Ryan Vaughn, City Council President Responds to my open letter

Give the man credit. Ryan Vaughn is our city council president and he's forthcoming with communication and invites us "little people" to a regular informal meeting with very people who disagree with his ethical position.

(The "little people" thing is my emphasis, not Ryan's)

Coffee is a whole lot more intimate than a town hall and shows more courage than the cowardly democrats in Congress are willing to do these days for their constituents. Agree or disagree, it shows some moxy and I respect the initiative.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm going to arrange a date to meet the man for coffee and see what can be done about making it a regular Friday habit. We have absolutely nothing to lose by not showing up except for a bit of time and a couple bucks for some coffee.

I'll never agree, however, that his voting on any matter that involves the purse of Barnes & Thornburg is not a conflict of interest to our citizens. Nor will I ever concede that it makes sense to take out 30 year bonds on capital improvements designed to last 10 years.
--Melyssa for HFFT

CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT RYAN VAUGHN'S RESPONSE TO MY OPEN LETTER:
Melyssa,

I'm not sure I track your analogy. Regardless, I've explained this 100 times. I do not have a conflict, legal or Council. We can continue to debate the issue if you like, but I don't think you'll ever be convinced of my analysis nor I of yours.

As to whether or not people are angry with me, well, I try to do the right thing regardless of what people think. Its those politicians whose actions are controlled by polls and popular opinion that you ought to be worried about, not the ones exercising their own judgment.

The threat of losing an election or having someone use something against me is no threat at all to me. I've never backed away from someone who has accused me of wrongdoing and I wouldn't do it here. I don't hide from conflict, its only my accusers who have thus far lacked the courage to debate the issue. That fact is, I'm doing exactly what I was elected to do.

As for the merits of the bond deal, I have a question for you. Do you know how much our infrastructure deferred maintenance grows with every month we do not address it? If the cost of that number were greater than than bond financing and repair of the "new" infrastructure, would only a mental midget vote against it? Look at the whole picture, not just the snap shot of the bond and it makes perfect sense.

Still waiting on dates for those coffees.

Best New Indy Blog

I am addicted. You will be too if you have not found it already!

Indy's Political Stock Exchange

I have yet to learn who is behind this masterpiece. Doesn't matter. It is more clever and non-partisan than Indy Undercover ever was and will be just as politically important in the next mayoral and city council races.

Mark my words

--Melyssa for HFFT

Open Letter To Ryan Vaughn, City Council President

Egads! I'm back from nearly a year hiatus. I'm semi-healed from my disgust and anger at the immorality of our local political climate, but I feel guilty watching Paul Ogden and Gary Welsh carry the lions share of the non-partisan blogging work in this town. I'll never be the powerhouses that they are, but I will try to add to what I can from the perspective of a woman who loves Indiana and her people and who seeks to see justice and the rule of law applied equally to all and who will never seek to personally profit from the taxpayer coffers.

Back in the heady days of our property tax protests of 2007 led by yours truly, the activists behind the Indiana Voters League endorsed Ryan Vaughn for City Council. Vaughn was elected and then promptly hired by Barnes & Thornburg, who it is said from both sides of the aisle, today run our city with our "People's Mayor", Greg Ballard as their puppet Mayor.

Thereafter accepting a top city law firm associate position, Vaughn was anointed City Council President. It appears the consensus to appoint him city council president was because he'll carry the water for his employer who stands to reap great sums of money if certain public decisions benefit the clients of Barnes & Thornburg, especially the city water utility transfer and the Indiana Pacers billionaire bailout, both clients of his new employer.

Ryan Vaughn and I have exchanged several emails over the past few months and I give him major credit for being forthcoming in his willingness to communicate with us.

Recently, Ryan suggested a weekly coffee meeting for activists on Fridays. We have yet to set up anything solid, but like Ryan, I'm open to meeting. I am open despite the fact that I think his employment creates many conflicts of interest in terms of his ability to vote without prejudice on any matter that involves a client or financial interest of his employer, Barnes & Thornburg law firm.

I sent the following email to Ryan today. I haven't heard back yet, but I hope it will be the start of an open dialogue about the ethical lines our city's citizen employers expect from our elected leadership. It is our responsiblity to show up if we are going to bend our city's leadership to do our will. I intend to jump back to this game for a time in effort to hold our politicians accountable and I hope you'll join me.
--Melyssa for HFFT

OPEN LETTER TO RYAN VAUGHN, CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT

Greetings Ryan,

If I sat on city council and there was a vote that had to do with Angie's List, but not necessarily involving my particular job or my advertising clients, I would not be able to vote on the council matter without prejudice toward my employer. Nor would I ever want to be in a position where I had to place a vote that ran against the interests of my employer in order to do what the people I represented wanted me to do.

I'm not sure how you you rationalize your involvement on the water company transfer, but it will be used against you. Everyone I know is angry you have not recused yourself from involvement in this matter.

Also, I'm not sure how you rationalize putting utility customers in a trick bag that forces them pay 30 year bond interest on projects designed for 10 year life span, but that doesn't even make sense to a mental midget.

I appreciate you wanting to meet for coffee. I really do. And I'll meet with you. But these are philosophical positions grounded in morality and common sense. And you are violating them.

You still have time to get off this unethical path.

Melyssa

Libertarian Fundraiser: Explanation of event cancellation

The Harvest Moon Fundraiser (which was planned since May 2009) is cancelled.

