Senate Primary Over, New Battle Begins in Indiana

Democrats were casting the general election fight as a referendum on whether moderates should still have a place in Washington, while Tea Party organizers said it would be seen as a national test of the movement’s enduring strength.

Democratic leaders, who had doubted their odds against Mr. Lugar, a Republican so moderate that even the leaders admitted that plenty of Democrats liked him, sounded giddy about their November opponent: Richard E. Mourdock, a Tea Party-supported Republican who seized a remarkable 61 percent of the vote in part by denouncing bipartisanship and pledging to an unwavering conservative approach.

“Democratic donors across the country are going to see this as a prime pickup opportunity,” said Matt Canter, a spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, who added that the Indiana seat would fall among five top Republican-held seats being targeted in the fight for control of the Senate.

Labor leaders, too, said they saw an opportunity now in Indiana. “We’re all ramping up our plans as we speak,” said Nancy J. Guyott, president of the Indiana A.F.L.-C.I.O.

National conservative groups, some of which had poured more than $3 million to benefit Mr. Mourdock in the primary, were poised to send still more if needed. The number of such outside groups also appeared likely to grow if the contest here, against Representative Joe Donnelly, a Democrat, appears truly competitive — a notion some conservative leaders remained skeptical about, given Indiana’s Republican leanings.

“It’s a big race because a lot hinges on our success,” said Brendan Steinhauser, director of federal and state campaigns at FreedomWorks, which trains Tea Party members and which spent about $850,000 in Mr. Mourdock’s victory and plans to be similarly involved in the general election.

“If Mourdock were not to win,” Mr. Steinhauser said, the gloating would come not just from Democrats but establishment Republicans, pointing to the Tea Party. “They would want to blame that on us — ‘See, we told you so,’ ” he said.

By Wednesday, the outlines of a new political battle were emerging, with Democrats trying to paint Mr. Mourdock as a far-right candidate with little appeal for independents or moderate Republicans, and conservatives portraying Mr. Donnelly as a typical Democrat.

The Club for Growth, which had spent money on television and radio commercials against Mr. Lugar in the primary and said it would contribute more, if needed, in the general election, said Mr. Donnelly was “an economic liberal who votes in lock-step” with Democratic leaders.

Mr. Donnelly, who was elected in 2006 to represent a northern Indiana district, described himself as among the most conservative Democrats in the House in a moment when, he said, voters are looking for something different than they were in 2010. “Right now, it’s not about fire and brimstone,” he said. “It’s about jobs and the opportunity for your family to succeed.”

Although President Obama won Indiana in 2008, the state has long been a place where Republicans do well, and Mr. Obama is considered unlikely to win here again. None of it would seem to be fertile ground for a Democratic Senate bid, and some conservative leaders said they remained unconvinced that Mr. Mourdock would have any trouble in November.

But Dan Parker, the chairman of the Indiana Democratic Party, described Mr. Mourdock as an “extreme Tea Party candidate,” who would not appeal to a general election audience. “Dick Lugar was the mainstream Republican,” he said. “Indiana is not crazy conservative.”

Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, a Democrat, who rose from nowhere to be elected in 2010 after Republicans there rejected a popular moderate and nominated Tea Party favorite Christine O’Donnell, said he reached out to Mr. Donnelly Tuesday night after Mr. Lugar’s defeat.

“I think there’s a very good chance he could be the Chris Coons of 2012,” the senator said.

State Republican leaders, calling on Wednesday for party unity following Mr. Lugar’s loss, stood beside Mr. Mourdock on a stage here and seemed eager to play down his Tea Party ties and emphasize his traditional Republican credentials. Complicating the efforts, Mr. Lugar, who was not in attendance at the gathering, issued a sharp statement condemning what he suggested was a rising trend of rejecting political independence and bipartisan conversation.  

“He comes right out of the heart, right out of mainstream of our party, and I think that was really, among many, his longest single suit in the huge win that he had yesterday,” said Gov. Mitch Daniels, the governor, who had endorsed Mr. Lugar and had previously said he viewed Mr. Mourdock as a friend.

Indeed, Mr. Mourdock is in his second term as state treasurer, and he has been known for appearing at local Republican events and county dinners for years; when he announced his bid for the senate, he had a surprising majority of endorsements from the party’s county chairmen and chairwomen around the state.

“The first label they’re going to try to put on me is that Mourdock is this wild-eyed Tea Party guy,” Mr. Mourdock said. “But as the governor said, I’ve been swimming in the pool of Republican politics a long time,” he said, growing choked up as he described his love for the party.

Jonathan Weisman contributed reporting from Washington, and Steven Greenhouse from New York.

View the original article here

Indiana union bill: Even with Dems AWOL, lawmakers move closer to vote (The Christian Science Monitor)

Chicago – Most Indiana Democrats were absent from the House floor in Indianapolis Friday, the third day of session they skipped to protest a proposed bill they say is harmful to unions.

But their absence Friday did not prevent a House committee from hearing more than five hours of testimony on the bill in question, which would ban negotiations between a union and company if workers are forced to pay fees for representation.

The committee ended the day by voting to send the bill to the House for a full vote, which Republicans say will happen next week. However, a quorum in that chamber is needed for the vote. Actions by Democrats suggest they are not worried about the fines, at $1,000 per day per lawmaker, that they face for not showing up.

RECOMMENDED: Top 5 fastest-growing states 

Republicans will get their vote, but it’s a matter of when, says Brian Vargus, a political scientist at Indiana University in Indianapolis. Democrats are reluctant to give the Republican majority a victory because it may weaken union support.

“Unions are big contributors to the Democrats, and they feel with the decline of unionization, it would solidify Republicans. It simply comes down to that,” Mr. Vargus says.

The area’s diminished role in the steel and automotive industries has resulted in declining membership for Indiana unions. In 2010, the share of workers in Indiana who were unionized was 10.9 percent, lower than the national average of 11.9 percent, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Last year, Indiana’s Republican leadership passed a collective-bargaining law that weakens the negotiating power of public unions in the state. The so-called right-to-work bill being contemplated this session would further clamp down on union activity.

Collective-bargaining legislation has been a bumpier road for neighboring states in the Midwest. For example, although Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) saw his collective-bargaining bill become law, it was not without a major fight that continues today with a recall effort to remove him from office. In Ohio, voters repudiated a collective-bargaining law in November. And in Michigan, Gov. Rick Snyder (R) is on record as saying it is not the time to push for such legislation, which he called “divisive” last month.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) and House Speaker Brian Bosma (R) are ignoring the potential backlash because they probably see it as an opportunity “to weaken the Democrats in the state” in an election year, says Vargus. “If they can limit union power and union strength, they will feel it will benefit their candidates,” he says of the state Republican leadership.

Friday’s testimony came from both sides of the issue. Keith Busse, a former chief executive officer of Steel Dynamics in Fort Wayne, Ind., described the bill as a “jobs boon” because it would convince companies outside the state that Indiana is business-friendly and prepared to help create job opportunities.

The NFL Players Association also weighed in, most likely because this year’s Super Bowl is set in Indianapolis on Feb. 5. In a statement, the organization, which is based in Washington D.C., criticized the legislation, calling it “a political ploy designed to destroy basic workers’ rights.” The statement added, “it’s the wrong priority for Indiana.”

Democrats say they will not return for a vote until Republicans agree to hold a series of public hearings around the state to justify the bill’s passage to voters. Republicans say they will probably start enforcing the $1,000 penalty next week.

That threat has already been enough for three Democrats to show up since Wednesday, which was the first day of the session. One of those Democrats, Vanessa Summers of Indianapolis, told reporters Thursday that she “cannot stand the fine” because she is a single mother with a son in college.

“I’m on the right side of history. So whatever happens is going to bless me,” Representative Summers said.

Online fundraising efforts via ActBlue, a Democratic political-action committee, launched Friday to help offset costs for the Indiana Democrats still staying away.

RECOMMENDED: Top 5 fastest-growing states 

Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.

View the original article here

Indiana GOP zeroes in on ‘right to work’ law, despite Dems going AWOL (Daily Caller)

When Democratic lawmakers in Wisconsin fled their state in February 2011 to hamstring Republicans working to limit the collective-bargaining rights of public-sector unions, their colleagues in Indiana were clearly paying attention. Beginning Wednesday, Hoosier State Democrats have been skipping out of work to prevent Republicans from passing a “right to work” law.

The legislative proposal, likely to pass the Republican-dominated state legislature — if everyone were present — aims to ban negotiations between companies and unions whose workers are forced to pay dues in order to keep their jobs.

But the Christian Science Monitor reports that although Democrats are AWOL, and risk $1,000 fines every day they are absent, Republicans are taking steps toward their goal. On Friday a House committee heard more than five hours of testimony on the bill.

Democrats, who rely on labor unions for political support, want to avoid a Republican victory. But they may not be able to hold their opponents off much longer.

“Unions are big contributors to the Democrats,” Indiana University political science professor Brian Vargus said, “and they feel with the decline of unionization, it would solidify Republicans. It simply comes down to that.”

Still, he told the paper, it’s a matter of when, not if.

Indiana’s Republican legislators already used their majority last year to pass a law similar to the one that caused the fracas in Wisconsin. And as steel mills and automotive plants decline in Indiana, unions have seen their memberships decline to 10.9 percent of the private sector workforce, a full percentage point below the national average

Democrats say they will not return for a vote until Republicans agree to hold field hearings throughout Indiana to justify the bill’s passage. Republicans say they will probably start enforcing the $1,000 per day penalty next week.

A Democratic-affiliated political action committee called ActBlue has already launched a fundraising effort enabling liberal voters to help offset those fines for Democratic lawmakers who continue to avoid coming to work.

David is The Daily Caller’s executive editor. Follow him on Twitter.

Read more stories from The Daily Caller

Gingrich goes after Romney

White House mum about guns on Giffords anniversary

Google bomb haunts Senate candidate, and it isn't 'Santorum'

Indiana GOP zeroes in on 'right to work' law, despite Dems going AWOL

TheDC Top Ten: Keith Olbermann, sir, hates his bald critics [SLIDESHOW]

View the original article here

Indiana House Democrats end boycott of right-to-work bill (Reuters)

INDIANAPOLIS (Reuters) – Democrats in the Indiana state House of Representatives on Monday ended a three-day boycott blocking Republican-backed right-to-work legislation that opponents view as an assault on unions.

House Democratic leader Pat Bauer said the three-day boycott by most Democrats last week gave them a chance to circulate information about the measure around Indiana.

Republicans hold a 60-40 majority in the Indiana House, which needs a quorum of two-thirds of its members to be brought to order. With 98 representatives present on Monday, the bill was assigned to a committee for discussion Tuesday.

An Indiana Senate committee on Friday advanced a right-to-work bill to the full Senate for consideration.

Under the proposed right-to-work law, employees at unionized private workplaces would not be required to pay union dues. Supporters say the move would attract jobs to Indiana. Critics call it union busting.

Last year, House Democrats fled the state to neighboring Illinois to avoid voting on a similar right-to-work bill and other legislation they viewed as anti-labor and anti-public education. The bill died, and other bills were altered.

If the right-to-work proposal is approved, Indiana would be the first state in the industrial heartland of the United States to adopt such a law. It is in force in 22 other states, mostly in the South and West.

(Reporting by Susan Guyett; Writing by David Bailey; Editing by Greg McCune)

View the original article here

Indiana braces for Wisconsin-style showdown over union bill - again (The Christian Science Monitor)

Chicago – Democrats in Indiana are replaying a scene from last year by refusing to allow the state’s House to come to session and vote on a controversial bill that they say will weaken unions.

