After several years of Republican supermajorities and control of the Governor’s Office, the GOP policy agenda has little remaining that might be as objectionable to Democrats as, for example, right-to-work legislation, which sparked the historic 34-day Democratic walkout in 2011, or the repeal of common construction wage laws in 2015.
Since shaming isn’t Gov. Eric Holcomb’s style and social conservatives have their message heard clearly in the House, the governor’s options for persuading House Republicans to amend the hate crimes bill are limited.
The number and nature of the moving parts involved in the gambling issue in this legislative session are numerous and complex; the opportunities and problems presented are endless.
In the State of the State address, Republicans saw an emphasis on the fundamentals and admirable restraint on spending absent sufficient revenue collections for new programs. But Democrats read into the agenda a lack of boldness and unwillingness to commit dollars where they would offer a bigger return on investment.
Three of the four leaders are “legislative legacies” of sorts, raised with a respect for “the system” and a sense of public service and selflessness.
Rep. Charlie Brown, D-Gary, first elected in 1982, is one of several lawmakers who will not run again. While he’s unfamiliar to most outside Lake County, he leaves a fascinating legacy and one of importance not just in Lake County and the Statehouse, but for people in Indianapolis.
With so many leading lawmakers with long years of experience in conference-committee deliberations leaving and being replaced by those who have played only supporting roles in recent sessions, we’re seeing a change in how conference committees operate.
Now that Hoosiers can purchase alcohol at retail on Sundays thanks to (technically) emergency legislation signed into law even before conference committees had begun to convene, some even question why legislators should stay in Indianapolis through March 14.
Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso, is leading the state’s effort to create rules for autonomous vehicle use in Indiana.
Rep. David Ober isn’t destined to remain a lawmaker. He’s asked the IURC Nominating Committee (four former legislators are among its seven members) for its consideration to fill the IURC vacancy.
Contrary to popular public belief, the session’s driving issue is not Sunday-alcohol or cold-beer sales expansion.
With income down $558.3 million from less than a decade ago—and gambling-related employment and state and local tax collections reeling accordingly—some lawmakers are looking to recharge the state’s gambling industry.
Former state Sen. Beverly Gard has been deftly wrangling her former colleagues as she leads a commission considering changes in the state’s alcohol laws.
In the long run, no changes will be more important than the Senate fiscal posts.
If you thought the state’s transportation woes and future needs were magically resolved via passage of the mega-funding package, your deficient vision should bar you from driving in the future.
The process works largely because legislative leaders and the governor—regardless of the party in charge—offer benevolent and pragmatic leadership, aberrational overreaches (and overreactions) aside.
Five different tensions typically intersect to shape legislative activity, and will do so again as lawmakers look to leave Indianapolis April 21 or 22.
No one in the regulatory-discretion debate is pleased with extremes taken by their opposites, but a happy philosophical medium is elusive.
The youngest Republican and youngest Democrat in the Indiana House have come together to form the Indiana Future Caucus, which will focus on passing future-focused legislation on issues affecting young Hoosiers across party lines.
History suggests to expect only some tinkering at the margins—although some of those margins might be in the tens of millions of dollars, enough to fund some new initiatives, fully fund former pilot programs, or shore up existing line items.
