MONDAY
“When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let’s go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about.â€â€
â€Luke â€2:15 â€NIVâ€
TUESDAY
“So they hurried off and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby, who was lying in the manger.â€
â€Luke â€2:16 â€NIVâ€
WEDNESDAY
“When they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child,â€
â€Luke â€2:17 â€NIVâ€
THURSDAY
“and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said to them. But Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart.â€
â€Luke â€2:18-19 â€NIVâ€
FRIDAY
“The shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things they hadheard and seen, which were just as they had been told.â€
â€Luke â€2:20 â€NIVâ€
SATURDAY
“On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise the child, he was namedJesus, the name the angel had given him before he was conceived.â€
â€Luke â€2:21 â€NIVâ€
SUNDAY
“When the time came for the purification rites required by the Law of Moses,Joseph and Mary took him to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord (as it iswritten in the Law of the Lord, “Every firstborn male is to be consecrated to theLordâ€),â€
â€Luke â€2:22-23 â€NIVâ€
Submitted to the City-County Observer by Karen Seltzer
Family New Year’s Eve Indiana State Museum Dec. 31, 6 to 9 p.m.
Welcome 2019 with face painting, magic, music, dancing and a balloon drop (8 p.m.) at this family-friendly New Year’s Eve party! Reserve your spot now so you don’t miss out. This is an alcohol-free event.
Cost:Â $10/members, $16/non-members, free for children younger than age 3. Tickets can be purchased in advance or at the door.
We hope that today’s “READERS FORUMâ€Â will provoke honest and open dialogue concerning issues that we, as responsible citizens of this community, need to address in a rational and responsible way?Â
WHATS ON YOUR MIND TODAY?
Todays“Readers Poll†question is: If the Republican primary for the Mayor of Evansville was held today who would you vote for?
Please go to our link of our media partner Channel 44 News located in the upper right-hand corner of the City-County Observer so you can get the up-to-date news, weather, and sports.
If you would like to advertise on the CCO please contact us at City-County Observer@live.com
Footnote: City-County Observer Comment Policy. Be kind to people. No personal attacks or harassment will not be tolerated and shall be removed from our site.
We understand that sometimes people don’t always agree and discussions may become a little heated.  The use of offensive language, insults against commenters will not be tolerated and will be removed from our site.
Any comments posted in this column do not represent the views or opinions of the City-County Observer or our advertisers.
Attorney General Curtis Hill announced Wells Fargo Bank N.A. will pay $575 million to resolve claims that the bank violated state consumer protection laws.
The states alleged that Wells Fargo imposed aggressive and unrealistic sales goals on bank employees and implemented an incentive compensation program in which employees could qualify for credit by selling certain products to customers
Specifically, the settlement resolves claims that Wells Fargo:
opened millions of unauthorized accounts and enrolled customers into online banking services without their knowledge or consent
improperly referred customers for enrollment in third-party renters and life insurance policies
improperly charged auto loan customers for force-placed and unnecessary collateral protection insurance
failed to ensure that customers received refunds of unearned premiums on certain optional auto finance products
incorrectly charged customers for mortgage rate lock extension fees
As part of a settlement involving all 50 states and the District of Columbia, Indiana will receive $5.2 million.
“Such grossly unfair and deceptive trade practices as those demonstrated by Wells Fargo must never be allowed to stand,†Attorney General Hill said. “We must continue working tirelessly to hold companies accountable for engaging in blatant misconduct that harms consumers.â€
The state of Illinois will receive $10.8 million and Kentucky will receive $3.67 million.
As part of the settlement, Wells Fargo will also create a consumer redress review program through which consumers who have not been made whole through other restitution programs already in place can seek review of their inquiry or complaint by a bank escalation team for possible relief.
BETTY WILLIAMS CONTINUALLY INSPIRED TO HELP THOSE IN NEED
COMMENTARY BY LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR SUSAN CROUCH
My first encounter with Betty Williams was when I started as a county commissioner in Evansville. Her strong voice and tireless advocacy for individuals who have Down’s syndrome, autism or cerebral palsy inspired me to help the 100,000 Hoosiers with an intellectual and developmental disability. Betty, who had cerebral palsy, showed me that people with disabilities are no different than the rest of us. They want to love and be loved in return. They want the opportunity to take risks and learn from their mistakes, but most importantly, they want to be as independent as possible and be successful.
