Loading ...
HPI Interview: JLT talks jobs, taxes and reform
INDIANAPOLIS - Democrat Jill Long Thompson became the first in her party to meet with the press on Tuesday and delve into a number of issues in the Indiana General Assembly, economic development and the Kernan-Shepard reforms. Here is much of the interview conducted at the Westin Hotel:
Matt Tully, Indianapolis Star: Do you favor raising sales or income taxes to solve the property tax problem?.jpg)
Thompson: I think too often the discussion is you can take it over here and put it over here. You take it from property taxes to sales taxes and income taxes. I think those are the wrong questions. The right question is what is the best tax program we can have that works for families, that works for homeowners, that works for Hoosiers, and also works for business and helps businesses make decisions that not only are good for that business, but also for growing the state’s economy.
Eric Berman, WIBC: You’ve been critical of the version that passed the House. What would your program look like?
Thompson: The program I would propose would be include a number of things. One, it would include only bodies that are elected would have the authority to raise taxes or levy taxes. Another provision would be the level of the revenue source would be tied to the level of funding. So you’re not taking locally generated taxes and then allowing the state use those to administer state-run programs. That’s a very important provision; it’s a very basic principle.
Berman: Isn’t the House version of the governor’s package essentially does?
Thompson: There is the shifting to the sales tax. I think that’s a problem for families and individuals. That is shifting the burden to those with lower incomes. I also think the governor’s proposal to increase the sales tax hurts businesses located along the borders of the state.
Berman: So, what you prefer, the sales or the income tax?
Thompson: My preference would be to put the various options in combination on the table for analysis and for the overall tax structure. Again, I go back to my previous statement which is when you just talk about shifting from this revenue source to another revenue source you’re not looking at the overall impact of the larger tax structure. For example, I think we ought to have the incentives in our tax structure for businesses to invest in new technology or invest in equipment in a plant that will increase productivity; that would make health insurance more affordable. Those are the things we ought to be proposing. But this notion that you look at how much money can be generated here to compensate for things over here, that doesn’t deal with the broader issue of economic growth and development. We have to do things that set us apart from other states. That’s why my argument has always been we need to deal with the overall tax structure which allows us to keep taxes affordable, but that we can also use strategically so it works for businesses and works for families.
Tully: Tell us about what you’ve done today?
Thompson: I’ve been endorsed by the Steelworkers. I’m not sure what they’re doing this afternoon but I had a great speech this morning.
Brian Howey, HPI: Jill, what’s your impression of the Governor’s plan to cap local taxes and what impact will that have on local governments and school corporations?
Thompson: Well, again, I think this proposal is not comprehensive. While I support caps on how much property taxes can be increased from one year to the next, I think you have to look at how these taxes work in the overall tax structure. And, you have to make sure you have the revenues needed for priorities in this state, including education. As I’ve said throughout my campaign, we have to reinvest in resources we already have in various aspects of our economy and our social structure. But I would also argue that the Governor’s privatization obsession … there may be some short term up front money, but in the end, we lose revenues for the state that should be ours that could have been used for improving infrastructure. For example, of the privatizing of the toll road, estimates are the consortium will have the investment recouped in somewhere between 15 and 20 years. That means for the next 55 to 60 years money that should be coming to Indiana to maintain our roads and highways; that money will be going not only outside of Indiana, but outside the United States of America. I think what’s going to set us apart in this governor’s race is my approach to economic growth and development and creating opportunities and that’s the kind of approach Indiana needs.
Berman: How would you deal with this Employment Insurance Trust Fund?
Thompson: The best way to deal with it is to grow the economy. You have to have people working and paying into the trust fund.
Berman: Does this qualify as a crisis when there’s a general fund surplus?
Thompson: The concern, of course, is if the resources aren’t there in the trust fund, then the state has to borrow money. Borrowing money means you have to pay interest on the money you borrow. This is an example of Gov. Daniels waiting until the last minute to address a real problem, just as he did with the property tax issue.
Berman: But the governor has made the case that Indiana’s jobs record is better than anywhere in the Midwest. Where do you find fault?
Thompson: Well, if you look a the real numbers, in the last six months we lost literally thousands of manufacturing jobs. Pfizer is eliminating 600 jobs in Terre Haute. I think the problem with the way the governor tries to spin that issue is that he is looking at the checkbook and considering the deposits and not looking at the withdrawals. And not looking at the size of the deposits relative to the withdrawals. The fact of the matter is the jobs we’ve been losing have been higher paying jobs and some of them are being replaced and when they are in general they were lower paying jobs. Which makes it very difficult for families to earn the income necessary just to maintain a household. That’s why we have many parents working two and three jobs just to make ends meet.
Howey: About the 900 layoffs at the General Electric plant in Bloomington, what could Gov. Daniels have done, or any governor - Republican or Democrat for that matter - to save old-line manufacturing jobs in a plant making an obsolele product? Are we looking at part of the manufacturing sector where jobs are going to leave, just like the glass industry of the mid-20th Century did?
Thompson: As governor what I will do very differently than what this governor does is look to the future and the economic opportunities of the future. Where are the good paying jobs going to be, in what industries? And then build the tax structure and policy - including health care policy and education policy that will allow us to attract those kinds of jobs to Indiana as well as build them here. It’s just not simply taking manufacturing jobs and keeping them with the same manufacturing jobs. It’s making sure that as a particular product becomes obsolete or a particular manufacturing process becomes obsolete that we have a better one that pays at least as well waiting in the wings to take over and fill that gap. To do that requires strategic planning and a broad strategic approach to policy. This can be a very exciting time for Indiana because there are new industries emerging. I think we can be on the forefront of rural energy and energy efficiency. I’m not talking just ethanol and biodiesel but wind and solar. There is so much more to the bio-sciences. Look at the research going on at the universities and colleges here. We are leading the pack and we need to do a much better job at incorporating that research into economic growth and development.
Howey: Are there any of the Kernan-Shepard Commission related bills in the legislature that you can support, like creating the county executive or shifting the assessing from townships to the counties?
Thompson: I haven’t seen one I’ve supported yet.
Howey: Are there any parts of the Kernan-Shepard Commission - any of the 27 - that you could support?
Thompson: I think they have included in one of the things I mentioned and that was only legislative bodies can raise taxes. That’s one I would support. But I commend the commmission. They worked very hard, conducted research and hearings. I think it’s a starting point. We need hearings in the small towns and rural counties as well as some of the bigger cities.
Howey: Your campaign reported about $634,000 at the end of the year. Is that going to be enough to win the primary?
