http://www.vanderburghsheriff.com/jail-recent-booking-records.aspx
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Only About 10 States Matter In Electoral Politics.
Only About 10 States Matter In Electoral Politics.
By Joe Wallace
Winning the presidency is not accomplished by getting the most popular votes. It is won in 50 independent elections for the electors of the states. This is not a new set of rules that was concocted last month to cheat Clinton out of winning. It has been this way since the nation was established.
The first rule of winning any game and this is a game, is to understand the rules and to make choices that result in scoring more points than the opposition. Some states are mismatches and others are tightly contested. CA and NY would go blue if Charles Manson was the Democrat nominee. WY, WV, AL, and a host of other rural states would support Candidate Manson if the Republicans nominated him.
Big wins in these uncontested states are as meaningless as Ohio State running up a 80-0 win over some obscure small college in football. The opposition doesn’t really have a chance and sometimes the scrubs play the whole game to minimize injuries.
Only about 10 states (games) matter in electoral politics. We all know where they are. This year the big games that determined the outcome were FL, NC, OH, PA, MI, and WI and everyone with half a brain knew it. President Obama won them all in 2008 and 5 of them in 2012. So why didn’t Clinton win these states? If Democrat strategists can answer those six questions (or even 4 of them) and correct for their own failures to play the game to win, they will have a battle plan for 2020.
To abolish the electoral college and move to a popular vote will take a constitutional amendment. That will require a 2/3 majority of the states (34) to pass. There is no path to such a victory this year and probably not in the foreseeable future.
Democrats have full control of a whopping 5 state legislatures that would likely vote to eliminate the electoral college. That leaves 29 more votes that would be needed.
We can rage at that reality and assert unfairness in the streets and on Facebook until the stars flame out if we choose, but that will not change the Constitution. A more prudent approach would be to audit the most unlikely defeat in modern politics and form a rational plan to win next time by playing within the rules of the game. This is a fundamental choice that Democrats have to make.
I am an Independent and always have split my vote so please don’t rage at me for a rational analysis of reality. I understand and have felt the thrill of victory and the pain of loss. Picking oneself up and changing after a loss is a valuable and lasting experience. Good luck to both parties at giving us great choices in 2020.
CHANNEL 44 NEWS: Lieutenant Governor-elect Crouch Finishes Tour of All Indiana Counties
Lieutenant Governor-elect Crouch Finishes Tour of All Indiana Counties
 Indiana State Auditor Suzanne Crouch marks the end of her visits to all 92 Hoosier counties.
Crouch was back in Warrick County Friday for the last stop. It is also where the lieutenant governor-elect started her trek. A graduate of Mater Dei High School, Crouch says she wanted to start and end her journey here in southern Indiana.
She found that during her trek across the Hoosier State local budgets are a problem. Crouch says she looks forward to being a watch dog for local government on the state level.
U.S. EPA Releases Final Report on Impacts from Hydraulic Fracturing Activities on Drinking Water Resources
EPA’s Report Concludes That Hydraulic Fracturing Activities Can Impact Drinking Water ResourcesÂ
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is releasing its scientific report on the impacts from hydraulic fracturing activities on drinking water resources, which provides states and others the scientific foundation to better protect drinking water resources in areas where hydraulic fracturing is occurring or being considered. The report, done at the request of Congress, provides scientific evidence that hydraulic fracturing activities can impact drinking water resources in the United States under some circumstances. As part of the report, EPA identified conditions under which impacts from hydraulic fracturing activities can be more frequent or severe. The report also identifies uncertainties and data gaps. These uncertainties and data gaps limited EPA’s ability to fully assess impacts to drinking water resources both locally and nationally. These final conclusions are based upon review of over 1,200 cited scientific sources; feedback from an independent peer review conducted by EPA’s Science Advisory Board; input from engaged stakeholders; and new research conducted as part of the study.