The Indiana House returned Wednesday for a 10-week session. On the agenda: a so-called right-to-work bill that would ban negotiations between a union and company if workers are forced to pay fees for representation.

Democrats did not show up for the legislative session and instead remained in private meetings, which prevented the Republican majority from having a quorum to start the session. Indiana law is written so a quorum is needed for every vote, whether or not it involves spending money.

RECOMMENDED: Top 5 fastest-growing states

Democrats are hesitant to call their actions a walkout, a term that was last year when the same legislative proposal prompted the same lawmakers to flee to Illinois for five weeks. They returned once Republicans removed the bill from a vote in the 2011 legislative session.

This time around, Democrats will not return until Republicans agree to hold public hearings around the state, says minority leader Pat Bauer of South Bend. “It’s a filibuster until we can get the truth. For now, it’s about the bill,” Representative Bauer told reporters Wednesday.

Bauer said that while their actions are indefinite, he and his colleagues have no intention of exiting the state.

How long they stay away is up to the public, says Brian Vargus, a political scientist at Indiana University in Indianapolis.

“You can’t tell exactly how far [the Democrats] will go until you see more of the public reaction to them not showing up again,” Mr. Vargus says. “It’s impossible if it comes to any kind of vote. The only hope they have is if it goes before the public.”

Republicans are promoting the right-to-work bill as a job creator that will drive businesses to the state for a business-friendly environment. They also say the bill gives workers a choice on whether they want to commit to union dues.

Democrats see the bill as a backhanded way to weaken unions. In a statement Wednesday, Bauer said the current legislation package proposed by Republicans is staked on “an anti-paycheck, anti-job bill that will lower wages, cut pensions and benefits, and increase workplace deaths.”

If the right-to-work bill does become law, Indiana would become the 23rd state with such legislation – though it would be the first in America’s traditional manufacturing belt. The last state to adopt this kind of rule was Oklahoma in 2001.

Republicans say that the Democrats’ actions are stalling votes on other important issues including education, a statewide smoking ban, a phaseout of the state’s inheritance tax, and a $1.3 billion overhaul of mass transit in central Indiana.

The Democrats’ filibuster is a “childish tactic,” Rob Beiswenger, executive director of the Indiana Right to Work Committee, told a local television station Wednesday. “Not only are [Democrats] stopping the right-to-work bill; they are stopping every single bill.”

For each day in session that Democrats miss, they face a $1,000 fine per lawmaker – a penalty that became law last year following that exodus. Republicans have yet to say if they will issue the fines.

The call by Democrats to hold public meetings is not unwarranted, according to a poll conducted this past November by Ball State University’s Bowen Center for Public Affairs in Muncie, Ind. It found that while 27 percent of Indiana residents support right to work and 24 percent oppose it, 48 percent are undecided.

RECOMMENDED: Top 5 fastest-growing states 

Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.

View the original article here

Walkout by Indiana Democrats stalls anti-union bill (Reuters)

INDIANAPOLIS (Reuters) – Indiana House Democrats met behind closed doors on Wednesday, delaying the start of the 2012 legislative session and blocking action on controversial anti-union legislation backed by Republicans.

House Democratic Leader Pat Bauer defended the walkout, saying his members had been forced to boycott the first day of the new session to thwart a Republican effort to quickly ram the so-called right-to-work measure through the house.

Only additional hearings on the bill, including public meetings around the state, would break the impasse, Bauer said.

A spokesman for House Speaker Brian Bosma, who tried unsuccessfully to bring the house to order on Wednesday, said Republicans eventually adjourned for the day without concluding any business but planned to reconvene on Thursday.

Without the Democrats in attendance, the House does not have the quorum it needs to conduct business.

Under the proposed aw, employees at unionized private workplaces would not be required to pay union dues. Supporters say the move would attract jobs to Indiana. Critics call it union busting.

Last year, House Democrats fled the state to neighboring Illinois to avoid voting on a similar right-to-work bill and other legislation they viewed as anti-labor and anti-public education. The bill died, and other bills were altered.

The absentees were fined and a bill that raised the amount of money that could be collected from absent legislators was enacted.

Should the Democrats return, the numbers are in Republicans' favor with a 60-40 majority in the House and a supermajority of 37-13 in the senate.

Bosma said there would be no fines involved with Wednesday's absences but criticized the Democrats for failing to do the jobs they were elected to do.

If the bill passes, Indiana would become the first right-to-work state in an area considered the country's traditional manufacturing belt.

The bill's sponsor, Republican Indiana State Representative Jerry Torr, has been introducing similar legislation since 2004. He said the bill was about "fairness and freedom" for individual employees to decide whether they want to associate with a union.

Democrats argue that such laws lead to lower wages for all. In an article circulated by Democratic lawmakers, University of Notre Dame professors Barbara Fick and Marty Wolfson argued that trying to attract businesses to a state based on low wages undermines living standards for most workers.

"Most people would agree that lowering wages and benefits for Indiana workers is not the best way to support economic development in Indiana," Fick and Wolfson wrote.

Fick, who teaches law, and Wolfson, who teaches economics, are both affiliated with the Higgins Labor Studies Program at Notre Dame.

(Editing by James B. Kelleher and Cynthia Osterman)

View the original article here

Walkout by Indiana Democrats stalls right-to-work bill (Reuters)

INDIANAPOLIS (Reuters) – Indiana House Democrats met behind closed doors on Wednesday, delaying the start of the 2012 legislative session and blocking action on controversial right-to-work legislation backed by Republicans.

House Democratic Leader Pat Bauer defended the walkout, saying his members had been forced to boycott the first day of the new session to thwart a Republican effort to quickly ram the anti-union measure through the house.

Only additional hearings on the right-to-work bill, including public meetings around the state, would break the impasse, Bauer said.

A spokesman for House Speaker Brian Bosma, who tried unsuccessfully to bring the house to order on Wednesday, said Republicans eventually adjourned for the day without concluding any business but planned to reconvene on Thursday.

Without the Democrats in attendance, the House does not have the quorum it needs to conduct business.

Under the proposed right-to-work law, employees at unionized private workplaces would not be required to pay union dues. Supporters say the move would attract jobs to Indiana. Critics call it union busting.

Last year, House Democrats fled the state to neighboring Illinois to avoid voting on a similar right-to-work bill and other legislation they viewed as anti-labor and anti-public education. The bill died, and other bills were altered.

The absentees were fined and a bill that raised the amount of money that could be collected from absent legislators was enacted.

Should the Democrats return, the numbers are in Republican's favor with a 60-40 majority in the House and a supermajority of 37-13 in the senate.

Bosma said there would be no fines involved with Wednesday's absences but criticized the Democrats for failing to do the jobs they were elected to do.

If the bill passes, Indiana would become the first right-to-work state in an area considered the country's traditional manufacturing belt.

The bill's sponsor, Republican Indiana State Representative Jerry Torr, has been introducing similar legislation since 2004. He said the bill was about "fairness and freedom" for individual employees to decide whether they want to associate with a union.

Democrats argue that such laws lead to lower wages for all. In an article circulated by Democratic lawmakers, University of Notre Dame professors Barbara Fick and Marty Wolfson argued that trying to attract businesses to a state based on low wages undermines living standards for most workers.

"Most people would agree that lowering wages and benefits for Indiana workers is not the best way to support economic development in Indiana," Fick and Wolfson wrote.

Fick, who teaches law, and Wolfson, who teaches economics, are both affiliated with the Higgins Labor Studies Program at Notre Dame.

(Editing by James B. Kelleher and Cynthia Johnston)

View the original article here