TheStatehouseFile.com

INDIANAPOLIS – Bless “Duck Dynasty” and Justine Sacco.

Together, they’ve created an opportunity for an important civic education lesson.

John Krull, publisher, TheStatehouseFile.com

For those of you who don’t know what the twin furors over “Duck Dynasty” and Sacco are – presumably because you have been wasting your time focusing on things that matter – allow me to explain.

“Duck Dynasty” is a reality show airing on A&E about a Louisiana family named Robertson that has made a fortune, which likely has been enhanced by the show, by making duck calls and other products for duck hunters. The show celebrates the Robertson family’s success and decidedly evangelical Christian faith.

To help promote the show, Phil Robertson sat for an interview with GQ magazine. In the interview, Robertson made comments that struck many readers as homophobic. Those offenders took to Twitter, Facebook and other social media to express their outrage.

The story crossed over to mainstream media and, pretty quickly, A&E decided to suspend Robertson from the show.

Robertson, his family and his fans tried to cast him as a martyr for the First Amendment.

He isn’t, but we’ll get to that in a moment.

While the “Duck Dynasty” controversy was raging, Sacco, director of corporate communications for media giant IAC, issued a tweet before boarding a plane.

“Going to Africa. Hope I don’t get AIDS. Just kidding. I’m white,” Sacco tweeted.

Once again, Twitter exploded. Tweets flew back and forth exploring, in 140 or fewer characters, whether Sacco was more insensitive to issues of race or the global AIDS crisis. On whichever side Twitter users landed, they were outraged.

When Sacco landed in South Africa, she in short order lost her job. Even an abject apology from her didn’t stop Sacco from being established as a new poster child for cultural cluelessness.

And, again, her relatively defenders tried to depict her fall as an assault on her First Amendment rights.

Again, they were wrong.

The First Amendment protects us from government suppression of our right to express ourselves, whether in speech, writing or art. It doesn’t protect us from having someone get angry or offended by something we have said or written.

No government entity – and, for that matter, no one I know of – has tried to prevent Robertson or Sacco from saying what either believes. No one has said that they can’t stand on a street corner to speak their minds, preach in the church or post something on the blog of their choice.

If someone did try to prevent either Sacco or Robertson from doing any of those things, I – as a former executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana and true believer when it comes to the First Amendment – would line up with Sacco and Robertson to prevent their rights from being violated.

But those rights weren’t violated here.

What happened was that two private companies decided that Robertson’s and Sacco’s comments were likely to drive away customers, so the companies opted to put some distance between them and those offensive comments.

It wasn’t a constitutional question in either case. In each situation, it was a business decision.

(And it is worth noting that the folks who complain that Robertson’s and Sacco’s views are being demeaned seem not have realized that Robertson and Sacco themselves were doing some demeaning.)

The First Amendment offers us many protections. Perhaps the most basic of those protections is the one that allows – no, demands – that we be the keepers of our own consciences.

The First Amendment doesn’t guarantee that we never will upset anyone else by standing up for what we believe. It also doesn’t guarantee that we never will suffer professional consequences for saying something that angers people – just ask the Dixie Chicks about that – or that we won’t suffer social ostracism for offending others.

What the First Amendment does guarantee is that the decision about what to believe or where to make a stand in defense of those beliefs is ours – and ours alone.

John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits” WFYI 90.1 FM Indianapolis and publisher of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

By Lesley Weidenbener

TheStatehouseFile.com

Lesley Weidenbener, executive editor, TheStatehouseFile.com

INDIANAPOLIS – When Republican Mike Pence became governor last January, sending Mitch Daniels officially up to Purdue University, I thought that might be the high point of the political year.

After all, Pence’s campaign had not promised a controversial agenda for the legislature and there were no elections on the calendar.

Even the legislature promised little excitement. With Republicans holding a quorum-proof majority in both the House and Senate, there wasn’t much Democrats could do to make things interesting.

