Lugar Responds To Residency Issue For Voting In Indiana

A blog post yesterday by fellow blogger Paul Ogden questioning Sen. Richard Lugar's voting registration has brought a quick response from Sen. Lugar's campaign staff. Via Howey Politics, the campaign responded with this statement:

"Other than during his college days, Senator Lugar has only been absent from the State of Indiana for an extended period to serve in the military or to serve in the United States Senate, both with distinction. The Indiana Constitution and the United States Constitution clearly establish that an individual does not lose his or her residency in a state when an absence is due solely to service to the State of Indiana or to the nation. Additionally, the Indiana Code specifically provides that a person is not considered to have lost his or her residence in a precinct solely by virtue of being absent in service to Indiana or to the nation. Senator Lugar's last place of residence in Indiana prior to leaving to serve in the Senate remains his proper voting precinct according to Indiana law. Like every other Hoosier who has left the State of Indiana to serve his or her nation in time of war or in time of peace, Senator Lugar remains a Hoosier in the eyes of the law." Section 4 of the Indiana Constitution states, "No person shall be deemed to have lost his residence in the State, by reason of his absence, either on business of this State or of the United States." Voting qualifications in Section 2 states, "(a) A citizen of the United States who is at least eighteen (18) years of age and who has been a resident of a precinct thirty (30) days immediately preceding an election may vote in that precinct at the election. (b) A citizen may not be disenfranchised under subsection (a), if the citizen is entitled to vote in a precinct under subsection (c) or federal law. (c) The General Assembly may provide that a citizen who ceases to be a resident of a precinct before an election may vote in a precinct where the citizen previously resided if, on the date of the election, the citizen's name appears on the registration rolls for the precinct."

Lugar's press spokesman Mark Helmke prompted the issue being raised when he told a reporter last month Lugar lives in a hotel when he's back home in Indiana. According to Lugar's campaign staff, he is using the home at which he last resided as his registered voting address before his election to the Senate, a home he has long since given up. Lugar's staff cites Article 2, Section 4 of the Indiana Constitution as saving Lugar from losing residency in the state by virtue of his absence from the state while serving in the U.S. Senate. The Section 2 of that same article relied on by Lugar's staff has been interpreted to allow a person who no longer resides in a precinct to vote one last time at his old precinct after moving out of it. Thereafter, the person is expected to update is voting registration information with a current address. Accordingly, Lugar would have to rely exclusively on Section 4's language to allow him to use as a voting address a residence at which his own staff has acknowledged he no longer resides. Section 2 became a focus in the Charlie White vote fraud case. White relied on a voting address at which he no longer resided beyond the election following his move from that voting address, in addition to the fact that he actually resided in a precinct located outside the council district he represented on the Fishers Town Council.

UPDATE: The Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette's Washington bureau reporter has picked up on the Lugar residency controversy first raised by his own staff's admission he lives in a hotel when he's back home. Lugar's staff produced to Brian Francisco a 1982 Attorney General's opinion to support his contention he does not need to maintain a residence in Indiana in order to maintain residency in the state:

Lugar’s Senate staff produced a 1982 letter from then-Indiana Attorney General Linley Pearson to Lugar that said, in part, “If such a person was entitled to vote in this state prior to departing for service in Congress, whatever residence that person possessed for voting purposes prior to such departure remains his or her residence. There is no requirement that such a person maintain a house, apartment, or any fixed physical location.”


Lugar lives in McLean, Va., a suburb of Washington. He owns a farm in Marion County.

Warsaw resident Monica Boyer, a member of tea party groups hoping to unseat Lugar, said in an interview: “Regardless of where he votes, wherever that is, we haven’t seen him in years. It’s been 13 years since he has been in Warsaw. His heart isn’t here.”


Lugar has been in the Senate since 1977. He is being challenged in the 2012 Republican primary election by state Treasurer Richard Mourdock.

Mourdock campaign spokesman Christopher Carter declined to comment on the residency question and Lugar’s response to it.

In February, a writer for the website RealClearPolitics reported that Lugar senior adviser Mark Helmke confirmed that Lugar stays in hotels when he is in Indiana.

