November 3, 2010

The Libertarian Party of Indiana will maintain ballot access for four more years because of their achievement of six percent in the Secretary of State race. Libertarian Mike Wherry earned 100,847 votes which is the highest number of votes cast for a single candidate in the LPIN’s history.

Automatic ballot access is granted to a political party that reaches two percent of the vote while the ten percent mark enters a political party in to the primary system. In 2006, Mike Kole received 54,381 (3.3%) votes. Rebecca Sink-Burris was the party’s candidate in 2002, and received 60,937 (4.1%) votes.

“Throughout the campaign, I can’t count the times I heard people say they agree with Libertarians, but feel they’re wasting a vote,” said Wherry. “Last night, we proved once again that our libertarian philosophy is spreading across the state. Our team topped 100,000 votes for the first time in the Secretary of State’s race. This means our county organizations and their candidates can continue their growth without the burden of petitioning.”

Wherry continues, “With municipal elections around the corner, maintaining our ballot access was critical. It’s this level where we stand to really see victories. Admittedly, it’s tough to compete in a statewide race as a third party. But, when put in a local race where we know our neighbors, have been active in service clubs, and our churches, we will be very tough competition. We can’t compete if we have to expend our resources just to get on the ballot. That’s why last night’s record vote total was so important.”

State Chair Sam Goldstein shared Wherry’s point of view.

“Ballot access is the key to our survival as the state’s only third party,” said Goldstein. “In many races across the state, we were the only other choice in many local and state races. We view electoral competition to be as important to the health of Indiana as economic competition.”

Media Contact: Chris Spangle, 317-920-1994

ABOUT THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY
The Libertarian Party is America, and Indiana’s, third largest political party founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties. Its vision is for a world in which all individuals can freely exercise the natural right of sole dominion over their own lives, liberty and property by building a political party that elects Libertarians to public office, and moving public policy in a libertarian direction.

The Libertarian Party of Indiana was formed in 1974, and has maintained ballot access since 1994. Sam Goldstein, an Indianapolis resident, currently serves as Chairman.

Learn what we stand for here.

Libertarian Party of Indiana
156 E Market St.
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
(317) 920-1994
lpinhq@lpin.org
www.lpin.org
www.freehoosiers.com

Sam Goldstein, Chairman
Christopher Spangle, Executive Director

Mole #3 is eagerly awaiting District #76 results to assert continued dominance of the title “Nostradamus of Local Politics”. Mole #3 was challenged by 8 other Moles in the contest to see which Mole was the best at projecting winners of the 2010 Elections in Southwest Indiana.

Mole #69 made a valiant effort and appeared to have matters within striking distance of Mole #3 after last night’s certifiable results. Coming into the morning Mole #3 had only one miss with Mole #69 having two misses with the contests for Indiana House of Representatives in Districts 75 and 76 too close to call. Mole #3 had projected Ron Bacon as the winner while Mole #69 projected that Mike Goebel would be making the spring pilgrimage to Indianapolis for the next two years.

In the hotly contested and still not determined race for District 76 between Bob Deig and Wendy McNamara separated by only 30 votes last night with two more precincts to count Mole #3 who picked Bob Deig and Mole #69 who went with Wendy Mac, had the potential to trade places on the top of the Molehill.

When District 75 broke for Ron Bacon with the Gibson County ballots counted Mole #3 secured the victory and another election season of claiming the title of “Nostradamus of Local Politics”. Without regard to the outcome of the District 76 race that is now only separated by 8 votes and is certainly destined for a recount, Mole #3 is still #1 among the City County Observer Moles.

Mole #69 will have to be satisfied with a strong second place and will for the next year be wearing the crown of “Jeane Dixon of Local Politics”.

UPDATE: The City County Observer has risen over 500,000 places in Alexa’s USA Internet Traffic Ranking to the place of #67,400th most visited website in America passing the City-County Government (www.vanderburghgov.org) at #155,021st, the website for Channel 25 Television (www.news25.us) at #129,471st, Fox 7’s website at #146,163rd, the conglomerate of weekly newspapers in Warrick and Gibson Counties in Indiana and in Illinois (www.tristate-media.com) at #124,714th, the Owensboro Messenger Inquirer at #255,370, while blowing by Integra Bank, Aztar, and several other recognizable regional businesses.

The City County Observer is now the fourth Alexa ranked online media business in Greater Evansville and surpasses not only the City of Evansville but every municipality and economic development entity within 100 miles. On a state wide basis the City County Observer is ranked in the top 10 media outlets in the entire State of Indiana for internet traffic.

We would like to thank our readers, our staff, and all of the people of Evansville for accelerating our readership to levels that we had never dreamed possible. It seems that articles about promoting good public policy are getting traction. IS IT TRUEthat the number of people in Evansville who advocate for positive responsible change through good public policy is growing daily?

Alexa.com is a website that ranks respective websites around the world according to the number of visitors that each site attracts. Alexa also presents these rankings with one month and three month trailing averages. During the last month the website www.city-countyobserver.com has risen in world wide rank by nearly 5.0 Million places.

Special Election Day IS IT TRUE

IS IT TRUE that the Reagan Democrats and independent voters all over the country are flocking to the polls today to cast their ballots in what looks like it will be a referendum on today’s economic realities?….that today is shaping up to be very much like 1994 with the names changed but the game the same?….that we surely hope that the economy of the late nineties that was lead by a popular Democratic President and a Republican Congress comes roaring back like that combination magically did in the 90’s?

IS IT TRUE that Evansville is a test market for national product launches for a reason?…that the reason is that what works here is most likely to work elsewhere?…that the same thing goes for politics?….that we will know by midnight just how much like the rest of the nation that Vanderburgh County is politically?

IS IT TRUE that the Evansville Convention and Visitors Bureau finally released a two page supposedly detailed budget for the 8 ball fields proposed for the Roberts Stadium site? ….that of the total budget of $17,500,000 that only $4,900,000 is for the actual ballfields?….that the City County Observer in a series of articles has documented the fact that the basic cost for a state of the art ball field starts at approximately $250,000?….that the price per ball field in the ECVB proposal works out to only $612,500 per ball field?….that the City County Observer while thinking this is a high number is not shocked or amazed by this budgetary figure?

IS IT TRUE that an additional $7,932,902 is detailed as infrastructure improvements that are required to make the site “ball field ready”?…that these requirements include water, sewer, irrigation, drainage, earthwork, buildings, electrical work, and nearly $400,000 in project initiation fees?….that there is a “contingency” line item in the amount of $385,254 and a “maintenance equipment package” budget for $350,000?…..that $350,000 will buy lots of lawnmowers?

IS IT TRUE that this budget also includes a “COMMUNITY SUPPORT COSTS” section that plans to spend $2,425,830?….that includes $1,500,000 to demolish Roberts Stadium?….that Mr. John Kish is on record stating that the budget to demolish the Executive Inn is also $1,500,000?…that these facilities are not remotely the same type of structure or even the same size?…..that the first “quote” to demolish the Executive Inn was announced by Mr. Kish at the August meeting of the Evansville Redevelopment Commission to be only $1,000,000?…..that the City County Observer wonders just how solid these exact quotes are?

IS IT TRUE that $12,600,000 is budgeted to build, prepare, design, demolish, and finance the proposed ball field project?….that the innkeeper’s tax for these kinds of purposes is designated for brick and mortar projects that promote tourism?…..that we wonder how demolishing Roberts Stadium attracts visitors to Vanderburgh County?….that most of the line items as it turns out are not related to ball fields at all?….that bailing out the City of Evansville for deferring maintenance on an already existing Wesselman Park may not be an appropriate use of the innkeeper’s tax?….that if the City of Evansville would have been GOOD STEWARDS of Wesselman Park and done the maintenance when it was needed that more than half of the line items in this proposal would not even be necessary?

IS IT TRUE that there is still no agreement in place for a Downtown Convention Hotel?….that the innkeeper’s tax is appropriate for doing preparation work to attract a Quality Hotel Developer to replace the Executive Inn?…..that you cannot spend the same money twice?…..that if the City of Evansville should have budgeted any demolition of Roberts Stadium into the new Arena budget?

