Understanding The Difference Between Collective Bargaining Rights For Private Versus Public Employees

As state and local governments grapple with balancing budgets since they cannot simply print up more money like the federal government every time they need more money to spend, the increasing debate over the collective bargaining rights of public employees has taken center stage. While more than 2 million federal employees lack collective bargaining rights under federal law, many state and local government employees have collective bargaining rights, particularly public school teachers. Those who defend full collective bargaining rights of public employees fail to recognize an important distinction that exists between public and private sector employment. Fellow blogger Fred McCarthy does an excellent job of explaining the key difference and why the taxpayers should support efforts to constrain the rights of public employees to collectively bargain:

Business A is unionized and produces revenues. A bargaining session between labor and management is designed primarily to determine what constitutes a reasonable share of those revenues for each group. To the extent that they are sharing a fixed amount, the bargaining is adversarial. What one gains, the other loses.


For public employees bargaining is between union leadership and elected officials. Both sides have every incentive to be generous. The employee gets more - salary and/or benefits. The politician gets the support of the union political arm at the next election. The inclusion of benefits is a plus for the politician since payment for these extras is a "can kicked down the road," well beyond the prospective career of the office holder. And of course the beauty of it all is that they’re dealing with someone else’s money. The taxpayer is never adequately represented at the table at all!

Fred hits the nail on the head with his observation that the taxpayers are never adequately represented at the table during public employee bargaining sessions. Increasingly, we're not even adequately represented in our elected legislative bodies at the state and local level as an increasing number of these elected officials hold public sector jobs as well, sometimes voting on their government employer's budget. Local city councils are filled with police, firefighter and other government employees who have a completely different perspective on government spending and taxation than those of us who work in the private sector.

There is a big exception in the private sector where the loser in these negotiations is the taxpayers as opposed to the employer or employees. I'm talking, of course, about professional sports teams whose businesses are heavily subsidized by the taxpayers. The Star's Bob Kravitz bemoans the greed of the NFL owners in the current union negotiations with the players. He seems to believe it is only the owners who benefit from the taxpayers' generosity:

It must be a tough gig, being an NFL owner.


The franchise you bought is worth exponentially more now than when you purchased it.

You're guaranteed millions of dollars in television revenues, the vast majority of a team's dollars coming from that shared pot of TV bucks.

You're virtually guaranteed a sellout every game, whether your team is any good or not.

The contracts you give to your players aren't guaranteed -- except for the initial signing bonus -- meaning you can cut a player tomorrow and either set him free or re-sign him for vastly fewer dollars.

And when you ask your workers to take a pay cut -- right now, they want the players to swallow a 12-15 percent loss of income -- you don't even have to show your financial books to prove that you're (cough, cough) losing money and need help from labor . . .

It's fashionable to say, "A pox on both their houses. Millionaires versus billionaires. I'm not rooting for anybody in this labor war."


Fine.

I'm rooting for the players, and with absolutely no hesitation.

The union isn't asking for much of anything in these negotiations. They're not asking for a single dollar more than they made off the last collective bargaining agreement. People need to remember, this won't be a strike, it'll be a lockout. The players want to play, and if they can negotiate some more jobs for their union and get better health benefits for former players, that's great.

But it comes down to this: The owners want a bigger piece of the huge revenue pie. They want it because so many of them have to pay debt service on their new stadiums, most of which were built with taxpayer dollars and bring each owner millions of additional dollars in revenue.

As far as I'm concerned, both sides are too greedy. In a real world, neither the team owners nor their players would be making anything approaching their current haul if the sporting industry paid the tab to build these sports palaces instead of the public. The least they could do is pay property taxes on the stadiums that are built by taxpayers when all of the revenues the facility generates are kept by the owner and all of the expenses of maintaining the facilities are paid by the taxpayers as is the case with Colts' owner Jim Irsay. Kravitz is right that team owners should be required to release audited financial statements, not for the benefit of the players in labor negotiations, but for the benefit of the taxpayers who are subsidizing their sport so heavily. The team owners may be making too much money from their sport but so are the players. If there is a fairer deal to be negotiated in these talks, it is a fairer deal for the taxpayers, particularly those of us who could care less whether they play or sit on their asses and can't begin to afford to shell out the money it takes to attend the games held in the facilities built and maintained with our tax dollars.