Thompson: I’m very pleased with the fundraising in my campaign, not just through the end of the campaign but this year as well. I’m very pleased with the momentum of the campaign, the four major endorsements. I’m very honored to get the Steelworkers’ endorsement. The Communication Workers, the Service Employees International and the American Federation of Government Employees. The campaign has a great deal of momentum. Based on the most recent polls, I think I’m well on the way of running a very strong primary and general election campaign.
Howey: Your primary opponent has a significant money advantage. Can you pull even with him?
Thompson: I will have the resources I need to win the primary.
Howey: What can we expect from you and your campaign over the next couple of months?
Thompson: Very active campaigning and discussion of the issues. High visibility, but most significantly, I will be laying forth my plans for growing Indiana’s economy and improving the high school graduation rate, addressing the issues associated with the high cost of health insurance.
Howey: First six months were spent raising money. Now you engage. Will there be white paper coming out?
Thompson: There will be some of that. But much of it will be direct communication from me talking about how we get from where we are now to meeting the potential capacity in this state.
Howey: What are you hearing from folks on the ground?
Thonpson: Very positive. Very positive feedbback from my own party, but also very positive feedback from independents and Republicans.
Howey: Are you detecting any of the kind of angst we’ve seen in Indianapolis?
Thompson: Very much. People are very frustrated with the Governor’s privatization, and his failure to address issues until they reach the crisis point.
Howey: Do you see a potential continuum from November when Mayor Peterson and other incumbents were defeated?
Thompson: Yes I do. People are looking for change.
Howey: Are you backing anyone for president?
Thompson: The Democrats (laughs).
Thompson, Daniels clash over jobs; frosty reception for governor at county confab
By BRIAN A. HOWEY
INDIANAPOLIS - If you’re keeping score, mark Jan. 29 as the day Hoosier Democrats began locking horns with Gov. Mitch Daniels re-election effort. After months of virtual silence on the public policy aspects of the 2008 campaign, Jill Long Thompson came out and attacked Daniels for letting the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund dip down to $350 million. It comes as the bears are out on Wall Street and fears of a recession are being expressed everywhere.
The news comes as the slumbering campaign of Democrat Jim Schellinger appeared to be shaking off the utter mismanagement that had placed its prospects in serious jeopardy. Tim Jeffers, a former aide to Gov. Evan Bayh and House Speakers John Gregg and Pat Bauer, will take the reins as campaign manager. Robert Kellar, recently of the Kentucky campaign of Gov. Bashear, comes on board as communications director.
The selection of Jeffers is important given the fact that he has been an ardent proponent of the kind of government reforms brought about by the Kernan-Shepard Commission. Jeffers ran for secretary of state in 1994 advocated that office be eliminated. It promises to create a potential contrast after Thompson told a press conference on Tuesday that there was only one of the 27 Kernan-Shepard Commission recommendations that she could support, adding that she does not support any of the recommendations currently before the Indiana General Assembly this session (see HPI Interview).
The Daniels campaign will respond by announcing that Bob Grand and former GOP Chairman Jim Kittle Jr. will become co-finance chairs of a campaign that already has close to $7 million cash-on-hand.
While Gov. Daniels was enjoying legislative success as his property tax reform plans coursed through the Indiana Senate and House, it was Long Thompson who attempted to draw first blood on the campaign front everyone is anticipating: jobs. Long Thompson said the loss of high paying manufacturing jobs during the Daniels years, individuals staying unemployed longer due to the lack of available jobs, and neglect by the Governor and his team have placed the Unemployment Fund in jeopardy.
"Unemployment insurance serves as a critical defense for workers against severe economic hardship," said Long Thompson. "It is troubling that as the country appears headed toward a recession the Governor has failed to meet his responsibility to keep this fund solvent. The consequences could be disastrous to people who lose their jobs."
Gov. Daniels, speaking at an Association of Indiana Counties, said afterwards, "We’ll have to address it at some point. We’ve had lower unemployment than we’ve had in six years; lowest in the Midwest. What happened is years ago they raised the benefits and didn’t raise the taxes that paid for them. Eventually it’s catching up, even though we have fewer people unemployed. It will have to be addressed; probably some readjustment on both ends, both on the benefit and tax ends." Daniels said there are "some businesses that take advantage of some seasonal layoffs and put their workers on this. Maybe they should be paying for the workers in the meantime. This is not a problem we don’t have time to deal with." Daniels added that his administration would be announcing 1,000 new jobs in Central Indiana the next day. Thompson noted the loss of 900 jobs at General Electric in Bloomington and 660 at Pfizer in Terre Haute as examples of the problem.
While Daniels appeared to have shrugged off the Long Thompson attack, just minutes before he was addressing a somewhat hostile crowd at the annual Association of Indiana Counties convention. After a polite standing ovation from the assembled clerks, commissioners, councilmen, auditors, recorders, treasurers and sheriffs, Daniels reiterated his call for a new way of looking at funding local government budgets.
"The question can no longer be: How much does government think it needs? It has to be: How much can the taxpayer reasonably be expected to pay?" Daniels said. He said that there are "no villains" in the governance system, just a bad system that hasn’t changed in 150 years. Noting the 2,600 taxing districts, Daniels said the "multiple layers of government adds up. We have got to change."
DuBois County Commissioner John Burger said to applause that he opposed the single county executive reforms."The concern is (he is) taking government away from the people," Burger said. "By going to a county CEO and having just one individual appoint every elected official is disengaging, rather than engaging. It’s like telling the people they are not smart enough to choose who they feel should represent them."
A Tipton County councilman asked Daniels to "use your bully pulpit to separate out counties" from the local government spending problem. He said he didn’t know how Daniels intended to restrict counties to "3 or 4 percent" when fuel costs are up 30 percent and costs for health care continue to rise.
Daniels responded by saying,"You know, Tony, that’s life. Every business is facing this. You are saying that ‘I think I need another 6 percent.’ What are you going to tell that family that is already struggling to pay this year’s bill?" Daniels noted that in cities, "there’s one mayor" and "everyone knows who the mayor is. There’s more accountability." Daniels asked the county elected officials to bring ideas to him.
"I never talk about this without enumerating that we’re talking about everything," Daniels said. "When we say ‘local’ people think of the mayor. The last few months have been a teaching moment for us all. I’ve certainly learned a ton. Our fellow citizens have too, as to what our property taxes actually pay for. Eight months ago people thought it came to the Statehouse when none of it does. I take your point and I do try to make that clear to people."
