Indiana Senate's Committee on Corrections, Criminal and Civil Matters unanimously passed Senate Bill SB06, a Knife Rights requested bill sponsored by Senators Jim Tomes and Johnny Nugent, which would overturn the state's antiquated and irrational ban on the possession of switchblade/automatic knives.

Click below to read Indiana's letter and the reply from the Federal Government.

Indiana insurance waiver request

Letter denying Indiana’s insurance waiver request

Public office ban proposed for city workers
House bill would bar local government employees from running for elected posts
By Brendan O'Shaughnessy
brendan.oshaughnessy@indystar.com
Hoping to eliminate potential conflicts of interest, a lawmaker is pushing a bill this year that would bar local government workers from running for elected office where they can vote on their own pay and other matters that benefit them.
"The cost in public confidence is too great to have this continue," said first-year state Rep. Ed Delaney, an Indianapolis Democrat who authored the proposal. "I think we will get better candidates if people don't think government is an insider's club."
A review by The Indianapolis Star in December

Right to work legislation that prompted a five-week standoff during the 2011 session and Indiana unemployment rate climbing to near national average. cc
This is two headlines that I recently read and wonder if it seems to you as it does to me that the two have something in common such as other states that are actually passing Right To Work legislation are providing a better atmosphere for new business growth and/or business re-location.

Maybe it’s time to separate government and private industry and employment from one another. The nanny state mentality is killing jobs in Indiana.
John R. Stanczak
 

cc's sent to all Indiana State representives.

Updated: Thursday, 03 Nov 2011, VIGO COUNTY, Ind. (WTHI) - According to scanner traffic, a suspicious package has been found on the grounds of the Terre Haute Federal Penitentiary and after x-rays of the package, it is believed to be a bomb. Sergeant Joe Watts with the Indiana State Police has confirmed to News 10 that three ISP bomb technicians have been called to the scene. Scanner traffic also mentioned of possible evacuations but it was unclear of where the evacuations were taking place. Officials have told News 10 that there was an "isolated incident" at the prison and that the public was not at risk. They also said that the inmates at the penitentiary were kept secure during the incident and they were not in any danger. News 10's Joe Astrouski is at the scene and he says that delivery trucks have been turned away. A News 10 crew is at the scene and we will update once more information is available.

Bomb scare puts prison on lockdown

Updated: Thursday, 03 Nov 2011, 2:00 PM EDT
Published : Thursday, 03 Nov 2011, 10:29 AM EDT

VIGO COUNTY, Ind. (WTHI) - A bomb scare at the Terre Haute Federal Penitentiary on Thursday morning put the prison on lockdown.

According to a press release, while the penitentiary staff was screening the inmates’ mail, a suspicious package was found.

The mail room was then secured and three members of the Indiana State Police Explosive Ordinance Team were called to the scene and the package was then removed.

The ISP EOD technicians utilized X-ray and determined the package was not an (IED) Improvised Explosive Device. They completed their work and left the prison at 1:30 p.m.

It was determined that there was no bomb in the package.

The complex returned to normal operations on Thursday afternoon.

They say that this was an isolated incident and that the public was not at risk.

October 21, 2011
Dear Mr. Stanczak,

Thank you for contacting me with your comments and concerns regarding H.R. 459, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2011, which was introduced by Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) on January 26, 2011. As your Congressman, it is beneficial for me to hear your thoughts on this important issue.

If enacted, H.R. 459 would direct the Comptroller General to complete an audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and Federal Reserve banks before the end of 2012 and present a detailed report to Congress. While Representative Paul's legislation auditing the 'Fed' was passed by the House in the 111th Congress, it was later weakened in conference committee with the Senate. This legislation is currently pending before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, on which I do not serve. Should the committee report H.R. 459, to the full House, please be assured I will keep your thoughts in mind.

It was good to hear from you. Please do not hesitate to contact me any time you have an issue of concern before Congress. Also, feel free to visit my website at bucshon.house.gov and sign up for my e-newsletter to receive updates from Washington. It is an honor to serve you and the people of the 8th District of Indiana.

Sincerely,
Larry Bucshon
Member of Congress

• Romney in Indianapolis

School vouchers:
A plan to redirect state funds from public schools to pay for tuition and fees at private schools through a state voucher program has been sent to the governor for his signature. Under House Enrolled Act 1003, families who qualify for the federal free and reduced lunch program (annual income less than $40,800 for a family of four), will be eligible to receive a voucher equal to 90 percent of the public school corporation’s per-pupil funding. With a household income of about $61,000, a student could receive a voucher in the amount of 50 percent of the school corporation’s per-pupil funding. The maximum voucher amount for students in grades 1 through 8 will be limited to $4,500 per school year. The act includes a short phase-in period allowing up to 7,500 available for the 2011-2012 school year, 15,000 available for the 2012-2013 school year, and no cap after that.

Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R IN)

Washington, D.C. Office
B-40E Dirksen Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
phone: (202) 224-5623
fax: (202) 228-1820

Indianapolis Office
1650 Market Tower
10 West Market St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
(317) 554-0750

Sen. Dan Coats (R IN)

Washington, D.C. Office
B-40E Dirksen Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
phone: (202) 224-5623
fax: (202) 228-1820

Indianapolis Office
1650 Market Tower
10 West Market St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
(317) 554-0750

Rep. Larry Bucshon (R IN-8)

1123 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1408
DC Phone:202-225-4636DC
Fax:202-225-3284
Contact Form:https://bucshon.house.gov/contact-me/email-me
WWW Homepage:http://bucshon.house.gov/
Twitter:@RepLarryBucshon

District Offices:

Voice: 812-465-6484
FAX: 812-422-4761

 101 NW Martin Luther Kind Jr. Boulevard, Room 124
Evansville, IN 47708

901 Wabash Avenue, Suite 140
Terre Haute, IN 47807

Voice: 812-232-0523
FAX: 812-232-0526

Each town in Indiana can add some restrictions if the city council votes in favor of the additions. Most police officers do not bother with golf carts as they do not want to go to traffic court over them except in your case somebody complained.
Keep in mind that many highways do have rules that do not allow slow vehicles such as golf carts to travel on them. A person would just have to check this out in their area.
Here in Bicknell I was talking to a police officer who was driving around in a golf cart handing out papers as he is trying to be a Bicknell councilman but even in this case I don’t believe that the Bicknell City Council ever actually passed an ordinance concerning the city requirements for golf carts.
In your case it appears that you have a neighbor who is either jealous of you or doesn’t like you for some reason.
Code:
DIGEST OF HB1483 (Updated April 27, 2009 11:53 am - DI 84)

Off-road vehicles, farm wagons, and golf carts. Defines "farm wagon" as including three, four, and six wheeled motor vehicles with a folding hitch that is used for certain purposes. Prohibits a certain type of farm wagon from operation on an interstate highway, or a state highway, except under specific circumstances. Authorizes an individual at least 15 years of age to operate a motorized farm wagon on a highway. Prohibits the use of a motorized farm wagon operated on a highway to tow another vehicle. Prohibits an

They're (the republican party) having a dinner at Monroe City to introduce Mike Pence, who is running for governor, to the Indiana voters if you wish to attend call Jerry Rains Cell Phone number is 887-9073 so they will know how much food to cook, this cookout is planned for the fourth of July.

I understand that there was a accident on I-70 (I think at mile marker 4) that included at least 9 tractor trailers that has shut down the interstate.

John

Terri Austin
317-643-3033 h36@in.gov
Jeb Bardon
317-232-9976 h25@in.gov
John Bartlett
317-233-5248 h95@in.gov
Kreg Battles
317-232-9798 h64@in.gov
Pat Bauer
317-234-9629 h6@in.gov
Charlie Brown
317-232-9798 h3@in.gov
Mara Candelaria
317-232-9991 h12@in.gov
Dave Cheatham
317- 232-7034 h69@in.gov
Bill Crawford
317-232-9875 h98@in.gov
John Day
317-232-9976 h100@in.gov
Ed DeLaney
317-232-0366 h86@in.gov
Nancy Dembowski
317-234-9012 h17@in.gov
Chet Dobis
317-232-9987 h13@in.gov
Ryan Dvorak
317-232-9834 h8@in.gov
Craig Fry
317-232-9822 h5@in.gov
Phil GiaQuinta
317-234-3101 h80@in.gov
Terry Goodin
317-234-9012 h66@in.gov
Dale Grubb
317-232-9987 h42@in.gov
Ed Harris
317-232-9634 h2@in.gov
Clyde Kersey
317-232-9600 h43@in.gov
Shelia Klinker
317-232-0366 h27@in.gov
Linda Lawson
317-232-0243 h1@in.gov
Chuck Moseley
317-232-9976 h10@in.gov
Win Moses
317-232-9999 h81@in.gov
David Niezgodski
317-234-92 h7@in.gov
Scott Pelath
317-234-9294 h9@in.gov
Phil Pflum
317-234-9012 h56@in.gov
Matt Pierce
317-232-9834 h61@in.gov
Gregory W. Porter
317-232-9634 h96@in.gov
Cherrish Prior
317-234-9047 h94@in.gov
Scott Reske
317-233-5248 h37@in.gov
Gail Riecken
317-232-0243 h77@in.gov
Vernon Smith
317-232-9875 h14@in.gov
Dan Stevenson
317-232-9794 h11@in.gov
Mary Ann Sullivan
317-232-0366 h97@in.gov
Vanessa Summers
317-232-9991 h99@in.gov
Dennis Tyler
317-233-5248 h34@in.gov
Shelli VanDenburgh
317-234-9047 h19@in.gov
Peggy Welch
317-234-3101 h60@in.gov

House Bill 1468
2011 1st Regular Session
DIGEST OF INTRODUCED BILL

Right to work. Makes it a Class A misdemeanor for an employer to require an individual to: (1) become or remain a member of a labor organization; (2) pay dues, fees, or other charges to a labor organization; or (3) pay to a charity or another third party an amount that represents dues, fees, or other charges required of members of a labor organization; as a condition of employment or continuation of employment. Establishes a separate private right of action for violations or threatened violations. Exempts individuals employed in the construction industry, employed by the United States, or subject to the federal Railway Labor Act.
Current Status:
In Committee - first House

Non-union state workers must pay bargaining units in neNon-union state workers must pay bargaining units in newly negotiated contracts
January 28, 2011
By Megan Poinski
Megan@MarylandReporter.com
State workers have until Monday to vote on the second union contract that enforces the controversial “fair share” law, allowing state government unions to require non-union members to pay them a service fee. The law passed in 2009.
The new memorandum of understanding between the state government and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees includes the service fee, as does the recently negotiated contract with the State Law Enforcement Officers Labor Alliance.
SLEOLA’s contract has been ratified by its membership, while employees are still voting on AFSCME’s contract.
The theory behind the law is that the union furnishes services that impact all employees, such as negotiating health benefits and work conditions, or representing workers in disputes with managers. Those who don’t join the union and pay union dues have to pay a fee for that representation.
No one had a solid estimate of what those fees would amount to or how much they would raise in total.
Secretary of State John McDonough, who led Gov. Martin O’Malley’s team in both negotiations, said that since the law was passed, the provision went into both contracts easily. It was not a point of contention.
“All we did is we negotiated it there as the legal authority,” McDonough said. “It is a little more detailed in the contract than it is in the law, but that’s all.”
SLEOLA President Jimmy Dulay also said that there was no problem getting the provision in their contract. SLEOLA represents almost all state law enforcement agencies. These include the Maryland State Police, Park Rangers, Fire Marshals and Internal Investigative Unit for the Department of Public Safety and Corrections. It also represents police for the state’s Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulations; Natural Resources Department; Capitol and General Services Department; Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; and Motor Vehicle Administration.
SLEOLA’s contract was negotiated at the end of 2010, and the service provision goes into effect July 1.
Dulay said that the SLEOLA contract has the fair share provision in a little more detail than the law that allows it, but that’s all. While SLEOLA represents a variety of officers, more than half don’t belong to the union. There has been no pushback about the contract and the fair share provision from them, Dulay said.
“The contract was ratified by over 90%,” he said.
Employees covered by the contract will get a letter notifying them of the change in May, Dulay said. The amount of the fair share payment has not yet been decided, but Dulay said it will be less than dues for union members.
AFSCME negotiated the fair share clause in its new contract proposal, which is currently being voted on by employees. AFSCME has about 24,000 members, and represents the majority of state employees.
AFSCME Executive Director Patrick Moran said that service fee provisions are common in private sector union contracts across the state, and everyone at the negotiating table was familiar with it. Not much time was spent hashing out the details, he said.
“The more important things in the contract, like ending furloughs, are what we spent a tremendous amount of time on,” said Moran.
Voting on the contract is still going on, but Moran said he’s heard mostly positive feedback. Nobody has commented on the fees, he said.
Sen. Christopher Shank, R-Washington County, who has many state employees in his district, said that the information about the fees should have been communicated more plainly by AFSCME. Shank said the one-page summary AFSCME put out about the contract was not clear. It says that “all state employees will share the cost of union representation.”
“It’s Orwellian doublespeak,” Shank said. “Everyone is going to share the cost of this. Why not indicate that everyone will pay the service fee?”
Shank said that he is against any sort of service fee, but opponents “lost the battle” in the 2009 legislature. He said he heard no complaints about SLEOLA’s fair share fee in their contract.
Moran brushed off Shank’s attacks, saying that the senator has “an ideological axe to grind.” he stressed that the union has not been hiding anything.
David Boschert, executive director of the Maryland Classified Employees Association, also protested the fees when they were before the General Assembly. Two years ago, he gave up the fight against them.
“We have to accept the reality that we lost, and now it is state law,” Boschert said. “We will abide by it.”

Newly negotiated contracts
January 28, 2011
By Megan Poinski
Megan@MarylandReporter.com
State workers have until Monday to vote on the second union contract that enforces the controversial “fair share” law, allowing state government unions to require non-union members to pay them a service fee. The law passed in 2009.
The new memorandum of understanding between the state government and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees includes the service fee, as does the recently negotiated contract with the State Law Enforcement Officers Labor Alliance.
SLEOLA’s contract has been ratified by its membership, while employees are still voting on AFSCME’s contract.
The theory behind the law is that the union furnishes services that impact all employees, such as negotiating health benefits and work conditions, or representing workers in disputes with managers. Those who don’t join the union and pay union dues have to pay a fee for that representation.
No one had a solid estimate of what those fees would amount to or how much they would raise in total.
Secretary of State John McDonough, who led Gov. Martin O’Malley’s team in both negotiations, said that since the law was passed, the provision went into both contracts easily. It was not a point of contention.
“All we did is we negotiated it there as the legal authority,” McDonough said. “It is a little more detailed in the contract than it is in the law, but that’s all.”
SLEOLA President Jimmy Dulay also said that there was no problem getting the provision in their contract. SLEOLA represents almost all state law enforcement agencies. These include the Maryland State Police, Park Rangers, Fire Marshals and Internal Investigative Unit for the Department of Public Safety and Corrections. It also represents police for the state’s Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulations; Natural Resources Department; Capitol and General Services Department; Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; and Motor Vehicle Administration.
SLEOLA’s contract was negotiated at the end of 2010, and the service provision goes into effect July 1.
Dulay said that the SLEOLA contract has the fair share provision in a little more detail than the law that allows it, but that’s all. While SLEOLA represents a variety of officers, more than half don’t belong to the union. There has been no pushback about the contract and the fair share provision from them, Dulay said.
“The contract was ratified by over 90%,” he said.
Employees covered by the contract will get a letter notifying them of the change in May, Dulay said. The amount of the fair share payment has not yet been decided, but Dulay said it will be less than dues for union members.
AFSCME negotiated the fair share clause in its new contract proposal, which is currently being voted on by employees. AFSCME has about 24,000 members, and represents the majority of state employees.
AFSCME Executive Director Patrick Moran said that service fee provisions are common in private sector union contracts across the state, and everyone at the negotiating table was familiar with it. Not much time was spent hashing out the details, he said.
“The more important things in the contract, like ending furloughs, are what we spent a tremendous amount of time on,” said Moran.
Voting on the contract is still going on, but Moran said he’s heard mostly positive feedback. Nobody has commented on the fees, he said.
Sen. Christopher Shank, R-Washington County, who has many state employees in his district, said that the information about the fees should have been communicated more plainly by AFSCME. Shank said the one-page summary AFSCME put out about the contract was not clear. It says that “all state employees will share the cost of union representation.”
“It’s Orwellian doublespeak,” Shank said. “Everyone is going to share the cost of this. Why not indicate that everyone will pay the service fee?”
Shank said that he is against any sort of service fee, but opponents “lost the battle” in the 2009 legislature. He said he heard no complaints about SLEOLA’s fair share fee in their contract.
Moran brushed off Shank’s attacks, saying that the senator has “an ideological axe to grind.” he stressed that the union has not been hiding anything.
David Boschert, executive director of the Maryland Classified Employees Association, also protested the fees when they were before the General Assembly. Two years ago, he gave up the fight against them.
“We have to accept the reality that we lost, and now it is state law,” Boschert said. “We will abide by it.”

Mitch Daniels: Dump Right to Work Bill: Indiana Democrat Lawmakers Flee
February 22, 2011
By Maggie
When Mitch Daniels became Indiana’s governor in 2005, the first thing he did was end Indiana’s state employees’ right to collectively bargain. But today…today he is asking Indiana’s GOP legislators to back off of “Right-to-Work” legislation, and his Democrat lawmakers have fled the state.

Mitch Daniels
Tthe big question today: will Daniels send the State Troopers out to bring the public servants back to the state house? Apparently, the answer is ‘no.’
A quorum was not present today, so Indiana’s business stood still. Elected representatives did…something, but that ‘something’ was not the people’s business. Do you think these flee-baggers will still receive a full paycheck, courtesy of the taxpayers? Yeah, I do too.
That’s one issue, but how about this one: Indiana Democrat legislators fled the state today for one reason, to continue forcing non-union members to contribute to funds that pay for union representation. Or said another way:
Today’s fight was triggered by Republicans pushing a bill that would bar unions and companies from negotiating a contract that requires non-union members to kick-in fees for representation. It’s become the latest in what is becoming a national fight over Republican attempts to eliminate or limit collective bargaining.
More from the Indianapolis Star and the issue of “right to work:
Union supporters say the bill which has sparked the protests, House Bill 1468 such a measure would weaken bargaining power because companies under collective bargaining agreements would no longer have to hire union members. Supporters, including the state’s Chamber of Commerce, say it would make Indiana more appealing to business and will bring jobs to the state.
Daniels says state Republicans did not campaign on the issue of bringing Right-to-Work to the state, and he wants the issue tabled until a state-wide debate can be had. Surely Governor Daniels has seen the national polling in support of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, who Rassmussen says has 48% backing him, and only 38% siding with Unions.
[From RASMUSSEN]: Fifty-six percent support the governor. Hardly any support the unions at this point in time. What we’re seeing in independent voters all around the country is a desire to rein in government spending. It’s even a little stronger than it is among some other voters. They’d like to see it cut across all sorts of the federal government. One of the big missing stories in all the debate about the budget is that most Americans are serious about cutting spending; they support specific cuts; they’re ready to make changes. The question is, will their politicians follow?
So Daniels is ducking this union-oriented legislation when momentum is building across the U.S. to do exactly the same. Tell me, who should not have the right to work? If you and I don’t want to be in a Union, how can forcing us to join be a good thing? You and I are sick and tired of filling the gravy boat for Unions. We’ve had it with Unions attacking all of us out here going to work every day, paying into our retirement, paying a large portion of our family’s health care, understanding that our shorter vacations and fewer paid holidays and sick days are due to the fact that we are valuable to our employer, our absence cannot be filled AND we revere capitalism.
Daniels position on delaying Right-to-Work is shocking to me. His budget cutting tactics are darn near legendary, he has supported Wisconsin governor Scott Walker as he battles collective bargaining, but he punts in Indiana.

We will not let up. The fleeing Democrats can't ignore their jobs and us forever. The court of public opinion is on our side because they know we are at work ready to debate the ideas we ran on. Our focus on paying great teachers more, increasing educational opportunity, balancing our budget and growing our economy will win the day over a Democrat minority wedded to higher taxes and the status quo.

Governor Daniels said it best this week when he said House Democrats have "embarrassed themselves and disgraced themselves. They've cost the taxpayers of Indiana a lot of money, which is what they're best at."

As of this writing, the cost has ballooned to over a quarter of a million dollars. That's a quarter of a million of your hard earned tax dollars being flushed away with no progress to speak of.

A chorus of newspaper editorial pages from the Indianapolis Star and NW Indiana Times to the Evansville Courier & Press to the Lafayette Journal & Courier have all said, "Enough is enough! Get back to work!"

Continue to call, continue to send e-mails, continue to convey your outrage to the 39 Democrats who have decided that thwarting democracy is the way. Contact information has been included below.

House Democrats
Contact Information

Terri Austin: Phone: 317-234-9047
Email: h36@in.gov
Jeb Bardon: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h25@in.gov
John Bartlett: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h95@in.gov
Kreg Battles: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h64@in.gov
Pat Bauer: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h6@in.gov
Charlie Brown: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h3@in.gov
Mara Candelaria: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h12@in.gov
Dave Cheatham: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h69@in.gov
Bill Crawford: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h98@in.gov
John Day: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h100@in.gov
Ed DeLaney: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h86@in.gov
Nancy Dembowski: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h17@in.gov
Chet Dobis: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h13@in.gov
Ryan Dvorak: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h8@in.gov
Craig Fry: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h5@in.gov
Phil GiaQuinta: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h80@in.gov
Terry Goodin: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h66@in.gov
Dale Grubb: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h42@in.gov
Ed Harris: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h2@in.gov
Clyde Kersey: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h43@in.gov
Shelia Klinker: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h27@in.gov
Linda Lawson: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h1@in.gov
Chuck Moseley: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h10@in.gov
Win Moses: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h81@in.gov
David Niezgodski: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h7@in.gov
Scott Pelath: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h9@in.gov
Phil Pflum: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h56@in.gov
Matt Pierce: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h61@in.gov
Gregory W. Porter: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h96@in.gov
Cherrish Prior: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h94@in.gov
Scott Reske: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h37@in.gov
Gail Riecken: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h77@in.gov
Vernon Smith: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h14@in.gov
Dan Stevenson: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h11@in.gov
Mary Ann Sullivan: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h97@in.gov
Vanessa Summers: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h99@in.gov
Dennis Tyler: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h34@in.gov
Shelli VanDenburgh: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h19@in.gov
Peggy Welch: Phone: 317-232-9600
Email: h60@in.gov

Dear Mr. Stanczak:
Thank you for contacting me to share your support for S. 91, the Life at Conception Act. I strongly believe that the unborn fetus deserves the rights and protections that all human beings desire. I am very proud that I have a 100% voter approval rating from the 111th Congress National Right to Life scorecard.
The Life at Conception Act was introduced on January 25, 2011, and would declare that the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human being beginning at the moment of fertilization. Following its introduction, S. 91 was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee for review.
I have consistently cosponsored and voted for many pieces of pro-life legislation over the course of my career. For example, I voted in favor of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which President Bush signed into law on November 5, 2003. I also cosponsored and supported the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which creates a separate offence for criminals that attempt to harm or kill an unborn child in a mother's womb. President Bush signed this legislation into law on April 1, 2004. In addition, I remain a firm supporter of the Hyde amendment, which restricts federal funding for abortions; I have supported upholding a ban on elective abortions in military facilities; I have opposed the inclusion of an abortion benefit in national health reform plans; and I support allowing OB/GYN residents with a moral objection to abortion to opt-out of related training.
As you are likely aware, the subject of abortion has been especially pertinent to the recent health care reform debate. Many have expressed concerns that the language in the new law does not go far enough to prevent taxpayer subsidization of abortions. I opposed the health care bill. In addition, during Senate consideration of the bill, I joined in support of efforts to make absolutely clear that abortions cannot be funded by public dollars and that insurers would be prohibited from offering abortion coverage to any individuals purchasing plans through new government insurance subsidies. Unfortunately, that language was not included in the bill signed by the President.
In January 2011, I joined every other Republican senator in cosponsoring legislation that would, if passed, repeal outright the new law and have voted twice to repeal it.
Again, thank you for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Richard G. Lugar
United States Senator

Dick Lugar used to be OUR US Senator. Now, according to MSNBC, Lugar is “Barack Obama’s Favorite Republican.” Why?
• Dick Lugar voted for Obama’s liberal supreme court nominees – Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan
• Senator Dick Lugar appeared in a 2008 Obama campaign commercial
• Lugar co-sponsored Obama’s DREAM Act that would provide amnesty for illegal immigrants
• Lugar recently expressed support for banning legal firearms in response to the shooting in Tucson
• Dick Lugar voted against earmark reform
• Dick Lugar helped ram the START Treaty through the lame duck session so that newly elected Republican senators couldn't even consider it
Simply put, Obama loves having Republican Senator Dick Lugar on his side.

But we Republicans in Indiana need someone who will speak for us. Not Barack Obama. That’s why, after much consideration, I’ve decided to challenge Dick Lugar in the Republican Primary for US Senate.