Go Sycamores: Indiana State Wins NCAA Tournament Berth

Indiana State University men's basketball team defeated Missouri State University 60-56 in a nailbiter this afternoon to capture the Missouri Valley Conference Tournament Championship, winning an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament. The game was broadcast live nationally on CBS from St. Louis' Scottrade Center. This will be the Sycamore's first appearance in the NCAA tournament since 2001. The Sycamores were the third-seeded team in the MVC Tournament and are 20-13 for the season after today's win.

More On No Show No Work Lawmakers With Government Jobs Should Be Fired

Last week I discussed how a number of the House Democrats who have remained in exile at a hotel in Urbana, Illinois in order to deny a quorum to conduct business in the Indiana House of Representatives hold government jobs from which they should be fired. As I explained it, when these lawmakers are not at the State House tending to their legislative duties, their absence from their other government jobs should not be excused. Any other employee who repeatedly fails to show up for work is immediately fired for "no show, no work." It's a common reason unemployed workers are denied unemployment benefits. The Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette's Political Notebook asks Rep. Phil GiaQuinta, who is a Ft. Wayne city employee, whether he is being paid for two jobs he isn't working:

But Rep. Phil GiaQuinta, D-Fort Wayne, is the utilities services manager for the city of Fort Wayne.


Reached at his hotel in Urbana, Ill., GiaQuinta said during all legislative sessions he works for the city only on Fridays – the day lawmakers are typically out of session. That means he gets paid biweekly for 16 hours of work.

“I only get paid for those hours I work during session,” he said.

City employees have to work a minimum number of hours a year to qualify for health insurance. He would reach that amount in even-numbered years when legislative sessions are shorter but not during odd-numbered budget-year sessions. Because of this, GiaQuinta is on the state health insurance plan instead of the city plan.

During the walkout, GiaQuinta has stayed in Illinois and therefore hasn’t worked for the city.

Did you catch that? "During the walkout, GiaQuinta has stayed in Illinois and therefore hasn't worked for the city." Not even the days the House is not in session. Yes, that makes him a no show, no work employee subject to firing. The reporters for the newspaper should have went a step further and asked the city's human resources manager what happens to a city employee who fails to show up for work without an excused absence. As I noted in my earlier story, House Democratic Leader Pat Bauer, Rep. Bill Crawford and Rep. Craig Fry have jobs working for Ivy Tech, and Rep. Greg Porter has a six-figure job working for the Marion Co. Health & Hospital Corporation. There are other Democratic legislators who hold government jobs as their regular jobs as well. Their government employers should be forced to explain why they aren't being terminated as no show, no work employees like any other employee would be treated under similar circumstances. Of course, some people would contend that some of those lawmakers' government jobs were treated as no show, no works jobs before the walkout occurred; they simply hold the government job because of political favoritism.

Beginning this week, House Speaker Brian Bosma intends to fine the lawmakers $250 a day for each day they remain in Illinois to deny the House a quorum to conduct business. I have a strong hunch many of those members cannot effort to pay those fines; however, they also can't afford to pay for their extended stay in Illinois but the Indiana Democratic Party is paying for that--likely with money it is illegally soliciting from unions and other special interest groups that benefit from the continued walkout. It's likely illegal because lobbyists are prohibited from paying for lawmakers' out-of-state travel, and lawmakers are prohibited from political fundraising during the legislative session. I suspect the fines, like the out-of-state travel, will be paid by special interest groups that benefit from the continued walkout.

UPDATE: Here's a list of 11 Democratic lawmakers compiled from the Indiana Chamber of Commerce directory who also have government-funded jobs. Yep, more than 25% of their caucus is comprised of double-dippers.

Kreg Battles, chemistry teacher, local public school
Pat Bauer, IVY Tech
Bill Crawford, IVY Tech
Craig Fry, IVY Tech
Phil GiaQuitna, City of Fort Wayne (Utilities)
Terry Goodin, public school superintendent
Earl Harris, Fixed Asset manager, Administration, East Chicago Schools
Sheila Klinker, liason for education school at Purdue University
Matt Pierce, visiting professor, Indiana University
Greg Porter, Vice-President, External Affairs,Health and Hospital Corporation
Vernon Smith, professor of Education, IU Northwest

Lugar Swinging Back At Mourdock

While the Lugar camp continues to boast high approval and poll numbers to counter suggestions he may be vulnerable in his bid for an unprecedented six term next year, he is obviously not going to ignore the case State Treasurer Richard Mourdock is building to deny him another term. In particular, Lugar is fighting a contention that he is too close to and supportive of President Barack Obama. In an e-mail blast on behalf of Friends of Lugar, Emily Krueger accuses Mourdock of engaging in "uncivil rhetoric and false statements." In response to Mourdock's claim that Lugar is "leading the way to bring in the Obama agenda," Kreiger calls the statement "so demonstrably false as to be slander."

Krueger continues, "Senator Lugar has a consistent record of voting against the Obama agenda." "He voted against all of Obama's major spending initiatives, against President Obama on the health care bill, against Obama's plans for cap and trade, against financial regulatory reform and against the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell." Eat your heart out on that last one, Chris Douglas.

Krueger responds to Lugar's vote in support of four issues upon which Mourdock and other Lugar detractors have criticized him for parting company with his Republican colleagues, including the START Treaty, Dream Act, Food Safety and Congressional Debt Commission. Krueger contends a vote against the START Treaty would have been "celebrated in Iran, North Korea and other rogue states that do not want nuclear cooperation between the United States and Russia." She defended Lugar's sponsorship of the Dream Act, which would provide a path to legal status for undocumented aliens who "came to our country as children and who want to serve in our military or pay their own way to attend college" as one "based on fundamental conservative principles." Krueger says Lugar was joined by a third of his Republican colleagues in supporting the Food Safety legislation, and the Congressional Debt Commission bill "would have forced spending cuts that the Congress can't seem to find the courage to make."

Krueger encourages supporters of Lugar "to e-mail the campaign with any attacks that you hear and want to know the truth about." "In the meantime, you may count on the fact that our campaign will be active and vigorous in putting a clear choice before Republican voters in May, 2012."

Chicago Police Officially Close Homicide Case Without Charging Daley Nephew

Chicago police know who threw a punch 7 years ago that knocked 21-year-old David Hoschman to the pavement, causing a brain injury that would claim his life 11 days later, but they're not talking about it. The department tells the Sun-Times it is closing the open homicide case without bringing charges despite a Sun-Times expose' linking Mayor Richard Daley's nephew to the killing. Police say the punch was thrown in self-defense, but that view is contradicted by virtually all of the eyewitnesses.

For the first time, the Chicago Police said Friday they know who hit David Koschman and knocked him to the ground in a drunken confrontation in the Rush Street area, leading to his death from a brain injury 11 days later — but they’re not telling.


They said they are closing Koschman’s 2004 homicide case without asking the Cook County state’s attorney’s office to charge anyone because they concluded the punch was thrown in self-defense.

Police reports made public Friday black out the name of the man who detectives concluded threw the lone punch at Koschman. But the descriptions they provided and accounts given by witnesses and others to the Chicago Sun-Times make clear it was Richard J. “R.J.” Vanecko, a nephew of Mayor Daley and White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley.

Vanecko, 36, has refused to speak to the police on the advice of his criminal-defense lawyers, including Terence Gillespie, according to the police.

As Koschman lay unconscious on Division Street at Dearborn, Vanecko and a friend, Craig Denham, ran away, jumped in a cab and headed to a bar, according to the police reports released Friday.

It's interesting that Chicago police decided to reopen and get this case closed so quickly whether the facts supported their conclusions or not just as Mayor Daley is winding down his term as mayor. Given incoming Mayor Rahm Emanuel's close relationship with the Daleys, it is highly unlikely he will order the police to reopen the case once he takes over as mayor.

North of South's Lobbyists Register To Lobby After Called Out For Failure

Last Monday after the Indianapolis City-County Council approved massive public subsidies for the downtown North of South project, I noted how lobbyists were thumbing their noses at Indianapolis' lobby law that first took effect last year. The number of registered lobbyists dropped from 76 last year to just 23 as of the end of February. I specifically mentioned the failure of anyone to register on behalf of Buckingham's North of South deal despite the intense lobbying efforts that have taken place over the last several months. "Lobbyists for Buckingham Properties, which won approval of a $98 million taxpayer loan and $40 million in public subsidies for its downtown real estate project North of South, did not bother to register to lobby this year despite their intense lobbying activities to win support for the project in recent months," I wrote. Well guess who belatedly registered to lobby this year after my blog post on Monday? Of course, Ice Miller's Tom John and Lesa Dietrick on behalf of Buckingham.

Ballard Administration Breaking Many Laws To Force Through Tadd Miller Project

By hook or crook, the administration of Mayor Greg Ballard is determined to make a sweetheart deal it entered into with political insider Tadd Miller to convert the former Bank One Operations Center adjacent to the former site of Market Square Arena into a mixed use development reach fruition. The nature of this agreement since it was rammed through the Metropolitan Development Commission 18 months ago with little public comment has been changed so dramatically, raising so many red flags, and which is being carried out in a manner devoid of any public accountability that nothing short of an independent investigation is needed to ensure taxpayers' interests are protected. "They invented the smell test exactly for things like this, and it doesn’t pass,” Pat Andrews, a Democratic candidate for at-large City-County Council told the IBJ's Cory Schouten in the business newspaper's current edition. And that's an understatement.

As originally proposed, the MDC approved in June, 2009 a deal whereby the City agreed to purchase the 1600-space parking garage operated and owned by a subsidiary of Smoot Construction, a politically-connected firm that made millions off sweetheart contracts awarded during the administration of former Mayor Steve Goldsmith, for a purchase price of $18.5 million, nearly double its assessed value. The City in turn agreed to turn over control of the abandoned Ops Center property for development to a yet-to-be determined group of investors headed up by Tadd Miller, who had no prior experience leading a real estate development project of this size. Miller had been a business partner of Kosene & Kosene, another firm with close ties to former Mayor Goldsmith, that was struggling financially on a number of its real estate development projects. In consideration for title to the Ops Center property, a subsidized lease agreement for 600 spaces in the garage and a 10-year tax abatement, Miller's investment group would agree to immediately invest $30 million in a mixed use apartment and retail development on the site from an anticipated loan from Regions Bank.

Ballard administration officials insisted Miller's investment group would have to close on a development agreement within three months and commence construction on the project within 9 months at the time the deal was approved. But as we've since learned, nothing transpired as the Metropolitan Development Commission and the public were told at the time of the project's approval, and to this day no project agreement has been entered into between the city and the developer. Anticipating the deal's approval, Smoot had long since stopped making mortgage payments and property taxes it owed on the garage and Ops Center. Fearing a foreclosure on the garage by Smoot's mortgage holder, PNC Bank, the City went ahead and took possession of both the Ops Center and the garage and, unbelievably, paid $369,500 in delinquent property taxes owed by Smoot, an unprecedented move. The property is now off the tax rolls and generating no tax revenues to the public; however, Smoot continues to operate the garage and retain all of its revenues. And even though Miller's promised financing with Regions Bank fell through, the City allowed title to the Ops Center property to be transferred to Miller's Milhaus Development, which is planning to develop the project known as The Residence with the Gene B. Glick Co.

It gets better. With Regions Bank refusing to loan Miller's group money for the investment, the City's Bond Bank is now stepping in to provide the financing the investors require for the project. "When Regions backed out of the deal, the Indianapolis Bond Bank stepped in," the IBJ's Schouten reported. "The Bond Bank is trying to sell 'participation rights' in a garage loan that offers only the revenue from the garage as collateral, but turmoil in the municipal bond markets has made it a tough sell, [Darin] Kintner said." "The loan would still be to Milhaus and be secured by the city’s payments." Remarkably, if the deal fails to go through, ownership of the property will revert back to Smoot, but Smoot will not be required to reimburse the City for the back taxes it paid on behalf of the politically-connected firm on the garage property. Smoot also owes $259,600 in back taxes on the Ops Center property, but the City says the developer will be required to pay those back taxes; however, if the deal isn't closed by May, the property is scheduled to be sold at a tax sale, in which case Smoot will be on the hook for the tax liability.

Deputy Mayor Mike Huber defended the deal to the IBJ's Schouten, in part, by noting the reduced price the City wound up paying for the garage over the original sales price--$13.6 million. The developer obtained the Ops Center property for only $1.4 million according to the sales disclosure forms, but Schouten says the developer is actually getting the property at no cost. There was a reason for the lower value for the garage though. The city discovered another wrinkle during its due diligence period: The owner of Chase Tower, Australia’s Macquarie Office Trust, had the right to use up to 800 spaces in the 1,600-space garage," Schouten reported, a fact not previously disclosed to the City. Smoot renegotiated with Macquarie, reducing the number of spaces potentially set aside for Chase Tower to 200," he noted. "Meanwhile, the city argued the tied-up spaces reduced the value of the garage and negotiated the lower purchase price," Kitner told Schouten. He added, “It’s been a moving deal for three years." Indeed, Schouten notes the city has not even agreed on the final purchase price of the garage despite the fact it has paid off the back taxes on it.

