Seen tonight as Andy Harris’ Facebook Status:

“Looking towards running for Wayne Township Trustee starting in January of 2010. It is time we bring TRUST back into TRUSTEE in Wayne Township. Enough is Enough, Andy Harris for Wayne Township Trustee!!!”

Andy is a great guy and will do well as the Trustee. My question for Andy is – if the opportunity to consolidate the township functions (i.e. fire department) into the City and County were to occur during his tenure as Trustee, would he willing go along with it, regardless of who occupies the 25th Floor or holds the majority of the City-County Council?

We are Talkin’ politics with Gary L. Snyder (me) on Monday night this week. And since we are rolling on Monday, I thought I would bring you a great lineup of guests, which include:

John Hostettler, former 6-term Republican Congressman and candidate for the United States Senate

Jim Banks, Republican candidate for the Indiana State District 17 Senate seat

Ron Fusselman, Republican candidate for Indiana State Representative District 50

Tom Carney, leading Republican candidate for Huntington County Sheriff

And Ken Zuk will be bringing us live updates from the Town of Andrews Town Council meeting as the council reacts to the State Board of Accounts decision on the inappropriate use of the town’s fire truck.

The following is reposted here with permission of Gary Welsh of Advance Indiana:

The following is a guest post by former State Rep. Jon Elrod (R-97th) explaining why you should vote no on the Wishard referendum. It’s great to see there’s a real Republican left in Marion County.

As the old maxim says, “The only certainty in life is death and taxes.” So if a governmental entity tells me they need the ability to raise taxes, but promises not to raise taxes, I am skeptical.

HHC must issue bonds to get a mortgage to build a shiny new hospital. In order to get a decent rate, the bonds must be secured by a property tax levy. But they assure us that the money from the nursing homes will pay the mortgage, without a tax levy.

Bull.

(More Below The Fold)

The guest post below reminds me of a post that I wrote back in January of this year.

By Evan Matthews, a Hoosier Libertarian. Originally posted at LPIN.org.

INDIANAPOLIS, IN — Smoking bans are onerous, misguided and dangerous.  As Indianapolis lawmakers debate whether the Circle City requires more stringent smoking legislation, they should stop to consider the economic and realistic implications.

The owner of a private establishment, be it bar, bowling alley or barber shop, should be able to determine whether or not smoking is permissible on their property. Proprietors would display a sign on the door, reading either “Smoking” or “Non-Smoking,” both enforced with vigor. Individuals would then be able to make informed and individual choices, free from government coercion.

About three-fourths of the population are non-smokers. Establishments would be foolish to alienate this huge market. As a result, many will enforce their own bans in order to cater to clientele. Government intervention isn’t needed to create non-smoking environments in private establishments.

One highly visible side effect of smoking bans is their adverse economic effects. A Montreal Economic Institute study examining several Canadian cities concluded that sales at bars and pubs were 22.5% lower than they would have been without the ban. Interestingly, the article adds that the population’s smoking rate remained at 25%, about a fifth above the national average, despite the ban, providing evidence that prohibitive measures do not change smoking habits.

(Read more after the leap)

The Post Tribune writes:

A new Web site that blasts town officials in the wake of employee furloughs and budget cuts is hoping to rouse public discussion and outcry from disgruntled residents, but town officials dismiss the anonymous site as sour grapes and lacking credibility

The site Merrillville Politics features links mainly regarding use of federal funding that supposedly was to be directed to hiring more police officers, and the site suggests these officers were not hired.

Recent news about Merrillville and it the town council’s desire to file for assistance from the State of Indiana’s Distressed Unit Appeals Board, and some input from consultants suggesting they don’t qualify and will have to cut budgets further. Can’t say I understand how this new site suggests that Merrillville cut their budget even further while putting more money into police?

The Post article goes on to suggest that the author of the site may be a disgruntled employee or even police officer. Was particularly interested in a statement by one town council member:

Shudick said he would be very disappointed if the Web site’s creator is a town employee, even more so if it is a town police officer.

“It would make one question their integrity,” he said.

From the Indystar:

A felony official misconduct conviction today resulted in the automatic removal from office of Lawrence Township Trustee Mike Hobbs.

Hobbs, 27, pleaded guilty to the charge this morning in Marion Superior Court, admitting to using a $500 check from the Castleton Volunteer Fire Department to pay his apartment rent in February 2007.

He apologized and asked Judge James Osborn to enter the conviction as a Class A misdemeanor; the option is allowed under Indiana law for a person’s first felony, and it would allow him to stay in office until his term is up at the end of 2010.

Osborn, a fellow Democrat, said no.