Last week, a Hamilton County grand jury indicted Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White on felony charges of voter fraud and perjury. White is accused of voting in a precinct where he did not live.

Attorney General opinions are just that and don't carry the force of law. I believe other members of Indiana's congressional delegation have at least maintained a rented apartment or house to use as their voting address in the state even if they use their Washington home as their primary residence. Regardless of how this issue is resolved legally, Lugar loses simply because it brings home the point his critics maintain that he has become disconnected from the voters in his home state. The admission that he no longer has a residence in the state is all his opponents need for ammunition.

Ballard Tapping Disaster-Area Bond Program To Finance North Of South Deal

We've told you before just how crazy a public subsidy to the tune of $140 million for the North of South redevelopment project for the southside of Indianapolis' downtown is, but it gets even crazier. It turns out the Ballard administration is tapping a bond program intended for disaster areas to float up to $98 million in bonds for the project. Who knew that part of downtown was a disaster area? The Bond Buyer explains:

Indianapolis will head to market next week with $98 million of debt that taps the Midwestern disaster-area bond program to finance a new corporate campus for Eli Lilly and Co. — a project officials say will transform the city’s central downtown business district . . .

The bonds carry a repayment pledge of revenue from the city’s sprawling and lucrative downtown tax-increment financing district. The borrowing will also feature a moral obligation pledge from the triple-A rated city.


Indianapolis will loan most of the proceeds of next week’s bond issue to the developer, Buckingham Cos., which is expected to refinance with a traditional mortgage in 10 years when the city calls the bonds.

Officials said the bond issue is necessary because traditional private-bank financing remains difficult to obtain at an economical rate.

It’s the latest in a series of complex financings undertaken by Mayor Greg Ballard and will tap the city’s allocation of qualified midwestern disaster area bonds. It also includes a small taxable piece.


The 2008 federal Midwestern disaster area bond program allows an issuer to structure bonds for qualified projects as tax-exempt that would otherwise have to forgo the tax benefit because they benefit a for-profit company.

“This really is a more economic way to incentivize the project in today’s climate,” said Deron Kintner, executive director of the Indianapolis Local Public Improvement Bond Bank. “All we’ve done here is rather than the city incentivize the project with very, very large upfront subsidies, we are providing access to capital markets at our borrowing rates.”

The Bond Buyer notes the critics complaint "the city is assuming too much risk with the financing and a city-held mortgage." "Moody’s Investors Service assigned an Aa2 rating to the debt, two notches off the city’s triple-A rating, due to the non-essentiality of the project and the risk of non-appropriation," the trade magazine reports. The Bond Buyer also gives a run down of the finance team for the deal:

JPMorgan is senior manager on the deal. Co-managers are Cabrera Capital Markets, City Securities, Hillard Lyons, Northeast Securities, PNC Capital Markets, and Siebert Brandford Shank & Co.


Crowe Horwath LLP is financial adviser and Barnes & Thornburg LLP is bond counsel.

JPMorgan is playing a similar role in the Ballard administration's 50-year privatization deal for the city's parking meter assets. City Securities hired former Bond Bank head for Ballard Kevin Taylor and is being rewarded with more business just like it was when the firm hired Mayor Peterson's former Bond Bank head John Dillon, Jr. Of course, Crowe Horwath's Ann Lathrop, another Goldsmith and ACS alum, gets a spot as financial adviser on the deal, while Barnes & Thornburg (Grand, Loftus and Vaughn) get to serve as bond counsel. Naturally, CCC President Ryan Vaughn didn't recuse himself from voting on the "disaster-area program" despite the fact his law firm is making money off the deal. He's just an employee, you see, whose compensation isn't tied to his job performance as your City-County Council President.

Just out of curiosity I wondered what the Midwestern Disaster Area Bond Program was. As a Midwesterner, I thought I would know if a disastrous event like Hurricane Katrina had hit the region. Yeah, there were the floods a couple of years ago, but those didn't affect downtown Indianapolis. There was that spring storm that damaged the Regions Bank building that weather observers couldn't agree on whether it was a tornado or straight-line winds. Spina, an Iowa bond lawyer, explains what the program is about:

Midwestern Disaster Area bonds were authorized by Congress on October 3, 2008 in the Heartland Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2008. There was an original $2,615,995,000 of Midwestern Disaster Area Bond capacity in Iowa. This financing is limited to 78 counties in Iowa. This financing is also available in certain counties in Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Nebraska and Arkansas. A similar program was adopted following Hurricane Ike for parts of Texas and Louisiana. These Bonds follow similar, but not identical, authorization of tax-exempt bonds in the New York Liberty Zone following 9/11 and in the Gulf Opportunity Zone following Hurricane Katrina.


Proceeds of these bonds are used for (1) qualified residential rental property (some income restrictions apply), (2) nonresidential real property (cost of acquisition, construction, reconstruction, and renovation) and (3) utility property.

Requirements for use of Midwestern Disaster Area Bonds are those that are generally applicable to tax-exempt bond financing. In addition, these bonds require a determination relating to the disasters. This requirement will be discussed in the following section.

There has been very little use of Midwestern Disaster Area bonds. In 2009, only two Borrowers obtained financing in Iowa. Projects are now lining up for financing . . .

In the Heartland Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2008, Congress imposed the following specific requirement:


“[except that in determining whether a bond is a qualified Midwestern disaster area bond--paragraph (2)(A)(i) shall be applied by only treating costs as qualified project costs if -- in the case of a project involving a private business use (as defined in section 141(b)(6)), either the person using the property suffered a loss in a trade or business attributable to the severe storms, tornados, or flooding giving rise to any Presidential declaration described in subsection (b)(1)(A) or is a person designated for purposes of this section by the Governor of the State in which the project is located as a person carrying on a trade or business replacing a trade or business with respect to which another person suffered such a loss, and in the case of a project relating to public utility property, the project involves repair or reconstruction of public utility property damaged by such severe storms, tornados, or flooding…]"

and “such bond is designated for purposes of this section (on the basis of providing assistance to areas in the order in which such assistance is most needed).”

"These bonds require a determination related to the disasters," Spina writes. I'm really curious how Indianapolis is tying the eligibility of this project to a disaster. Is it possible some disaster struck this part of downtown of which I'm not aware? Anyone have a clue? Was it Lincoln Plowman's ill-fated attempt to get a zoning variance for a high-end strip club in the area in exchange for a $5,000 cash payment he allegedly accepted from an undercover FBI agent that resulted in his indictment on extortion and solicitation charges? That was one hell of a storm. If this bond program can be tapped for this purpose, then Congress needs to immediately move to repeal this absurd program. And people wonder how the public finance sector bankrupted this country and placed us at the mercy of the Communist Chinese.

More Tough Words From Daniels And More Nonsense From House Democrats

More than two weeks into their self-imposed exile in Urbana, Illinois, Gov. Mitch Daniels offers these tough words for the House Democrats' walkout:

"The speaker's been patient. The voters have been patient. I'm trying to be patient. But this is outrageous behavior," he said. "Why do we hold elections if people aren't going to respect the outcome? Why do you run for office if you're not going to show up for work -- collect the dough and run?"

That original list of 11 bills House Democratic Leader Pat Bauer demanded be dropped from further consideration (including one already sent to the governor) has now grown to 23 (including a ban on funding for abortion clinics) according to the Star's Mary Beth Schneider:

The only communication between the two sides Tuesday came when Bauer sent a letter, delivered by courier, to Bosma asking for additional assurances that 23 bills that passed out of committee, but which never cleared a procedural hurdle to advance further because of the walkout, will stay dead.


Those include the so-called "right to work" bill that bans companies and unions from negotiating a contract that imposes fees on nonmembers; a bill banning any state or federal funds from going to Planned Parenthood; and some education and government reforms that were part of Daniels' agenda.

And Matt Tully visited the Democrats in exile and found them to be more dug in than ever and not making much sense:

For many of the Democrats, this stalemate has become a cause. The walkout might have started as a protest of anti-union legislation. But the Democrats have begun to believe this impasse stands for something bigger.


"The whole experience," said Rep. Mary Ann Sullivan, Indianapolis, "I don't know how to explain it. It's been very powerful."

