Ed Feigenbaum: Statehouse ‘silly season’ produces legislative surprises

  • Comments
  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

IndyCar has its so-called “Silly Season,” in which drivers, sponsors, owners and sometimes even engine manufacturers play an unpredictable off-season version of musical cars.

This interim was particularly exceptional. Former Indianapolis 500 pole-sitter James Hinchcliffe had a contract and manufacturer and sponsor backing—but not a car for the season. Former CART series champ Sebastian Bourdais was similarly out of a ride. Both drivers eventually found seats for the 500 and a handful of other races, but the feeling around the paddock was that, if it could happen to Hinch and Sea Bass, no combination was safe.

Just like IndyCar, the Indiana General Assembly has its own version of silly season, when the lawmakers, lobbyists and agency officials suddenly realize time is short in the legislative session—and wish lists remain long.

As legislation entered the final days of committee deliberations, solons frantically sought to insert key provisions into bills perhaps only tangentially related. In some cases, amendments became the principal focus of the new bill, just like, for example, a former 500 winner salvaging a part-time ride with a small team.

At least, however, some amendments received a public hearing—if not vetting (a few committee chairs claimed time constraints allowed for consideration of the amendments, but not for public testimony).

Several changes weren’t unveiled until second reading—the principal amendment stage—on the House or Senate floor. It was the final week to keep language alive for consideration in conference committee deliberations, where differences between a bill as passed by the House and Senate are ironed out—and where even more unforeseen language might arise without public input, despite rules ostensibly barring the practice.

We told you last week about 35- and 75-page amendments suddenly becoming the norm, taking over other bills. But there were even more egregious examples of substantive—and highly controversial—items that popped up near the end without full vetting.

While hospital billing legislation was handled more in the open than some of the others (perhaps due to the heavyweight crossfire between hospitals and insurers), other items seemed to appear out of the limestone mist.

One big surprise on March 2: a House floor amendment to an omnibus election bill—the kitchen sink of legislation—that had already undergone significant surgery. Backers sought to ensure embattled Attorney General Curtis Hill, a Republican, couldn’t remain in office or seek election again if the Supreme Court suspends him for more than 30 days (half the hearing officer’s recommended punishment) in a pending disciplinary case.

Hill’s office quickly retorted, “This kind of rushed proposal lacks transparency and leaves no opportunity for public input.”

When lawmakers advocated a measure to “essentially remove a city’s ability to regulate landlord-tenant relations,” as an IBJ editorial opined, the Indianapolis City-County Council responded by passing a comprehensive tenant-rights ordinance just hours later—and the mayor signed it in a rare public ceremony.

Another set of late amendments seeking to impose state control on Indianapolis government involved criminalizing certain panhandling practices—prompting an ACLU litigation threat—and allowing the state to recoup 10% of IndyGo’s income tax revenue unless it funds 10% of annual expenses with privately raised dollars.

A major new Senate floor amendment to allow charter schools access to funding from public school tax referenda passed 26-25 without public input and with Lt. Gov. Suzanne Crouch, a Republican, casting the tie-breaking vote.

Whether some of these actions survive conference deliberations and floor action is uncertain. You might see further surprises next week in conference. After all, in 2013, lawmakers finalized a $100 million bond-loan deal for the Indianapolis Motor Speedway as time was running down, a package different from that vetted in committee.

And racing fans are still waiting on those lights they thought the deal would help underwrite!•

__________

Feigenbaum publishes Indiana Legislative Insight for Hannah News Service. He can be reached at EDF@hannah-in.com.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

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 comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

Get the best of Indiana business news. ONLY $1/week Subscribe Now

Get the best of Indiana business news. ONLY $1/week Subscribe Now

Get the best of Indiana business news. ONLY $1/week Subscribe Now

Get the best of Indiana business news. ONLY $1/week Subscribe Now

Get the best of Indiana business news.

Limited-time introductory offer for new subscribers

ONLY $1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Get the best of Indiana business news.

Limited-time introductory offer for new subscribers

ONLY $1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Get the best of Indiana business news.

Limited-time introductory offer for new subscribers

ONLY $1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Get the best of Indiana business news.

Limited-time introductory offer for new subscribers

ONLY $1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In