Sadly, our friends at the Republican Liberty Caucus decided that Libertarian Party Ballot Access isn't as important they claim it to be, and pulled their promised support from this noble cause because of how it might look to their fellow Republicans.

I am truly heartbroken promised support was withdrawn and hope to hold another fundraiser for the Libertarian Party in the near future. To make up for it, I am personally donating $300 to the LPIN, and hope that you will do the same.

If you were planning to come to the fundraiser and you believe ballot access for a third party is important to keep, please donate here. I'll throw a private party for all the people who join me in donating to the Libertarian Party's effort to retain our ballot access in Indiana.

-Melyssa for HFFT

Melyssa Donaghy & Lisa Kelly to host Fundraiser

PURCHASE TICKETS ON LINE HERE

Lisa Kelly of the Republican Liberty Caucus and Melyssa Donaghy of the Libertarian Party are teaming up to bring you a night of fine food, libation, and entertainment to benefit the Libertarian Secretary of State Race.

You might be asking yourself why there is Republican support for the Libertarians. It is because there are individuals within the liberty faction of the Republican Party, the RLC, that want to help ensure that the Libertarian Party maintains its ballot access by getting 2% or more of the vote in the upcoming election.

There's a long history of political cross over support in Indianapolis. Many remember that the Republican establishment gave a great deal of support to ensure democrat Bart Peterson's mayoral victory in 1999. We feel what works for the Establishment insiders should also work for the Liberty insiders. Early this year, Lisa Kelly committed to co-host a fall party to benefit the Secretary of State race for the Libertarian Party and she is making good on her word.

Having three parties represented on your ballot is good for Indiana and liberty comes before party in our circles.

In addition to a lavish gourmet menu of rare roast beef tenderloin, shrimp cocktail, and delightful canapes, we arranged for you to relax with professional chair massages, fortune tellers, and an after dark backyard bonfire. The house will be well stocked with a nice selection of champagne, good beers, and wines too.

Tickets are $100 for singles and $150 for couples. Students, currently enrolled in classes, can buy tickets at half price.

Please do not wait to purchase tickets because there are only 50 available. This is one party, I promise will be memorable and you don't want to miss it!

PURCHASE TICKETS ON LINE HERE

--Melyssa for HFFT

Need graphic designer to volunteer for small project

I am looking for a graphic designer to volunteer time in the next week to create an invite for a Libertarian fundraiser to benefit the Secretary of State race in 2010.
Email me if you want to help.
--Melyssa

Our unprincipled, City Council puts party before The People at last night's CIB bailout vote

As if we didn't know already, last night confirmed to Marion County residents that the majority of our civic leaders at City Hall are not philosophically principled and serve the city's elites, not you.

The democrats, who in 2007 rammed a 65% income tax hike down our throats on the coattails of massive property tax increases, found religion last night. In block, except for Jackie Nytes (D) whose council seat is considered safe, they voted against the bailout. A deal was likely struck in advance with the tax-and-spend-Republicans for her "yay" vote to continue to feed the CIB monster.

The democrats did not find principle last night. They voted against the Republican tax increase, so that they can use their voting record in an onslaught of campaign fliers which will litter your mailboxes and front porches during the next election cycle.

The Marion County Democrat machine thinks they can trick you into believing they are looking out for you. The reality is that they are not and will not. They made sure their own Jackie Nytes voted "yay" so that the tax increase would pass.

We even heard the ethically challenged Monroe Gray (D) give a rousing speech beginning with the words, "It's a dark day in Indianapolis". What a damned hypocrite. You might remember Monroe Gray cares so little about the CIB bailout that he did not show for the recent committee hearing on the proposal. While the democrat party wrote to HFFT to give explanation for Joanne Sanders absence from the hearing, they offered no explanation for Monroe Gray's failure to show up to do his job. A job, you should always remember, we pay him several thousand dollars each year to do for us.

It was leaked that Republican Mike Speedy (R) intended to vote "nay" before the council meeting. Our sources inform us that he was instructed to wait to cast his vote until all other votes could be seen. Sure enough the entire council's vote appeared on the board except for Speedy. After about 30 seconds, when it was clear his "yay" vote was needed by his Republican party masters, he voted to increase taxes too.

Ryan Vaughn (R) should have recused himself from voting. Ryan, who recently lost his bid to replace Senator Lubbers, works for Barnes and Thornburg. Ryan's boss is Bob Grand of the CIB and the firm's clients include the Pacers.

Of the councilors, two showed they are philosophically principled by their vote. Those two lone councilors are Libertarian Ed Coleman and Republican Christine Scales. They cast their "nay" vote for you, and not their party bosses. Please be sure to thank them.

There is a silver lining, however, brought about by local attorney bloggers, Gary Welsh and Paul Ogden by their constant drum beating to expose the CIB's ponzi scheme. But for their persistence and diligence reporting on the workings of the CIB, it is doubtful the CIB would have backed off their original request for $47 million per year and whittled it down to $4 million a year. None of the CIB officials explained exactly how the CIB got to that lower number. That goes to show you just what a secretive disservice we are being done by the CIB.

