ILNews

LSA leaves opinions at the door

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

In the political arena that seems dominated by strong views, little patience and loud voices, Jack Ross is an anomaly – a man with no opinion.

He has sat in the leadership chair of the Legislative Services Agency at the Indiana General Assembly for five years and marshaled the staff of roughly 80 professionals as they have drafted bills, provided fiscal analysis, and printed the legislation. Most importantly, he has made sure his charges express no opinion.

They not only keep any personal biases and political leanings from their work at the LSA, they also avoid any activity that could be interpreted as favoring one party over the other.

il-jack-ross02-15col.jpg Jack Ross stands in the Indiana Statehouse where he has aided the legislative process for 30 years. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

In a world of partisan wrangling, the agency has “jealously guarded” its nonpartisan nature.

“More than anything else, I think the nonpartisanship of this entity has to be maintained,” Ross said. “We cannot compromise a bit or the whole (legislative) process, I think fairly shortly, would become chaotic.”

The foundation for that nonpartisan reputation was laid when the LSA was established in the late 1960s and has been built through the tenures of seven executive directors. At the end of November, Ross will turn over the responsibility of the agency as well as the keys to his office to someone else.

Ross is retiring as the LSA’s executive director, and the four partisan leaders of Indiana’s Senate and House of Representatives are searching for a replacement. Being dispassionate and non-ideological will be the first requirement.

The backbone

Before the Legislative Services Agency began operating, bills were primarily written by lobbyists and the governor’s office. These authors had their points of view which could be reflected in the proposed legislation.

Speaker of the House Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, knows the history of the Legislature from both his father, who served in the state Senate, and from his work as a legislative staff member prior to being elected to office.

Energy bills were written by utilities, local government bills were written by local government representatives, and tax bills were bent in one direction or another. While many of the individuals drafting these pieces of legislation had good intentions, Bosma said the prior situation underscores the need for a “nonpartisan, non-ideological, Jack Webb just-the-facts-ma’am” approach to writing bills.

Without the agency, House Minority Leader Linda Lawson, believes the General Assembly would stop. The members would not get anything done because they would be uncertain of whom and what they could trust.

“Honestly, the LSA is the backbone of the legislative process,” the Hammond representative said. “They help us in ways you just can’t imagine.”

The agency has several roles in the General Assembly. Along with the bills proposed by legislators, it drafts amendments, conference committee reports and most resolutions. It also writes and updates a fiscal note, indicating what, if any, impact the bill will have on taxpayers and the state budget.

Under Ross, LSA has paid more attention to its fiscal division and improved a database that draws information from a broad array of agencies. Bosma remembered during the debate over property tax caps, the data provided by the agency was frequently updated, very detailed and gave the impact on every political subdivision from townships to schools.

If the Legislature did not have that fiscal information, the members “would have been shooting completely in the dark” when crafting the tax caps, Bosma said.

Crafting a bill

Proposed legislation can arrive at the LSA in many forms – from an idea for changing or creating something to a draft completed by an organization or individual outside the General Assembly. Members of the House and Senate bring their propositions to the agency where they are assigned an attorney who will prepare a written document.

Ultimately, the legislator has the final say on the contents of any bill. The LSA attorneys will point out any potential legal trouble spots in the draft, such as conflicts with other provisions or what may be unconstitutional, but they do not give advice on policy or indicate whether they think the legislation is good or bad.

“I think the Legislature relies on us to draft bills, tell them what the bill does, and the fiscal impact,” Ross said. “They view us as giving an objective description and fiscal analysis. Without us, they could not rely on description or fiscal impact.”

As the bill proceeds through the legislative process, the LSA will keep track of conflicts within the document. When the proposal gets far enough in the process to pass from one chamber to another, the LSA alerts the partisan staffs to any oncoming problem.

Ross credits this cooperation with the partisan staff members with making the resolution of conflict smoother and with reducing the number of technical corrections that need to be made after the conclusion of the Legislative session.

The final bill that lands on the governor’s desk is not always pretty or reads perfectly, Ross said, but when the process comes together, sometimes it is magic.

A replacement

Before he joined the LSA, Ross had extensive experience with the Indiana Legislature. He was an attorney for the Senate Democrats for 25 sessions.

There, his job was to be partisan and that background gave Bosma pause when Ross applied for the LSA position. However, Bosma got a recommendation from a trusted friend, and he knew that Ross had a reputation for being a problem solver, so the Speaker gave his support to the eventual executive director.

For his part, Ross said his partisan background is constantly on his mind, and he is sensitive that everyone is watching.

“I don’t want there to even be the perception of any partisanship,” he said.

Going through the search process, Lawson admitted she has changed her mind about who would best lead the agency. Initially, she thought the position needed to be filled by someone who was more of a manager, who could bring people together and be assertive without being a bully.

While she still believes managerial skills are necessary, she thinks the best person for the position will be an attorney. The four leaders hope to have the new director in place by the beginning of November but, she said, legislators are already filing bills for the 2013 session and an attorney would have the advantage of understanding the law and being able to get up to speed more quickly.

Ross, a 1973 graduate of the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, agreed the job does come with managerial demands, noting the office is filled with well-educated, highly skilled professionals. To his successor, he would say, “You’ve got a good staff. These people know what their job is and know how important it is to be impartial and accurate.”

By the application deadline for the executive director position, Bosma said the number of candidates had reached 52 and includes a mix of LSA personnel, government employees from around the state, and out-of-state professionals.

The new LSA head will have a full agenda overseeing the preparation of bills and fiscal analysis for the 2013 legislative session while deflecting the constant pressure to be partisan and coordinating a full upgrade of the computer hardware and software systems at the statehouse. Looking ahead, Bosma does not foresee the agency diminishing in importance.

“I think as the issues the Legislature is dealing with become more complicated – and they become more complicated daily – the role of the LSA will only become more predominant,” he said. •

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. I like the concept. Seems like a good idea and really inexpensive to manage.

  2. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  3. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  4. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  5. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

ADVERTISEMENT