Betty’s advocacy helped the Indiana General Assembly pass legislation in 2017. This created a 17 person task force, which I had the honor of chairing and serving alongside Betty. Our purpose was a direct one, assess current supports and services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and come up with a plan to make them better. We recently concluded our meetings and delivered our report outlining the goals and recommendations on how to best serve those with an intellectual and developmental disability to the general assembly.
The task force took their job seriously and we traveled the entire state to hear from families, providers, and people with disabilities to learn what was most important to them. Over the last year, we met 10 times in places from Boonville to Valparaiso and New Albany to Columbia City. Each meeting, we tried to visit providers that delivered important services to people with disabilities to see firsthand what services and supports were being accessed. At our meetings, we took public comment from more than 100 self-advocates with intellectual and developmental disabilities, 60 family members, advocacy organizations, numerous staff from 26 service providers and state government agencies on how we could fix some of the gaps in how we are helping these individuals.
I learned it is imperative we continue to evolve the services and supports for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. People want choices in the type of services they receive and where they receive them. I am constantly inspired by the work of our service providers in our state. They are trying to stay fresh with ideas, some offer art and others run coffee shops. I always walk away feeling proud in how they provide services and how they access the individuals’ talents.
As the task force worked on our report, we relied on data to better understand and evaluate community-based services. This helped to focus on the cost, utilization, and services of the existing programs and how we could improve. Our report highlights four goals: prioritize community settings and individualized approaches, advance and maximize community and state resources and programs to be inclusive to all Hoosiers, respond to individual and family needs and include a wide array of supports and services that are sustainable, equitable and available across all communities. To read the report in its entirety, visit www.in.gov/fssa/files/1102_final_report_11.1.2018.pdf.
As our work came to an end, I continued to think about my friend, Betty. She became ill this past June and was unable to attend the last few meetings of the task force. I know her wishes were carried through by the other members and I think she would be proud of our final report. Betty passed away just a few weeks ago, but her advocacy and spirit is heard throughout the final report. She taught us to be bold, and stand up for those who need help, and I hope the Indiana General Assembly enacts the recommendations from the task force this legislative session.
I am proud that Indiana has a strong history of helping Hoosiers with intellectual and developmental disabilities through community-based services and supports across their lifespan, rather than relying on state-operated facilities to serve them. If we truly want to take our state to the Next Level, we must continue to invest in, and improve upon, these services and meet the needs of the individuals, their families and the community-based organizations.
 IS IT TRUE we are told that the patrons of Ellis Park are disappointed that the current owners of Ellis Park (Saratoga Gaming of New York) hasn’t begun to compensate the dedicated, professional and hardworking employees of Ellis Park in the appropriate manner? ..we are also told that many Ellis Park patrons are also disappointed that the new owners haven’t invested money to professional pave the parking lot, install proper exterior security lighting and signage, install a first-class exterior digital on-premise sign located next to the highway? …that they are hoping that the new owners of Ellis Park (Saratoga Gaming of Newb York) will also address ways to update the interior decor, remodeled the restrooms, correct the issues with the heating and air conditioning, fix the leaking roof and damaged ceiling tiles in the the main Club House building and the Sky Theater Club House area?
IS IT TRUE that we been told by reliable sources that the new owners of Ellis Park (Saratoga Gaming of New York) is currently negotiating with a successful gaming establishment from New Mexico to sell the track to them?
IS IT TRUE that we been told by reliable sources that the new owners of Ellis Park (Saratoga Gaming of New York) is currently negotiating with a successful gaming establishment from New Mexico to sell the track to them?
IS IT TRUE that this bookkeeper is making over $120,000 per year which is more than 20% higher than the salary of the mayor of Evansville?
IS IT TRUE that in addition to working full time (37.5 hours per week) for Prosecutor Hermann, she has billed the county in excess of 4,000 hours in a year for time spent writing grants?
IS IT TRUE that this calculates to 77 hours per week if she works a full 52 weeks per year, never taking vacation, holiday, sick day, etc.
