IBJNews

State lawmakers remain divided; deal by Sunday in doubt

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

With the legislative session's end approaching, lawmakers on Friday remained divided on several key issues, and key party leaders said they expected the impasse to continue.

Republican and Democratic leaders said Thursday that they hoped to reach compromises on several bills Friday, before the session ends at midnight Sunday.

But House Speaker Patrick Bauer, D-South Bend, said Friday afternoon he was not hopeful those differences could be overcome by the end of the day.

He said House Democrats were willing to go along with delaying by one year an increase in taxes that businesses pay into the state's unemployment insurance fund. Republicans want to delay the tax increase because they say it would cause businesses to lay off workers in an economy that is still foundering.

Senate Republicans passed a bill earlier this session that would delay the tax increase slated to take effect in April by one year. Bauer said that would save businesses about $500 million, but now Senate Republicans want a two-year delay.

He said that was unacceptable, characterizing it as a $1 billion bailout for businesses at a time when the state's unemployment insurance fund has borrowed $1.6 billion to remain solvent.

He said Senate Republicans were using the unemployment insurance issue to hold other measures hostage. They include a bill that would allow schools to tap money from property tax accounts to offset a portion of $300 million in cuts for general operating expenses.

"If they set those free we will try to deal with them," Bauer said. "If they won't, we haven't gotten any other option but to leave."

He said he was only willing to keep the session going over the weekend "if there was a purpose for it."

House Minority Leader Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, said he and other GOP leaders from the House and Senate met with Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels to update him on negotiations.

"It's my impression that discussions have not been going well today, that the speaker has been a moving target, that he's picked up the cause of a number of special interests including the AFL-CIO, language that the State Teachers Association desires, and he's injecting a lot of new material in the closing hours here," Bosma said. "I'm not confident that we'll have an opportunity to complete our work."

Senate Appropriations Chairman Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, said the parties were in a "waiting period" that he couldn't decide was good or bad.

"Nothing is happening and nobody's talking right now," he said. "I think it can easily be done, but I don't see the signs yet."

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. 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