After 35 years in Washington, Dick Lugar has forgotten what it means to be a Republican. But we haven't.

You know, President Obama once said that Dick Lugar was among those “who have shaped my ideas and who will be surrounding me in the White House.”

But, instead, it appears that Obama has shaped Lugar.

To turn our country around, we need fresh ideas from new leaders who hold conservative principles. As Indiana State Treasurer, I single-handedly challenged the Obama Administration’s illegal bailout and takeover of Chrysler. I took this case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Indiana pensioners and all the while, Dick Lugar never once protested the fact that Indiana's teachers and State Police officers were having their pensions funds looted.

I will stand up for hard-working citizens, unlike the bureaucrats that are in Washington now.

Folks, it’s time. It's our time to be heard and so I humbly ask for your support.

Sincerely,

Richard Mourdock
Indiana Republican US Senate Candidate

P.S. I’ll be traveling the state in the next 14 months before the May Primary to meet every Republican Primary voter I can. I’d love to meet you face to face. Make sure you watch my website for upcoming events.

Thursday, 17 Feb 2011
Lugar, Snowe and Hatch are all on notice that their approach to governance may no longer be welcome.
What does a longtime Republican senator with a national reputation for working well with Democrats do in the face of a potentially career-ending tea party challenge? The Tea Party Express has announced its disapproval of her votes for stimulus funding and her support of the Supreme Court nominations of Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.
If you're Richard Lugar of Indiana, you tell them to "get real."
Lugar, 78, is telling tea party activists to "get real" if they want to take on the New START nuclear arms reduction treaty. They also oppose his support for President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominees and for the DREAM act, legislation that would give a faster path to citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants if they graduate from college or serve two years in the military.
There is also a more abstract complaint about Lugar's genial disposition, something that has for years been viewed as a strength as he worked with Democrats. They want someone pugnacious, less willing to make deals with Democrats.
Unlike in 2010, when incumbents were surprised to be overtaken by upstarts, these longtime senators can't say they were caught off guard.
"We feel like we can do better and get someone who will listen to us more," said Monica Boyer, one of the co-founders of Hoosiers for Conservative Senate, a tea party-inspired group. "We feel he needs to be challenged."
Top Indiana tea party leaders recently met to coalesce behind one Lugar challenger. State Treasurer Richard Mourdock is expected to announce his candidacy later this month.
Apart from some quiet efforts — Lugar has met in private with tea party leaders in his state, including Boyer — Lugar has shown no signs that he will change his message.
It's clear the tea party — not even 2 years old — isn't going away anytime soon after huge success in last fall's congressional elections. Dozens of its favorite candidates — Republicans who champion limited government and sharply reduced spending — won House and Senate races. Now, the tea party is empowered and turning its attention to vulnerable Republicans up for re-election in 2012. How the three GOP senators handle the tea party threat will go a long way to determining whether the outcome mirrors that of 2010.
In Indiana, the tea party is organizing to unite behind one candidate who could challenge Lugar in a primary.
"Sen. Lugar just expected this. He's good-humored about it," said Mark Helmke, a senior adviser to Lugar. "He's going to continue to do what he's always done." (2010 The Associated Press)

I have been told that State Representative Bruce Borders is or has offered up a bill in the Indiana Legislator to disqualify construction workers from receiving unemployment compensation by renaming their profession as seasonal work; seasonal workers do not qualify for unemployment.

I have not contacted him yet but I am in the process of doing so. It seems to me that the benefits are employer based and not State based. The question is how will such a ruling approval affect the profession? Second will the employers still be held liable and be required to continue payment into unemployment compensation when their employees do not qualify for the benefit?

John R. Stanczak

House Speaker Brian Bosma (R-Indianapolis) recently indicated that House Republicans would be “fast tracking” Senate Bill 32, a bill that authorizes the use of Vote Centers statewide. Vote Centers, a concept piloted in Tippecanoe, Cass, and Wayne Counties, may be one means to increase ballot access for Hoosier voters, and decrease the cost of future elections.

The reason for the fast tracking is due to the cost savings and convenience to the voters as seen in the three pilot counties. The bill has sped through the legislative process to allow sufficient time for county to implement Vote Centers prior to the May municipal elections. Previous legislation from 2006 put into operation pilot vote centers in these counties, allowing voters to cast