Pat Andrews wonders how the deal can even be legal since the original resolution approved by the MDC conditioned the deal upon the execution and negotiation of a project agreement with the developer. Nonetheless, the City went ahead with the purchase of the garage and paid off Smoot's back taxes. Schouten noted no project agreement had yet been consummated as of last week. City officials say not to worry because they have no intention of making any payments on the garage property until the project is finalized. Schouten points out that city officials had originally planned to close the gravel parking lots on the site of the old MSA, thereby increasing demand for extra parking in the garage. The city has since decided to pave over the parking lot and continue using it. Lest we forget the city over-valued the garage using an appraisal based on its expected value based on its future use, an appraisal method not permitted under state law.

Bruce Donaldson, an attorney with Barnes & Thornburg who is representing the City in the deal, scoffs at any concern for the subsequent changes and its impact on the validity of the original deal approved by the MDC. Schouten notes the original resolution imposed a July, 2009 deadline to complete the agreement and was premised on Miller obtaining a loan from Regions. “As long as we stay within the financial parameters, it doesn’t matter who the lender is,” Donaldson said. In other words, it makes no difference that the deal being carried out by the Ballard administration worked out nothing like what was presented to the MDC when it was originally approved. Purdue University's Larry DeBoer told Schouten he had never seen another deal quite like this one. “It just sounds like a clever way to subsidize development,” he said. “Maybe they didn’t think the usual tools were available. It looks like someone has been working overtime to get it done.”

Meanwhile, Tadd Miller, who stands to make lots of money off the deal heavily subsidized by taxpayers, tells Schouten he has no concerns. “My price is settled,” Miller said. “I’m trying to stay out of the middle.” Yeah, that's precisely the problem. The same can't be said of the taxpayers who are footing the bill so he and his partners can be enriched. Given Barnes & Thornburg is giving a green light to the project as the City's attorney, you can bet there will be no council oversight or investigation into these matters as long as their boy Ryan Vaughn, a friend of Miller's, is presiding over the City-County Council.

On a final note, former Mayor Steve Goldsmith has been rumored to have played a key role in making this deal happen before he joined the administration of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg as a deputy mayor. The Indianapolis Times Blog recently observed an upcoming fundraising event he is participating in  on behalf of Ballard at the J.W. Marriott that is being organized by another Goldsmith crony, Mike Wells, that is directed at city contractors:

From: Mike Wells [mailto:MWells@REIRealEstate.com]

Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 11:09 AM
To: Mike Wells
Subject: Fundraising Event for Mayor Ballard, Thursday, March 10th, JW Marriott

Steve Goldsmith, Cathy Langham and I are hosting a fundraising event for Mayor Ballard. We believe the Mayor has worked tirelessly to move the City forward and we want to show our support by helping raise at least $250,000 at a special event to be held at the JW Marriott. We asking you to participate in this event by raising or contributing $5,000 for the event.

Steve Goldsmith will be the special guest for the event and he will be hosting a roundtable prior to the event for a limited number of supporters. We would envision that architects, engineers and financial advisors may have an interest in hearing Steve speak on public policy issues and his new role in New York. This roundtable will be from 4:30 to 5:15. A VIP reception will be held from 5:00 to 6:00 for all contributors raising or contributing $2,500 or more and the main reception will be held from 5:30 - 7:30 with a short program around 6:15.

Our plan is to get the invitations out by February 14th, so time is of the essence. If you are willing to serve as host of this event, please let me know by February 10th, so you can be listed on the invititation. If I do not hear from you, I will follow up with a call next week; thanks for your consideration. Mike

Michael W. Wells
President
REI Investments, Inc.
11711 North Pennsylvania Street
Suite 200 ]
Carmel, IN 46032

Blogger Terry Burns asked, "I wonder if [Mayor Bloomberg] likes his new Deputy Mayor being part of Greg Ballard's pay-to-play program? " Indeed. Ballard's administration has essentially been directed behind the scenes by former Goldsmith cronies for their personal benefit, including former Deputy Mayor Joe Loftus of Barnes & Thornburg, who many complain has too great of a role in telling officials of the administration what to do. Hardly any one has been appointed to any position of significance within Ballard's administration without Loftus' or Bob Grand's approval. Both Ballard and Goldsmith have admitted Goldsmith's role in advising the administration, although he has no official role. Goldsmith also never registered to lobby with the city even though he has been rumored to have assisted parties with business before the city.

Possible Charlie White Successors

Speculation on who Gov. Mitch Daniels might appoint as Secretary of State should Charlie White voluntarily resign or be forced from office under a plea bargain agreement or guilty verdict has commenced. Ed Feigenbaum tosses out these names in the latest edition of the Indiana Daily Insight:

As was the case when rumors were flying about the Governor trying to dissuade White from assuming, names are floating for a potential White replacement, including Sens. Connie Lawson (R) and Jim Banks (R); former Reps. Luke Messer (R), Dan Dumezich (R), Jackie Walorski (R), and David Yount (R); former Department of Natural Resources director Kyle Hupfer; Alcohol and Tobacco Commission Chair Mark Massa; and mayors Jon Costas (R) of Valparaiso and Wayne Seybold (R) of Marion. Front-runner: Messer if he wants it.

Any other names?

Can House Democrats Afford $250 A Day Fine? And Who Will Pay?

Indiana House Republicans have finally taken the action they should have taken more than a week ago. Beginning next week, House Democratic caucus members holed up in a hotel in Urbana, Illinois in order to shut down the business of the House of Representatives will be fined $250.00 a day for their absence. From today's Star:

It's my hope that this incentive will bring back a quorum beginning next Monday, and we can conduct business accordingly," said House Speaker Brian Bosma.


Minority Leader B. Patrick Bauer, D-South Bend, was unfazed.

"We'll pay these fines, and it's worth it," he told reporters via speakerphone. "It's worth it for the kids. It's worth it to keep our public schools open. And it's a far less penalty than the hundreds of thousands of workers are going to be paying if (Republicans') bills are passed."

"We'll pay these fines?" We know House Democratic members are not picking up the tab for their hotel rooms in Urbana. The Indiana Democratic Party is picking up the $2,500 a day tab for their hotel bill in Urbana, Illinois with money that may be coming from unions and other lobbying interests into the state party coffers for this purpose in clear violation of Indiana law. Lobbying interests are barred by state law from paying for legislators' out-of-state travel expenses. Further, the party is openly soliciting these contributions for the benefit of the legislators in clear violation of another state law that bars legislators from fundraising activities while the legislature is in session. The fact of the matter is that a number of the Democatic caucus members like many Hoosiers live paycheck to paycheck and do not have the financial means to pay that kind of a fine on an ongoing basis. I don't believe for one minute that most, if not all, of these members have any intention of paying these fines out of their own paychecks. Once again, they will likely turn to their union pals or other special interest groups to finance their exile.

This is what should happen. Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller should do his job as provided by statute and immediately open an investigation to determine whether union funds or other lobbying sources are being funneled through the state party to fund the Democrats' act of holding the legislature hostage until its legislative demands are met. Subpoenas should be issued to command receipts and other records tracking the flow of money. If the shoe were on the other foot, you can bet a Democratic Attorney General would not hesitate to take similar steps against such conduct if committed by Republican lawmakers and Democrats would expect no less from him or her. If the evidence gathered from the investigation shows a violation of the law, he should file criminal charges against the offenders, which in this case is a Class D felony. If Greg Zoeller has time in his day to to use the bully pulpit of his office to stand up for people who break our laws and come to our state illegally from other countries, surely he can help us ensure that our elected representatives fulfill their constitutional duties by showing up to conduct the people's business instead of standing idly by while this small minority remains in exile at the behest of their union bosses.

On a final note, the many House Democratic members who have other government jobs should be fired from those jobs. Why? Because their absence from their government jobs is premised on them tending to their legislative duties at the State House. If they aren't reporting for work at the State House, then they have a duty to their government employers to report to duty at their regular jobs. This would include House Democratic Leader Pat Bauer and Rep. Craig Fry, both of whom are employed by Ivy Tech Community College, a state education institution financed with state tax dollars. Also, Rep. Greg Porter is employed by the Marion County Health & Hospital Corporation. All three of these men are paid high salaries for their plum jobs. In the private sector, employees who are no show, no work are fired. These men should be treated no differently.