Voted FOR the CIB Bailout
Virginia Cain (R)
Jeff Cardwell (R)
Bob Cockrum (R)
N. Susie Day (R)
Ben Hunter (R)
Robert Lutz
Barb Malone (R)
Janice McHenry (R)
Mike McQuillen (R)
Jackie Nytes (D)
Marilyn Pfisterer (R)
Lincoln Plowman(R)
Kent Smith (R)
Mike Speedy (R)
RyanVaughn (should have recused himself - his BOSS is CIB President)

Voted AGAINST CIB Bailout
Paul Bateman (D)
Vernon Brown (D)
Ed Coleman (Libertarian)
Jose Evans (D)
Monroe Gray (D)
Maggie Lewis (D)
Brian Mahern (D)
Dane Mahern (D)
Angela Mansfield (D)
Doris Minton-McNeill (D)
Mary Moriarty Adams (D)
William Oliver (D)
Joanne Sanders (D)
Christine Scales (lone Republican "nay" vote)

Councilor Christine Scales, the only principled Republican on City Council.

City Councilor Christine Scales (District 4)
A true public servant
cscales_2000@yahoo.com

At last night's city council meeting every single Republican, except one, turned their backs on the campaign promises they made to not raise taxes. They chose to bailout the ponzi scheme known as the CIB instead. After the vote was taken, Christine Scales, made a statement as to WHY she voted no to bailout the CIB. Here are the words of the lone Republican councilor who voted to stop feeding the monster known as the CIB. We want to know why the information from the Governor's office was not made known to the public to study advance too. This is OUR money, and these people are our servants. Never forget that.
--Melyssa for HFFT.

STATEMENT FROM COUNCILOR CHRISTINE SCALES:
I would like to explain my vote on Proposal 285. Despite speculation by some, the motivation behind my vote was not influenced by whether I might win or lose a future election. It is an honor for me to serve this community in the many ways a councilor is able to. BUT-if this, or ANY vote I cast costs me another term, I can live with that. I really am here to serve, not to advance a political career.

Before I vote on any issue, I do my homework. I speak to as many of the stakeholders involved in an issue and get as many perspectives on a matter as possible. I read articles and books and take time to process all I have learned. That is how I came to make my decision on how to vote on this proposal tonight.

It was difficult for me to accept the terms of the CIB funding package handed to the Council from the General Assembly. So, I set about trying to devise alternative solutions. Most of the community leaders with whom I discussed these other possibilities, did not offer much hope that any of them would go anywhere.

Not one to easily accept defeat, I sent a letter to Governor Daniels asking him to consider supporting the alternative solution I had to Proposal 285. I was hoping for a last minute reprieve.

I appreciate that Governor Daniels took the time to respond to my plea. He and Chief of Staff Earl Goode made room in their schedules late this afternoon to discuss Proposal 285, and why MY idea wouldn’t work. During my time with the governor and his chief of staff, I was shown financial data and given information I had previously not been privy to.

The governor made a compelling case for the need to vote for Proposal 285. Had the hour not been late, and had I enough time to review and process all the new information given to me, I might have come to vote yes on this proposal tonight. But I didn’t have the time, and could not on short order abandon the research and analysis that I used to determine my reasons for voting no on tonight’s proposal.

For Who Then Shall Save Us From The Other?

The City Council is likely to take up a proposal again this coming Monday that would seek to ban 'panhandling' by barring all manner of sign holding, protest or begging within 50 feet of an intersection. The proposal; however, well intentioned, is over broad and even fails to specify how the '50 feet' is to be measured. It runs the risk of violating people's right to free speech and I would hope the council is wise enough to go back and strengthen existing panhandling laws or petition IMPD to increase enforcement of such.

My point for the day is this:

The Council would seek to protect us from panhandlers on street corners who seek voluntary contributions to their cause, however worthy or otherwise.

If only the Council saw equally fit to protect us from the professional panhandlers that come in the form of sports teams or arts organizations. Those organizations seek to extract money by proxy using the force of government - essentially offloading the panhandling to people with badges to somehow legitimize it.

One million dollars to an arts organization still divides out to an involuntary contribution of probably about $5 per family in Marion County. Might not seem like much, but some family somewhere would probably have liked that five dollars back so they could buy a gallon of milk and some bread for their kids.

If the purpose of the law is to protect our life, liberty and property from the predations of others; should it not be interested in protecting us equally from all such threats? Perhaps a proposal that outlaws lobbying the Council by private organizations within 50 feet of the City County building would be more appropriate and certainly would save us all more money.

Make Mine Freedom (1948)

Hanna Barbera cartoon!

INDY STUDENT: 23 year old counsels City Council on Indiana Constitution and Rule of Law

"No county shall subscribe for stock in any incorporated company, unless the same be paid for at the time of such subscription; nor shall any county loan its credit to any incorporated company, nor borrow money for the purpose of taking stock in any such company; nor shall the General Assembly ever, on behalf of the State, assume the debts of any county, city, town, or township; nor of any corporation whatever."
-- excerpt read from The Indiana Constitution

There's a new blog in town published by 23 year old student, Matthew Stone, that I would like you to bookmark and add to your blog rolls. His grandfather, Gordon Gilmore once sat on the city council. The kid blew me away last night when he stood before the city council committee and read the rule of law to them directly from the Indiana Constitution, which he studied upon reading Andy Horning's blog.

The entire room listened to him. I could hear them absorbing it as if it never occurred to them that what they are pushing with the CIB bailout is in direct violation of the Indiana Constitution.

Now, they voted to violate the law 20 minutes later anyway, but I'm perceptive and something sunk in just a little bit with the city's suits and the councilors in attendance. I realized that no one Matthew addressed ever bothered to read The Indiana Constitution that is their job to uphold.