“The value of high quality science has never been more important in helping to guide decisions around our nation’s fragile water resources. EPA’s assessment provides the scientific foundation for local decision makers, industry, and communities that are looking to protect public health and drinking water resources and make more informed decisions about hydraulic fracturing activities,†said Dr. Thomas A. Burke, EPA’s Science Advisor and Deputy Assistant Administrator of EPA’s Office of Research and Development. “This assessment is the most complete compilation to date of national scientific data on the relationship of drinking water resources and hydraulic fracturing.”
The report is organized around activities in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle and their potential to impact drinking water resources. The stages include: (1) acquiring water to be used for hydraulic fracturing (Water Acquisition), (2) mixing the water with chemical additives to make hydraulic fracturing fluids (Chemical Mixing), (3) injecting hydraulic fracturing fluids into the production well to create and grow fractures in the targeted production zone (Well Injection), (4) collecting the wastewater that returns through the well after injection (Produced Water Handling), and (5) managing the wastewater through disposal or reuse methods (Wastewater Disposal and Reuse).
EPA identified cases of impacts on drinking water at each stage in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle. Impacts cited in the report generally occurred near hydraulically fractured oil and gas production wells and ranged in severity, from temporary changes in water quality, to contamination that made private drinking water wells unusable.
As part of the report, EPA identified certain conditions under which impacts from hydraulic fracturing activities can be more frequent or severe, including:
- Water withdrawals for hydraulic fracturing in times or areas of low water availability, particularly in areas with limited or declining groundwater resources;
- Spills during the management of hydraulic fracturing fluids and chemicals or produced water that result in large volumes or high concentrations of chemicals reaching groundwater resources;
- Injection of hydraulic fracturing fluids into wells with inadequate mechanical integrity, allowing gases or liquids to move to groundwater resources;
- Injection of hydraulic fracturing fluids directly into groundwater resources;
- Discharge of inadequately treated hydraulic fracturing wastewater to surface water resources; and
- Disposal or storage of hydraulic fracturing wastewater in unlined pits, resulting in contamination of groundwater resources.
The report provides valuable information about potential vulnerabilities to drinking water resources, but was not designed to be a list of documented impacts.
Data gaps and uncertainties limited EPA’s ability to fully assess the potential impacts on drinking water resources both locally and nationally. Generally, comprehensive information on the location of activities in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle is lacking, either because it is not collected, not publicly available, or prohibitively difficult to aggregate. In places where we know activities in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle have occurred, data that could be used to characterize hydraulic fracturing-related chemicals in the environment before, during, and after hydraulic fracturing were scarce. Because of these data gaps and uncertainties, as well as others described in the assessment, it was not possible to fully characterize the severity of impacts, nor was it possible to calculate or estimate the national frequency of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle.
EPA’s final assessment benefited from extensive stakeholder engagement with states, tribes, industry, non-governmental organizations, the scientific community, and the public. This broad engagement helped to ensure that the final assessment report reflects current practices in hydraulic fracturing and uses all data and information available to the agency. This report advances the science. The understanding of the potential impacts from hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources will continue to improve over time as new information becomes available.
Farmers Push Back Against Animal Welfare Laws
Farmers Push Back Against Animal Welfare Laws
By Jen Fifield for Stateliness /Pew Charitable Trusts
All hogs in Massachusetts will be able to stretch their legs and turn around in their crates and all hens will be able to spread their wings under a law passed this month by voters in the state.
Laws like this one, which strictly regulate how farm animals are confined, are becoming more common across the U.S., as large-scale farming replaces family farms and consumers learn more about what happens behind barn doors. Massachusetts is the 12th state to ban the use of some livestock- and poultry-raising cages or crates, such as gestation crates for sows, veal crates for calves or battery cages for chickens, which critics say abusively restrict the animals’ movement.
The restrictive laws have taken hold so far in states that have relatively small agriculture industries for animals and animal products and fewer large-scale farming operations. But producers in big farming states see the writing on the wall. Backed by state farm bureaus, large-scale industrial farmers are pushing for changes that would make it harder for states to further regulate the way they do business.
North Dakota and Missouri adopted amendments in the last few years that enshrined into their constitutions the right of farmers and ranchers to use current practices and technology. Legislatures in many states, including Indiana, Mississippi, Nebraska and West Virginia, considered proposed amendments this year. And Oklahoma voters this month rejected a similar amendment sent to them by the Legislature.
Farmers acknowledge that some people who do not spend much time on farms may object to some of their practices. But they say that they do not abuse animals and that their practices are the most efficient and safest way to keep up with demand for food. And, they say, complying with restrictions on raising poultry and livestock like those approved in Massachusetts are costly for them and for consumers.
They point to an 18 percent increase in the price of eggs — about 49 cents a dozen — in California last year that was attributed to a law that created strict space requirements for hens. The law applies not just to producers in the state but to producers in other states that sell eggs there.
“Our nation’s ability to protect its food supply can be threatened by unnecessary regulations driven by activist agendas, often by people who’ve never set foot on farmland or have no idea what it takes to produce a crop,†said Paul Schlegel, director of environment and energy policy for the American Farm Bureau Federation.
‘Right to Harm’
Right-to-farm laws were put in place by all 50 states starting in the 1970s, as suburban development sprawled to rural areas. The laws were intended to protect farm owners from lawsuits brought by new neighbors who claimed the farms — with their smells, sounds and chemicals — were a nuisance. The newly proposed amendments would extend the protections by locking in farmers’ ability to use modern technology and practices.
Animal welfare advocates, such as Daisy Freund, director of farm animal welfare for the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, say the modern practices are not humane and call the right-to-farm amendments “right to harm†laws.
The amendments would not only prevent states from passing new animal treatment laws, but would make it harder for anyone to win a lawsuit against an agriculture business, even if the operation was affecting nearby quality of life, or air or water quality, Freund said.
Matthew Dominguez, a former lobbyist at the Humane Society of the United States who now works a national advocacy organization called the Nonhuman Rights Project, said the legislators who are proposing the amendments — including some who have received hefty donations from the industry — are trying to find any way they can to continue agriculture business as usual.
But consumer expectations already are forcing producers to change how they operate, said Josh Balk, vice president of farm animal protection at the Humane Society of the U.S. Demand for free-range eggs and grass-fed beef is growing, pushing large companies to change their standards. Wal-Mart and McDonald’s recently committed to using only suppliers that raise cage-free hens by 2025.
Market demands will force producers to change their practices or be left behind, Balk said. The U.S. Department of Agriculture projects that to meet demand, the industry will have to convert over half its egg production to cage-free systems by 2025, up from the current rate of 10 percent.
“It’s kind of similar to which companies are trying to still produce black and white TVs, and which ones are selling color TVs,†Balk said.
Paying a Premium
Consumer expectations have shifted as animal welfare groups such as the Humane Society have used undercover investigations to expose industry practices.
Videos and images published on the advocacy groups’ websites, on YouTube and in documentaries depict windowless warehouses with hundreds of sows confined in gestation crates, where they spend most of their lives. Hens are shown in cages as wide and long as a letter-sized piece of paper, and barely tall enough for them to stand in.
Many of these methods are accepted by industry groups such as the United Egg Producers and the National Pork Producers Council. Farmers say keeping animals in cages is the most sanitary and safest way to care for large groups of farm animals. And farming groups say the practices encouraged by animal welfare groups might not make life for farm animals any better.
The National Association of Egg Farmers said that while Massachusetts voters will pay more for eggs, the lives of chickens will not improve. Caging chickens, the association said, reduces the likelihood they will become diseased. It also improves the quality of eggs, the group said, by reducing the chance that the eggs touch manure.
Farmers and ranchers aren’t opposed to regulation that protects “the environment, that protects the food supply and that protects our families,†said Tom Buchanan, president of the Oklahoma Farm Bureau. “We buy our food from the same shelves you do,†he said.
