ILNews

Tax cut dispute overshadowing Legislature’s work to lower state’s unemployment, Bosma tells lawyers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A public spat between the Legislature and governor’s office over tax cuts has become an overarching issue, but Indiana Speaker of the House Brian Bosma said the state should be focusing on job creation.

The Indianapolis Republican talked about the current legislative session during a meeting of the St. Thomas More Society Monday, March 25, at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. He devoted much of his remarks to a 2005 lawsuit challenging the General Assembly’s practice of saying a prayer each day during the session.

Turning his attention to the current session, Bosma noted the Republicans have a supermajority in the Legislature and many were concerned the caucus would not be united and would run amuck. The key to preventing that from happening is leadership, he said.

He has worked at developing respect between the rank-and-file members of the House of Representatives and the leadership. He said he has met and developed a level of trust with every member of his caucus.

“Probably one of my largest leadership challenges is to keep folks from majoring in the minors,” Bosma said, explaining he does not want the Legislature to get distracted by sideshows.

However, he noted, disagreements are bound to occur. In previous sessions, the General Assembly had disputes with former Gov. Mitch Daniels, but this time the disagreement with the governor’s office has, unfortunately, Bosma said, become public.

The speaker said the central question in the tax cut disagreement with Pence was what the state should do with the “very wisely accumulated reserved” that has been developed. Pence is pushing for a tax cut for Hoosiers while the proposed budget winding through the Statehouse does not include such a cut but instead puts more funding into roads and education.

Bosma said the tax issue is drawing the attention right now and overshadowing the “big story for this session” of the Legislature’s work in addressing unemployment. In particular, the state, along with local governments and schools, are trying to find ways to fill the skills gap and opportunity gaps.

Pointing to recent research, Bosma said even while Indiana’s unemployment rate hovers above 8 percent, jobs are going unfilled because the skills Hoosiers have do not match the abilities employers need. Compounding that, the brain drain is continuing as many young people leave the state because they cannot find the high-challenge, high-opportunity jobs they want.

 Among the bills Bosma authored this session is House Bill 1002 which would establish the Indiana career council. This body would focus on aligning the state’s education and career training system with the skills Indiana companies need.

It passed the House 99 - 0. In the Senate it has bipartisan sponsorship from Senate President Pro Tem David Long, R-Fort Wayne, and Senate Democratic Leader Tim Lanane, D-Anderson.

 

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
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The $320,000 is the amount the school spent in litigating two lawsuits: One to release the report involving John Trimble (as noted in the story above) and one defending the discrimination lawsuit. The story above does not mention the amount spent to defend the discrimination suit, that's why the numbers don't match. Thanks for reading.

  2. $160k? Yesterday the figure was $320k. Which is it Indiana Lawyer. And even more interesting, which well connected law firm got the (I am guessing) $320k, six time was the fired chancellor received. LOL. (From yesterday's story, which I guess we were expected to forget overnight ... "According to records obtained by the Journal & Courier, Purdue spent $161,812, beginning in July 2012, in a state open records lawsuit and $168,312, beginning in April 2013, for defense in a federal lawsuit. Much of those fees were spent battling court orders to release an independent investigation by attorney John Trimble that found Purdue could have handled the forced retirement better")

  3. The numbers are harsh; 66 - 24 in the House, 40 - 10 in the Senate. And it is an idea pushed by the Democrats. Dead end? Ummm not necessarily. Just need to go big rather than go home. Nuclear option. Give it to the federal courts, the federal courts will ram this down our throats. Like that other invented right of the modern age, feticide. Rights too precious to be held up by 2000 years of civilization hang in the balance. Onward!

  4. I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.

  5. It's just an ill considered remark. The Sup Ct is inherently political, as it is a core part of government, and Marbury V Madison guaranteed that it would become ever more so Supremely thus. So her remark is meaningless and she just should have not made it.... what she could have said is that Congress is a bunch of lazys and cowards who wont do their jobs so the hard work of making laws clear, oftentimes stops with the Sups sorting things out that could have been resolved by more competent legislation. That would have been a more worthwhile remark and maybe would have had some relevance to what voters do, since voters cant affect who gets appointed to the supremely un-democratic art III courts.

ADVERTISEMENT