I hope Matthew will continue to show up to public hearings and read the Indiana Constitution, for they are stealing the Rule of Law away from our children and it is immoral, let alone unprincipled.

We owe something to these kids. We owe them The Rule of Law and we have a moral obligation not to leave them with this mess that was started back when I was younger than Matthew.

I would like you to read his take on last night's council meeting over at the new blog, Indy Student and leave a comment or two to encourage him to keep blogging. He's got talent and moxy that is uncommon.

INDY STUDENT: City County votes against citizens, Constitution; for millionaires and taxes

--Melyssa for HFFT

Councilor Sanders absence at last night's meeting explained

I got a short email today from Adam Kirsch, Executive Director of the Marion County Democrats to explain why Joanne Sanders was not at last night's city council committee hearing decide whether to send the contentious CIB bailout to full council. I think it sounds entirely plausible considering city councilors almost always have regular jobs too. It does not surprise me that the Republicans switched the meeting time. In a separate email, Adam Kirsch stated on the record that Ms. Sanders vote would have been "NAY". He offered no excuse for another democrat city councilor, Monroe Gray who was also absent. Here's the letter:

Melyssa:
Councillor Sanders was out of town on responsibilities with her full time job that evening, and couldn’t attend. She was going to be back for the originally scheduled committee meeting, but the Republican majority changed the meeting time, and she could not attend. Councillor Sanders is on record as not supporting the Ballard CIB tax increase.
Best,
Adam Kirsch
Executive Director
Marion County Democratic Party
(317) 637-3366 (o)

Had Enough Indy?

From the new blog Had Enough Indy? The blog is exceptionally well written. The post below is a summary of last night's horrible council committee meeting for the CIB bailout. I think Had Enough Indy gave the best in depth coverage from the perspective of The People.
--Melyssa for HFFT

Warning: Rant ahead

Last night, the City-County Council Rules & Public Policy Committee voted 5-1 to move Proposal 285, 2009, to the full Council with a do pass recommendation. Aye votes were from Councillors Lutz, Cockrum, Plowman, Malone, and Pfisterer -- all Republicans. The lone nay vote was from Councillor Mansfield, the only Democrat Committee member present.

The meeting, Chaired by Councillor Bob Lutz of Wayne Township, was a grueling 4-ish hour affair that was an orchestrated parade of 'invited witnesses' with unlimited time to disgorge all of their thoughts, followed by a brief public comment period where speakers were limited to 2 minutes (more on that below) but who were 'graciously' allowed to dribble over that time limit in 5 second increments. Of the parade of maybe two dozen 'invited witnesses', all save three had a personal financial interest in more money being thrown at the Capital Improvement Board and all save two were in favor of the Proposal.

At the conclusion of the public testimony, Councillor Lutz feigned a let's get this over with and let the chips fall where they may attitude, fully knowing he had the votes to get this out of committee. Why did he know he could accomplish his goal? Because two Democratic Councillors, Sanders and Gray, were no-shows. Lutz had indicated he would likely not take a vote last night, but re-convene in a week to give the Committee members time to mull over the testimony they had heard. This probably was because the Committee is composed of 5 Republicans and 3 Democrats; certainly the Committee most likely to produce a positive outcome for the Proposal. Even so, Lutz could not count on Councillor Malone to vote do pass. With all three Democrats present, that could have caused a tie vote which would leave the Proposal in Committee. But, with the two MIAs, the math moved in his favor and he was guaranteed that his reliable 4 votes would serve his needs.

Some random thoughts:

The public deserves an explanation from Councillors Joanne Sanders and Monroe Gray for their absence on this critical Committee meeting and vote. I see that the blog, Indianapolis Times, which is the mouthpiece of the County Party, remains silent on the hearing, in contrast to their seeming interest leading up to last night (see here, here, and here). This makes me to wonder if Sanders and Gray are holding their aye votes in the wings for a last minute save of Prop 285 at the full Council. Politics as usual - play 'smart' at the public's detriment. But, I don't know why they were not there and maybe there is an explanation - we deserve one.

The public was done a disservice, as is usual when more than two people show up, in the public comment period. Chairman Lutz' should have given the public the same time limit as his parade of invited witnesses. His handling of comment time may have been generous by Council Committee standards, but that bar is set very low. In all of these committees it is as though the public point of view is not as worthy as that of proponents of a proposal. From my perch in the cheap seats it often seems as if the attitude of the Chairmen is that the problem with the public comments is that they drag the meeting out too long. While the Council does the public's business, I believe they need to be much more accommodating of the time in which they give the public to express its views. As I mentioned in a comment to Paul Ogden's blog, I challenge Committee Chairs to try to speak to an issue for 2 minutes with buzzers going off every 5 seconds thereafter.

The proponents of Prop 285, save one or two, hid behind the skirts and aprons of the service workers in order to shill for more tax money for the CIB. As I mentioned earlier, these folks have a personal financial interest in the ever increasing investment of more and more tax money into the sports/convention business. Folks like Tamara Zahn of IDI, Susan Williams of ISC, Barney Levengood of the CIB, and Bob Welsh of ICVA are even more outrageous, as they haul down fat salaries derived almost exclusively from tax revenues. As reported by Paul Ogden, Zahn makes around $200,000 a year while IDI has squirrelled away over $7M in savings living lavishly off the public dole, and Welsh makes about $350,000 in salary and benefits while the ICVA had 'only' $4M in assets in 2007. Meanwhile Williams makes over $130,000 (poor thing) with ISC holding assets of nearly $7M in 2007, and Levengood makes $221,000 per year while the CIB takes in over $100M in taxes each year. These folks are pulling down the more than generous salaries from the public trough and have little real accountability for how well they do their jobs. Compare that to the maids who average a mere $15,000 a year in Indianapolis. To pretend that this CIB bailout is for the little guy, is bold faced lying. Its to keep the good times rolling for a select few living large off taxpayer largess.

There has been and will be NO examination of how the CIB got into this mess. Each Councillor is apparently quite content to believe it is the Mayor of the opposite political party, or the Governor, who caused this supposed catastrophe. This attitude will never identify the problems with the CIB in its fiscal and policy structure that will continue to bleed the taxpayer. The Councillors all acknowledged last night that this is only a two year 'fix' and ignored the obvious conclusion that it is therefore not a real fix of the real problems. Only Councillor Malone expressed an opinion that indicated that a real fix was important to her - enough to influence her vote at the full Council.

There is no interest in doing the public a service and creating a plan to make the sports/convention/tourist/hospitality industry self-sufficient. Speaker after speaker tossed around numbers in the range of hundreds of thousands to billions of dollars. I kept thinking - so why aren't we rich already and why are these guys back begging for more tax revenues?

Passage of the hotel tax and acceptance of the state loan, if successful at the full Council meeting on August 10, will trigger the necessity to increase two more taxes, car rental and ticket, in 2013. This is putting the onus on the next Council. Quite irresponsible in my view and it smacks of politics. The public good should count for something and it never seems to be weighted very high when elites have their hands out for the public dole. The public good is all the rage as a foil when the discussion is more money to help those who struggle to put a meal on the table or clothe their children or what to do about those pesky panhandlers who inconvenience us at stoplights. It takes the EPA to force Indianapolis to fix the sewer overflows that push human feces into our river and streams like some third world cesspool. But, all it takes for the wealthy overseers of our sports empire to get more, is to claim a need for an additional $47M on top of the $100M they already get and the only topic for discussion among our elected officials becomes how to land that money for them. Again, no request for an examination of what the CIB did wrong to put it in the position it is in now. That is the only way you can determine what to fix.

Blame decisions past and push problems forward seems to be the name of the game. But, make sure you get the CIB all the money it wants.

I hope the significance of the August 10th Council meeting is not lost on the Councillors. Mayor Ballard will present the 2010 budget proposal with something like $30M in cuts. Proposal 285 will be voted upon with its increase of $12M of tax revenues and a $27M loan from the State to add to the $100M in tax revenues the CIB already gets. Contrasting what City services are to be cut with the bailout of our sports empire, will shed a clear white light on what is really important.

Angela Mansfield...the lone "nay" vote opposing the unlawful CIB bailout by taxpayers

COURAGE
City Councilor, Angela Mansfield

This lady citizen and your representative was the only "nay" vote at yesterday's critical CIB bailout committee hearing. Remember her name because she alone stood up for you tonight against all the fancy suits at City Hall there to shake you down for even more money to put in the deep dark hole of your money known as the Capital Improvements Board.

Noticebly absent from the meeting were CIB Chair Bob Grand and Joe Loftus. They know the heat is too hot on them. They can't operate in the light of day and conveniently left the begging to the other board members and the city's schill's in suits.

The ICVA president, Don Welsh, for instance makes $350,000!! That is THREE TIMES what Governor Daniels earns for his service to us. Welsh is not even from Indiana! He's a damned hired gun paid for with YOUR money!

Don Welsh's suit was very expensive. No wonder he wants that bailout. We are funding his lavish lifestyle! We had to listen to him and his boring power point presentation for nearly a half hour after four tedious hours of endless pleas by the game's insiders to get you to buy into their Ponzi scheme.

Finally the taxpayers, The People footing the bill, got a measly two minutes each to speak out against the bailout at the very end of the night when the media (except for WXNT's Abdul) was worn out and went home.

There was not one single private citizen at last night's meeting who spoke in favor of the CIB Bailout.

One 23 year old student during his two minutes even read the part of the Indiana Constitution (Article 10, Section 6) that specifically states that:

No county shall subscribe for stock in any incorporated company, unless the same be paid for at the time of such subscription; nor shall any county loan its credit to any incorporated company, nor borrow money for the purpose of taking stock in any such company; nor shall the General Assembly ever, on behalf of the State, assume the debts of any county, city, town, or township; nor of any corporation whatever.

Every other councilor at last night's meeting voted to violate Indiana's Constitution and continue to borrow money for the purpose of taking stock in a company...the CIB is a corporation, folks.

HFFT will keep you posted of the full council vote on the CIB bailout which is coming up. It's not over yet.

HAT TIP to Andy Horning! I learned that the young man who read the Indiana Constitution to the assembly said he found Andy Horning's "Indiana Constitution Explained" link here on HFFT. Those Andy Horning seeds keep popping up everywhere! He's missed, but left us a great legacy.

SHAMEFUL! Democrat Councilors Monroe Gray & Joanne Sanders failed to show up for critical CIB Bailout Vote

Democrat Councilors Monroe Gray & Joanne Sanders
NO SHOW FOR CRITICAL CIB BAILOUT VOTE!

Politics in this town is filthy. I hate it. Few of our politicians put The People and the long term health of our city before party or their insider interests.