But Buchanan and others, such as Harry Kaiser, a professor at the Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management at Cornell University, say consumers should have the option of buying meat and eggs without paying a premium for special animal treatment.
Kaiser led the study, funded by the National Pork Producers Association, that showed an 18 percent increase in the price of eggs in California. The price increased even more than that because of a bird flu crisis, but that additional increase was filtered out of the study’s results.
Kaiser said the results didn’t surprise him. If businesses aren’t able to use the most efficient methods for producing eggs, he said, their costs will go up.
Not everyone can afford to pay premium prices, he said, and others don’t want to.
Rodolfo Nayga, professor in the department of agricultural economics and agribusiness at the University of Arkansas, has found that while a segment of the population is willing to pay higher prices for organic food, or food produced using higher standards for animal treatment, not everyone is.
“This isn’t for everybody,†Nayga said. “There are some farmers that won’t be able to accommodate the regulations for animal welfare and for environmental concerns.â€
Industry Response
When animal welfare groups started about a decade ago to pay their employees to take jobs on farms to expose practices, the industry responded by pushing for what animal welfare advocates call ag-gag laws. Some of the laws made it a crime to take photos or videos of private farm property without the owner’s permission, while others made it a crime for an employee of an animal welfare organization to lie about where they worked when they applied for a job on a farm.
About 26 states considered ag-gag laws from 2010 to 2015, but only nine — Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Utah and Wyoming — passed them.
The Humane Society is not aware of any ag-gag bills proposed this year. Interest in these laws has faded after they faced opposition from animal welfare groups, as well as groups advocating for food safety, freedom of speech and workers’ rights, said Dominguez, who traveled the country fighting the laws for the Humane Society. Lawmakers also may be hesitant to propose the laws when so many are being challenged in court, he said.
Idaho’s ag-gag law was overturned last year by a U.S. district judge who said it suppressed freedom of speech and violated the Equal Protection Clause. Lawsuits are pending in North Carolina, Wyoming and Utah.
Six states — Alabama, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska and Oklahoma — filed suit against California for its anti-confinement egg law, which was approved by voters in 2008 and took effect last year.
The states said the law put their egg producers that supply California at a disadvantage, requiring them to either stop selling eggs in California or spend hundreds of millions of dollars to comply with the California law, which would increase prices even at home.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this month that the farming states had no legal right to challenge California’s law, upholding a lower court’s decision to dismiss the case.
Updates to right-to-farm laws have seen some success, but not everyone thinks they are the way to go.
In Oklahoma, small farmers worried that the proposed constitutional amendment would prevent them from suing larger producers whose practices damage their business. It took years for the Oklahoma Farm Bureau to get the measure on the state’s ballot, only to see it overwhelmingly defeated.
The amendment was meant to prevent the Legislature from passing the same type of law Massachusetts approved, one that would “drastically handcuff and handicap farmers and ranchers, which ultimately results in less food and higher prices,†Buchanan said.
Although Oklahoma is a traditional farming state, Buchanan fears that as more people move to cities and away from rural areas, and as more legislators come from urban backgrounds, laws further regulating farms may eventually have a chance of passing there.
