Archive → January, 2012
There’s More Going On Than Just “Right To Work”
Though “Right To Work” legislation has definitely been the hot button issue of this legislative session, there ARE other pieces of legislation floating around. There were three pieces that caught my eye and, I think, are particularly important pieces of legislation (or at least important enough I felt compelled to write about them).
The first has to do with drug testing welfare recipients in order for them to collect their dollars. The fact that this hasn’t already been law is shocking, and common sense will tell you that if a person has money for drugs, then they certainly don’t need taxpayer money. The bill has solid bipartisan support (15-5) through the Ways and Means Committee (it goes to a full House vote next) and would require the state’s Family and Social Services Agency to test out a drug-screening program on a small scale before it was launched statewide. That sounds fair enough to me, too. Something like this will have sweeping effects, and should be tested on a sample group first. The effects, I think, will be obvious enough; there will be some people that will have to make a choice. Do they want to feed their children? Or do they want to do drugs? I think it’s a fair enough question when it comes out of my own pocket, and I think most people have little problem with helping those who are willing to help themselves.
Another law has to do with public intoxication laws. Senate Bill 97, which now goes to the full Senate, prohibits a public intoxication arrest unless a drunk person is endangering their life, the life of another person or breaching the peace. This combats a court ruling where a vehicle that is pulled over counted as a “public place”, and so a person who is drunk, getting a ride from a sober friend who gets pulled over for, oh, I don’t know…a seat belt violation, would end up in jail. This bill passed the Senate Committee 10-0, and is another “no brainer”.
The last bill is sponsored by our own Senator Charbonneau, R-Valparaiso. This bill passed committee by an 8-0 vote and ensures that a rapist is not allowed custody to the child that he fathered from that violent encounter. Leave it up to Illinois, again, to be our inspiration in what not to do. Sen. Charbonneau said he sponsored Senate Bill 190 after learning of a Chicago case in which the rapist sued his victim for custody of the child conceived as a result of the rape.
There are a lot of other bills that will effect us as Hoosiers, but these are just three that have caught my eye and, I think, will be very good for the state and the people living in it. Of course there are other bills, like the “no smoking in public/let’s take away the rights of private property and business owners” bill that looks to be inching closer and closer (and SHOULD NOT pass), and the “Right To Work” bill, which NEEDS to be amended so that those that opt out of the union don’t HAVE to be represented by the union that they don’t pay dues to (I’m all about choice and peoples rights to not be forced into anything, but we can’t say one person can’t be forced into something, and then force the other guy into something different), and so on, and so on. These are three bills that seem to be flying under the radar, though, and haven’t gotten talked about much. So here they are, what do YOU think?
LIVE Blogging The CNN Presidential Debates From SC
Iowa, A Close Race, and the Three Legged Stool
Tuesday night was an interesting night, in many ways. First, since I was away on business in Ohio, I watched the Iowa caucuses from my jacuzzi while sipping on a Sam Adams Winter Lager…no, this was not a political trip, but rather one for my day job; it just appears that I’m that politically connected. Quite honestly, if it gets to the point where the party is putting me up in hotel room just to watch the Iowa caucuses while soaking in a jacuzzi sipping on beer, somebody slap me so that I can reground myself.
Second, the race between Romney and Santorum was jaw dropping. I don’t want to go too deep with the race in general, because I think EVERYONE is tired of hearing pundits go on and on and on about the reasons that Santorum came so close to Romney (though it should be noted that I made almost all of the same predictions that Karl Rove did). It can be summed up pretty quickly, actually. After evaluating all of the candidates (rather, conservative candidates, since the libertarian leaning one and moderate leaning one have already solidified their particular base), the conservative voters in Iowa picked the one that hadn’t already flown into the sun. One by one they have been picked off. Bachmann with her remarks about the Perry’s vaccinations started her downfall and it has continued to the point where she dropped out the day after Iowa. Perry’s poor debating eroded his base quickly (though I’m still rooting for him, and think if he can do a 180 he COULD capture South Carolina). Gingrich’s past and his inability (or rather lack of want) to attack Romney with negative adds allowed him to be led around by the nose. Sure, he’s running some now, but it’s too little too late; now the ads appear spiteful (which, really, they are) and will hurt more than they help. All that was left was Santorum, and that ball of fire probably won’t last long. I watched his interview with Bill O’Reilly the night after his win and it was rough, to be kind. I think I’d like him as a Governor or VP or cabinet member, and I think he’s got some good ideas, but I think he’s ill prepared and lacks the finances to finish it off.
All right, now that that’s out of the way, what kept rolling around in my head were the numbers. Romney and Santorum all but tied with 26 some odd percent, and Paul finished in third with 22 percent. Now, this doesn’t mean NEARLY what so many Paul supporters have been saying and posting. Yes, it is an impressive showing and he should be congratulated, and I don’t want to belittle the work that he and his supporters put in (some of his policies and ideas, sure). The fact is, with those three numbers, 26, 26 (plus the other conservative candidates numbers, making the Santorum/conservatives total come to about fifty percent, with Huntsmans one percent going, in my opinion, in with the Romney grouping), and 22, the GOP is represented the same way it always has; as a three legged stool. One post in particular by a buddy of mine who is a Paul supporter inspired me to really point this out, though it had been floating around inside that skull of mine since Tuesday night.
Hopefully what it shows is what I have always said about Paul. Though some of his ideas are far more libertarian than I am (or the GOP in general), he’s been a needed aspect to the party to help pull certain aspects, like cutting spending and being fiscally responsible, of the party back over. The 22 percent, and third place finish, show that this has happened. BUT, and this is a big but (note the decision to caps lock the word) the worry is that one of two things will happen, since, while Paul has helped the party as a whole, he has also built a cult of personality around himself where many of his followers would jump off a bridge if he asked them to. First, that he will lose and tell his followers to vote for the libertarian candidate. Many wouldn’t, but enough will to make a difference (after all, many Paul supporters voted for Bob Barr last time around). The second is even worse: that he will lose and run as a big L, rather than a little l. In this instance, most if not all would follow. This is a VERY real possibility, and may be the reason that he decided against running for his House seat again. I know I’ve outlined these concerns before, but it bears repeating, that he could, and just might, single handedly make Obama a two term President. Certainly the GOP field has had it’s troubles, to say the least, and Obama may become a two term President anyways. But that’s another piece for another day.
For now, it is important to note once again that the Republican party is a big tent that is primarily conservative, but still filled with many ideas that are all equally important to the brand. The quicker that we can coalesce, the better chance we’ll have in November.
-Travis Gearhart
