IBJNews

Senate OKs plan spurred by White indictment

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Republican-controlled state Senate has approved a measure that would allow Gov. Mitch Daniels to appoint a new secretary of state if the current office holder, a Republican facing criminal charges, is found to have been ineligible to run — legislation Democrats have branded a blatant power grab.

Charlie White, a Republican who won office in November, is charged with seven felony counts, including voter fraud. The Indiana Recount Commission is considering a Democratic-led challenge to White's eligibility to hold the office.

Under current state law, the runner-up, Democrat Vop Osili, would take office if the commission were to rule that White was ineligible. But some Republican lawmakers want to give Daniels, a fellow Republican, the power to choose replacements for several government posts, including secretary of state, should the office holder be found to be ineligible. The Senate voted 33-17 in favor of the legislation on Thursday, sending it to the House for consideration.

Supporters of the bill say an elected official should determine who fills the seat, and that it shouldn't hinge on the decision by the non-elected recount commission.

But opponents say the legislation is an attempt by Republicans to keep the post in their party's hands.

"Politics aside, this is just not good law," said Sen. Greg Taylor, D-Indianapolis.

The allegation at the core of the eligibility challenge and criminal case against White is the same: that he committed vote fraud and was ineligible to run for secretary of state because he used his ex-wife's address as his own on a voter registration form. White has previously acknowledged the voting error, chalking it up to his busy schedule and new marriage.

A spokeswoman for Daniels said the governor did not push for the legislation and had no comment on it. House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, said Wednesday that he hasn't looked closely at the bill yet but said the appearance that Republicans are changing the rules in the middle of the game was a concern.

The votes cast for secretary of state in Indiana are used to determine ballot access for parties. The bill also clarifies that Republicans would keep their party status, saying a secretary of state's ineligibility wouldn't affect the votes for purposes of determining ballot access and other issues.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Power Crazy
    I sure hope these Republicans are all voted out. They are moving in a very dangerous direction that will hurt the middle class and poor. Wake up and see these men are not creating jobs, they are shoving a social agenda that is not in step with the general public. Separate church and state is not in their vocabulary.
  • Why VOP?
    why should a man who lost by a wide margin become the default sec of state? We should hold a special election because neither of the other options is a true measure of what the people want.
  • senate ok"s
    Our republican party has gone completely crazy with POWER, the GOVERNOR needs to step in and slow them down. I hope, come primary time the republicans vote most of them out,yes I"m a republican, but Bosma is sick with POWER lets send him home.
  • Ignorance At Its Best
    One major thing I have learned since relocating here, is Indiana has a serious social and racial problem. I believe it is due to a lack of political education. Low , and middle income folks voting away their pay checks because they rather believe a lie than read the facts for themselves. The consequences of that is a Republican Senate giving themselve power to screw over the very folks that they suppose to be representing. Wake up Indiana!

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. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT