Connect with us

Indiana

Ballot initiatives won’t fix Indiana government. Here’s what will. | Opinion

Published

on

Ballot initiatives won’t fix Indiana government. Here’s what will. | Opinion



The winning side of ballot initiatives typically outspends opponents by millions.

play

It is campaign season for Indiana’s chief elections officer. Republican Secretary of State Diego Morales has become a lightning rod for public anger over the perceived unresponsiveness and corruption of our state government. Some of his opponents have suggested citizen-led ballot initiatives would help fix that. 

Indiana does not allow citizen-led ballot initiatives to change the state constitution. Instead, the legislature must pass proposed amendments as resolutions two years in a row.

In theory, Indiana’s system of so-called “legislative referendums” should limit the ability of corporations with deep pockets to take advantage of voters. However, many people no longer trust the state government to safeguard the process.

It would be easier and more effective to fix that by reforming the legislature rather than making the constitutional changes needed for citizen-led ballot initiatives.

Ballot initiatives would open the door to more lobbyist control

“People feel disconnected with our government in Indianapolis right now,” Beau Bayh, who is seeking the Democratic Party nomination for secretary of state, told me. “They feel like it’s unresponsive to their needs … I have faith in the people of our state to decide the biggest issues of the day.”

Advertisement

Blythe Potter, a Democrat, and Jamie Reitenour, a Republican, are also running for secretary of state. Both also support citizen-led ballot initiatives.

“We will never have a perfect system,” Bayh added. “Even if we don’t have the citizen-led ballot referendums, which I’m in favor of, corporations and wealthy individuals are still going to contribute to our legislators.”

IndyStar’s Marissa Meador, in fact, recently reported on the cozy relationship energy company lobbyists and donors have with several state legislators. Lobbyists spent over $729,000 this year to develop relationships with legislators and millions more to get them elected. 

Ballot initiatives, however, have less stringent regulations than traditional political campaigns.

Advertisement

“Ballot measures are commonly associated with weak political parties, dark money, national single interest groups and disregard for centuries old deliberative legislative process,” Lindsey Eaton, a spokesperson for Morales, told me. “Indiana has a well-functioning republic form of government. We trust voters to elect representatives that will govern in their best interests.”

That is largely true. Charitable nonprofits are allowed to contribute to ballot initiative campaigns and are not required to disclose their donors. Social welfare nonprofits, which can include political advocacy, face no limitations on contributions to ballot initiative campaigns.

A quick analysis of ballot initiatives passed in 2023 shows the winning side frequently spent millions more.

Advertisement

In Ohio, a recent ballot initiative to enshrine protections for abortion in the state constitution was an extreme example of corporate influence over public questions. The Sixteen Thirty Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Open Society Policy Center, all based outside of Ohio, donated a collective $10.8 million to support the ballot initiative. In total, supporters of the initiative raised $19 million more than opponents.

Bayh blamed the influence of money on the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision.

“I share your concern, just like most Americans, just like most Hoosiers about the role that money plays in our politics,” he told me. “The Supreme Court has decided … that corporations have First Amendment rights to involve themselves in these things. I can’t change that as the secretary of state.”

Voters don’t understand ballot questions

Money aside, it is unrealistic to expect the average voter to understand most public questions.

Advertisement

David Shelton, a Republican challenging Morales for the secretary of state nomination, told me the author of a referendum can shape voters’ perception of the issue through confusing word choices.

“People would vote for it, not realizing that they removed the cardinal as the state bird and … voted in the stink bug,” Shelton said.

If you look at Indiana’s last 15 legislative referendums, voters haven’t rejected one since 1990. The most controversial one since then came last year, when only 54% of voters supported eliminating a state office that no longer existed from the line of gubernatorial succession. 

I worked at the state Senate at the time and several friends told me they had no idea about the public question beforehand and had no idea what it was asking in the voting booth. Studies suggest that’s a common experience.

Advertisement

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, only 24% of legislative referendums and 30% of initiatives have failed nationwide since 1990. If you look solely at attempted constitutional amendments, only 22% of legislative referendums and 17.7% of initiatives have failed since 1990. 

Studies have shown low-information voters tend to vote yes on ballot initiatives that are easy to understand and no on ballot initiatives with complicated wording. 

Big spenders opposing initiatives also have a clear advantage: Research shows it’s far more effective to attempt to persuade voters to reject a measure than to support one. Even small changes in how a question is worded or where it appears on the ballot can significantly affect the outcome.

Bayh acknowledged these concerns but suggested there are ways to fix the problem.

Advertisement

“If it is possible to have some type of bipartisan or nonpartisan group that looks at these ballot measures before they go in front of people, it would be a great thing,” Bayh told me. “Let’s work these in a fair way. Let’s get support from people on both sides of an issue with the wording of things and make everyone comfortable with it.”

That bipartisan or nonpartisan group responsible for safeguarding the process, in theory, is the Indiana General Assembly, but the control of party leadership over the legislature admittedly makes it difficult for even broadly popular legislation to pass.

Advocates for representative government should reform the legislature instead

An easier fix to unrepresentative government would involve reforming our legislature. Unlike citizen-led ballot initiatives, many proposed ideas would not require a constitutional amendment.

For one, legislative committee chairs could be elected by committee members, rather than by party leaders. That would make them less accountable to party leaders and lobbyists and more accountable to the committee members they serve. 

On many occasions, legislation passes either the Indiana House of Representatives or Senate with wide support, only to not receive a hearing in another chamber because of one committee chair.

Advertisement

Sometimes this leads to public outrage, such as when Sen. Liz Brown, R-Fort Wayne, held up an immigration enforcement bill this year. Other times, bills die without much controversy. 

Committee members could be held accountable to the legislature as a whole if individual legislators were able to bypass the committee entirely through a discharge petition. 

These petitions usually require the signature of a majority of legislators in a given chamber and would bring legislation directly to the chamber for consideration. 

This is possible in the U.S. House of Representatives, where a petition was recently filed by Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, to release the Epstein Files.

Many supporters of citizen-led ballot initiatives sincerely view them as a way to bypass the perceived corruption of elected officials. They are unlikely to succeed anytime soon, though, and would be better off advocating for reforming the legislature.

Advertisement

If legislators want to regain public trust, they also have an incentive to make themselves more accountable to their constituents.

Contact Jacob Stewart at 317-444-4683 or jacob.stewart@indystar.com. Follow him on XInstagram and TikTok.





Source link

Indiana

Kelsey Mitchell winner completes Fever comeback against Mercury, without Caitlin Clark

Published

on

Kelsey Mitchell winner completes Fever comeback against Mercury, without Caitlin Clark


play

PHOENIX — The Indiana Fever barely eked out of Mortgage Matchup Arena with a 92-89 win over the Phoenix Mercury on Thursday night on the second night of a back-to-back.

Caitlin Clark (rest) did not play after making her return on a minutes restriction on Wednesday against Los Angeles. Aliyah Boston, who missed the game against L.A. for precautionary reasons, finished with 19 points and eight rebounds against the Mercury.

Advertisement

Kelsey Mitchell scored 29 points on 10-of-22 shooting, adding on eight assists. She hit the game-winning layup with 10 seconds left. Tyasha Harris finished with 15 points and five assists, including a stretch of nine of 11 Fever points to close the gap.

Phoenix’s Alyssa Thomas had 22 points, six rebounds and seven assists, Kahleah Copper added 22 points and five rebounds.

Here’s what I liked and disliked, and what the win means.

Buy 2026 Indiana Fever tickets!

Advertisement

What I liked in the Indiana Fever’s win vs Phoenix Mercury

  • Early 3-point shooting: One of Boston’s main focuses this offseason was improving her 3-point shot, and it’s coming to fruition. She made two 3-pointers in the first quarter, helping lead the Fever to six total makes beyond the arc in the opening 10-minute period. Harris, starting in place of Clark, had two 3-pointers in the first quarter, as well, with Lexie Hull and Mitchell each making one. At the time, it was big for the Fever to maintain a lead.
  • Roaring back in the third quarter: Basketball is a game of runs, and the Fever embodied that. They led by 12 in the first, then trailed by four at halftime, then went on a 20-9 run over seven minutes in the third quarter to take a one-point lead by the end of the third. Mitchell was the one to lead that comeback, scoring nine points on 3-of-6 shooting along with three assists in that quarter. The third was crucial for the Fever not just to get back into the lead, but, especially on a back-to-back, to try and have the mental fortitude to close the game out.
  • Tyasha Harris coming in clutch: Harris’ role has expanded since Clark has been out (or limited), and she is making the most of her minutes. She scored nine points in the fourth quarter alone, including a 3-pointer with three minutes left to take the lead, then four straight points to give the Fever the lead again with 44 seconds left. She finished the game with 15 points and five assists, being the facilitator the Fever need while Clark recovers.

What I disliked in the Indiana Fever’s win vs Phoenix Mercury

  • Second-quarter slide: For the second straight game, the Fever held a double-digit lead in the first quarter then were trailing by halftime. The Fever allowed the Mercury to shoot 12 of 20 from the field in the second quarter (and 5 of 8 from 3-point range), completely negating the Fever’s six 3-pointers from the first quarter. Phoenix went on a 12-2 run over the final three minutes of the quarter, too, taking advantage of the Fever’s off the mark shots.
  • Silly mistakes: In a close game like this, every possession matters. And every mistake compounds. The Fever had a few in the second half, including a shot-clock violation from Harris where she wasn’t even in shooting motion yet, a defensive three-seconds foul from Aliyah Boston, a backcourt violation from Kelsey Mitchell, and another shot clock violation from Raven Johnson to start the fourth quarter. All of those mistakes gives Phoenix extra points or extra possessions. While the Fever ultimately won the game, it made it closer than it needed to be.

What the Indiana Fever’s win vs Phoenix Mercury means

Indiana (13-9) is a strong team offensively, but recently, the Fever haven’t been able to get out of their own way on defense. It showed in the runs they gave up to Phoenix, flip-flopping the lead and forcing the Fever to continue to play from behind. It worked out for Indiana this time around, finding what they needed when they needed it, but it won’t be sustainable long term.

Chloe Peterson is the Indiana Fever beat reporter for IndyStar. Reach her at chloe.peterson@indystar.com or follow her on X at @chloepeterson67. Get IndyStar’s Indiana Fever and Caitlin Clark coverage sent directly to your inbox with our Caitlin Clark Fever newsletter. Subscribe to IndyStar TV: Fever for in-depth analysis, behind-the-scenes coverage and more.



Source link

Continue Reading

Indiana

Attempted murder suspect arrested in Indianapolis for Bloomington shooting

Published

on

Attempted murder suspect arrested in Indianapolis for Bloomington shooting


BLOOMINGTON, Ind. (WISH) — A Bloomington man was arrested Wednesday in Indianapolis on an attempted murder charge after police say he fired seven to eight rounds into a white GMC SUV occupied by three adults and four children last month in Bloomington before fleeing the area.

A news release issued Thursday from the Bloomington Police Department said members of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department’s special weapons and tactics team took Kafern P. Johnson, 32, into custody near the intersection of West 84th Street and Allison Avenue in Indianapolis without incident.

The arrest came more than two weeks after the June 23 shooting in the 1000 block of North Summit Street. That’s in a residential area next to Crestmont Park in Bloomington.

Monroe County Central Emergency Dispatch received 911 calls at 7:41 p.m. June 23 reporting gunfire in the area.

Advertisement

Responding patrol officers and detectives determined Johnson had fired into the SUV following a verbal fight with the vehicle’s driver. Police said the dispute stemmed from an argument over a relationship.

No injuries were reported despite the number of people inside the vehicle.

Following his arrest, Johnson was taken to an IMPD facility for questioning and later booked into the Marion County jail. On Thursday morning, he was booked into the Monroe County jail.

The release said Johnson could face felony charges of attempted murder, criminal recklessness with a firearm, and pointing a firearm. No formal charges have yet been filed, according to online court records.

Bloomington police asked anyone with additional information to call 812-349-3324.

Advertisement

This story was formatted for WISHTV.com using AI-assisted tools. Our editorial team reviews and edits all content published to ensure it meets our journalistic standards for accuracy and fairness.



Source link

Continue Reading

Indiana

FAIRFIELD NATIVE AND HIS WIFE FOUND DEAD IN THEIR NEWBURGH, INDIANA HOME

Published

on

FAIRFIELD NATIVE AND HIS WIFE FOUND DEAD IN THEIR NEWBURGH, INDIANA HOME


Fairfield native, David K. Wells, 69, and his wife Aileen, were found dead inside their home in Newburgh, Indiana, Monday night. Warrick County Sheriff Michael Wilder said that deputies responded to the residence just before 8:00 p.m. after dispatch received a call around 7:40 p.m. from a friend of the family requesting a welfare check. When officers didn’t get an answer at the door, they entered through the back of the home and found the couple deceased. Officers cleared the home and waited for detectives to arrive. Investigators also obtained a search warrant to do a further examination of the residence. Authorities were able to notify family members and conduct interviews to gather additional information. Sheriff Wilder said investigators believe the couple had been dead for less than 24 hours before they were found. He also said there is no indication of any forced entry or an intruder. Sheriff Wilder has not made a formal determination as to what happened. Autopsies for the couple were scheduled for yesterday morning to help determine a cause. David Wells grew up in Fairfield and graduated from Fairfield High School in 1975. He had a long career in television commercial production in Evansville and had more recently operated the Cigar! Cigar! tobacco store in Evansville.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending