IBJOpinion

HETRICK: Sitting at the polling place, wishing you were here

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Bruce Hetrick

If you listen even a little, you’d swear there were two different legislative sessions in 2011.

One session boasts remarkable success.

“With the gavel dropped on the 2011 legislative session, Hoosiers have many reasons to be proud,” said an e-mail from the Indiana Republican Party. “We have a fourth balanced budget that doesn’t raise taxes and sweeping education reforms that increase choice and ensure a great teacher in the front of every classroom.”

The other session was a miserable failure.

“We Hoosiers are in the final stretch of the session from hell,” said an e-mail from a social-policy advocate whose cause met the guillotine. “We gotta stay the course. Good’s bound to prevail again in our lifetimes.”

No matter which side you’re on, the process was the usual sausage factory of charges and counter-charges, midnight machinations, sneak attacks, artful dodges, arm-twisting, backstabbing, brinkmanship and gamesmanship.

The most visible ploy was, of course, the House of Representatives Democrats’ five-week walkout to Urbana, Ill.

But some of the back-room, behind-closed-door deals were equally daring and far more decisive—especially on divisive social policies and reform initiatives.

Thus, a constitutional gay marriage ban was set in motion.

There’s a crackdown on illegal immigrants.

If we’re licensed, we may carry our firearms into most public buildings.

Education reform passed. But local-government reform failed (again).

Planned Parenthood was defunded—a move that was, allegedly, pro-life. Yet the state’s tobacco-cessation agency was eliminated and a smoke-free-workplace law defeated (again)—moves that are, almost certainly, pro-death.

When it comes to legislation, arbiters of logic need not apply. Yet none of this should have come as a surprise.

In the 2008 federal election, one party won the presidency and majorities in the House and Senate. That brought us health-insurance reform, withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq, financial-industry reform and other “liberal” policy changes.

After the 2010 state election, one party held the governor’s office, a super-majority in the state Senate and a strong majority in the state House of Representatives. That brought legislation on gay marriage, abortion, guns, immigration and other “conservative” policy changes.

In short, when voters let candidates of a particular bent have their say, they’re bound to get officeholders who have their way.

What bothers me in the wake of both these elections and the policies that have followed is the invocation of the collective “we.”

“The American people said loudly and clearly they want us to slash the deficit,” a senator will say. Or, “The American people don’t believe in abortion.”

“Hoosier children are the losers,” an opponent of education reform will proclaim. Or, “Hoosiers don’t want government telling us what we can and can’t do.”

In Indiana and the nation, we are not one people of one mind. We rarely, if ever, agree 100 percent that we want or don’t want a particular policy or program. And the wise officeholder will avoid sweeping statements that imply we’re all under the same tent—not to mention presumptuous pronouncements that he or she speaks for all.

The fact is, given low voter turnout in most elections, your average politician speaks not for “the American people” or “Hoosiers everywhere” or “the people of Indianapolis,” but rather, for a majority of the minority who bothered to vote.

Thus, once elected, the voters who pulled a particular candidate’s lever are not synonymous with the constituents that officeholder represents. Nor are the views and desires of the candidates’ voters the only ones that ought to be considered.

But none of this is the candidates’ problem. The quest to be re-elected, the pretense of speaking for all, the pronouncement of majority-backed authority are all possible and practical because of voter ignorance, apathy and complacency.

Public policy is a participatory sport. The fewer among the mainstream masses who play, the more influence the energized, engaged and well-funded fringe factions will have.

Being involved and making an impact don’t have to carry a hefty price tag. While money still buys far too much influence, the proliferation of mass, niche and social media makes it easier than ever to be what The New York Times columnist Tom Friedman calls a “super-empowered individual.”

Now more than ever, it’s easy to get your voice heard, to find like-minded people, to organize behind your cause, and to influence public policy.

If you don’t, someone else will.

Elections have consequences. After all the jeering and cheering produced by the state legislative session that ended April 29, you’d think “Hoosiers everywhere” would get more involved.

But alas, a dismal percentage of eligible voters showed up to vote in the May 3 municipal elections.

Just wait. Come November, the winning candidates in cities statewide, fresh from winning a majority of the minority who bothered to cast ballots, will proclaim, “The people of [insert your city here] said loudly and clearly … .”•

__________

Hetrick is chairman and CEO of Hetrick Communications Inc., an Indianapolis-based public relations and marketing communications firm. His column appears twice a month. He can be reached at bhetrick@ibj.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

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. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1

ADVERTISEMENT