Tonight's city council committee meeting to vote whether or not to move the proposed CIB bailout was a 5 hour dog and pony show orchestrated by Republican Councilor Lutz, who as talk show host Abdul so aptly put, held his nose and voted for more tax, borrow, and spend madness that landed us in this mess in the first place.

Indiana Barrister, Ogden on Politics, and Advance Indiana offer detailed summaries of the night's proceedings.

Democrats Monroe Gray and Council Minority Leader Joanne Sanders did not even show up for this critical vote which will direct literally millions of tax dollars every single year. I guess they don't think you are worth their time. Insiders say they chickened out because they want to make this possible tax increase look like the Republicans fault come election. So in other words, they put party politics ahead of the future of your city.

Remember, that we the taxpayers, PAID for Sanders and Gray to be at this crucial meeting tonight. I don't think they even called in sick. SHAME ON THEM BOTH!

We will not forget their failure to show up tonight to stop the CIB bailout proceedings. There will be no mercy from the taxpayers on this matter. And you can bet, our memory is long.

One lone councilor, Angela Mansfield, was the only "nay" vote. She had the courage of her convictions to stand opposed. You can bet we'll remember Councilor Mansfield too.

This is offensive ....Tom John GOP tattoo on woman's rear end

.
Good grief. Is this what the Marion County GOP under Tom John's chairmanship has come to? It is in very poor taste and it certainly objectifies women. To be fair, we have no idea where the photo came from or who made it. It appears to be doctored in photo shop and does not look like a fresh tattoo, as the picture would lead you to believe. It was published by Paul Wheeler who often poses as a patriot in costume.

Fortunately there exists an alternative for the adults in the Republican Party who want better government. And you are invited to participate.

The Republican Liberty Caucus is forming the Marion County charter for those individuals who want to remain inside the Republican Party and embrace the values of a small limited government, individual freedom, and liberty.

YOU ARE INVITED!
Sunday, August 2nd @ 2pm
RSVP by Saturday @ Noon, please

BINKLEY'S RESTAURANT
(College Avenue & Kessler)
(317) 722-8888
5902 N College Ave

The Republican Liberty Caucus exists to promote individual liberty, limited government, and free enterprise within the Republican Party by promoting these ideals among Party officials and its various organizations, identifying and supporting candidates sympathetic with these ideals, and promoting Caucus membership among Republican Party registrants, officials, and
officeholders.

Republican Liberty Caucus
RLC Marion County Facebook Page
RLC Indiana Facebook Page

In order to be a founding member, and a Regular members, dues must be paid to the Indiana Republican Liberty Caucus. Please bring a check to the meeting if you have not already paid. Dues are $30 a year for single membership, and $45 per year for couples.

To Learn more go to: http://www.inrlc.org/

Shock: Inside the Healthcare Bill

Monday, July 20, 2009
Shock: Inside the Healthcare Bill

Following the mad recommendations of Peter Singer made in NYT's Sunday magazine, it pays to take a look at what is actually in the healthcare bill.

It's worse than you can possibly imagine. Somehow, it manages to be Singer on steroids. Who wrote this bill. It has Singer's footprints all over it.

Peter Fleckstein (aka Fleckman) is reading it and has been posting on Twitter his findings. This is from his postings (Note: All comments are Fleckman's)

Pg 22 of the HC Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!

Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benes u get

Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED!!!

Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose UR HC Benefits 4 you. U have no choice!

PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC will be provided 2 ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise

Pg 58HC Bill - Govt will have real-time access 2 individuals' finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued!

Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access 2 ur banks accts 4 elect. funds transfer

PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan 4 retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).

Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC Exchange 2 bring priv HC plans under Govt control.

PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit pkgs 4 priv. HC plans in the Exchange

PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs for of Benefit Levels for Plans = The Govt will ration ur Healthcare!

PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Govt mandates linguistic approp svcs. Example - Translation 4 illegal aliens

Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps 2 sign up indiv. for Govt HC plan

PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs of Ben Levels 4 Plans. #AARP members - U Health care WILL b rationed

-PG 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Indiv. will b automat.enrolled in Medicaid. No choice

pg 124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt Monop

pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ #AMA - The Govt will tell YOU what u can make.

Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into pub opt plan. NO CHOICE

Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay 4 HC 4 part time employees AND their families.

Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Emplyr w payroll 400k & above who does not prov. pub opt. pays 8% tax on all payroll

pg 150 Lines 9-13 Biz w payroll btw 251k & 400k who doesnt prov. pub. opt pays 2-6% tax on all payroll

Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesnt have acceptable HC accrdng 2 Govt will be taxed 2.5% of inc

Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from indiv. taxes. (Americans will pay)

Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Admin (GOVT) will have access 2 ALL Americans finan/pers recs

PG 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that

Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Govt will reduce physician svcs 4 Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor affected

Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Doctors, doesnt matter what specialty u have, you'll all be paid the same

PG 253 Line 10-18 Govt sets value of Dr's time, prof judg, etc. Literally value of humans.

PG 265 Sec 1131Govt mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries

PG 268 Sec 1141 Fed Govt regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs

PG 272 SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!

Page 280 Sec 1151 The Govt will penalize hospitals 4 what Govt deems preventable readmissions.

Pg 298 Lines 9-11 Drs, treat a patient during initial admiss that results in a readmiss-Govt will penalize u.

Pg 317 L 13-20 OMG!! PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Govt tells Drs. what/how much they can own.

Pg 317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Govt is mandating hospitals cannot expand

pg 321 2-13 Hospitals have oppt to apply for exception BUT community input required. Can u say ACORN?!!

Pg335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339 - Govt mandates estab. of outcome based measures. HC the way they want. Rationing

Pg 341 Lines 3-9 Govt has authority 2 disqual Medicare Adv Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing peeps in2 Govt plan

Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs ppl! WTF. My sis has down syndrome!!

Pg 379 Sec 1191 Govt creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Cmtte. Can u say HC by phone?

PG 425 Lines 4-12 Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consult. Think Senior Citizens end of life

Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, durable powers of atty. Mandatory!

PG 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Govt provides apprvd list of end of life resources, guiding u in death

PG 427 Lines 15-24 Govt mandates program 4 orders 4 end of life. The Govt has a say in how ur life ends

Pg 429 Lines 1-9 An "adv. care planning consult" will b used frequently as patients health deteriorates

PG 429 Lines 10-12 "adv. care consultation" may incl an ORDER 4 end of life plans. AN ORDER from GOV

Pg 429 Lines 13-25 - The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.

PG 430 Lines 11-15 The Govt will decide what level of treatment u will have at end of life

Pg 469 - Community Based Home Medical Services=Non profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Svcs here!!?

Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment 2 a community-based org. Like ACORN?

PG 489 Sec 1308 The Govt will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means they will insert Govt in2 ur marriage

Pg 494-498 Govt will cover Mental Health Svcs including defining, creating, rationing those svcs

Here's the full Health Care bill that sits in the House.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200 ih.pdf

Open letter to City County Councilors on CIB bailout committee

Open letter sent today to:
(R) Robert Lutz, Chair rlutz@indy.gov 241-4020
(R) Bob Cockrum (no published email address) 856-5549
(D) Monroe Gray mgray@indy.gov 327-4242
(R) Barbara Malone barbara_malone@sbcglobal.net 291-4359
(D) Angela Mansfield angelamansfield@aol.com 872-3306
(R) Marilyn Pfisterer cpfist1061@aol.com 244-7156
(R) Lincoln Plowman lincolnplowman@comcast.net 557-7594(
D) Joanne Sanders jmsanders@msn.com 283-6040

Greetings Councilors,

Here we are, the whole CIB mess is dumped into your laps. I feel for you. However, I've learned that every batch of lemons has opportunity to make lemonade. And I'm here to help you turn this into a positive for your political careers if you vote against the bailout. Because I will not forget the councilors that vote against this bailout and will help publicize that you stood with The People against tax increases.

The CIB has operated as a secretive dark hole of our money long enough. Throwing additional hard earned taxpayer dollars at this mess is not going to fix the problem. It makes it worse and it won't be long until the CIB comes back to the taxpayer trough for yet more of our money.

Raising hotel taxes to among the very highest in our country is not going to save hospitality jobs. First of all there aren't 66,000 hospitality workers downtown. That figure is from central Indiana. And furthermore, if our hotels have to lower rates to compensate for yet another tax increase, that is going to hurt their bottom line and their ability to keep everyone on the payroll. We need to give convention planners a reason to come to Indy...not a reason to steer clear!

In the words of Mayor Greg Ballard, "We have Had Enough!"

Before we authorize giving the CIB another dime, we need a complete forensic audit of the CIB. We need to shine a light on every penny of our money to understand how it is being used and where there is waste.

Taxpayers know from studying the 2007 IRS statements of just one of the organizations funded by the CIB, the "not-for-profit" Arts Council spends 57% of our money on administrative costs. There's got to be plenty of other places the CIB funds that is also wasting our money. We will find the waste only with a thorough audit.

Taxpayers will not relent on this issue. We will beat this drum constantly between now and your next election. We will beat the drums even harder when you are campaigning for re-election.

Conversely, taxpayers will have your backs if you do what is in our best interest and open up the CIB to the light of day so that we can fix what is wrong without spending more money.

I hope I can sing your praises to people when they ask me what's going on instead of giving them a list of the councilors we want removed.

Do the right thing for the long term health of our city and stop this CIB mess dead in its tracks by ordering an independent forensic audit. That will send a clear message to taxpayers that you are serious about protecting our financial interests.

Best Regards,
Melyssa (publisher)
HOOSIERS FOR FAIR TAXATION

Citizens to oppose CIB bailout at Tuesday's public hearing

Come to the CIB bailout public hearing on Tuesday night (7/28/2009) at City Hall on Market Street across from the City Market. It starts at 5:30.

We know that several city councilors are against the bailout. Those good guys on the council need plenty of public support and encouragement.

When you arrive, sign up to speak (they usually give you 2 minutes) and let it be known that the prudent thing to do is to order a forensic audit of the CIB that has operated in near secrecy with our money for at least a decade.

Thanks to relentless bloggers like Gary Welsh who went head-to-head with CIB chief Bob Grand at the last meeting, everything is set up for the party bosses to fail to get their bailout money for his client, The Pacers. And contrary to what you hear the mayor say over and over, 66,000 hospitality workers are not going to lose their jobs. That's a bold faced lie. Downtown workers might lose their jobs, however, if we end up with the highest hotel tax and lose convention business or the hotels have to lower their rates to make the room rates affordable.

All we need is for citizens to show up to give the final punch that knocks down their game.

