Ken de la Bastide column: How will legislation impact Hoosiers?
One bill that will have long-range implications enables school board candidates to declare a political party. Heretofore, school board elections have always been non-partisan in Indiana.
It certainly appears that the Republican Party majority at the legislature is attempting to give school board candidates that declare the GOP label an advantage.
In the past, voters would have to research the political leanings of school board candidates. Now a voter can just cast a ballot based on the political party declared by school board candidates.
Will this take some interest away from school issues? Also, will it affect potential funding for school systems, sending more money to schools with boards controlled by the party in power at the Statehouse?
It's similar to legislation that was proposed by local lawmaker Sen. Mike Gaskill to move municipal elections to the same year as elections for state and federal offices.
Gaskill's proposal was assigned to a study committee that will make a recommendation to lawmakers in 2026.
If the change is eventually adopted, it will take the focus away from local issues in municipal elections, instead encouraging voters to cast ballots based on state and national concerns.
Lawmakers were also informed that Indiana is expecting to see a decrease of $2.4 billion in state revenues over the next few years.
The two-year budget passed for 2026-27 is $45 billion, with funding reductions in several areas, including the Indiana Economic Development Corp. and local health departments.
Spending for public health was cut from $100 million annually to $40 million.
Lawmakers also approved a $2 increase in the state's cigarette tax to $2.99 per pack starting July 1. The anticipated $800 million in additional revenue will be used to help cover the state's Medicaid costs.
I suspect many people will consider kicking the smoking habit when a pack of cigarettes will cost close to $12. At least for a brief time, cigarette companies will probably offer discounts on the price in an effort to keep people purchasing their products.
The good news from the General Assembly is that lawmakers defeated an effort to criminalize homelessness by making it illegal to camp on public grounds.
Although the intention of the bill was to help the homeless get needed services, the reality is that it would not have been effective.
Over the next weeks and months, local residents will learn of the impact new legislation will have on county and city government operations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
14 minutes ago
- The Hill
Paxton's lead over Cornyn nearly cut in half: poll
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's (R) lead over incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) in the state's Senate primary is narrowing, according to a new survey from Texas Southern University's Barbara Jordan Public Policy Research and Survey Center survey. The poll showed Paxton holding a five-point lead among likely primary voters, 44 percent to 39 percent, in a two-way race with Cornyn. Another 17 percent said they were undecided. The last Texas Southern University poll released in May showed Paxton with a nine-point lead over Cornyn. The five-point gap between Paxton and Cornyn remains the same in a hypothetical three-way race with Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-Texas), who has been considering a primary run. Paxton leads with 35 percent while Cornyn trails at 30 percent. Hunt comes in with 22 percent support. Another 13 percent said they were unsure. The poll released on Wednesday comes after a separate Emerson College survey released last week showed the incumbent senator and attorney general locked in a dead heat. That poll showed Cornyn leading Paxton 30 percent to 29 percent, with five percent saying they prefer another candidate and 37 percent saying they were undecided. Most polls released before last week's Emerson College poll showed Paxton with a double-digit lead over Cornyn, leading to questions about the incumbent senator's electability in a primary. Cornyn's allies have pulled out all of the stops in an effort to boost him. According to The Texas Tribune, the Senate GOP leadership-affiliated One Nation has spent more than $4 million in advertising, while Texans for a Conservative Majority, another pro-Cornyn group, has spent $3.2 million. The pro-Cornyn Conservative Majority Project has spent roughly $500,000. The latest poll from Texas Southern University's Barbara Jordan Public Policy Research and Survey Center was conducted from Aug. 6 to Aug. 12, 2025 among 1,500 likely Texas Republican primary voters. The margin of error is plus or minus 2.53 percentage points.
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's what some Virginia lawmakers want to do about the affordable housing crisis
RICHMOND — The General Assembly allocated $87.5 million in the current budget for the Virginia Housing Trust Fund, a financial resource that helps preserve and develop affordable housing units. That's the largest investment from the state in the fund's history. More funding has equaled more affordable housing — in fiscal 2024, $60 million went toward the creation or preservation of more than 3,000 affordable units, compared to $5.4 million generating about 300 units in fiscal 2014. But in 2021, the last time a comprehensive statewide housing needs assessment was conducted, the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission found the state would need to allocate closer to $1.6 billion annually to develop 20,000 units per year to meet the state's need for affordable housing in 10 years. 'We still have a long way to go,' said Isabel McLain, director of policy and advocacy at the Virginia Housing Alliance, during a presentation to a Virginia Housing Commission workgroup at the General Assembly Building Tuesday. The VHTF helps get existing projects with other funding sources over the finish line. The bulk — 80% — of the funds are administered to the Affordable and Special Needs Housing loan pool. Those loans then go to projects with units affordable to people earning 80% or less than the area median income. Affordable is defined as costing no more than 30% of one's income. The other 20% of the VHTF funds go toward homeless reduction grants, which can pay for projects like a new shelter or rental assistance. State Sen. Emily Jordan, R-Smithfield, proposed a bill this past session that would change that formula to a 65-35 split. That bill died in committee. At Tuesday's meeting, she made the case it should be reintroduced. 'In Hampton Roads, we know that we have an affordable housing issue,' she said. 'What this bill sought to do is provide some flexibility in that ratio so we could try to, in the immediate forefront, find some additional funding to address our targeted homelessness population as we work towards addressing the affordable housing crisis we have in Hampton Roads.' Members of the workgroup did not have additional comments or questions for Jordan, but chair Del. Briana Sewell, D-Woodbridge, said the group looked forward to working with Jordan on the issue in the future. Three senators, five delegates and three governor appointees sit on the Housing Commission. There are two workgroups within the Commission: the one that met Tuesday studies affordable housing solutions, and the other studies local land use and and community living. The workgroups, which include stakeholders from different housing sectors, provide recommendations on proposed legislation to the full commission, which in turn makes legislative recommendations to the legislature. The workgroup also heard from Del. Bonita Anthony, D-Norfolk, on her bill to require a geographic equity impact assessment on new affordable housing units. That bill passed the House, but was referred back to the Senate Finance and Appropriations Committee, where it was passed by. The goal, Anthony said, is to correct history of high concentrations of poverty and allow families who qualify for affordable housing more choice on where to live. She cited areas of Norfolk including the Park Place neighborhood and Young Terrace and Calvert Square, two public housing complexes in the process of being redeveloped. 'We wanted to correct decades of precedence where affordable housing has been disproportionately clustered in certain neighborhoods,' she said. 'We wanted to unpack some of those structural patterns, we wanted to disrupt some of those cycles of concentrated poverty and oversaturation.' But Anthony acknowledged the language of the bill could have had unintended consequences, like introducing caps on how many affordable housing units could be in specific neighborhoods. 'I absolutely understand the intent of this bill,' said workgroup member Erin Kormann, legislative counsel with the Virginia Association of Realtors. 'I would encourage you to work, and I'm sure you already have, with the affordable housing people and how to tweak that language so that it can't be used to keep this kind of housing out of certain areas.' Sen. Glen Sturtevant, R-Midlothian, presented his bill to limit how many single family houses private equity firms and hedge funds can buy. That bill was incorporated with legislation proposed by Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg, D-Richmond, before it died in committee. Sturtevant said he planned to reintroduce the bill this coming session with added provisions, recommended by the Virginia Poverty Law Center to include limits on how those firms can buy mobile home parks. 'This is only going after the biggest of the big entities, the Wall Street hedge funds and private equity groups,' Sturtevant said. 'The threshold that we have come up with is those institutional investors that have $50 million or more in assets.' Under the guidance proposed by Sturtevant, entities would also only be prohibited from purchasing single family homes if they already had 50 or more properties. Sturtevant acknowledged that only own a small portion of homes — about 6.3% in Richmond, he said — were sold to institutional investors. But he said it matters for first time homebuyers. 'When you have a skewing of market forces by an entity that has a ton of money and the ability to pay cash to be able to come into a housing market, that is going to have in the aggregate effects throughout the rest of the market,' he said. 