Added Rep. Bill Crawford, also of Indianapolis: "It has the appearance of a movement as opposed to a typical political battle." . . .

"It would be disastrous for us to back down now," said Rep. Charlie Brown, Gary . . .

Some of the Democrats' arguments make little sense. Indianapolis Rep. Gregory Porter, for example, was among a handful of lawmakers who told me they were protesting a bill that would allow the state to take over the state's worst-performing public schools. But the bill in question would only add to the landmark 1999 law that allowed such takeovers. Porter criticized the idea and said the issue would keep him in Urbana. But after being questioned, he acknowledged he co-authored the original bill that gave the state the authority to assume control of failing schools . . .

No endgame is in sight. Over and over, I asked Democrats what it would take to lure them back to the Statehouse. Some insisted Republicans would have to scrap huge chunks of their legislative agenda, which is unlikely. Others offered more ambiguous answers, vaguely demanding "compromise."

Yeah, Greg Porter can't even remember bills he has sponsored that are now law and you're paying him $115,000 a year for a no show, no work job at the Marion County Health & Hospital Corporation on top of his no show, no work job as a state lawmaker.

Lugar: U.S. Cannot Afford War In Libya

I find myself in total agreement with Sen. Richard Lugar on this issue. He warns President Obama not to get involved in a war with Libya that our country cannot afford. Hell, we cannot even afford the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but for some reason we are dumping more than a trillion dollars into those shit holes trying to help people who are committed to are destruction. Here's Lugar's complete statement on a Libyan intervention:

Protesters and innocent people in Libya are being shot and killed. The tanks of Muammar Qadhafi’s supporters are firing at lightly-armed rebels and government planes are attacking insurgent positions.


Understandably, calls are growing for the United States to step in and do something to stop the bloodshed. The most popular option is imposing a no-fly zone, a supposedly low-cost, low-risk course of action.

Imposing a no-fly zone, requiring extensive bombing of Libyan military facilities, would be an act of war, as Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said. The United States should not, in my view, launch military intervention into yet another Muslim country, without thinking long and hard about the consequences and implications. Given Libya’s strategic importance, owing to its oil and its location, a misstep would be very costly.

Are we prepared, either alone or as part of an alliance, to see such military intervention through to the end? If the no-fly zone doesn’t stop the street-to-street fighting, are we prepared to escalate further, to put boots on the ground? Would that involve taking control of the country? Would we be obligated to stay until democracy is established?

Such tasks would further stress a military already stretched thin by long deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq. Even if intervention could be limited to a no-fly zone, this is a complex, expensive military operation involving a large number of assets in the air, at sea, and in space. It would impose significant new costs on a budget already under extraordinary strain.

In other words, a major military action to support anti-Qadhafi forces is a commitment that would require, in my view, a formal declaration of war by the Congress of the United States, not just a tactical redeployment of some aircraft.

Moreover, our intervention may well not have the positive effects that supporters assume. There is a plenty of evidence instead that our intervention could create anti-American fervor within the country and the region. It would also allow Qadhafi to portray himself as a hero battling the infidels. Muslims worldwide could be inflamed anew by another U.S. strike against an Islamic country.

This is now a civil war. Intervening in such conflicts is fraught with unknowns and unintended consequences. Who is it we want to help? We really don’t know how the rebels are organized or what their plans are for the governance of the country. For that matter, we don’t know exactly who’s fighting for Qadhafi, aside from his sons—a lot of the armed forces have deserted him.

Self-determination has proved fundamental to the success of revolutions such as this, including Egypt and Tunisia. American help often taints those we assist. If the winners of this conflict are seen as shills of America, they will face repudiation by others in a post-Qadhafi Libya.

We also have to consider the impact of American military action on the reform fervor sweeping the rest of the region. It may well strengthen the hand of the autocrats who would accuse the protesters in their country of serving outside interests or attempting to provoke American intervention.

Moreover, we’ve had experience in using the U.S. military on a humanitarian mission in the midst of a civil war—it was to stop warlords, armed with little more than Jeeps and machine guns, from stealing food aid for starving people in Somalia in 1993. It ended in disaster, a score of young Americans lost their lives, and Al Qaeda took inspiration from the perceived American weakness.

Clearly, the United States should do what it can to provide humanitarian assistance of food, shelter and medical care to those affected by the fighting in Libya, and ratchet up sanctions and other diplomatic pressure on the regime. We should work with allies on potential multi-lateral responses.

And we should not hesitate to use military force when it is necessary and our objectives are clear. But given our experience in Somalia, in Afghanistan, and in Iraq, the burden of proof lies on those calling for military intervention to demonstrate that doing so would be in the United States’ national interest.

Would someone please explain to me where all the liberal protesters are in speaking out against President Obama for waging these "illegitimate wars" in the Middle East and making daily calls for his impeachment as they did incessantly when Bush was president?

Where Is Lugar Registered To Vote?

After Sen. Richard Lugar's press spokesman, Mark Helmke, foolishly acknowledged Lugar stays in a hotel when he's back home in Indiana, people have been wondering where Lugar was registered to vote in Indiana, particularly in light of the Charlie White residency controversy. Fellow blogger Paul Ogden learns Lugar has been registered to vote for many years at a northwest-side Indianapolis home he once owned but which property records show is now owned by Elizabeth Hughes, who along with David and Joseph Hughes, is registered to vote at this address. "Does he actually reside there to qualify to vote in that precinct as he's been doing for apparently the last 41 years?, "Ogden asks. Inquiring minds want to know.

The Case For Ending Federal Funding Of NPR

You have to watch this video to believe it. Project Veritas sent two representatives of an organization purportedly funded by the Muslim Brotherhood to lunch with two top executives with the NPR Foundation to discuss their media concerns, particularly the supposed bias in coverage against Muslims. They told the NPR executives their organization was considering a $5 million donation to NPR. Speaking candidly to the two undercover reporters for Project Veritas, the NPR executives spoke derisively and condescendingly of Republicans and the Tea Party folks they claim have hijacked the Republican Party. NPR's Ron Schiller told of his concern that Muslims were lacking a voice in America. He described Republicans as fanatical evangelicals that he wouldn't even describe as Christians. He said these white, middle class, bigoted, racist, gun-toting, uneducated folks were really scary. He even threw in a gratuitous anti-Semitic comment about the Zionists owning the newspapers. Schiller acknowledged during the luncheon meeting that NPR would be better off if it had no federal funding so it would not have to worry about attacks from Republicans of its bias news coverage. Schiller lamented that the "educated, so-called elites" represented too small a percentage of the American population. "You have this very large uneducated population that carries these ideas," Schiller said in reference to conservatives. "It's much more about anti-intellectualism than a political . . .," he continued. Anyone who is intellectual is liberal according to Schiller. Schiller and his colleague laughed when the undercover reporters joked that many Muslims refer to NPR as "National Palestinian Radio." "That's good. I like that," replied Betsy Liley of NPR. Schiller said he was very proud of NPR's decision to fire Juan Williams for comments he made that were perceived as bigoted towards Muslims, seemingly ignoring the clearly bigoted views he shared with Muslims about mainstream Americans. If the Republicans don't move immediately to cut all funding to NPR after hearing what these two top executives at the NPR Foundation think of them and mainstream Americans, not to mention their own admission they would be better off without federal funding, then they deserve the condemnation of middle America as much as these two patronizing individuals do.

UPDATE: NPR responds to the video:

NPR spokeswoman Dana Davis Rehm said in a statement, “We are appalled by the comments made by Ron Schiller in the video, which are contrary to what NPR stands for,” The New York Times reported.


Schiller, who was hired in September 2009, announced last week that he would be leaving NPR for a new job. NPR said his departure was "effective immediately."

Rehm told members stations that "there is no connection between the video and (Ron Schiller's) decision to leave NPR," NBC News reported.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor responds:

As we continue to identify ways to cut spending and save valuable resources, this disturbing video makes clear that taxpayer dollars should no longer be appropriated to NPR,” Cantor said in an e-mail to TheDC. “Not only have top public broadcasting executives finally admitted that they do not need taxpayer dollars to survive, it is also clear that without federal funds, public broadcasting stations self-admittedly would become eligible for more private dollars on top of the multi-million dollar donations these organizations already receive.”

