IBJNews

Panel dismisses complaint against Indiana Democrats

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Indiana Election Commission has dismissed — for now — a campaign finance complaint involving House Democrats who staged a five-week walkout earlier this year.

The panel's Republican chairman, Dan Dumezich, said Thursday that the issue will likely return in January after Democrats file campaign finance reports, according to a Friday report in the Journal Gazette of Fort Wayne.

House Democrats walked off their jobs in the chamber in February and fled to Illinois to protest a Republican agenda they called an assault on labor unions and public education.

In March, a constituent of Rep. Kreg Battles, D-Vincennes, sent an e-mail complaining that Battles accepted illegal campaign contributions by allowing the Indiana Democratic Party to pay for his hotel and meals while he and his colleagues were in Urbana, Ill.

Legislators are prohibited from soliciting or receiving campaign contributions during the long budget session of the General Assembly, which is when the walkout occurred.

The Indiana Democratic Party paid about $95,000 in Urbana expenses, according to its campaign finance report.

While the complaint is specifically against Battles, any finding in the case would likely apply to all the House Democrats who joined in the walkout. Democratic officials contend that they financed a caucus — not campaign activity.

But some Republicans during the walkout said the state party's payment of those expenses should be counted as an in-kind campaign contribution.

"(Battles) came across this money somehow. The question is did he solicit?" Dumezich said. "And unless the Indiana Democratic Party plans to give legislators a 1099 or W2 for the amount of money spent on vacation in Illinois, it had to come from somewhere."

During Thursday's discussion, it became clear that Battles has not filed a campaign finance report for the time period in question because he isn't required to do so until January.

Democratic member Sarah Steele Riordan said given that fact there is no substantial likelihood of a violation.

"I do not understand what we are doing right now," she said.

Dumezich conceded that point and the group voted unanimously to dismiss the complaint.

But he said in January, if the contribution isn't listed on Battles' report, the commission should consider the issue again.

The commission has two Republican members and two Democratic members and often deadlocks on issues with political overtones. It takes three members to penalize a candidate.

Riordan and fellow Democratic member Anthony Long stressed that if the commission began looking into the Indiana Democratic Party, they would have to remove themselves from the proceeding. Riordan is legal counsel for the party, and Long is a member of the Democratic state central committee.

Neither Battles nor Indiana Democratic Party Chairman Dan Parker attended Thursday's hearing.

"My understanding is that this was not sanctioned by the commission, only Dumezich," Parker said via e-mail. "It's not a formal proceeding, just a fishing expedition."

Members of the election commission never got to the substance of the complaint Thursday because the two Democratic members questioned whether Dumezich had the authority to unilaterally place the item on the agenda for investigation.

Legal counsel for the Republican and Democratic co-directors of the Indiana Election Division differed on Dumezich's authority, so the group asked Attorney General Greg Zoeller for an advisory opinion on the applicable law.


ADVERTISEMENT
  • more political spin
    And Charlie White who committed FRAUD voted illegally, and served on a town council when he did not even live in the town...and the Republicans honor him with keeping him Sec of State to oversee elections???
    Something is not right here. And it is the GOP who think the ends justifies the means
  • Dumbocrats Walk Out
    Think about it...if 99% of hard working Hoosiers walked out on their jobs, they would be fired, and not be able to draw unemployment, and have to pay for COBRA. These dumbocrats really set a fine example for their constituants. We should limit polititions terms to two years, and be able to fire the ones that do a bad job. They should also have to pay for their own healthcare. Maybe at this point, politions would at least try to do a better job.

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. something to take iman's mind off CART,,,the league itsownself doesn't do it

  2. Someone mentioned a green roof. Every designer of a new urban building should be required to at least explore the feasibility of a green roof. The ability to cut carbon dioxide, save precious rainwater (drought this summer??) and re-use grey water, cool the building cheaper, and improve the view for neighbors, should be, not only the good neighbor thing to do, it should be the responsible neighbor thing to do. Too bad the city didn't require it when they gave up downtown green space for the Simon Building. Surprised they aren't requiring it now.

  3. About the same means down, like the TV ratings.

    My favorite tradition that needs to be brought back is the 25/8 rule.

  4. Your stats are incorrect. The 85k Government employees working in Marion County includes all government workers in Marion county. That is state, federal, non profit agencies, city and county. The stats the article list is the number of employees for all of the city/county employees and it is correct. That number includes the library, airport, convention center, and so on. The policy of extending benefits to domestic partners is consistent with private sector companies of the same size. Isn't the mantra of most conservatives "run the government like a business."

    Also, too say the "fiscal proposil is huge" without considering the actuarial factors involved is a bit of an overstatement. We really don't know if it is huge or not. If all of the people added to the plan are healthy and don't have claims then it could bring cost done or hold them neutral.

  5. There are 85,346 government employees in Marion county according to Stats Indiana.

    My understanding is that this proposal covers not only same sex partners and children, but opposite same sex partners who are not married and any kids.

    It also covers all city and county employees, plus municipal corporations which use city/county benefits packages including Health and Hospital Corporation (Wishard), Indianapolis Airport Authority, Indianapolis Convention Center,Lucas Oil,Bankers Life, Indianapolis Marion County Library, and Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation (IndyGo).

    Certainly Indianapolis Public Schools will also want more benefits also.

    The fiscal cost on this proposal is huge.

ADVERTISEMENT