IBJNews

Indiana Statehouse capacity limit angers Dems

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A plan by Indiana officials to limit the number of people who can be inside the Statehouse at any given time has angered Indiana Democrats and union officials.

State police, homeland security officials and the state fire marshal's office announced Friday that they've decided to cap the number of people who can be inside the Statehouse at 3,000.

That number includes the 1,700 employees who work in the building, so the number of non-employees who could assemble in the building on any given day would range between 1,000 and 1,500, Fox59 reported.

House Democratic Minority Leader Patrick Bauer of South Bend said the policy is intended to prevent Hoosiers from protesting a proposed ban on workers from being required under labor contracts to pay union fees.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • what dems want
    HEADLINE !!!!!!!!! DEMOCRATS WANT PEOPLE TO DIE IN THE STATE HOUSE
  • Common sense vs. rhetoric
    David,

    Limiting the number of bodies allowed in any public building is about public safety, not the suppression of your First Amendment rights. Notice I said “in” the building, not outside the building. If you want to rant and rave about anything, just do it outside the statehouse.
    I suppose you were going to try to fit 5000+ protestors in Mitch’s office to try to get your point across? Another page from the Cloward & Piven playbook: Try to overwhelm the system regardless of the potential risk to others. Very thoughtful of you.
  • Supression
    Once again, It appears that state lawmakers are trying to limit free speech. No doubt, they know, quite well, that this issue is not going to be easily passed so they think it best to not hear from the public and pass the legislation anyhow. Hopefully someone has the guts to take this through the court system and put these lawmakers in their place representing the people and not impossing their own narrow minded idea on Hoosiers.
  • So What?
    I do not care about this.
    They limit the number of people in night clubs, schools, restaurants, etc.
    Are all those conspiracies against protesters, too?

    I
  • Really?
    Isn't it strange that for the past seven years, and throughout the "Great Recession", Indiana has thrived and had a great business climate......until now. Minus Elkhart, the rest of the state has weathered the economic storm better than most all other states. Why do we need to revert back to a policy that has already been overturned in the past? What has changed? This is the lameduck year, Mitch no longer cares what people think or need. His wife said "no", so now we all have to reap the benefits of a leader, who albeit not my favorite but has been an effective and efficient governor, who now can bow to party politics and be remembered by a few business leaders as the best governor of all time. The betterment of a few for the punishment of the many. How long will the blind be led? Wake up, Hoosiers. The comments about Union and Non-Union are irrelevant. The facts are the facts, 22 states already have this legislation and look at where we rank among those 22. The Union scale sets the Non-Union scale, if they take a pay-cut, so do we. Why would you want to belittle yourself for the sake of some politician who doesn't leave the shelter of his/her tax bracket? God help us all.
  • Poor Pat
    Poor Patrick Bauer. Another conspiracy in his mind. He just can't understand that 100 civilized individuals can do more for him than 5000 loud, impolite and uncontrolled yellers. Welcome to the civilized world and keep the hairpiece secure!
  • Capacity Limits
    Waaaaaahhhh, sob, sob, sob,

    Poor Patty Bauer. Can't get all his thugs in the statehouse to create carnage. Too bad, Patty. You shouldn't have taken so much money from them and then you wouldn't be beholden to them!

    You need a term limit just like Dear Mr. Lugar and Mr. Burton!
  • are you kidding me
    Let the politicos demonstrate participatory democracy and establish self imposed term limits. Specifically, limit terms to reflect that there are no pensions, or life long health insurance.

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. 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.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. 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.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT