Thursday, July 16, 2009

Council Dems To Force Full Frontal Exposure Of Republicans On Issue Of Raising Taxes

I can't say that I'm surprised or disagree with their strategy. Indianapolis council Democrats plan to force Republicans to put at least 15 votes on the board, the number needed for passage of a council resolution, before any Democrats will cast a vote in favor of the $25 million a year tax and spend CIB bailout. Democratic blogger Terry Burns suggests that CCC President Bob Cockrum has let it be known he'll need at least 3 or 4 Democratic votes to pass the CIB bailout:

Council Democratic leader JoAnne Sanders was even more to the point when asked by the Indianapolis Times about Cockrum's hunt for Democratic votes.

"The legislature gave us a "funding tool" to resolve a crisis the governor created. Now I hear the council president expects us to deliver 3 to 4 votes -- no call, no letter, no e-mail. Show me 15 Republican votes and we'll talk," Sanders said.
When former Mayor Bart Peterson sought support for his income tax increase in 2007, Republicans aligned in opposition to the tax increase, promising voters that year there would be no tax increases if voters put them in charge of the City-County Council. One incumbent Republican councilor who voted for the tax increase, Scott Keller, got trounced at the polls. Keller had pledged not to raise taxes when he narrowly defeated Karen Horseman in 2003.

There are consequences when politicians say one thing to get elected and then do quite another thing once in office. Republicans should think long and hard before jumping off this cliff to which Mayor Ballard is leading. Ballard has already reneged on numerous campaign promises, including an anti-tax pledge. The Republican number of councilors shrunk by one earlier this year when Ed Coleman left the party to become a Libertarian. He differed with his caucus on a number of fiscal matters, including the CIB bailout.

Although the council resolution to be introduced next Monday to bail out the CIB will technically only include one tax increase, a hike in the hotel tax, making it the highest in the nation, a vote for this bailout is effectively a vote for raising more taxes in the future. Additional taxes will have to be raised by 2013 to fund the repayment of $27 million the plan calls for the CIB to borrow from the State of Indiana.


M Theory said...

Here's a letter I just sent to Councilor Scales:

Hi Christine,
Vote against it and make a good speech why you won't vote to raise more taxes for the CIB. Did you see what Gary Welsh wrote today?. It's getting pasted all over facebook.

People are watching and Republicans that vote for this bailout are going to be railed against by The People. The council republicans that want to keep their jobs, better side against the mayor.

I know you'll do the right thing. It's time together citizens and councilors stood up against these monsters that constantly have their hands in our pockets.

Spread the word that The People are watching how you vote. This is equivalent to Peterson's COIT vote. It will be used over and over and over again in the next election.

Fond regards,

jabberdoodle said...

Thanks for the fact that the proposal has been filed. Given that information I plowed through the Council website for details.

Proposal 2009, 285, is being introduced Monday night, as you report. It was initiated by the Office of Finance and Management. Apparantly no Councillor wanted to have his fingerprints on it at least initially. It will be sent to the Rules and Public Policy committee. That committee is chaired by Bob Lutz of Wayne Township and is composed of 5 Rs and 3 Ds. The next scheduled meeting of this committee is 5:30 pm, Tuesday, July 28, in room 260 of the City-County Building.

artfuggins said...

I hope the Dems dont cave and give any votes to the tax increase. Let Cockrum and the repubs do it. They and Ballard campaigned on no new taxes and Ballard even bragged that he could save $40 to $60 million dollars in fat in the budget. Time to produce.
I am not sure that the defeat of Scott Keller can be tied to his vote. He originally won in a 60% plus Democratic district due to a split in the Dems and a poorly run campaign. Most people knew that he was a one termer when he was elected.

Paul K. Ogden said...


The sad fact is the Democrats actually agree with Ballard on the tax increases to bail out the CIB and throw yet more money at professional sports.

Democrats are such hypocrites. They claim to be for the working men and women and not for the wealthy, yet not a single one of them has stood up against giving the billionaire Simons $15 million more of our tax dollars. That's not the only instance of Demcorats being for corporate welfare. Indianapolis Democrats are all about screwing over taxpayers to give more money to the wealthy elites who run this city.

Paul K. Ogden said...


As far as the Democratic strategy being employed, gee did we all not see this coming?

I still think Sanders might slide Ballard a few votes of Council Democrats to make sure it passes and can be used against Ballard at election time.

A passed tax increase is a much better political weapon than one that fails. I remember when Gov. Bayh proposed a tax increase and couldn't get it through. People forgot about the proposal and he was able to campaign as a Governor who did not raise taxes.

Downtown Indy said...

Sanders against reminds me of the saying 'What's the different between a politician and a statesman?'

It is, of course, that a politician looks out for themselves and their party, while the statesman looks out for the people's best interests.

No question which one Joanne is.

jabberdoodle said...

Just curious Downtown - do you see any 'statesmen' in the Republican ranks?