I guess I’m addicted to CNN this evening. I found an article that discusses President Bush’s response to the wildfires in Southern California. He’s very proud of the way he has handled the situation. “I made a pledge to the people of California on behalf of all Americans: We will help you put out the fires, get through the crisis, and rebuild your lives,” he said in his weekly radio address. It’s a good thing he did something right in the face of a natural disaster. After he botched up the response to Katrina. Unfortunately, he’s now receiving complaints because he is giving praise to beaurocrats in California, who many believe do not deserve the recognition. I can’t help but wonder if there has ever been a good response to a disaster.

According to an article on CNN, the 75% of Americans do not approve of the job congress has been doing. This is bad news for Democrats, who control both houses. Last year’s victory in the midterm elections was mostly due to the fact that the Republican-controlled houses held a 63% disapproval rate. It appears that the Democrats have not been progressive enough to appease voters. What impact will this have on the 2008 elections? Time will tell.

Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN) announced his property tax plan. Thanks to Pat Bauer (D-South Bend) and his Democratic buffoons in the House, the residents of Indiana faced staggering property tax bills this year, but were saved by the governor’s intelligent move to essentially freeze homeowners’ rates to those of 2006. However, there has been no solution posed to Hoosiers for 2008. This wouldn’t have been as big of an issue if the Democrats hadn’t killed every bill and amendment that the Republicans put forth in the Democrat-contolled house. However, each one was killed by a party-line vote.

Once again, Governor Daniels has come to the rescue with a controversial new approach. Mitch has proposed a cap in property taxes at a value of 1% of the property’s appraised value each year for regular homeowners, 2% for rental properties, and 3% for businesses. To counter-balance this, he has proposed an increase in the sales tax, from six to seven cents per dollar. Unfortunately, Mitch is calling for the property tax cap to be created as an amendment to the Indiana constitution, which must pass two consecutive sessions for the Indiana General Assembly. This means that, if proposed in 2008, the earliest it would be in place is for the tax bills received in 2010, and even that is doubtful because the House Democrats have proven that they will kill any tax legislation that is attached to a Republican. However, when Democrats kill this proposal, it will make them look bad in front of voters and will help Mitch gain a second term, and help to bring the House back into the control of the Republicans. If this happens, this legislation might actually pass in 2009 and 2010 (assuming Republicans stay in power), taking effect in 2011.

For more details, read his full statement below.

Good evening.

For the last few months, no subject has been on my mind, or the mind of most Hoosiers, as much as property taxes. In almost every county, some homeowners were hit with huge increases; in some counties, it seemed almost everyone got a big jump. Assessments were inconsistent and often grossly unfair. It is not acceptable that any citizen cannot afford to keep the home they may have worked all their lives to buy. The status quo is not tolerable and we must act to fix it.

Several causes combined to produce this situation. Back in the 90s, courts ordered a change to assessments based on market prices. In 2002, the legislature repealed the inventory property tax on business, and switched from reassessment once a decade to once a year, or trending. And, the biggest factor of all, total local spending on schools, libraries, school construction, and other services has continued growing faster than taxpayers’ incomes. When that happens, property taxes can only go up.

We’ve been here before. Repeatedly over the last 35 years, state government has tried to help out. State taxes have been raised and the money used to subsidize local budgets and reduce property taxes. By now, 85% of school operating costs are paid for by our state taxes, not our property taxes. Half the sales tax, 3 cents out of 6, is sent back to support local government, or your property taxes would be far higher than they already are.

What we do next must learn from this history, because the old approach has not worked. In every case, a few years later our state taxes were higher and our property taxes were, too. It only took 5 years this time.

I have looked at every option for change. I have talked with Hoosiers all over the state. I have studied Indiana’s past approaches to this issue and the attempts of other states to deal with their own problems. When Indiana acts this time, and act we must, our steps must be fair, far-reaching, and final.

I have prepared and will recommend to the legislature a proposal to cut every homeowner’s property taxes sharply and cap them forever, at no more than one per cent of a home’s true value. This last provision must be added to the state’s constitution to ensure its permanence, and guarantee that no Hoosier ever again pays more than a penny on the dollar of their home’s value.

We can lower the average Hoosier property tax bill by more than a third by removing forever the rest of school operating costs, and the cost of protecting abused and neglected children, from the local to the state level. Immediate relief should be provided to every homeowner on the May ‘08 bills, and the full 1% ceiling protection put in place by 2009.

We can fund this reform through a one-cent increase in the sales tax, and by using a small share of the surplus we have restored to the state budget these last three years.

Before settling on the cut and cap approach, I looked hard at the idea of totally eliminating property taxes in our state. Much as I would like to have taken that route, the risks to our schools, to small business, and to our economy generally, dissuaded me. In particular, I could not support the large increase in personal income taxes, paid by every Hoosier worker and most small businesses, which would be necessary for total elimination.

Any plan that makes a real difference in property taxation will have to go to its root cause, and that is excessive spending. Total local spending on school construction, libraries, fire departments, and all other local services simply cannot keep rising faster than Hoosier incomes.

To achieve better discipline while preserving local control, we must have single-point accountability for spending. Today, no one is responsible; each local taxing district sets its budget and sends you its part of the bill, which is only added up when it hits your mailbox. The County Tax Board in each county must accept the duty of reviewing the total of local spending plans and trimming those budgets as needed to keep our taxes down.

As further protection against overspending, we should strengthen taxpayers’ direct say in local decisions, especially the borrowing for new schools and other construction which has been the biggest driver of property tax increases. I will propose that any significant new capital project, or any spending in excess of the growth in local income, must be approved by voter referendum.

Next, we must protect other property taxpayers from being exploited. I will propose hard ceilings, with no exceptions and no loopholes, of 2% for rental properties and 3% for other businesses, also written into our constitution.

Finally, our unfair and unfixable assessment system must go. I will propose the elimination of all political assessors and the appointment by each County Council of a single, qualified and certified assessor to oversee trained professionals in conducting future appraisals.

Immediate relief for every homeowner; a one per cent permanent cap on every homeowner’s taxes; an end to unfair and inaccurate assessments; real limits on local spending. As bold as these changes would be, I am very optimistic of achieving them, especially if you will help.

In the last 3 years, we have already solved problems like the state government deficit and the state highway shortfall that people said would take years or were simply impossible. We can solve this one, too, and open a new era of opportunity in which Indiana is the nation’s leader in defending and promoting the American dream of home ownership.

Thank you and good night.

The campaign of presidential hopeful Barack Obama (D-Illinois) recently sent a postcard to Iowan voters that slams many senators, including Hillary Clinton (D-New York), because of their vote in favor of labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. I’m not advocating support for Clinton, nor am I advocating opposing Obama, but I personally think it is ridiculous that he is sending out these messages to voters. He is drawing attention to a vote for which he wasn’t even present. Through my work in the Senate, I understand that it is sometimes necessary to miss a vote, but never one that will have the political ramifications of the Lieberman-Kyl amendment. If he cared so passionately about the topic, he should have been present for the vote. If he had voted against the amendment, like Sens. Dodd and Biden, then he would have room to talk.

It seems as if a lot of today’s politicians admire Harry Truman. He was a calculating and bossy during his administration. When he left office, there were more than a few happy people. His administration was accused of corruption and the Korean War was stalemated. So, why is he admired today? As years passed, he was most remembered for taking risks. He felt a sense of responsibility and often said “the buck stops here” as a way of explaining what power he felt he had.

With many citizens unhappy with President Bush, they are saying they want a bolder president. One who isn’t afraid to make choices that might be unpopular. Unfortunately, it is hard to tell, until a person is in office, what they really stand for.

I graduated. Woohoo! I officially have a BA in Political Science and Communication Studies. Now it’s off to grad school to get my master’s.

The ceremony was okay. It was hot in the fieldhouse, but I had a fan pointed directly at me, so it wasn’t too bad for me. The speakers were not very good. Dr. Eugene White spoke. He is the superintendent of the Indianapolis Public Schools. He was not a very good speaker, and I honestly don’t remember anything he said. That’s never a good sign.

The faculty speaker was very frustrating. He was basically telling us that when we look back on our graduation, it will be overshadowed by the fact that the United States is fighting a pointless and needless war, in his opinion. I don’t care what he thinks, I just wanted my diploma.

Why is it that people think they have to make a political statement out of every speech? Don’t people realize that their audience is probably tired of hearing about Iraq?

I don’t understand the way some people come to their conclusions. A guy I live with said that he thinks that in order to fix the property tax crisis facing Indiana, we should raise taxes for businesses, but then offer the businesses tax breaks for funding certain educational programs.

There are two reasons that won’t work. First and foremost, if you move the taxes to businesses, but then you don’t charge the businesses all of their taxes, where are you going to get the money that you would otherwise have been getting from property taxes? You can’t give them tax breaks and still expect to receive all of your funding.

The second reason this won’t work is because it’s an anti-business bill, which is an anti-economy bill. In a state like Indiana, where much of our industry is dying, we have to be competitive in recruiting new businesses and showing them that they would benefit from being in Indiana. Having high taxes for businesses won’t do the trick. If they want to be close to Chicago, then we should be showing them the benefits of being located in Northwest Indiana and not giving them reasons to locate in Illinois or Wisconsin. After all, those states are doing the best they can to recruit businesses, too. We must stay competitive so that we can provide jobs for our citizens.