ILNews

Editorial: In this war of words, will anyone win?

Editorial Indiana Lawyer
March 30, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Editorial

At more than 30 days and counting, at least at Indiana Lawyer deadline, we’re not sure what will cause the Democrats elected to the Indiana House of Representatives to return to their posts at the Statehouse.

There’s enough blame to go around for everyone in the legislative process, voters included, to have a share. Yes, we said voters. After all, we keep electing the majority of this cast of characters over and over again. It’s developed into an insane process, and a popular definition of insanity is when one keeps doing the same thing over and over hoping for a different outcome.

We’re sure the heated rhetoric isn’t helping at all. Note this example from the state leader of the Republican Party on the 31-day mark of the Democrats’ absence from the House:

“This is now your legacy, your footnote of failure.

“With your actions over the past 31 days – obstructing important pieces of legislation, like passing a balanced budget, cost of living adjustments for retired state employees and your constitutional duty on redistricting – you’ve branded the Democratic Party in Indiana far better than anything we could do,” said Indiana State Republican Party Chair Eric Holcomb.

We’re sure that only added fuel to the fire and increased the tensions that precipitated the Democrats leaving the state in the first place. Will such statements score points among longtime mainline party members? Certainly. Secure their continued support, with votes and monetary contributions? Most likely.

The other party hasn’t been particularly angelic in the rhetoric department, either. Calling Gov. Mitch Daniels’ plan to reform public education an attempt to “destroy” it was far from an attempt to curtail the argument. State Rep. Pat Bauer, D-South Bend, isn’t helping with statements like these: “Until the schemes to dismantle public education are resolved, we will continue to fight for the best possible education for Hoosier children.”

Last time we checked, dismantling public education wasn’t big on the Republicans list of things to do this session. But will statements like these from Bauer score points among longtime, mainline party members? Certainly. Secure their continued support, with votes and monetary contributions? Most likely.

We’ve heard of “No Labels,” (nolabels.org) which purports to foster a movement in which citizens who hail from a variety of political vantage points can put aside their political differences and come to consensus on some of the truly critical issues we face across the country.

We’d like to be a little less cynical and believe that a nation which fostered the Tea Party movement, a movement that sprung up quickly in response to the 2008 election cycle, can give attention to ideas such as these. It sounds remarkably sane: Put aside one’s petty political posturing and search with political opponents in an effort to find common ground to work on common problems. That would have to be much more efficient than the partisan stalemates that have become the order of the day at the state and national level.

At this writing, Indiana’s House Democrats are no closer to coming back to Indianapolis than they were when they left Indiana last month.

But also at this writing, we are one step closer to having an amendment that could make discrimination a part of our state’s constitution.

We’d like to introduce our legislators to the No Labels movement, but recognize that more than mere labels would have to be put aside in order for it to be effective.

We’re going to have to work on our cynicism before we can get our hopes up for that.•

--------------------

Opinions: Readers may offer opinions concerning Indiana Lawyer stories and other legal issues. Readers may respond immediately by viewing the “submissions” section on our website: www.theindianalawyer.com. We reserve the right to edit letters for space requirements and to reproduce letters on the IL website and online databases. Direct letters to editor Rebecca Collier at rcollier@ibj.com or 41 E. Washington St., Suite 200, Indianapolis, IN 46204.

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 Indiana Lawyer 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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The is an unsigned editorial masquerading as a news story. Almost everyone quoted was biased in favor of letting all illegal immigrants remain in the U.S. (Ignoring that Obama deported 3.5 million in 8 years). For some reason Obama enforcing part of the immigration laws was O.K. but Trump enforcing additional parts is terrible. I have listed to press conferences and explanations of the Homeland Security memos and I gather from them that less than 1 million will be targeted for deportation, the "dreamers" will be left alone and illegals arriving in the last two years -- especially those arriving very recently -- will be subject to deportation but after the criminals. This will not substantially affect the GDP negatively, especially as it will take place over a number of years. I personally think this is a rational approach to the illegal immigration problem. It may cause Congress to finally pass new immigration laws rationalizing the whole immigration situation.

  2. Mr. Straw, I hope you prevail in the fight. Please show us fellow American's that there is a way to fight the corrupted justice system and make them an example that you and others will not be treated unfairly. I hope you the best and good luck....

  3. @ President Snow - Nah, why try to fix something that ain't broken??? You do make an excellent point. I am sure some Mickey or Minnie Mouse will take Ruckers seat, I wonder how his retirement planning is coming along???

  4. Can someone please explain why Judge Barnes, Judge Mathias and Chief Judge Vaidik thought it was OK to re weigh the evidence blatantly knowing that by doing so was against the rules and went ahead and voted in favor of the father? I would love to ask them WHY??? I would also like to ask the three Supreme Justices why they thought it was OK too.

  5. How nice, on the day of my car accident on the way to work at the Indiana Supreme Court. Unlike the others, I did not steal any money or do ANYTHING unethical whatsoever. I am suing the Indiana Supreme Court and appealed the failure of the district court in SDIN to protect me. I am suing the federal judge because she failed to protect me and her abandonment of jurisdiction leaves her open to lawsuits because she stripped herself of immunity. I am a candidate for Indiana Supreme Court justice, and they imposed just enough sanction so that I am made ineligible. I am asking the 7th Circuit to remove all of them and appoint me as the new Chief Justice of Indiana. That's what they get for dishonoring my sacrifice and and violating the ADA in about 50 different ways.

ADVERTISEMENT