As standard procedure, Lawrence Township Democrats will caucus in the near future to pick Hobbs’ replacement. Anyone familiar with Lawrence Township Democrat politics have a hunch on who would be picked to replace Hobbs?

Ok so I am behind a few days….work comes first! I have been reading some things coming out of Evansville that Mayor Weinzapfel is doing a poll to see where he stands and what his next move could or should be. You can read the post by Troy Woodruff from The Bloody 8th has the details here

“nor shall any person… be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” — The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Two years ago, the city of Bloomington approached Jeff Sagarin and informed him they were going to be upgrading the footpath that goes through his yard, connecting his street to Greenwood Avenue to the north. The city claimed it had an easement for the footpath, so Sagarin began researching, and made a shocking discovery. The city never had an easement to put a path through Sagarin’s yard, and there is no legal documentation that the city has any right to use Sagarin’s property for public use. When the city refused to budge, Sagarin filed a lawsuit. The case finally went to court late last month.

The city’s excuse for keeping the land that they never had any right to use is that they have obtained a right to use the land through adverse possession. The city claims that since the path has been used by the public for well over thirty years, the use of the path automatically defaults to the city. While adverse possession has a history in common law, it clearly does not apply here. The supreme law of the land in the United States is not common law, but the U.S. Constitution. The Fifth Amendment trumps common law, adverse possession, or whatever other lame excuse the city (or its defenders) wish to use to defend this egregious attack on private property rights.

(Read more after the leap)

I attended and spoke at the Monroe County Board of Health meeting last night, where the BOH considered a resolution to urge the County Commissioners to ban smoking in vehicles with children younger than 14.The Commissioners will consider the ban at their 9:00 a.m. meeting, safely hidden away from people who have to be at work. (See yesterday’s post.)

What I found amazing was the attitude of some of the supporters, including some members of the Board of Health. There was a great deal of pretentiousness and arrogance, as if they’re looking down on us and making decrees on the sheep who are too stupid and ignorant to run our own lives. People know better, but we have to control behavior by law because they do not do what is good for them, as one BOH member said.

The language of the amendment does not allow police to use smoking in a car with a child to be a reason to pull someone over. That was the case with seat belts too, and I have driven through checkpoints in downtown Bloomington where police look to see if I am wearing my seat belt. (I always do.) Of course, it’s entirely possible that police may pull someone over for another violation that would not otherwise merit the driver being pulled over, for the purpose of collecting the $100 fine. There’s also nothing to prevent the ordinance from being amended again.

(Read more after the leap)

Tonight, the Monroe County Board of Health will hold a public forum at 7 p.m. in the Monroe County Courthouse regarding a proposal to make it illegal for people to smoke in their own vehicles if a child less than 14 years old is in the vehicle. The County Commissioners will consider the proposal in their meeting tomorrow. See the PDF legislative packet.

Before I even get into the issue, this is exactly why County Commissioner meetings should not be hidden away at 9:00 a.m. on a Friday morning, while most people are at work.
This is a significant piece of legislation that will affect the liberty of thousands of Monroe County residents. Having a meeting schedule that discourages public participation is unconscionable and the Commissioners meeting times should be changed as soon as legally permissible.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Smoking is prohibited in a motor vehicle, either at rest or in motion, in which there is present a person thirteen (13) years of age or younger. A law enforcement officer shall not stop a vehicle for the sole purpose of determining whether there is a violation of this section.

(Read more after the leap)

It should have been a quick and easy decision. The Bloomington/Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization was to vote on whether federal money would be used to buy less than an acre of land in a “hardship acquisition” from “someone who lost their job at GE, had medical problems and has moved out of state.” It was a simple planning move for the Interstate highway that will eventually come through Bloomington.

But it wasn’t so simple after all, because anti-Interstate activists attended the meeting in force to demand that the MPO not purchase the land. After the meeting, Citizens for Appropriate Rural Roads sent an email warning that voting to purchase the land “would have meant that Bloomington/Monroe County is on record as officially accepting I-69.” This despite the fact that the Bloomington City Council has passed two separate resolutions against building Interstate 69 and despite the fact that the community is a hotbed of anti-Interstate activism.

(Read more after the leap)

According to the Ft. Wayne News-Sentinel, Allen County Republican Party Chairman Steve Shine will face opposition on Saturday for the Chairmanship for the first time in his 16 year tenure.   Rick Runestad has decided to re-enter the race for the job and is setting up a sort of referendum on the typical conservative vs. moderate debate that has raged in the party at all levels for decades now.

Electoral and fundraising troubles have raised questions about Shine’s ability to continue to lead the party, though the conservatives’ enjoyment of Matt Kelty’s primary victory in 2007 was a bit tampered by the following financial disclosure problems that probably ended up costing Kelty the race.

Click here to read the News-Sentinel story.