ILNews

Editorial: Stalemate leaves constituents without a voice

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Editorial

There’s a lot of shouting and political posturing going on, but we’re not at all certain there’s much in the way of listening and compromising taking place.

On President’s Day, most all of Indiana’s House Democrats left the state for Urbana, Ill., to deny their Republican counterparts a quorum with which to do business.

The stated objection at the time was a piece of legislation labeled “right to work,” which would prohibit requiring workers who are not union members to pay representation fees when unions and businesses negotiate agreements.

Republicans have said the legislation is off the table for the remainder of the session, but Democrats have since compiled a list of other pieces of legislation that they strenuously object to. Name calling ensued, and at this writing, Democrats said they wouldn’t return to the Statehouse on the next session day, Feb. 28.

The same thing is happening in Wisconsin, only in that state, it’s the Senate Democrats who have left home for Illinois. At issue there are state workers’ collective bargaining rights.

In both states, voters on both sides of the issues being so hotly contested have filled their statehouses to speak out for their positions.

We wish there was a lot more listening going on, as in politicians listening to the people trying to get their message out.

Many people have pointed out the obvious: that elections have consequences. In Indiana’s case, those who hold that opinion indicate that the House Democrats should come home and take their political lumps.

But we truly see no difference between what’s going on in Indiana now and what happened during the first two years of President Barack Obama’s presidency. Indiana’s Democrats left the state when they could affect no compromise on legislation they object to. In Washington, D.C., they have this little tool called a “filibuster.” From where we sit, it accomplished the same thing – the filibuster, or even the threat of it, brought the legislative process to a standstill.

In Indiana’s case, we have a budget to crank out during this legislative session, and we do not have the means to pay our elected officials to work overtime and complete it.

We’d like to see some indications that there’s actually talking and listening and therefore compromising taking place. In addition to the lawyers who serve as elected officials in the General Assembly, perhaps we need a few mediators to join them.•

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. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

  2. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  3. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  4. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

  5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

ADVERTISEMENT