IS IT TRUE that simple math shows that she claims to be working 114.5 hours per week (37.5 +77) or 22.9 hours a day Monday through Friday?
IS IT TRUE that this only leaves 1.1 hours per day to sleep, eat, bathe, drive to and from work, spend time with her family, etc., etc. etc.?
IS IT TRUE that it’s a felony if she is double dipping on the county’s dime?
IS IT TRUE that she also finds the time to walk around the Prosecutor’s Office with a clipboard attempting to sign up “volunteers†to work on Hermann’s re-election campaign which violates the Hatch Act?
IS IT TRUE that she insinuates to employees not willing to “volunteer†that their jobs may be in jeopardy which violates the Hatch Act?
IS IT TRUE that our Prosecutor Nick Hermann who is charged with enforcing our laws has refused to investigate this matter, has refused to request others to investigate this matter, and has refused to name an independent special prosecutor to investigate this matter, stating that “it’s not my problem�
IS IT TRUE that the City County Observer demands that Prosecutor Nick Hermann and Prosecutorial Candidate Stan Levco address these allegations?
An Indianapolis man who was found guilty of multiple crimes following a single traffic stop has gotten some relief after the Indiana Court of Appeals tossed one of the convictions because it violated double jeopardy principles.
Dwayne Springfield was pulled over by an Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Officer in December 2016. He scuffled with the officer and tried to run away but was quickly caught with the help of other officers who had arrived at the scene. They were able to place Springfield in handcuffs, but not before he bit one officer and struck another in the face.
Subsequently, the officers discovered Springfield had a handgun in one pocket and a sock with “multiple baggies of narcotics†in the other.  He was thus charged with Count I, dealing in cocaine while in possession of a firearm, a Level 2 felony; Count II, possession of cocaine and firearm, a Level 4 felony; Count III, dealing in a narcotic drug while in possession of a firearm, a Level 3 felony; Count IV, possession of a narcotic drug and a firearm, a Level 5 felony; Count V, an unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, a Level 4 felony; Counts VI-VII, battery resulting in bodily injury to an officer, Level 5 felonies; Count VIII, resisting law enforcement, a Class A misdemeanor; and Count IX, possession of marijuana, a Class B misdemeanor. Also, the state filed a habitual offender charge against Springfield.
In the first phase of a trifurcated jury trial, the jury found Springfield guilty on Counts II, IV, V, VI, VIII and IX. During the second phase, the jury returned with a guilty verdict on Count V, a Level 5 felony for unlawful possession of a firearm by a SVF. In the third phase, a bench trial, the court adjudicated Springfield a habitual offender. He was then sentenced to an aggregate of 30 years, including 12 years for Count V.
On appeal, Springfield argued his convictions for the Level 4 felony possession of cocaine and a firearm, Level 5 felony possession of a narcotic drug and a firearm and Level 5 felony unlawful possession of firearm by a SVF are all based on the possession of a single gun. Thus, the convictions violate Indiana’s prohibitions against double jeopardy because the same evidence was used in the three convictions, he said.
The Court of Appeals agreed double jeopardy was violated. It reversed Springfield’s conviction and accompanying sentence for the Level 5 felony unlawful possession of a firearm in Dwayne A. Springfield v. State of Indiana, 18A-CR-1317.
Specifically, the appellate panel found that during the trifurcated trial, the state moved to incorporate all the evidence from the first phase – which included convictions for possession of narcotics while armed with a firearm – into the second phase. Also, the state submitted a certified document from Springfield’s prior Class B felony robbery conviction in 2004, which classified him as a serious violent felon.
“It is readily apparent that the State invited the jury to rely on evidence that Springfield had a gun when he possessed cocaine and fentanyl, to also convict Springfield of unlawful possession of a firearm by an SVF,†Judge Patricia Riley wrote for the court. “The same conduct cannot permissibly support both the enhancements and form the basis of a separate crime.â€
Politically and economically, unions are sort of an odd duck. They aren’t part of the apparatus of the state, yet they depend crucially on state protections in order to wield their power. They’re stakeholders in corporations, but often have adversarial relationships with management. Historically, unions are a big reason that the working class won many of the protections and rights it now enjoys, but they often leave the working class fragmented and divided — between different companies, between union and non-union workers, and even between different ethnic groups.