Daniels earned a round of spontaneous applause when he praised county officials for "honestly" seeking to rein in budgets. "There are no villains in this story. But, when you look back at the whole picture, income of Hoosiers grows 3 to 4 percent. Total spending at the local level, 6 to 8 percent. You do that and in a couple of years, property taxes will be out of control." Daniels said he has kept state spending in line with the 3 to 4 percent inflation rate. He noted that he had brought state spending down from 6 percent to 2 percent. "We’re in OK shape, but it wasn’t easy."
One Marion County official, noting a $50 million deficit there, said that Unigov was a bad example of reforms. Daniels said, "I wouldn’t Xerox the Unigov model," but added that Indianapolis is much better positioned than many other big cities.
"As somebody who travels the state all the time, I wish we had more places with the problems of Central Indiana," Daniels responded. "It is generally considered one of the most successful cities in America let alone Indiana. I am contributing all of that to consolidated government, but there are volumes and volumes written about it that said it had a lot to do with it. Just look at the other cities of the late ’60s and look what happened to them. When they were trapped with an artificial core and a shrinking tax base, people fled the city and took their tax dollars with them to the nearest suburb. It usually didn’t work out very well."
I was about to zing Schellinger and then Tim Jeffers called
By BRIAN A. HOWEY
INDIANAPOLIS - My hands hovered over my keyboard casting monstrous shadows when the phone rang Wednesday afternoon. It was Tim Jeffers calling. He wasn’t going to give me fresh perspectives about Iraq. Instead, he told me he was taking the helm of Jim Schellinger’s gubernatorial campaign.
If you’re on the Schellinger campaign, this is divine intervention. I was about to write a column for my 25 newspapers around the state saying that this Democrat was essentially a not-ready-for-primetime-player. The architect CEO entered the race last winter. I spent nearly two hours with Jim at the CSO headquarters and we had a delightful conversation. I left with notions of good access to the candidate and a potentially stimulating campaign that could challenge Gov. Mitch Daniels on the idea front. Unfortunately, neither came to pass. Calls to the candidate seeking ideas averaged about one a month. The ideas were always days or weeks away. Calls last summer to the candidate’s cell phone were answered by then campaign manager Mike Edmondson, who reminded me there was still 17 months … 16 months … 15 months left to talk ideas. I finally gave up. There were no ideas.
It got to the point that when I thought of Jim Schellinger, I also heard John Mellencamp’s voice in my head: "You’ve got to stand for something; Or you’re gonna fall for anything." And then I’d think of past gubernatorial campaigns and I could hear clarion phrases: Thanks a billion. Aiming higher. Your taxes have doubled. Give it back! (*Quiz: who said that?)
With Schellinger, there was no there … there. He promised to listen, which is good. But after listening, you have to say something relevant.
But there was no there there.
In December, the Schellinger campaign finally jettisoned the Edmondson crew and what was left was a shell of a campaign. It was an organizational nightmare. A
mish-mash. The campaign was not generating ideas, but instead scornful columns by the Star’s Matt Tully. .jpg)
He, too, was finding the big dodge and zero substance. In the tiny Edmondson mindset, columnists like Tully and myself (we reach more than 500,000 readers each week) were enemies not to be trusted, as opposed to conduits willing to convey ideas via something called "earned media." Two of its campaign co-chairs had either died (Julia Carson) or gone down in defeat (Bart Peterson). There was a property tax rebellion well under way. And no ideas from Schellinger. There was the Kernan-Shepard Commission report, and only a "thanks for the effort" press release. If you can’t run a campaign, how in the hell are you going to run a state of 6 million Hoosiers?
Last week, I sent the campaign an e-mail asking them the same question I asked Jill Long Thompson on Tuesday about the General Electric layoffs in Bloomington. It was one of the few topics Schellinger had weighed in on in recent months.
My e-mail read: "I’d be interested to know how a Gov. Jim Schellinger would have saved those 900 jobs at General Electric in Bloomington. The plant was making what appears to be an increasingly obsolete product, dictated by the market. If you talk to the Indiana Manufacturers and other economists, we are in the midst of a a manufacturing transformation, away from old-line production models to advanced techniques and products. So I’m not sure how Gov. Daniels, or any Governor - Republican or Democrat - can "fix" or keep in business old-line manufacturing. An example: Indiana was once a major glass producer, but not any more. The steel mills in Gary used to employ up to 70,000 people. Now it’s about 7,500 due to new manufacturing techiques. So I’m looking for some context here. Let me know if the candidate would like to discuss."
There was no response.
So there I was, hands poised over the keyboard, my spread fingers casting off very scary shadows. I was going to tell my 250,000 column readers how Jim Schellinger is a nice guy, but he’s not-ready-for-primetime. He appears to be incapable of discussing easy issues like job layoffs, let alone something as complex as tax or government reform (which just about everyone else in Indiana politics is talking about these days). And then Tim Jeffers called.
He is an excellent addition to the Schellinger campaign. He played a key role in the Democratic takeover of the Indiana House in 2006. He has been close to power before as an aide to Lee Hamilton, Evan Bayh, Frank O’Bannon, John Gregg, and Pat Bauer. He is a patriot who was called up out of the blue in 2005 to serve in Iraq. I remember attending his going-away bash at the Distillery one cold December night. All of his friends were rigftfully concerned about his safety and well-being. Jeffers conveyed a cool kind of confidence and calm. He resurfaced in Baghdad as an aide to Gen. David Petraeus, who was then and is now the most successful American commander in that awful enterprise.
Jeffers is an ideas guy. He ran for secretary of state in 1994 vowing to abolish the very office he was seeking. His other reform ideas were washed away in the GOP tsunami that year. I’ve written about our brain storming sessions at the Chatterbox and how those talks launched me on my government reform and constitutional convention kick that began in 2002. I’d like to think that commentary helped pave the way for Kernan-Shepard as I was having simultaneous conversations with Daniels when he was White House budget director and with former Gov. Bob Orr who repeatedly told me to keep writing even when I was a lonely voice on the topic.
At the 2005 Howey Politics Forum, Jeffers participated on the last panel of the day and admonished his party for failing to use its power to affect the needed change in an Indiana withering under the atrophy of the status quo as the global economy raced by. I found Jeffers candor stimulating. Here was a guy who watched power from the inside and he was offended by all the unspent political capital.
