Ed DeLaney: Holcomb’s choice or ours?

Is the state forcing Hoosiers to put their health at risk to vote?

Ed DeLaneyLife is often beset with difficult choices, such as: Do I take a medicine with strong side effects or try to ride out an illness? Normally, individuals seek to avoid such dilemmas. And leaders try to avoid putting their voters to such a choice. Doctors, for example, seek a third path with more hope and less risk.

At the moment, Gov. Eric Holcomb alone has the power to act like a leader or a good physician. He can let us choose to vote in a way that protects both our health and the right to vote: mail balloting for all. He won’t allow us that choice. Instead, he is avoiding leadership and giving many of us two bad choices. Go to a polling place or skip voting! Nice choices.

What should a leader do when citizens face the question of whether to risk our health or our right to vote? A leader would act to reduce the risk and ease the problem of choice. He would inform us and let us decide. Holcomb has refused to lead. While he usually sets us adrift with ever-changing “guidance,” in this one case, he decides for us.

In the spring, the governor made the simple decision to allow all Hoosiers to decide whether to vote by mail or in person. It worked: He gave us the chance to make an informed choice. But now, after a series of stalled “openings” and ever-changing “guidance,” he has resolved to make our choice for us. If we are not elderly or out of town, we must vote in person.

I pray that it is merely a coincidence that Holcomb has chosen the path Vice President Mike Pence and President Donald Trump prefer. Those two gentlemen lifted Eric Holcomb from obscurity and made him governor. Is he grateful? Does that explain his refusal to let us choose how to vote? Does it matter to him that this can only lead to one result: fewer votes cast? Even accidental governors have a duty to lead in the interests of their people.

On a personal note, I am sick of hearing the governor say he felt safe when he chose to vote in person at my parish in the primary. Just how scary was it for him to walk across the street, along with security to keep people at bay, to a neighboring church? Does everyone have that option? Not likely. Voting shouldn’t require courage, whether his vote was an act of courage or not.

Sadly, Indiana is near the bottom in voter turnout. It ranks near the “top” in restrictive rules for voters. Might we not try to reverse this just once?

There is a popular term for the situation where one has two bad options yet must choose. It is called a Hobson’s choice. If we as voters can’t decide how we feel safer, we will face a “Holcomb’s choice”: Do what he prefers or else. He alone will put us to that choice.•


DeLaney, an Indianapolis attorney, is a Democrat representing the 86th District in the Indiana House of Representatives. Send comments to ibjedit@ibj.com.

Click here for more Forefront columns.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Story Continues Below

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our updated comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

4 thoughts on “Ed DeLaney: Holcomb’s choice or ours?

  1. May I say I am sick of you liberals using the scare tactics of health safety and voting. There are a tiny % of people that take a real risk in voting in person and most all of them can vote by mail. Your argument is made to prey on the minds of the uninformed and based on premises and lies that are just to sooth your own ego. If not that, your just dishonest to your constituents.

  2. Quote from above, “Go to a polling place or skip voting! Nice choices.” Mr. Delaney, if you are going to list choices, let’s list them all shall we!? You listed choices 1 & 2 above, choice 3 would be to vote absentee, (totally safe, requires a little effort) choice 4 would be to vote early. (safer with reduced or no lines, would also require a little effort, starts October 6th) You also stated that “If we are not elderly or out of town, we must vote in person.” That is only 2 of the 12 possible reasons to vote absentee, why did you leave out the other 10? Indiana voters have multiple options and they can choose which one best fits their situation. But, listing all the options for voting or voting absentee doesn’t fit your narrative of possible political payback or voter suppression. Your bias, or trying hard to make your article fit your narrative by leaving out key points/options, just leads me to not care about your opinion.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}