IS IT TRUE that the City of Evansville should have maintained Wesselman Park and kept the existing ball fields in tournament condition if ball tournaments are indeed beneficial to tourism?….that if the City of Evansville would have done both of the things well and planned properly to avoid the EXECUTIVE INN DILEMMA, that both projects could have gone forward with the bonding of the innkeeper’s tax?….that this $18M Ball Field Proposal is really a $4.9M Ball Field Proposal and a $12.6M BAILOUT OF THE CITY OF EVANSVILLE?

The 2006 election for Vanderburgh County Prosecutor pitted these exact same candidates against one another that are squaring off in 2010. In that election a very young Nick Hermann was introduced to countywide electoral politics by a sound defeat at the hands of the Democratic incumbent Stan Levco by a vote tally of 32,291 to 22,009 a victory margin of over 10,000 votes.

That was 2006 when the sentiment of the county was so strongly in the Democratic camp that Linda Durham rode the coattails of that sentiment to victory in the race for Knight Township Trustee. In the 2006 elections 20,434 (36% of all votes) people voted straight ticket ballots out of the 56,279 that were cast. Of those straight ticket voters 58.4% went to Democratic candidates and 40.2% went to Republicans. The margin of straight ticket voters in 2006 is eerily close to the 59.4% to 40.5% margin that Mr. Levco defeated Mr. Hermann by.

How long were the coattails of Brad Ellsworth and Democratic sentiment in 2006? Did these coattails have any impact at all on the Vanderburgh County Prosecutor’s race or were the results fully determined by the voter’s judgment on the candidates appeal? The real question in this campaign is whether or not Nick Hermann can convince 9.5% of the electorate that in 2010 he is the best man for the job.

Mole #3 has yet to make a call on this race. During the past four years Mr. Hermann has greatly increased his political knowledge base with a stint as the Chairman of the Vanderburgh County Republican Party, has established a track record as a volunteer in children’s advocacy programs including the Juvenile Drug Court, and accepted several board appointments in Vanderburgh County. He also has grown accustomed to the role of father that always offers opportunities to develop a more mature perspective. It is safe to say that the Nick Hermann of 2010 is a much different person than the Nick Hermann that Prosecutor Levco defeated in 2006.

Mr. Levco has spent the last four years right where he has been since winning the election for Vanderburgh County Prosecutor in 1990. Stan has been the steady hand on the plow continually running the Prosecutor’s office now for two decades. Levco knows the job of Prosecutor as he has defined it and managed it for most of his adult life.

This race was disrupted several weeks ago with the reporting that Mr. Levco had violated the Hatch Act by soliciting political donations from staff members. This allegation was addressed quickly by Mr. Levco who communicating exactly what his fundraising practices have been. The typical reaction among the voters has been “don’t they all do that?” If that opinion is broadly held this allegation should have little impact on the election.

This contest really comes down to maturity, experience, and coattails. There is no question that Mr. Levco, who has the support of Sheriff Eric Williams has more experience than Mr. Hermann who was endorsed by the FOP (Fraternal Order of Police) and spent the last four years dedicated to becoming a better candidate for office. It will be up to each voter to decide whether or not Mr. Hermann’s combination of youth and potential merits a decision for the veteran Prosecutor Mr. Levco to pass the torch on to a younger man.

Mole #3, while not making a projection in the Vanderburgh County Prosecutors race is willing to go out on a limb and state that if the coattails of Larry Bucshon, who was recruited to run for Congress by Mr. Hermann, are going to determine this very close race. If Mr. Bucshon’s coattails and the general aura of discontentment with the status quo play themselves out in Vanderburgh County as they are poised to across the nation, then Citizen Hermann will most likely become Prosecutor Hermann.

The discontentment with the state of the country will most certainly influence local elections like the one for Vanderburgh County Prosecutor. Sometimes this is warranted and sometimes it is not. Stan Levco has served this office in an honest and dignified manner and if reelected will continue to do so. The City County Observer hopes that each and every vote is based on a knowledgeable person making an informed vote for the person that they believe is the best candidate for the job of Prosecutor.

Mole #3’s Notes from the Street:

Coattails and sentiment can be quite disruptive. In the City County Observer reader’s polls a “throw the bums out” sentiment runs deep and some of the letters and comments are personal. If 2010 is an indication of things to come, and we have every indication that it is, the volume will be turned up in 2011. The entire Evansville City Council and the Mayor of Evansville are up for election next year. The sentiment on the street with a very few exceptions is that there will be close to a complete change of power in the City of Evansville next year and that no amount of money can keep that tide from coming in.