But it turns out 2013 wasn’t boring after all. Here are five things – a list that is by no means meant to be inclusive – that commanded attention in the past year.

Pence convinces lawmakers to cut the income tax

It seemed clear when Pence became governor that legislative leaders were done being pushed around. They’d spent eight years doing Daniels’ bidding and they were ready to reestablish the General Assembly as an independent branch of government.

Poor Pence. Lawmakers in the House were so uninspired by the governor’s plan to cut income taxes by 10 percent that they just blew it off, failing even to include the proposal in their budget. A ticked off Pence said in response that Hoosiers “deserve better,” words that were about as hostile as this governor would ever get.

A few weeks later, though, Senate Republicans did include a tax cut in their budget – albeit only half what the governor wanted and phased in over twice as long. It wasn’t much but Pence smartly declared the tax cut a win and signed it into law.

The death and possible rebirth of the Rockport coal-to-gas plant

The story of a proposed coal-to-gas plant planned for Rockport is just too complicated to explain in a few paragraphs. But in brief, it’s a project that promises to inject billions of dollars into the state economy, use Indiana coal, create jobs and tie the state’s natural gas customers to a 30-year-contract with prices that may or may not be a good deal.

Oh, and the project is backed by a company that employs a good friend of Daniels, who brokered the deal for the state to buy most of the plant’s product.

The plant has been in the works for years, but lawmakers – at the urging of some of the state’s natural gas utilities – rethought it during 2013. They passed a bill that was thought likely to kill the project. In fact, its future seemed so bad that the developers announced they’d stop investing.

But just this month, the Indiana Supreme Court – which has a member who worked as Daniels’ chief counsel when the deal was being negotiated – issued a decision that appears to give the plant new life.  It’s too soon to know for sure but the rollercoaster that is Rockport promises to ride on into 2014 as well.

Dwayne Sawyer appointed auditor – and resigns weeks later

Pence made a historic appointment last summer when he named Brownsburg city councilor Dwayne Sawyer to serve as the state auditor, making him the first black Republican to serve in a statewide office.

But it was not to be. Just a few months later Sawyer abruptly resigned for what he said were personal and family reasons. The move raised questions about Pence’s vetting system, although the reasons for Sawyer’s decision remains a mystery.

This month, Pence tried again. He named Rep. Suzanne Crouch, R-Evansville, to the post.

Legislature delays decision on marriage – and public opinion flips

In a surprise move, Republican leaders in the General Assembly delayed a debate on a proposed constitutional amendment to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. It’s essentially a same-sex marriage ban, although its authors refuse to call it that.

Lawmakers have passed it once but must pass it again before it can go on the ballot for ratification by voters. The fight was expected earlier this year but with the U.S. Supreme Court set to consider marriage laws and amendments in other states, legislative leaders decided to wait.

But during the delay, public opinion in Indiana has shifted. Where Hoosiers used to support the amendment, now they’re not so sure, according to recent polling. And an increasing number of people indicate they even support gay marriage.

Meanwhile, big businesses – including Eli Lilly & Co. and Cummins Inc. – are throwing their weight and money behind an effort to defeat it.

It’s with that backdrop that lawmakers prepare to take on the measure in 2014.

Republicans, new superintendent clash

The biggest surprise of 2012 was the election of Democrat Glenda Ritz as superintendent of public instruction, beating out GOP darling Tony Bennett.

I never thought the situation would grow even more dramatic after she took office. But Ritz and the other members of the State Board of Education – whose members are appointed by the governor – got off to a bad start and the rift grew and grew.

By the time the year ended, Pence had created a second education agency, Ritz had sued her fellow ed board members, and the sides brought in a national group to mediate.

At the board’s final meeting of 2013, relations seemed to have calmed but with big decisions pending about the state’s curriculum standards and testing, fireworks are likely in 2014.

Lesley Weidenbener is executive editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.