Jim Schellinger is a smart guy. He should listen to Jeffers beyond just the needed ballot signatures or internal polling or TV ads or GOTV. The Democratic side of the gubernatorial ledger is bereft of comprehensive ideas. As you read the HPI Interview with Jill Long Thompson, she is not likely to back much of the Kernan-Shepard Commission report. Some see her as eyes on the rearview mirror, vowing to review all the privatization of Govs. Daniels, Kernan, O’Bannon, Bayh and Orr.
It is getting late in the primary gubernatorial campaign. Thompson vows to begin discussing her vision. It’s time for Jim Schellinger to turn all that listening into a competing plan. But before he does, he should take a couple more hours and listen to Tim Jeffers.
* Publisher’s Note: Answer to the quiz … J. Patrick Rooney in 1996.
Eric’s revenue and an accusation of Sen. Long’s ‘abuse of power’
By BRIAN A. HOWEY
INDIANAPOLIS - When we last left Eric Miller, he was venting about the demise of SJR-7, the gay marriage ban. In the Jan. 24 edition of Howey Politics Indiana, we told you the wrath of Eric had yet to be felt.
Well, now that we’re at the halfway point of the legislature, consider the wrath … building. On Tuesday, Miller sent out an e-mail encouraging his followers to run for office. "Have you ever thought about running for elected office in Indiana? Have you ever thought about running for the Indiana General Assembly? Did You Know: All 100 State Representatives are up for election in 2008? 25 or ½ of the 50 State Senators are up for election in 2008? [CLICK HERE] to view district maps." The e-mail informs readers that the filing deadline is Feb. 22."
That was followed by a second e-mail taking direct aim at Senate President Pro Tempore David Long. "On Tuesday, January 22nd at approximately 5:40 pm the Chairman of the Senate Rules and Legislative Procedures Committee, Senator David Long, started a public hearing on SJR 8, the Constitutional Amendment to Repeal Property Taxes and a new bill, Senate Bill 100, which would set up a study committee on the repeal of homestead property taxes. Senator Long is also the leader of the State Senate. Sen. Long held a committee hearing on January 8th on SJR 8 that permitted the public to testify both for and against SJR 8. This was the right thing to do. However, on January 22nd Senator Long refused to let the citizens who came to the committee hearing to testify on either SJR 8 or the new bill, Senate Bill 100. After a long opening statement where he demeaned those who wanted to repeal property taxes, he proceeded to discuss the new bill, Senate Bill 100, which would set up a study committee. This bill had never been discussed in a public committee hearing prior to January 22nd. Senator Long abused his position as the Chairman of the Rules Committee and refused to allow any of the more than 20 citizens who came to the hearing to testify on Senate Bill 100."
This came a day after he hosted a rally at Jeffersonville High School that was attended by 580 people. The Louisville Courier-Journal described him as speaking in the "excited tones of an evangelist."
"’I trust the people of the state of Indiana to do the right thing,’ said Miller. ‘You deserve the right to repeal property taxes.’ Miller, who often spoke in the excited tones of an evangelist, told the crowd last night’s rally was the 13th to repeal property taxes that he has attended. The rally was sponsored by a group of organizations and individuals, many of whom are connected with the real estate and construction industries."
Miller will let the pain emanating from Jan. 22 on Friday, when he hosts a rally at the Statehouse. As we used to say, the church buses will be rolling. How much pain is felt by legislators and Gov. Daniels is still an open question.
Mark Curry: Is the past our future? Super Tuesday will bring answers
By MARK CURRY
WASHINGTON - Voters in more than 20 states will cast ballots next Tuesday to determine the path of American politics in a post-W world. If polls are to be trusted, then it seems quite possible that our future includes visitors from the past. Both the Democratic and Republican front-runners represent much of their party’s moderate center. The GOP’s John McCain of Arizona, now in his fourth term as senator, has served in Washington since 1982. Sen. Hillary Clinton, the second-term Democrat from New York, laid the foundation for today’s precedent-breaking campaign when her husband lived in the White House during the 1990s.
Is McCain unstoppable?
Polls indicate Republican voters intend to select McCain on Super Tuesday to be their candidate in November, perhaps with enough of a margin to make him unstoppable as the party’s choice. Former Gov. Mitt Romney is expected to edge former Gov. Mike Huckabee for second. McCain’s victory in Florida this week was further boosted when former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani dropped from the race and endorsed the Arizona senator. 
A national Gallup survey released yesterday, but conducted before Giuliani’s exit, puts McCain at 32 percent to Romney’s 21 and Huckabee’s 18. Rudy was the choice of 11 percent of respondents. While state polling presents a confusing picture, most analysts predict McCain has the momentum to carry the day. Jim Geraghty examined the state numbers in a thoughtful article posted yesterday to National Review Online. He found that the front-runner was on target to gain more than 400 of the 1,100 delegates up for grabs Feb. 5, followed by Romney at 200 to 250 and Huckabee at around 200.
Anyone who listens to talk radio can tell you that Sen. McCain has yet to win the battle for the hearts and minds of a key GOP constituency, the conservative voters. Radio host Hugh Hewitt told the Associated Press that "Senator McCain is a great American, a lousy senator and a terrible Republican. He has a legislative record that is not conservative. In fact, it is anti-conservative." Rush Limbaugh, who has rallied listeners and garnered headlines by bashing the Senator, yesterday offered a "non-concession" speech. "Senator McCain’s been able to cobble together enough votes to win in a few states," Limbaugh said. "Fine. He deserves credit for that. But to pretend that Senator McCain is the choice of conservatives when exit poll data from every primary state show just the opposite. He is not the choice of conservatives - as opposed to the choice of the Republican establishment - and that distinction is key. The Republican establishment, which has long sought to rid the party of conservative influence since Reagan, is feeling a victory today as well as our friends in the media. But both are just far-fetched and wrong."
Others have indicated a willingness to support Sen. McCain should he win the nomination, even if reluctantly. In an entry entitled "The Last Action Hero," Ben Domenech, of the conservative website Redstate.com, wrote yesterday that "We are left with two realistically possible nominees, with hopes for a brokered convention dashed. In 2008, the question has become: do you support the calculating unprincipled friend, or the passionate principled foe?"
"After two-plus years of having Candidate Mitt before us, conservatives have barely scratched the surface of this candidate’s remarkable political liabilities," he wrote. "His weaknesses are not just small or needling - they are epic."
The decline of hope?
Among Democrats, surveys indicate Hillary will take the popular vote in most state elections. Sen. Barack Obama has narrowed the gap in recent polls and is expected to make a strong second-place showing. Nationally, Gallup reported, Hillary’s lead has shrunk to just 6 points from a 20-point lead only a week ago. But signs indicate the Clinton camp may have successfully blunted Obama’s surge in several key states, particularly in the heavily populated states of California and New York, which carry a combined total of more than 700 delegates. 
The Los Angeles Times reported on Monday that it’s latest state polling found Hillary has maintained a "sweeping lead" - 49 percent to 32. In New York, most surveys give their own junior senator a 10-point margin of victory. She also boasts wide leads in several other states, including New Jersey, Massachusetts, Minnesota and Missouri. Obama dominates the polls in Illinois, with 185 delegates, but is tied or leading by slim margins in Georgia, Colorado and Connecticut. While the outlook for Obama is not exactly roses, many analysts note that in some states there are enough undecided voters to sway the election his way, should they decide to support him at the polls. These voters describe perhaps the most brutal battleground in the campaign thus far.
To the consternation of Hillary supporters, many critics say her camp has exploited racial divisions to divert support for Obama. Particularly galling to some were messages that seemed designed to drive a wedge between Hispanic and African American voters. Critics point to the reporting of Ryan Lizza of the New Yorker, who concluded a report on race in the campaign with telling comments about Hispanic voters from Clinton pollster Sergio Bendixen.
"It’s one group where going back to the past really works," Bendixen told Lizza. "All you need to say in focus groups is ‘Let’s go back to the nineties.’" But, Lizza wrote, Bendixen "was also frank about the fact that the Clintons, long beloved in the black community, are now dependent on a less edifying political dynamic: ‘The Hispanic voter - and I want to say this very carefully - has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates.’"
Many observers share the sentiment of Gregory Rodriguez, a columnist for the Los Angeles Times, who countered by noting a long list of African-Americans voted into office with strong Latino support, including Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley and all three black members of the California Congressional delegation.
"…the evidence is overwhelming enough to make you wonder why in the world the Clinton campaign would want to portray Latino voters as too unrelentingly racist to vote for Barack Obama," Bendixen wrote. He went on to speculate that the strategy "helps undermine one of Obama’s central selling points, that he can build bridges and unite Americans of all types, and it jibes with the Clinton strategy of pigeon-holing Obama as the ‘black candidate.’"
During the Democratic presidential debate two weeks ago, MSNBC’s Tim Russert asked Hillary if Bendixen’s view represented that of her campaign. "No, he was making a historical statement," she said. "And, obviously, what we’re trying to do is to bring America together so that everybody feels like they’re involved and they have a stake in the future."
While Hillary’s camp continues to fetch blame for comments and activities that critics say are underhanded and divisive, Obama touts important endorsements that may help him in Tuesday elections. This morning his campaign distributed a news release entitled "Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Senator Tom Daschle, Senator Bill Bradley, General Tony McPeak, Rep. John Conyers, and Actors Kal Penn and Dulé Hill to Campaign for Barack Obama Today." He received a further boost yesterday when the New York Post ran a front-page banner proclaiming its endorsement of the Illinois Senator. The supporting article was more of a back-handed compliment than anything else, however. It might as well have read, "Anybody But Hillary."
Chris Sautter: Searching for Bobby
By CHRIS SAUTTER
WASHINGTON - The week before he announced he would challenge President Lyndon Johnson for the Democratic nomination, Senator Robert Kennedy traveled to
Delano, California, where he appeared at a farm workers rally for Caesar Chavez. Chavez had been fasting for weeks trying to win recognition of his union 
The United Farm Workers, whose members and families were frequently being beaten up by agents of the growers. Chavez invited Kennedy to break the fast and share communion with him at a Mass of Thanksgiving, after which Kennedy spoke to the large rally of farm workers. An aide translated from Kennedy’s English to Spanish as the crowd responded enthusiastically. Then Kennedy broke into Spanish (“with a Boston accent” Chavez later joked) as he called out a familiar slogan dating back to the Mexican Revolution: “¡Es mejor morir de pie que vivir de rodillas!” “It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.” The crowd roared in approval.
Robert Kennedy was like no presidential candidate before or since, and 1968 was like no other presidential year. It would not be an exaggeration to suggest that the history of the Democratic Party’s presidential nominating process over the past 40 years has been an unconscious search for the successor to Robert Kennedy’s legacy. Since June 1968, Democrats have been searching for a candidate to fulfill the promise of Kennedy’s last campaign.
Robert Kennedy launched his campaign for the presidency on March 16, 1968 against the dark backdrop of the Vietnam War, a painfully divided country, and the weighty legacy of his martyred brother John. At best, the campaign seemed a long shot. Lyndon Johnson, though politically wounded by an unpopular war and racial strife, had won a landslide victory only four years earlier. Kennedy’s run was complicated by the fact that he had declined earlier pleas to challenge Johnson, which opened the way for Senator Eugene McCarthy to run. Then four days before Kennedy was to announce, an under-funded McCarthy won a surprising 42% to Johnson’s 49% in the New Hampshire primary. In the political game of expectations, it was scored a victory for McCarthy. Two weeks after Kennedy announced, Johnson ruled out another term, and Vice President Hubert Humphrey became his heir apparent.
McCarthy’s experimental new politics derived its support primarily from upper income professional liberals, party outsiders, and students who had gone “Clean for Gene.” Kennedy’s support came from more traditional Democrats, blacks, loyalists from his brother’s administration, and young activists with ties to the “New Left.” A great moral issue, the Vietnam War, united both campaigns. Yet, Kennedy’s moral foundation reached farther into the issues of social justice and racial equality. But, Kennedy’s entry coming on the heels of McCarthy’s success, was viewed by many observers as opportunistic and further evidence of Kennedy’s “ruthlessness.
Indiana’s May 7 primary proved to be the first crucial test for Kennedy. Kennedy and McCarthy spent much of April and early May crisscrossing the state, in the same way that candidates this year have campaigned in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. Indiana’s Democratic establishment mostly opposed Kennedy’s candidacy, and backed Governor Roger Branigan, who had filed as a stand-in for Johnson.
Robert Kennedy could always draw a crowd. In small town Indiana, hundreds of people would wait hours to catch a glimpse of him as his motorcade drove past. Many of his rallies were chaotic, a sea of outstretched hands with choruses of cries and screams. His rallies and speeches were totally unlike the scripted and staged events of today. Kennedy would frequently drop his prepared remarks, go “off message,” and challenge his audiences. He told an unsympathetic group of IU Medical students that America’s system of health care had failed millions of Americans. He once told a group of students who expressed support for the war that they should drop their deferments and join the military. But he was also humorous and irreverent. His parting words to students often were to “remember that it was a Kennedy (long pause) who got you out of class.” His extemporaneous speech on April 4th in the heart of an Indianapolis African American neighborhood on 17th and Broadway in which he announced the assassination of Martin Luther King to a stunned audience is considered one of the most moving speeches ever delivered by a political candidate.