Sign ideas:
AUDIT THE CIB
NO CIB BAILOUT
BOB GRAND OLD PARTY

Never forget that the biggest fear of the party bosses is public exposure. All we need are citizens to show up and we can knock this tax increase out because the city councilors know it is political suicide to vote for it.

City Council Republicans Want Panhandling Left To The Professionals Only?

(crossposted from ShepardPolitics)

Last night the Indianapolis City County Council was presented with two proposals to vote on that I found of particular interest, especially given that they were to be considered in back-to-back to votes.

The first was a proposal to grant $1,000,000 (one million dollars) of taxpayer money to "the arts". When I think of arts organizations I think of people producing a product that they either need to figure out how to sell or charge money for. Tickets to the museum or symphony are good examples. I find it abhorrent that the brute force of government is so often used to pry loose money from taxpayers and private organizations can then go "panhandling" at the City Council, State House or Federal legislative chambers.

The second was a proposal that would have essentially banned holding signs or panhandling within 50 feet of an intersection (measure how, nobody was sure). The target of the bill was, indeed, panhandlers and was prompted by one Councilor who indicated a few bad interactions with panhandlers. Personally, I find them generally standing on corners, holding their signs minding their own business unless money is offered; but, I do note the many private security people who actually step out in the roadway to direct traffic for business parks, eating establishments or parking garages.

There are laws already on the books regarding panhandling in roadways, blocking or impeding traffic or pedestrians and, certainly, accosting or assaulting somebody. The point was made quite clear, largely by Council Democrats, that these laws existed but were not necessarily being enforced.

Instead of tabling the bill and trying to come to some better solution or evaluate options to strengthen the current laws or get increased enforcement, the Republicans pushed ahead. The Democrats even offered up concern about Constitutional issues regarding free speech in public places (I'm sure they would not have brought up the Constitution if this had been a "right to self defense" issue). Fortunately, the measure narrowly failed 14 to 12 (with 3 councilors not in attendance - it otherwise would have likely passed).

It will likely be brought up again at the next meeting and I'm hoping at least one of the Republicans will realize how wrong this is and what kind of unintended consequences there could be. Oddly, NONE of them seemed very concerned about unintended consequences. Seriously, what is the hurry? If you're going to do something, do the right thing properly not just rush through a bad proposal.

Bringing a handful of chuckles from the crowd, Councilor Pfisterer actually commented, "This is not a restriction on free speech, this is a restriction on where you can have it." Huh? I guess everyone eventually has a "I voted for it, before I voted against it" moment.

At the end of the day two core principles were under assault. The are as follows and politicians need to learn and understand these concepts:

(1) People have a natural right to their property. Stealing their property to transfer it to private organizations that should be privately funded is inappropriate. If one of those people mugged someone in the street to subsidize museum tickets or something it would be a crime, it should also be a crime when legislators do it their behalf just because they put on a suit and came begging. The "good intentions" or perceived improvements to livability in the community do not matter, if those things are legitimate and important than private donors should give to the cause and/or legislators should promote the idea and help them raise funds for such purpose without using taxpayer money.

As Bastiat wrote, once the government (the Law) is used as a tool to transfer from one group to another unjustly, it opens the doors to it being a free for all. You lose all moral authority to challenge other similar arrangements. I'll give legislators a pass for roads, police and fire protection but not on private arts organizations, government operating what should be private businesses (like stadiums and convention centers) or subsidizing sports teams.

(2) People have a natural and Constitutional right to free speech. Your rights exist to the extent that you do not harm or violate the rights of others. Just because a couple of bozos were "unprofessional panhandlers" doesn't mean you can just set Freedom of Speech aside and ban people from standing roadside or on a corner with a sign. This is ill considered legislation and without meaning to, comes across like jack-booted thugs trying to recklessly stomp out something just because they are annoyed by others' behavior. Personally, I'm annoyed by the "elected class" more than anything these days.

Besides. The panhandlers downtown are great when I need parking meter change. Give 'em a dollar and ask for 75 cents back and good for an hour.


COPY OF THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF MARION COUNTY PRESS RELEASE ON THESE ITEMS IS BELOW:

INDIANAPOLIS, IN - In back to back votes, a majority of Council Republicans voted to transfer $1 million of taxpayer money to private "arts organizations" and then immediately moved to restrict the freedom of speech of panhandlers who may be passively seeking VOLUNTARY contributions.

Tim Maguire, Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Marion County said "There are already significant laws on the books regarding panhandling that perhaps just need better enforcement, but this fell on deaf ears as Republicans worked to rob taxpayers on behalf of private arts organizations and then, immediately following, tried to tell poor people they can't even hold a sign asking for money."

"We had a room full of people seeking to panhandle by using the force and power of government to extract money from citizens while, at the same time, a motion to restrict those who might seek voluntary contributions by denying them their rights to free speech was next on the agenda." said Sean Shepard, Communications Director for the Libertarian Party of Marion County.

"We are proud of Councilor Coleman, the sole Libertarian on the council, for voting against both of these terrible proposals." Maguire added.

Laws against standing in traffic or otherwise impeding the progress of traffic or pedestrians already exist. New laws against passively holding signs will accomplish nothing other than to restrict unpopular speech.

Councilor Coleman (L) noted during debate that it is not reasonable or appropriate to try and ban every little thing that annoys people.

Maguire also noted that, "Perhaps the Council should make laws against solicitations in the City-County Council chambers so private companies and organizations don't come begging for tax money."