Economists, too, have long puzzled about how to think about unions. They don’t fit easily into the standard paradigm of modern economic theory in which atomistic individuals and companies abide by rules overseen by an all-powerful government. Some economists see unions as a cartel, protecting insiders at the expense of outsiders. According to this theory, unions raise wages but also drive up unemployment. This is the interpretation of unions taught in many introductory courses and textbooks.
If this were really what unions did, it might be worth it to simply let them slip into oblivion, as private-sector unions have been doing in the U.S.:
It’s Been a While Since the Union Made Us Strong
The share of workforce belonging to unions in the private sector
But there are many reasons to think that this theory of unions isn’t right — or, at least, is woefully incomplete.
First, even back in the 1970s, some economists realized that unions do a lot more than just push up wages. In a 1979 paper entitled “The Two Faces of Unionism,†economists Richard Freeman and James Medoff argued that “by providing workers with a voice both at the workplace and in the political arena, unions can and do affect positively the functioning of the economic and social systems.â€
Freeman and Medoff cite data showing that unions reduced turnover, which lowers costs associated with constantly finding and training new workers. They also show that unions engaged in political activity that benefitted the working class more broadly, rather than just union members. And they showed that contrary to popular belief, unions actually decreased racial wage disparities. Finally, Freeman and Medoff argue that by defining standard wage rates within industries, unions actually reduced wage inequality overall, despite the cartel-like effect emphasized in econ textbooks.
But the world didn’t listen to Freeman and Medoff, and private-sector unions declined into near-insignificance. Now, four decades later, economists are again starting to suspect that unions were a better deal than the textbooks made them out to be. A recent paper by economists Henry Farber, Daniel Herbst, Ilyana Kuziemko and Suresh Naidu concludes that unions were an important force reducing inequality in the U.S. QuicktakeIncome Inequality
Since past data tends to be patchy, Farber et al. combine a huge number of different data sources to get a detailed picture of unionization rates going all the way back to 1936, the year after Congress passed a law letting private-sector employees form unions. The authors find that as unionization rises, inequality tends to fall, and vice versa. Nor is this effect driven by greater skills and education on the part of union workers; during the era from 1940 through 1970, when unionization rose and inequality fell, union workers tended to be less educated than others. In other words, unions lifted the workers at the bottom of the distribution. Black workers, and other nonwhite workers tended to benefit the most from the union boost.
Now, however, private-sector unions are mostly a faded memory and their power to raise wages has waned — Farber et al. find that although there’s still a union wage premium, it’s now much more due to the fact that higher-skilled workers tended to be the ones who stayed unionized. A 2004 paper by economists John DiNardo and David Lee found that by 1984-1999, unions had lost much of their ability to force wages higher.
Given the contrast between the golden age of 1940-1970 and the current age of spiraling inequality, wouldn’t it make sense to bring unions back? Perhaps. The key question is why private-sector unions mostly died out. Policy changes — right-to-work laws, and the appointment of anti-union regulators, probably played a key role in reducing unionization. But globalization may have also played a big part. Competition from companies in countries like Germany — where unions often bargain to hold down wages in order to increase their companies’ competitiveness — might have made the old American model of unionization unsustainable. Now, with even stiffer competition from China, the challenge of re-unionizing the U.S. might be an insurmountable one.
But it might be worth it to try. Other than massive government redistribution of income and wealth, there’s really no other obvious way to address the country’s rising inequality. Also, there’s the chance that unions might be an effective remedy for the problem of increasing corporate market power — evidence suggests that when unionization rates are high, industry concentration is less effective at suppressing wages. Repealing right-to-work laws and appointing more pro-union regulators could be just the medicine the economy needs.
So supporters of free markets should rethink their antipathy to unions. As socialism gains support among the young, both economists and free-market thinkers should consider the possibility that unions — that odd hybrid of free-market bargaining and government intervention — were the vaccine that allowed the U.S. and other rich nations to largely escape the disasters of communism in the 20th century.