It’s better to pass a law now to block such measures, he said. “As the saying goes, it’s too late to shut the barn door once the horse is out.â€
OFFICE-PARTY CHRISTMAS SPIRIT RUNS AFOUL OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
By Tom Purcell
“You almost got fired because your company had a holiday party? You’re going to have to explain.â€
“Look, where I come from, we call holiday parties ‘Christmas parties.’ Nobody told me I was supposed to avoid anything relating to our country’s Christmas tradition.â€
“What did you do?â€
“Well, the owners of my company threw our holiday party after work one evening. Thanks to me and the boys in the sales department, the adult beverages were flowing. That’s when the Human Resources director threatened to can me.â€
“You were unaware that many organizations no longer serve alcoholic beverages due to liability issues and the fact that some religions and cultures are offended by the consumption of alcohol?â€
“That’s right. As far as I was concerned, we were having a normal Christmas party. That’s why I brought a Christmas tree.â€
“You didn’t.â€
“Look, I figured everybody would love it, but HR threatened to fire me if I didn’t remove it. HR said I was creating a hostile work environment by being insensitive to people of other faiths – that even though the Supreme Court ruled that a Christmas tree is a secular symbol, the only acceptable tree would be a ‘diversity tree’ that represented everybody’s point of view. But then I got into trouble again.â€
“What did you do next?â€
“Well, me and the boys in sales had gotten pretty well oiled before HR took our hooch away, and we love to sing when we’re liquored up. We started singing Christmas carols like ‘Silent Night,’ ‘Hark! The Herald Angels Sing’ and ‘The First Noel.’ We were working our way through the ‘Hallelujah Chorus’ when HR called me in again and complained that the Christmas carols we sang were offensive to members of the staff who were non-Christians. She said I’d better knock it off or she’d process my pink slip.â€
“You didn’t knock it off, though, did you?â€
“Nope. You see, me and the boys in sales slipped outside to have a few more snorts of whiskey, and when we got back, one of the hottest ladies in Accounting walked into the room. You wouldn’t believe some of the clothing she wears to work – or, to be more precise, the clothing she doesn’t wear.â€
“Please don’t tell me there was mistletoe.â€
“How’d you guess? The boys bet me 20 bucks I could coax her under the mistletoe and give her a little peck. Silver-tongued devil that I am, I began commenting on how great she looked in her scanty duds when – â€
“HR threatened to fire you?â€
“Bingo. The Accounting babe dresses like a pop star and I’m the one who gets into trouble for commenting on her lack of clothing? I don’t get it.â€
“I read about similar Christmas office-party woes in several news reports. As our workforce has become more diverse – Americans have so many different social styles, religions and points of view these days – more companies are no longer sure how to handle Christmas events.â€
“My company handled it by taking all the fun out of Christmas.â€
“Well, in our lawsuit-crazy world, companies are afraid to serve alcohol. And their fear of being insensitive to people of diverse faiths and points of view is the reason many are abandoning traditional Christmas parties in favor of dull, generic, daytime events. Though you have to admit you were awfully boorish and brash at your Christmas party.â€
“I admit it. But me and the boys in sales have been boorish and brash every year. It’s just that nowadays, HR will threaten to fire you for it.â€
Pence Statement on November Employment Report as Indiana Economy Continues to Grow
Unemployment Cut in Half Since Governor Pence Took Office
Indianapolis – Vice President-elect Governor Mike Pence today issued the following statement as Indiana’s unemployment rate fell once again in November and now stands at 4.2 percent. The November decrease marks a 4.2 percent decrease in unemployment since January 2013 – exactly half that of the state’s unemployment rate when Governor Pence assumed office.
“November’s employment numbers reflect the successful policies and fiscal management that have been hallmarks of this administration over the last four years, including balanced budgets, low taxes and healthy reserves,†said Vice President-elect Governor Mike Pence. “While cutting taxes and red tape, we have also committed to investing in workforce development and advancing the vibrancy of our communities. This focus on economic development and hardworking Hoosiers has produced record employment and investment in Indiana over the last few years which, I have no doubt, will be carried forward in the future under the leadership of Governor-elect Eric Holcomb.â€
Background
The Indiana unemployment rate stands at 4.2 percent. Since January 2013, Indiana’s private sector has grown by more than 168,000 jobs. Indiana’s total private employment has grown by 36,500 jobs so far this year. Total private employment is now at 2,660,900. The highest levels of growth occurred in the following sectors: Professional and Business Services, Financial Activities and Manufacturing. November is the 17th consecutive month that Indiana has recorded private-sector employment above the March 2000 peak.