'Homes are for people and are supposed to be owned by people, not as part of some stock portfolio investment strategy.' The VPLC said that there are also maintenance concerns when often out-of-state private equity firms own mobile home parks. 'What we have seen, especially down in Southwest Virginia, is that they do not put people on staff on site,' said workgroup member Daniel Rezai, a housing attorney with the Virginia Poverty Law Center. 'Trying to get someone on the phone to come and take care of a major maintenance issue is almost impossible.' But some members of the commission appeared skeptical of a ban on mega investors. 'My concern is where a lot of this conversation pops up around the country, it's motivated by a fear of rental properties in traditionally single-family home ownership communities,' said workgroup member Andrew Clark, vice president of government affairs at the Home Builders Association of Virginia. 'But if the focus is truly to make sure that we're having housing stock and increasing supply and not having these mega investors come in… I don't think we'd necessarily be moving the needle at all by prohibiting these folks from purchasing these properties when we should be looking at zoning, financing opportunities, all those things that are constraining supply.' Kate Seltzer, 757-713-7881, Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hoosier elections must remain free and fair
Will Indiana follow Texas' lead in redistricting mid-decade? (Getty Images) Vice President J.D. Vance recently visited Indiana to meet with Gov. Mike Braun and Republican leaders. They discussed a plan to redraw the state's congressional districts this year, mid-decade, in order to gain one or both of the seats currently held by Indiana Democrats and rig the 2026 mid-terms so Republicans can preserve their very slim House majority. We are scholars and teachers of U.S. law and politics. And we are deeply troubled by the Trump administration's attempt to rewrite the electoral rules mid-stream to maximize its power, and by Indiana Republicans' failure to immediately reject such a transparently partisan move, which would corrupt the fairness of our elections. Whatever our party affiliation, all Hoosiers should care about fairness. We would never support changing the rules in the middle of a basketball game so that our team would gain unfair advantage. We want winners to win fair and square. In sports, and in politics. Such corruption is possible because the process whereby Congressional districts are created is localized and susceptible to being rigged by those bent on gaining an unfair partisan advantage. According to the U.S. Constitution, Congress allocates seats in the House of Representatives to states based on population. A census must be taken within every ten years to determine how population shifts may change the number of Congressional districts allocated to each state — a process called reapportionment. The actual shape of Congressional districts in each state is determined by state legislation. Indiana's House GOP congressional contingent lines up behind redistricting effort In 1964, the Supreme Court ruled that Congressional districts must be of roughly equal population and honor the principle of 'one person, one vote.' Since then, Congressional redistricting has almost always been done on the ten-year cycle, except when federal courts have required certain states to redraw their maps to bring them into compliance with federal election law. But now Texas Republicans are trying to redraw their Congressional map mid-decade. The reason why: because President Trump has very publicly called upon them to do this, telling CNBC's Squawk Box: 'We have an opportunity in Texas to pick up five seats. We have a really good governor, and we have good people in Texas. And I won Texas . . . and we are entitled to five more seats.' It should be obvious that Trump's vote total in the 2024 presidential election confers no GOP entitlement to extra House seats, which are not allocated based on presidential popularity (indeed, while Trump only received 56% of the 2024 Presidential vote, the Texas GOP controls 66% of the state's House seats). If the party wants five more seats in Texas or two more in Indiana, then the correct way to obtain them is to run strong candidates in districts currently held by Democrats, and win the elections in those districts, fair and square. The administration's push for Texas, Indiana, and other 'red' states to redistrict now has one very clear purpose: to change the electoral map, midstream, so that Trump and his party can retain control of the entire federal government by giving more power to voters they like while taking electoral power away from voters they don't like. And that is simply not fair. Hoosier citizens, and not statehouse Republicans, should choose who they want to represent them in their congressional districts in 2026 and 2028 and 2030. And they can freely choose only if the elections are fair. Any party that tries to try to change district boundaries in advance of an election just so they have a better chance of winning the election is doing something that has a simple name: cheating. Basketball coach John Wooden, a legendary Hoosier, famously taught his players to 'never lie, never cheat, never steal.' Indiana Republicans should heed coach Wooden's famous words, politely refuse to do the bidding of the Trump administration, and stand tall, with their Democratic counterparts, and all patriotic Hoosiers, in defense of the fairness of our elections.