White AWOL From State House

It's not just the House Democrats who aren't showing up for work at their State House offices. WRTV's Norm Cox is reporting that embattled Secretary of State Charlie White has failed to show up at his State House office since he turned himself in to the Hamilton Co. Sheriff's office after a grand jury returned a 7-count indictment against him last week. White's spokesman, Jason Thomas, tells Cox he has no idea where his boss is.

Embattled Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White was again missing from his office Tuesday, marking the third-straight day White's whereabouts have been publicly unknown since he was indicted on seven felony counts last Thursday.


6News' Norman Cox has been trying to find White, but his spokesman, Jason Thomas, told Cox that he doesn't know where White is.

"I'm not too sure, Norman. I'm telling you the truth. I haven't seen him yet," Thomas said Tuesday morning. "I haven't talked to him today, so as soon as I find out, I'll let you know."
 
6News filed a public records request in hopes of finding White. Gov. Mitch Daniels told Cox on Tuesday that White's apparent absence bothers him, but there's nothing he can do about it . . .

White has not spoken publicly to reporters following his indictment last week, but he has indicated via electronic messages he intends to remain in office and fight the charges against him, despite the call by Gov. Mitch Daniels and other Republican leaders calling on him to step down. White is charged with committing vote fraud by misrepresenting his residence in Fishers in order to remain a member of the Town Council, as well as other charges of fraud, theft and perjury growing out of the initial investigation by a special prosecutor.

UPDATE: The Star's Robert Annis is reporting in an online story this afternoon that the special prosecutor has asked the Inspector General to investigate whether White improperly accessed a report after he took office in January that his predecessor, Todd Rokita, prepared while  investigating allegations leveled against him by Democrats that he had lied about his voting residence during last year's election. Rokita refused to release the 265-page report to the media, claiming it was exempt from public disclosure as an investigative record, even though he was not legally required to investigate the allegations against White.  The report was not provided to the Indiana Recount Commission when it ruled 2-1 against a Democratic challenge that White was not properly registered to vote and, therefore, not eligible to run for Secretary of State last year. The special prosecutor presented the findings of Rokita's report to the grand jury that heard evidence in White's criminal investigation before deciding to indict him. Annis' report notes the special prosecutor has so far declined to release the report, even though he can legally release it to the public. Personally, I could care less whether White accessed the report, but if he got to see it, then his office should have released it to the public in a show of transparency.

House Democrats Hint They May Remain In Illinois The Remainder Of Session

With special interest groups illegally funding their out-of-state exile in Urbana, Illinois to further their legislative agenda, House Democrats appear content to remain there the remainder of the legislative session if it furthers their union bosses' agenda. The Star's Mary Beth Schneider explains:

One House Democrat says his party will continue its standoff for "as long as it takes" to win concessions from Republicans on bills involving labor unions and public schools -- even if it means a government shutdown this summer.


Legislative leaders in both parties said they hope Indiana is not facing that sort of doomsday scenario. But no one seemed to have a plan yet on how to avoid it.

Shrugging off the $250 per day fines being levied against them, Democrats began their third week at an Urbana, Ill., hotel Monday. Their goal: deny House Republicans the quorum of 67 lawmakers to do business in order to stop bills that would weaken collective bargaining and shift funds from public to private schools.

Rep. Terry Goodin, D-Austin, said Democrats are willing to stay out until April 29, the statutory deadline for the legislature to end this session, and even through special sessions that Gov. Mitch Daniels would surely call.

If the standoff persisted until June 30, the deadline for passing a new budget, portions of state government would have to shut down.

"We will stay out as long as it takes," said Goodin, one of three Democrats on the House floor Monday. "The principles we are fighting for here are the very principles that our party is founded upon: working families, public schools and Hoosier children. . . . We cannot turn our backs now. We cannot go back and erase 50 years of what our parents, grandparents and great-grandparents fought for." . . .

Rep. Terry Goodin (D-Austin) is one of those double dippers serving in the legislature. He is pulling down $130,000 a year to serve as superintendent of the Crothersvile Community Schools. The question is why he is permitted to refuse to show up for his job at the State House and not return home to the school system he is suppose to be in charge of running. The taxpayers of his school district should be demanding the school board fire him for dereliction of duty since he isn't showing up to work for either of his taxpayer-funded jobs. It is even more disturbing to think his exile is being funded, in part, by the teachers unions. This makes it evident he is not on the side of taxpayers when discussions at his school district turn to the negotiation of salary and benefits for teachers employed by his school district.

When will Republicans in the legislature please demand that Attorney General Greg Zoeller get off his butt and investigate the illegalities behind the funding of the Democrats' exile in Urbana?

Ballard And Daley More Alike Than Different

Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley have much more in common than you might think. They are both big fans of raising taxes. They are both big fans of handing out huge public subsidies to their favored developers. They are both big fans of privatization deals that shortchange taxpayers while enriching private contractors. They both raise millions of dollars for their campaign committees from pay-to-play city contractors. They both favor laws curtailing gun ownership by law abiding citizens. And they both believe in giving ex-cons a second chance by giving them a city job. The Sun-Times reports on drug dealers, car jackers and cop shooters landing city jobs:

One of them smuggled cocaine from Jamaica about a decade ago. Another was a carjacker. A third was convicted in the shooting of two Chicago cops in the 1970s, hitting one of them in the face.


They are among 139 people who got hired by the City of Chicago over the past two years despite having been convicted of crimes. That’s according to a list of all of the city’s hires of ex-cons in 2009 and 2010 obtained by the Chicago Sun-Times under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act.

Mayor Daley has said ex-offenders deserve a second chance and has made that his policy at City Hall.

Those hired under that policy include one person convicted of a crime who’d been on the “clout list” that was made public during the trial of Daley’s former patronage chief, Robert Sorich. Sorich went to prison after being convicted in federal court in 2006 of overseeing an illegal hiring scheme that gave city jobs and promotions to people with clout.

“Of course I needed clout to get on,” acknowledged the ex-con, speaking only on the condition of anonymity.

He was first hired by the city in the 1990s and has been rehired every year since as a “seasonal” worker. He now drives a truck for the city Department of Aviation.

His political sponsor, according to the Sorich clout list, was former Ald. Isaac “Ike” Carothers (29th), now a convict himself, serving a 28-month term in federal prison after being convicted last year of corruption in a zoning case.

There’s no set formula for deciding whether to recommend an ex-offender be hired, according to the city policy. Job applicants aren’t asked whether they have a criminal record when they apply. Instead, they’re asked for that information and to submit their fingerprints for a background check only after they’ve been given a conditional job offer.

It’s up to the city’s Human Resources Department to then recommend whether an ex-offender should be hired, city officials say, taking into account factors including the nature of the crime, the number of offenses, the length of time since the last conviction and any evidence of rehabilitation. In 2009, for instance, the agency recommended against hiring 18 prospective employees with criminal records, according to the city . . .

The Sun-Times story says the Daley administration initially tried to block the newspaper's reporters from obtaining the list of ex-cons hired by the city but was forced to comply with the request after the Attorney General's office deemed the information subject to the state's public records law. It's too bad we don't have news media in this town who will dig for this kind of information because it might offend some one's politically correct sensibilities. Mayor Ballard and Deputy Mayor Olgen Williams pushed a program to promote the hiring of ex-cons early on in his administration. Williams is a convicted felon. He was sent to prison for stealing money from his former employer, the U.S. Post Office. Williams claimed his stealing was fueled by a drug addiction. Williams later won a pardon from President George W. Bush so he could run for the IPS board. Another ex-offender and city worker, Steve Quick, stood behind Mayor Ballard on TV this morning as the Mayor announced the city's latest efforts to repair potholes. Quick is the president of the lcoal AFCME union who won a pardon from Gov. Mitch Daniels for an armed robbery conviction that involved the shooting of a woman by Quick's accomplice. He was also indicted, along with his brother, for shooting and killing another man, but those charges were later dropped due to a problem with the evidence.