 Dr. Bucshon Applauds CMS Decision to Stop Medicare Experiment
| (WASHINGTON, D.C.) –Congressman Larry Bucshon, M.D. released the following statement regarding the Obama administration’s announcement that it will halt the Medicare Part B payment experiment released by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) earlier this year.
“This experiment would have disrupted care for the most vulnerable Medicare beneficiaries,â€said Bucshon. “I am happy the administration listened to the bipartisan concerns raised by members of Congress, patient advocates, and physician groups by putting an end to this disastrous proposal. Yesterday’s announcement is a win for patients across the country.† Bucshon, a physician, became a leading opponent of the controversial proposal and introduced legislation in May to block it from moving forward.
In September, Bucshon also raised concerns that the experiment would limit access to much-needed care and increase costs for seniors during a congressional hearing with the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The interaction can be found here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvJm5DNVD9U.
More information on Bucshon’s legislation, H.R. 5122, can be found here. |
COA: Case For Relief Against INDOT May Continue
COA: Case For Relief Against INDOT May Continue
Olivia Covington for www.theindianalawyer.com
The Indiana Court of Appeals allowed a local government entity to continue seeking relief against the Indiana Department of Transportation Friday, holding that the local unit of government had standing to seek both injunctive and declaratory relief.
When the Indiana Department of Transportation performed construction and repair work on State Highway 27 in Union County in 2010 and 2011, it allegedly damaged septic systems on the properties of three private landowners as a result of improper or negligent work, which “may (have impacted) other properties and may (have implicated) a broader public health and safety concern … .†The county board of commissioners asked INDOT to investigate and remedy the damage, but INDOT failed to do so.
The commissioners filed for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against INDOT and Brandye Hendrickson in her official capacity of INDOT commissioner in July 2015. The motion sought an order declaring that State Highway 27 and any associated storm drain was the responsibility of INDOT and not the county and compelling INDOT to immediately remedy any negligent work that caused septic or public health issues.
INDOT moved to dismiss, arguing that the county lacked standing. The commissioners responded with an affidavit from Ron Parker, the county sanitarian, who stated “the highway repair has resulted in raw sewage flowing outside appropriate septic and drainage systems.â€
The Union Circuit Court granted INDOT’s motion to dismiss on the basis of a lack of standing, but did not indicate whether Parker’s affidavit was considered. The county moved to correct error, and INDOT requested that Parker’s affidavit be stricken and the motion to correct error be denied. The trial court denied the motion to correct error but did not expressly rule on the motion to strike.
In the Indiana Court of Appeals’ reversal, Judge Michael Barnes first wrote that the panel had determined that the appeal should be reviewed as a Trial Rule 12(B)(6) dismissal, not a Trial Rule 56 dismissal, because the trial court erred when it did not make clear whether it was considering Parker’s affidavit. Thus, because the review proceeded as a 12(B)(6) dismissal, the appellate panel disregarded Parker’s affidavit. Barnes wrote that on remand, either party could file for summary judgment under Trial Rule 56.
In regard to the county’s motion for declaratory judgment, Barnes wrote that the commissioners were entitled to seek declaratory relief. The appellate court found that because INDOT is required to designate which roads constitute the state highway system and also to maintain maps of the highway system, “it should be possible to determine and issue a declaration as to who bears responsibility for State Highway 27 and its drainage system.â€
Further, Barnes wrote that the county commissioners had standing to seek injunctive relief, even though the board did not suffer a direct injury as a result of INDOT’s actions, because the public standing doctrine allows actions against governmental activities even if the plaintiff does not have a special interest in the outcome of litigation different from that of the general public.
The panel also found that the commissioners had standing under the associational standing doctrine, which holds that an “association†– here, the county – can sue on behalf of its members if the members would individually have standing to sue yet would not be required to participate in the association’s suit, and if the interests the suit seeks to protect are relevant to the organization’s purpose.
The case is The Board of Commissioners of Union County, Indiana v. Brandye Hendrickson, in her official capacity as Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Transportation, and the State of Indiana, 81A01-1603-Pl-696.