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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  2. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

  3. The US has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners. Far too many people are sentenced for far too many years in prison. Many of the federal prisoners are sentenced for marijuana violations. Marijuana is safer than alcohol.

  4. My daughter was married less than a week and her new hubbys picture was on tv for drugs and now I havent't seen my granddaughters since st patricks day. when my daughter left her marriage from her childrens Father she lived with me with my grand daughters and that was ok but I called her on the new hubby who is in jail and said didn't want this around my grandkids not unreasonable request and I get shut out for her mistake

  5. From the perspective of a practicing attorney, it sounds like this masters degree in law for non-attorneys will be useless to anyone who gets it. "However, Ted Waggoner, chair of the ISBA’s Legal Education Conclave, sees the potential for the degree program to actually help attorneys do their jobs better. He pointed to his practice at Peterson Waggoner & Perkins LLP in Rochester and how some clients ask their attorneys to do work, such as filling out insurance forms, that they could do themselves. Waggoner believes the individuals with the legal master’s degrees could do the routine, mundane business thus freeing the lawyers to do the substantive legal work." That is simply insulting to suggest that someone with a masters degree would work in a role that is subpar to even an administrative assistant. Even someone with just a certificate or associate's degree in paralegal studies would be overqualified to sit around helping clients fill out forms. Anyone who has a business background that they think would be enhanced by having a legal background will just go to law school, or get an MBA (which typically includes a business law class that gives a generic, broad overview of legal concepts). No business-savvy person would ever seriously consider this ridiculous master of law for non-lawyers degree. It reeks of desperation. The only people I see getting it are the ones who did not get into law school, who see the degree as something to add to their transcript in hopes of getting into a JD program down the road.

ADVERTISEMENT