Election Day is almost here and I want to thank you for all your help. I am feeling very positive about the outcome of our election. I have avoided misrepresentations and exaggerations of the truth as my opponent enjoys and have stayed the course of honest discussion. You have told me you appreciate this.

• I continue to fight against utility rate increases because now is not the time to raise energy rates or taxes, especially in tough economic times.

• In the legislature I fought for a jobs bill that would create up to 30,000 new jobs and establish tax incentives for small businesses to help them grow and create new jobs in-state.

• I believe we need to enforce the immigration laws we have on the books and fine companies who knowingly hire illegal immigrants instead of legal citizens.

• We must put a stop to the outsourcing of Indiana jobs. I will require corporations doing business with the state to hire at least 80% of its workers from Indiana.

• Companies should be held accountable, and I would force them to return taxpayer dollars if they received tax breaks for promising new jobs in our state, but never created the jobs.

• I passed legislation that limits the burden foreclosures have on our community. The result was to speed up the process to sell vacant and abandoned homes, so that new owners can move in and our property values are not hurt by homes left to ruin.

• I will protect local schools from further budget cuts. I oppose the $9 million cuts to our local schools, which have increased class sizes and allows Indianapolis bureaucrats to control our local schools.

I believe you and I share similar values. I have two children, two grandchildren and am a former Sunday School teacher. With a friend and strong help from the Junior League of Evansville, I co-founded the ARK Crisis child care center. I believe our children should have a healthy and happy childhood.
I’ve talked face to face with you at your home, called you on the phone and asked others to call you. As we have talked, you have asked about the confusing and misleading statements of my opponent and I have answered. Until my opponent actually stepped over the line and called me a “liar”, I was comfortable with the tone of the campaign, however, unprofessional and degrading her remarks were to her, personally.
So, let me set the record straight on a few issues:

1.) The vote to not support 10,000 jobs was the right vote. The bill will put another new major highway in front of funding I 69 to compete with Major Moves money we need to complete I 69. It doesn’t provide one job to southwestern Indiana. Obviously, Musgrave would have voted for the bill.

• Was the bill on a statehouse mailer? Yes.
• But was this intentional? No.
• Rep. Jeb Bardon, who voted against the bill, had the same reference as I.
• A lie? Hardly. A mistake? Yes.
• Do I take responsibility? Certainly.

2.) The neighborhood meeting incident with the press. Perhaps Musgrave should tell what really happened at the meeting, how she refused to honor the “rules” the president of the neighborhood association had set. This was a new president and her first candidate meeting. Musgrave’s campaign was disrespectful.

3.) The debates. Neither I nor my campaign field manager nor the person representing me in the negotiation “promised” or even intimated that we would agree to three debates. If the truth be known, Musgrave never expected that I would agree to one; word is she and her husband were pretty upset when I did. Even then, in the debate she didn’t answer questions or present one idea or platform. I did and my constituents loved it.

We’ve come far from the announcement in February. We’ve brought our message to every part of the district. We’ve helped people understand that only one candidate in this race stands for jobs, for a balanced budget, for keeping taxes low, for reforming our schools, and for building a stronger Indiana. And that is me. But, there is still work to be done.

Over 50 people are working for our campaign daily but I need your help to contact those last few voters. Even though this race is not a close one, my opponent seems to want to steer everyone to that conclusion. Let’s prove her wrong. She fantasies this race the status of the historic McIntyre-McCloskey Eight District Congressional race. She compares herself to McIntyre. With your help, I can win this election and continue the work we are doing remembering we should be competing because we want to represent you and your interests not because we want to set another record.

You are what makes me work; you are why I endure being called a “liar” and other degrading, unprofessional and totally out-of-bounds criticisms. My opponent has spent a lot more money than I have been able to getting out her distortions of my record. We will see if she can buy an election with Indianapolis money.
I’m asking you to take action. Email me at my personal email griecken77@aol.com, if you can help me by:

• Volunteering at a precinct on Election Day or just as important,
• Calling or talking to your friends and neighbors, and asking them to vote for me or
• Very important, sending this email to three or four of your friends.

Paid for and authorized by Gail Riecken for State Representative, Treasurer, Marilyn Ratliff