IBJLists | @IBJSmallbiz | |
-
Every one who has been scammed by these people may be interested to know that we got our money back from them. It took some time and a 'special approach', but it worked. We are now on the way to stopping their activities. Anyone wishing to participate in this action is welcome. Please make contact through our website www.laterelle.com Peter Clutton
-
Lou, I had mouth watering just by reading your review. I recently was in this restaurant with family and friends and I can tell you THIS IS A REAL TASTE OF MEXICO. Forget about those restaurants that claim being "authentic Mexican food". Don Gusto P.J. has the most Authentic regional taste of Mexican food. My wife is from Mexico City and she can tell this was like home. It's a small place, but the greatness of Don Gusto P.J. is the real authentic taste of Mexican Food and the friendly service. By the way, this is a family owned and operated business. Great review, Lou!
-
With the way this lovely couple met, it's amazing their business failed. I mean, I'm young and easy going but I wouldn't trust her or him as far as I could throw them
-
You agreed to make a law to take peoples children out of there home for any little thing I feel like if there is no abuse no violence no neglect no molestation you shouldn't take children from their homes if there not in danger or harm people that do drugs shouldnt loose their kids because they have an addiction they should be helped in wich way they can taking children out of there homes is not the answer nor the solution 90% of time you make the situation worser than what it is do you think that it's fair to the children putting them through this who would even ever come up with this its unfair one of the presidents used marjuana did they take his children or freedom the law is crooked and its alot of dirty people taking advantage of it god isn't unfair to us so we shouldnt be unfair to others something needs to be done about now not later this world is corrupt and the people in it this is a disgrace to man kind I'm going to pray for justice
-
Getting to perform there again!
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
IBJ Conversations
22 Comments
Add Comment
http://www.epi.org/publication/working-hard-indiana-bad-tortured-uphill/
10% of the Indiana workforce is a LOT of people!
If RTW effects 11% of the state work force how could it lower wages across the board? I understand those arguing that RTW might lower Union wages, but I find it hard to believe it will effect all workers.
The facts on the 'union' bill
*Workers DO NOT currently HAVE to join a union. They are protected by federal law to not have to do this. AND although they don't have to join, they are still GUARANTEED to reap the benefits from the union bargaining. They DO have to pay what's called their 'fair share' of bargaining...these do not equate to the same amount of union dues that actual members pay.
*Federal law REQUIRES unions to bargain for EVERYONE. Thus is some refuse to pay, they STILL reap the benefits. Unions do not get a choice in this--fair?
*Federal law requires that those paying union dues be allowed to opt out of having their money given to support political parties.
The ads stating that 2/3 Hoosiers agree with this law are bogus. Wishtv did a story that proved this wrong. This is a blatant attack on the middle class. Think of the union workers you know. Are any of them rich? No. They are making a living, most of them do hard labor. They deserve to be paid overtime after forty hours and have health care and other benefits bargained for. Yes, some people give unions a bad name...but they are really in the minority.
Union shops can and do vote to be non-unionized. If the workers don't feel represented, they will vote the union out. I do wish I could opt out of things I don't support, such as the stadium tax which I don't want -- it only cost me money.
In the end, it is just more of Mitch trying to lower our standard to that of Mexico. Reduce education, reduce wages, cut corp income tax, cut property tax for corporations, and say that Indiana workers are not good enough, that we need foreign (cheep) labor, often illegal and untaxed for his business friends.
Our wages are going down, our jobs are being worked by imported labor, tax breaks are going to wealthy. Based on what I see, I give 100% support the walk-out.
Dupree
If the Union is all that it says that it is (all about the employees) then it would be money well spent by the employees to CHOOSE to be in the union. If pepole are worried that it will reduce wages and benefits, then change the laws for minimum wage and mandatory benefits.
If you would go to Muncie, Anderson, Kokomo, etc. I think you would see how the Union did nothing to keep the jobs there. It would be interesting to see if a past union employee who lost their job, would join the union again it there was a Right to Work law.
I have a friend who is a Union person, she brags about all her vacation days and full "free" benefits (i.e. insurance). Where do you think all the money comes from? Have any of you priced insurance? Imagine having a company who has to pay for all that while some of its emaployees abuse it?
Many of the unions are still tied to the Mafia.
It's a political fight for both sides, one side wants to hurt the other side financially and one side wants to protect their financial support. The contrived hysteria about creating/losing jobs, safety degradation, etc is just political cover for the real issue of financial support.