A colleague and I were in a conversation last night with someone thinking about moving to Indiana. My colleague noted–somewhat proudly, I thought–that despite the recession, and unlike so many neighboring states, Indiana has a budget surplus. He attributed that to sound “money management” by the Governor.
The dirty little secret behind Indiana’s budget surplus is exactly how it came to be. Not the bounty of a booming economy but the result of nicks, cuts and downright slashing of programs critical to the safety of vulnerable Hoosiers and to the economic future of all its residents.
The article focused especially on cuts to child services, noting that DCS returned an “astonishing” amount of money to the state at the same time that repeated reports of abuse went un-investigated, and at least six children died.
In a forthcoming article, Morton Marcus notes that Indiana’s unemployment remains among the highest in the country, despite the recovery. He makes the point–so often ignored–that government jobs are, in fact, jobs. When the state lays off workers, cuts teachers, police officers, child protective workers and others, it not only reduces the effectiveness of services we all depend upon (with sometimes tragic results, as the Journal-Gazette article documents), it reduces employment. It reduces the number of people paying taxes, and increases the number of those needing public services.
When times are tough, tough decisions absolutely need to be made. Budgets–at least in Indiana, which has a constitutional provision requiring it–must be balanced.
In Afghanistan, American soldiers inadvertently burned several copies of the Koran. Apparently, it was an honest mistake; however–predictably–it infuriated many Muslims. Some of them have responded violently, and a recent attack that killed two Americans may have been prompted by the incident.
President Obama apologized for the burning of the Muslim’s holy book.
Newt Gingrich and other Republicans criticized the President for apologizing even before the recent attacks. Locally, Gary Varvel’s cartoon on the matter showed caskets covered with American flags and the President off to the side apologizing–defiantly suggesting, with the attitude of five-year-olds everywhere, that “they’re worse than we are, so we shouldn’t apologize.”
Let’s (patiently–in the manner of parents of small children everywhere) use this as a “teachable” moment. A couple of lessons come to mind.
First, let’s try putting ourselves in the other guy’s shoes. How do you think the bible-thumpers in the United States would have reacted if bibles had been accidentally burned by Muslims? With reason and understanding, acknowledging that “accidents happen”? Of course not.
Now, let’s talk about appropriate/inappropriate behavior. Violence is never appropriate; it is a sign of immaturity and lack of discipline. It doesn’t matter “who started it”–fighting doesn’t solve anything. It makes things worse, and it doesn’t persuade anyone of anything. So the Afghans’ response was wrong.
Lesson three is important. Adults apologize for their mistakes. Those apologies are not a sign of weakness; quite the contrary. As we constantly admonish our children, admitting when you’ve done something wrong–accidentally or purposely–and saying “I’m sorry” when that is appropriate are signs of honesty and maturity.
And as I used to tell my children, you apologize when you’ve done something wrong even if the other guy is a jerk who doesn’t accept that apology. Because it’s the right thing to do.
Sometimes, I’m so distracted by how batshit crazy the right-wingers have become that I forget how utterly despicable they can be.
To appropriate an old Henny Youngman joke (google him), “Take Eric Miller. Please. Take him.”
Miller–who makes a comfortable living pretending that bigotry is religion–has a new “Urgent Legislative Alert” that will be distributed Sunday to the network of far-right churches that support his salary (thinly disguised as membership dues to his organization, Advance America).
The “Urgent Alert” has a banner headline: “BMV Approves Pro-Homosexual License Plate!” In only slightly smaller font is “Help Protect Children-Revoke License Plate Now!” This is followed by the usual sanctimony, text piously bemoaning the harm to children that will be caused if the Indiana Youth Group receives the “seal of approval” that issuance of a license plate would imply. What is truly disgusting is the assertion, which is repeated three times in the text of the flyer, that IYG “targets” children as young as twelve.
Well, yes indeed it does. It has to, thanks to people like Eric Miller.
IYG is an organization that only exists because people like Miller cause so much pain to so many young people who don’t have the wherewithal to fight back, or even understand what the fight is really about. It is an organization that opens its arms to young, vulnerable, hurting kids –too many of whom have been thrown out of their homes by parents who care less for their own flesh and blood than for the illusory security offered by a rigid, punitive, unChristian theology.
IYG “targets” these teenagers by providing them with acceptance, a healing message and a safe place to figure things out. The message is simple: no matter what hateful people say, you are a valuable human being who simply happens to love differently. Being different is neither right nor wrong–it’s just different. So don’t hurt yourself, don’t hate yourself, and please don’t kill yourself.
That’s the “pro-homosexual” message Eric Miller finds so offensive.
I could point out that what Miller wants the State to do is unconstitutional–he wants the State to deny IYG the equal protection of the laws–but I’m sure he knows that. He just doesn’t care–just as he doesn’t care if the children he is helping to hound and demean, the children he is targeting, end up physically or emotionally damaged or dead as a result of the attitudes he is promoting.
We certainly should lock up our twelve-year-olds–not to “protect” them from IYG, but to keep them away from heartless bigots like Eric Miller.
The most recent issue of NUVO features a lengthy exploration of a curious relationship between the Indiana Family Institute–the virulently anti-gay, anti-choice, “traditional values” organization–and the State of Indiana.
According to NUVO, IFI contracts with the State of Indiana to the tune of 1.5 million dollars, to provide a “Healthy Marriage Demonstration Project.” The purported goal is to strengthen child support enforcement by “promoting healthy marriages and healthy parental relationships.”
Leaving aside my personal conviction that IFI–which traffics in religious bigotry and extremism–and “healthy” are contradictions in terms, this article raises a number of questions.
First of all, as a matter of policy, why in the world are we spending scarce Medicaid dollars on marriage, healthy or not? Medicaid is supposed to provide a safety net for people too old, poor and/or disabled to pay for needed medical care. The Governor routinely bemoans its expense, and we hear constantly that fiscal realities require reducing payments to nursing homes and doctors who are providing these medical services. Why would we take a million and half dollars away from those pressing needs for a dubious social experiment?
This unsavory relationship isn’t simply bad policy. It raises substantial constitutional concerns.
No one who has ever encountered IFI, or Sue Swayze, the project director, is left with any doubt about their positions, or the explicitly religious roots of those positions. That’s not a problem when they are lobbying the legislature–like all Americans, they have the right to voice their opinions and attempt to persuade lawmakers to pass or defeat measures in which they have an interest. But it is a big problem if they are taking tax dollars to provide religiously-infused services to the State.
The rules that govern contracting-out are clear: faith-based and religious organizations are entitled to contract with government to provide secular services. The government can support the soup kitchen in the church basement, so long as what is being served is soup, not theology. Tax dollars can buy beds for elderly patients in religiously-affiliated nursing homes, so long as those tax dollars are being spent for housing and nursing care, not religious services. And whether it’s a good idea or a boondoggle, IFI could constitutionally provide counseling about healthy marriage–if that counseling was based upon sound psychology and professional counseling standards.
It is inconceivable that IFI would operate on that basis.
This is an organization permeated with a religious extremism that views gay people with horror and loathing, and still attacks the American Psychological Association for its 1975 decision removing homosexuality from its index of mental illnesses. IFI wants to outlaw abortion and many forms of birth control. It wants to destroy Planned Parenthood. Their representatives and their website are candid about these goals, and filled with conspiratorial accusations–most recently, they defended Rep. Bob Morris’ attack on the “commie lesbian feminist” Girl Scouts and their “connections” to Planned Parenthood.
If there’s someone out there who thinks IFI can deliver programming that doesn’t incorporate these and other religious elements, I have some swampland in Florida to sell you.
According to Andy Kopsa, who wrote the NUVO story, the Daniels’ Administration was unable to provide any evidence of monitoring or oversight of this contract, and IFI refused repeated requests for interviews.
So–we have a lot of tax money being siphoned away from needy Medicaid patients into a contract with an extremist organization that is philosophically incapable of providing its (dubious) services in a constitutionally acceptable manner.
The question is, why?
Perhaps the answer might be found in the photos of supportive politicians that accompany the article–Dennis Kruse, Eric Turner, Jim Banks, Larry Bucshon, Todd Rokita, Dan Burton, Todd Young, and of course, Mike Pence–aka “the usual suspects.”
Looks like they’re buying “street cred” with their base. With our money.
Ummn…how much longer must we endure this “short” legislative session?
And why are Indiana lawmakers so spooked by gay people?
This week alone, we’ve heard how the Girl Scouts are “really” in the business of producing commie feminist lesbians. Yesterday (while even Brian Bosma was roaming the Statehouse halls passing out Girl Scout cookies and trying to distance himself from that particular bit of crazy), the Roads and Transportation Committee acted to save Indiana motorists from the calamities that would undoubtedly follow should the Bureau of Motor Vehicles allow the Indiana Youth Group to–gasp!–have a specialty license plate. (IYG supports gay youth. Oh, the shame…)
Now, in all fairness, the issuance of specialty license plates has proliferated, and there undoubtedly need to be some standards and controls. But everyone present understood the real target of the measure that would disqualify groups that “advocate for violation of federal or state law, violation of generally accepted ethical standards or societal behavioral standards or fund individual political candidates.” Furthermore, our moral stewards–er, legislators–will henceforth decide whether groups violate those rules. Can’t leave such pressing issues to the bureaucrats at the BMV.
In an effort to cloak the new rule with a veneer of impartiality, the measure requires–as a condition of approval–a burdensome amount of financial information from the petitioning nonprofits, 500 signatures of Indiana residents, and evidence of a “statewide public benefit from the use of the money the group would receive from the sale of license plates.” And each plate would have to be sponsored by a lawmaker and individually approved.
Because our elected officials don’t have anything more important to do than ensure the moral purity and “public benefit” of messages on Indiana’s license plates.
As this morning’s Star noted, “The changes come in the wake of controversy over the granting of a license plate to the Indiana Youth Group, which supports gay youths. That issue, though, was never discussed Wednesday by the House Roads and Transportation Committee.”
In order to prevent the predictable calamity that would occur if license plates bearing the legend “Indiana Youth Group” were allowed to roam freely over Indiana highways, the committee eliminated plates for the Indiana Association of Chiefs of Police, IU Health, Indiana Soccer, the Zoo, the Marine Foundation and Ducks Unlimited. (Just as well. You can’t ever tell what those ducks might be up to…)
Bottom line to all this foolishness–the legislature wants to pick and choose which organizations’ messages the state will “endorse” by allowing them to sell specialty license plates. The Free Speech clause of that pesky First Amendment says that is exactly what government cannot do. It’s called “content neutrality”–meaning that government can’t allow some messages and disallow others.
If the legislature doesn’t want let IYG operate under the same rules as everybody else, there’s no need for this sort of elaborate kabuki theater.
Just get rid of the whole damn specialty license plate program.