The Indianapolis Star had campaigned openly and hard against Kennedy. In spite of the obstacles and turmoil, Kennedy won 42% in a three-way race in which a record number of Democratic voters showed up. Kennedy carried nine of Indiana’s eleven congressional districts and eleven of the state’s twelve largest counties. He won 90% of the black vote, while holding his own in the working class white precincts which George Wallace had carried in the 1964 Democratic primary. Indiana had put RFK on a path to the nomination. He followed the same approach in primaries through California. Kennedy’s faith in the fundamental goodness of Americans, his uncompromising optimism, and his message that united and determined the country can overcome poverty, inequality, and violence still resonates today.
In endorsing Barack Obama, Caroline Kennedy invoked the spirit of her father’s 1960 campaign. Indeed, JFK’s campaign was based on generational change. But Obama’s rhetoric about bringing the country together is pure RFK. Obama has yet to demonstrate the deep empathy for the victims of injustice and inequality that was at the core of Kennedy’s 1968 campaign. But like RFK, Obama is a unique figure in American politics with the potential to bring hope and change to a country divided by war and cultural differences.
Lugar surveys Iraq complexities for the next president
By BRIAN A. HOWEY
INDIANAPOLIS - U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar says the current presidential candidates face a "very, very tough predicament" in taking positions on the Iraq War due to the sheer complexity of the situation. In an exclusive HPI Interview on Friday, Lugar explained, "It’s a difficult thing for the presidential candidates because most of the dialogue on this is in debates."
Lugar is famous for long answers on any given topic. After surveying the Jan. 16 Brookings Institute Iraq Index that was published in the Jan. 24 edition of Howey
Politics Indiana, Lugar spent nearly 15 minutes talking about an aspect of the American involvement that has received little attention: the 140,000 American contractors working in Iraq. 
"Essentially, the presidential candidates are going to have to understand that they are going to inherit a very substantial set of problems in Iraq and in the countries that surround Iraq," Lugar said. "I mention this because in the speech I gave on the floor last summer, among what I hope were constructive suggestions were the thoughts that our secretary of state or our president should call together representatives from all the surrounding countries or others who may have a stake in the future of Iraq, including the allies who have fought with us in the country or even countries in the Middle East that are not contiguous.
"This needs to be a continuous round table discussion because each of the parties needs to know what the other is doing," Lugar continued. "I say this becasue Iraq is in the disarray of having, as your report pointed out yesterday, anywhere from a million and a half to two million of its citizens dispersed outside the country, most of them in Syria and Jordan. There’s probably an equal number who have been dispersed within the country. The displacement comes largely because of sectarian separations because of Shiites seeking protection from other Shiites and the same with the Sunnis."
Lugar said the next president "inherits a complex of foreign policy situations because we have, leaving aside Iraq and talking about Iran, the two are intermingled because of the religious grounds and likewise people coming and going from it. The administration has begun to think through the bilateral agreement with Iraq to protect the American contractors. They are estimated to be about 140,000. This is in addition to the 160,000 military people in the country."
Lugar said that unlike other countries which have legal exemptions for foreign contractors (in the case of injury or deaths related to security details), the U.S.-Iraq agreements end on Dec. 31. "On one hand, there is a debate about how much we should be rebuilding the country and we are doing so in a very large way," Lugar explained."It’s not just a question of when the troops come home, but how about 140,000 contractors. And what kind of agreements will we formulate. "Unlike others in other countries where we routinely ask for exemptions for actions of our contractors, in this case the Iraqis are very much opposed."
Lugar said that the presidential candidates cannot deal with Iraq in a comprehensive way due to a swing in the political polls that began in 2004 and continues to this day. A majority of Americans not only oppose the war, but they now feel they were deceived by the Bush administration as to the pretext of the invasion.
He said that it will be unlikely to a candidate to "settle down on a stage and give an hour talk about Iraq."
Lugar, who unsuccessfully ran for president in 1996, said, "It appears to me that the candidate who will be successful at least ought to convey detailed knowledge about the complexity of the situation as opposed to the cliches that the surge succeeded or that victory is ours, or everybody out. This is not helpful at all, although large blocks of the American public do want to rally around just such cliches. The thing is so dense in terms of foreign policy complexity that people really want somebody who they think is on their side."
Lugar called on the United States to convene a summit of all "who have a stake in the future of Iraq" to work on issues involving reconstruction. Asked what happens when the surge essentially ends this summer Lugar said,"Well, no one knows."
2008 Indiana Congressional
2ND CD: Democrat: U.S. Rep. Joe Donnelly. Republican: Luke Puckett, Tony Zirkle. 2006 Results: Donnelly 103,561, Chocola (R) 88,300. 2008 .jpg)
Forecast: South Bend attorney Tony Zirkle will run for Congress this year — his second attempt at the job (Ronco, South Bend Tribune). "Zirkle, a Republican, ran for the Republican nomination in the 2006 primary but lost to then-U.S. Rep. Chris Chocola, the incumbent, who lost to freshman Rep. Joe Donnelly (D) … Eliminating pornography and prostitution was a centerpiece of Zirkle’s 2006 campaign, and he gained attention by shredding a copy of Playboy magazine featuring Marilyn Monroe on the cover. But perhaps his most memorable suggestion was bringing back the guillotine to punish child sex offenders. ‘There was a lot of misunderstanding about what I said about the guillotine,’ Zirkle said Wednesday by phone. ‘If you look at my original press release, I said I was attempting to stimulate debate.’" In the current campaign, Zirkle said he "would focus on eliminating pornography and prostitution." Also expected to file for the IN2 GOP primary is Luke Puckett, a businessman from Goshen. Primary Status: LIKELY PUCKETT. General Status: LIKELY DONNELLY
3RD CD: Republican: U.S. Rep. Mark Souder. Democrat: Michael Montagano. 2006 Results: Souder 95,421, Hayhurst (D) 80,357. 2008 Forecast: Republican Congressman Mark Souder will have a challenger in November’s election. Michael Montagano, a lawyer from Bristol, announced that he’s running in this
year’s democratic primary for the third district seat. Montagano is currently the only democratic challenger, but he has his work cut out for him (WANE-TV). The job he wants in U.S. Congress has been held for thirteen years by republican Mark Souder.
Montagano made his candidacy official this morning. Fort Wayne mayor Tom Henry introduced him in front of a crowd of supporters at the Embassy Theatre. Montagano is a graduate of Depauw University and the IU school of law. At 26 years of age, this is his first campaign. He has served under former Indiana governor Joe Kernan, and congressman Tim Roemer, but has never held public office. Montagano says the lack of experience should not be an issue. "That is exactly our campaign’s benefit", Montagano said. "This is about fresh leadership and a new direction for the country. We need a break away from the old Washington system, and a break away from politics that bring us down as a region. We need a fresh start." Status: LEANS SOUDER
5TH CD: Republican: U.S. Rep. Dan Burton, Dr. John McGoff. 2006 Results: Burton 133,118, Carr (D) 64,362, Sharlow (L) 7,431. 2008 Forecast: (Headline) Burton’s Primary Challenger Says Incumbent Has Become "Too Comfortable." The Marion Chronicle Tribune reports on the primary challenger to IN5 Rep. Dan Burton (R), who has held the seat since 1983. Emergency room physician Dr. John McGoff, 48, has said that Burton, 69, a 25-year incumbent, is taking his seat for granted and "has become too comfortable with the perks of the office. He said that from 2001 to 2006, Burton has voted for every spending bill that went through the office. He also voted for pay raises for congressmen," which McGoff says, "are not the actions of a fiscally conservative congressman who cares about personal responsibility." Primary Status: LEANS BURTON
7TH CD: Republican: State Rep. Jon Elrod. Democrat: Councilman Andre Carson. 2006 Results: Julia Carson (D) 74,750, Dickerson (R) 64,304. 2008 Forecast: The people hired to run the congressional campaigns of Republican Jon Elrod and Democrat Andre Carson are all professionals, but there’s one big difference between them. Elrod’s campaign is being run by one of three partners in a local political consulting group, Franklin-based Maverick Strategies (Indianapolis Star). It’s one of the first high-profile races Maverick has managed. Carson, on the other hand, is using a political consultant from Washington, D.C., with experience in several congressional races across the country. There are other differences. Elrod, a member of the state House, so far has not received any money or promise of help from the party’s fundraising apparatus. Carson, an Indianapolis City-County councilman, is one of a handful of Democratic congressional candidates nationwide to receive a commitment from his party for financial assistance. Moreover, Elrod elbowed his way into the race despite pressure from local party leaders to step aside so that a self-financed candidate could run. It’s no news to Elrod that he’s the underdog. "Everything I’ve ever run for was a long shot," he said last week. "I knocked on thousands of doors and fought my way into office." He has pulled off upsets by just 35 and eight votes in his elections to the Center Township Advisory Board and the state House of Representatives, respectively. The numbers certainly lean in Carson’s favor. Even in the upset win by Mayor Greg Ballard in November, Democrat Bart Peterson won by 11,000 votes in the 725 precincts (out of 914 in the county) within the 7th District. Turnout at special elections, however, tends to be low, somewhat blunting the district’s Democratic leanings. Despite his apparent edge, Carson acknowledges he must prove to voters that his bid to inherit his grandmother’s seat is not based on heritage alone. "Certainly, that’s a legitimate concern because of the possibility of abuse," Carson said. "For us, it’s not about legacy, but about carrying on a tradition of helping those who have been marginalized." State Rep. David Orentlicher is so far the only Democrat who has filed to challenge Andre Carson in the 7th District race for the May primary. Special Election Status: LEANS CARSON
9TH CD: Republican: Mike Sodrel. Democrat: U.S. Rep. Baron Hill. Libertarian: Eric Schansberg. 2006 Results: Hill 110,454, Sodrel (R) 100,469, Schansberg (L) 9,893.2008 Forecast: Sodrel made his fourth campaign for the bloody 9th seat official yesterday (1/25/08), filing his candidacy at the secretary of state’s office (Louisville Courier-Journal). Sodrel is trying to unseat U.S. Rep. Baron Hill, the Democrat who ousted him two years ago. Hill has won two of their three races. "I’m sure some will try to characterize this as a grudge match," Sodrel said during a brief trip to the Statehouse yesterday. "Fact is, I would be running regardless of who was on the other side of the ballot." Sodrel blamed his 2006 loss in part on a national political climate that was bad for Republicans and said it’s too soon to know whether this year will be different. "You really don’t know what the climate’s going to be in November," he said. "They say a week is a year in politics. So almost a year is a lifetime." Sodrel followed his announcement yesterday with rallies in Bloomington, Nashville, Columbus, Seymour, New Albany and Jeffersonville. Hill, meanwhile, held a "congress at your corner" event at a Bloomington grocery store, where people could meet him or talk about issues. Status: TOSSUP
Matt Tully, Indianapolis Star: What Thompson did not offer — and what she hasn’t offered so far in this campaign — were many specifics. She promised more and better jobs, improved health care and schools, lower taxes and, in general, better lives for Hoosier families. .jpg)
As for how she would achieve any of that, the details have yet to arrive. When a steelworker asked about the ongoing property tax debate, Thompson criticized Daniels, who is pushing a monumental tax overhaul proposal, but failed to offer her own plan. That’s pretty much how the Democratic primary has gone so far. Thompson and her even dodgier opponent, Indianapolis businessman Jim Schellinger, have spent much of their time bashing Daniels and offering feel-good applause lines. That could be a winning strategy in the current anxiety-fueled political environment, but it’s not very inspiring. Schellinger has raised more money than Thompson has. But he’s suffered a humbling campaign shake-up in recent weeks. Meanwhile, Thompson has polled well and won key endorsements, setting the stage for a spirited primary. (For the record, I’ve asked Schellinger’s staff for time with the candidate several times in recent weeks, to no avail.)
Rich James, Post-Tribune: If I were to say that Lake County will have two Republican county commissioners after the November election, you’d probably say I had lost it. I’m not saying that it is going to happen, but it’s an interesting proposition. And, oh my, would it turn county government and the Democratic Party inside out. It’s not out of the question, mind you, particularly if the two potential candidates follow through and file. Can you imagine two former Hammond mayors sitting as Republican county commissioners? There’s heavy-duty talk that Thomas McDermott might file in the 2nd District, where Democrat Gerry Scheub is the incumbent. And there is equal hype about Duane Dedelow running in the 3rd District and likely facing incumbent Frances DuPey in November. She filed on Wednesday, even though she has been saying for three years that she wasn’t running again. It’s in the 2nd District, that encompasses south county, where things are most contentious. The problem for Tom Sr. is his son, Tom Jr., who happens to be the mayor of Hammond.
Gary Gerard, Warsaw Times-Union: I’ve been listening to all the news reports about the recession this week and I asked myself, what does this mean to me? I have a job. That’s a big plus. But that’s pretty much the case with most Americans, because the U.S. unemployment rate stands at 5 percent, which isn’t a horrible number. In Indiana, the unemployment rate for December was 4.6 percent, down from 4.7 percent in November. The cost of fuel is up. It’s costing more to heat the house and drive to work, but it’s not like we’re scraping by. I don’t like the looks of the 401(k) and IRA, but I’m not ready to cash that in anyway so it’s kind of irrelevant. I guess when I hear all the talk about recession, I ask myself, what recession? It’s kind of transparent to me. My personal financial situation doesn’t feel any different today than it did a year ago when nobody was talking about a recession. And I would guess if you asked 100 people on the street in Warsaw, they’d say the same thing, except they probably feel a little worried about what they’re hearing on the news. Tuesday morning, I was watching CNN. Their financial analyst guy’s name is Ali Velshi. I like watching him. He’s knowledgeable and I like his delivery. But Tuesday morning he was almost gleeful when he was reporting about big losses in the overseas markets. He connected the dots for us. It’s the U.S. recession that’s driving the markets down, he said. Then he said something that was fairly stunning. "Ben Bernanke (Federal Reserve Chairman) says we’re not in a recession. President Bush says we’re not in a recession. Nobody believes them."
Jack Colwell, South Bend Tribune: Luke Puckett now appears almost certain to be the Republican challenger opposing Congressman Joe Donnelly, D-Granger, in Indiana’s 2nd District this fall. Puckett starts short on money and with long odds against him; with low name recognition but high hopes. "I think it’s a winnable race or I wouldn’t be getting into it," says Puckett. He plans soon to file officially as a candidate for the Republican congressional nomination and then travel throughout the district to start getting known and to improve odds for an upset of Donnelly. Donnelly’s moderate record and rhetoric during his first term seem to be in tune with the district, making him a tough target for Republicans, so tough that Republicans with far better political credentials and name recognition than Puckett have chosen not to run. Others can file, and it would not be surprising if some very unusual candidate, such as a Farmer Hass type from the past, also seeks the GOP nomination. Puckett, however, now appears to be the choice of party leaders. He almost certainly will be the nominee, unless some Republican who could personally finance a campaign or has wide name recognition suddenly decides to make the race. For those who don’t know Puckett — and that’s at least 99 percent of the voters in the sprawling 12-county district — he is a 38-year-old Goshen businessman who describes himself as "an opportunist." He seeks opportunity in business ventures, and now he will venture into politics to seek the opportunity to serve in Congress. Puckett says of his business approach: "I look for investments, ideas that will be profitable. I’m an entrepreneur and small business guy."
Rep. Mays eyes Sen. Howard’s seat
Advance Indiana is picking up rumors that Sen. Glenn Howard (D-Indianapolis), who has missed the entire legislative session to date this year due to an undisclosed 
illness, will not be filing for re-election. Word on the street is that State Rep. Carolene Mays (D-Indianapolis), who earlier launched a bid for the 7th District Democratic congressional seat of the late U.S. Rep. Julia Carson, will abandon those efforts and run for Howard’s seat. City-County Councilor Cherrish Pryor, who was just elected to the council after being appointed to fill the vacancy of former CCC member Greg Bowes last year, has already filed to run for Mays’ House District 94 seat. Speculation is that the Center Township Democrats are trying to keep the public in the dark as to Howard’s intentions in order to prevent others from entering the race.
illness, will not be filing for re-election. Word on the street is that State Rep. Carolene Mays (D-Indianapolis), who earlier launched a bid for the 7th District Democratic congressional seat of the late U.S. Rep. Julia Carson, will abandon those efforts and run for Howard’s seat. City-County Councilor Cherrish Pryor, who was just elected to the council after being appointed to fill the vacancy of former CCC member Greg Bowes last year, has already filed to run for Mays’ House District 94 seat. Speculation is that the Center Township Democrats are trying to keep the public in the dark as to Howard’s intentions in order to prevent others from entering the race.
Strange bedfellows: repeal and right rally against taxes
Hoosiers for Fair Taxation is urging citizens to attend Friday’s property tax repeal rally at the Indiana Statehouse, but for more reasons than rally organizer Eric Miller has planned. “We do not support the marriage amendment or any other legislation that steals attention from our state’s tax crisis. We support open, accountable government that uses our money wisely. While Eric Miller’s Advance America has done much to push property tax repeal, he now drives a wedge into the property tax repeal momentum by attaching citizen activism to his Christian right agenda as he joins the marriage amendment to a property tax rally,” they said in a press announcement this week.
Text messaging motivates young voters
According to the nonpartisan, New Voter’s Project, young voters (defined as 18 – 31 years old) are turning out in record numbers at the primary polls. They say the youth vote more than tripled in the Iowa caucuses, increased by 25% in New Hampshire, nearly tripled in South Carolina primary (Democratic), and more than tripled in the Florida primaries. Politicians are increasing turning to the Internet to get their message out to the Myspace Generation– Barack Obama had his video response to President Bush’s State of the Union Speech posted the very same night. The bigger challenge is getting young people to actually show up at the polls come election day. A recently released study on text messaging found that 4.2 percent of young people are more likely to vote if they receive a text message reminder to show up at the polls. A quarter of Americans younger than age of 25 used a mobile phone as their only telephone during the first half of 2006. In November 2006 elections, researchers with The Student PIRGs’ New Voters Project – working with Princeton University and University of Michigan - sent text messages voting reminders to more than 4,000 mobile phone numbers, mostly young registered voters. Following the election, the recipients were matched with their voting records. The researchers found that 56% found the message helpful; 23% were annoyed. Researchers say that at just $1.56 per additional vote generated, text messaging was extremely cost effective. Telephone calls had a similar impact on voting, but the cost per vote was $20.00. Direct mail increased mobilization by about 0.6 percent, but at a cost of $67 per vote. Short, to the point reminders increased voting by nearly 5%.
No tag for this post.
Related posts
This entry was written by and posted on January 31, 2008 at 1:27 pm and filed under HPI Weekly. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.
Post a comment(Latest is displayed first) or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.