ThinkProgress Home
ThinkProgress
ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Indiana

Economy

Indiana GOP Senate Candidate Says His Concern About Poor Not Paying Taxes Akin To Lincoln’s Fears About Slavery

The Republican Party’s nominee for Indiana’s U.S. Senate seat recently compared the fight over tax rates and reform to former president Abraham Lincoln’s concern over slavery, alluding to Lincoln’s famous “House Divided” speech ahead of the Civil War.

State treasurer Richard Mourdock (R) rehashed a favorite GOP talking point — that 47 percent of Americans don’t pay income taxes — at the town hall in Columbus City, Indiana, comparing those 47 percent to the Confederate states that seceded from the Union in an attempt to protect and expand slavery. Referencing Lincoln’s speech, Mourdock said that as long as nearly half of Americans don’t pay taxes, “we are a house divided” that is presumably on the point to another fight, this time between the rich and the poor:

MOURDOCK: What he meant by that was that slavery was either going to be totally eliminated from the United States or it was no longer just going to be restricted to the Southern states, it was going to go everywhere. I am here to suggest to you that we are in a house divided. You know this past April, when our federal taxes were paid, 47 percent — 47 percent — of all American households paid no income tax. In fact, half of that 47 percent almost, actually got tax money back from the government that they never paid -– because a few years ago we revised the welfare program to make it part of the tax code. When 47 percent are paying no income taxes — they do pay Social Security — but they are not paying income taxes, and 53 percent are carrying the load, we are a house divided.

Watch it:

Mourdock’s ridiculous allusion to a speech referencing the spread of slavery aside, the facts he presented to town hall attendees aren’t telling the whole story. It’s true that half of Americans don’t pay federal income taxes, but they do pay state income taxes, payroll taxes (which Mourdock referenced), and a host of other taxes. Many of those 47 percent don’t pay income taxes because they don’t have income on which to pay taxes — they are students or seniors without taxable income, or they don’t make enough money to qualify for the bottom tax bracket.

Republicans have opposed tax increases of various kinds to help pay down the deficit, largely because so many are beholden to a radical no-taxes pledge authored by Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist. Mourdock, who has signed the pledge, seems no different than many Republicans in Congress — he’s willing to ignore the pledge, as long as the only tax increases that pass are on the poorest Americans.

Election

Top 5 Things You Need To Know About Indiana Senate Nominee Richard Mourdock (R)

Last night, Richard Mourdock (R) upset Sen. Dick Lugar (R) in Indiana’s Republican Senate primary. Mourdock, who currently serves as State Treasurer, trounced the 36-year Senate veteran by 22 points, 61-39, due in no small part to his support from Tea Party groups.

Mourdock won by positioning himself well to the right of Lugar. Now, as he enters the limelight as the biggest Tea Party victory of 2012, let’s take a look at the top five things everyone should know about Mourdock.

- (1) Mourdock believes that President Obama deserves the blame for a bad economy, but no credit for its improvement: In an interview with ThinkProgress earlier this year, we asked Mourdock about the economy and who deserves credit in bad times and good. He pinned the blame on President Obama for “killing our economy,” despite the fact that the financial collapse occurred under George W. Bush’s watch. We asked Mourdock whether Obama would deserve credit if the economic recovery continues. “It won’t be because of President Obama when we see recovery,” Mourdock explained. “It will be in spite of President Obama.” [ThinkProgress]

- (2) Mourdock’s take on bipartisanship: it “ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view”: Appearing on MSNBC following his primary victory, Mourdock offered his own unique take on how bipartisanship should work in Washington DC, telling Chuck Todd, “I certainly think bipartisanship ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view.” In other words, the solution for Washington’s ills is not less partisanship and polarization, but more. Dick Lugar had earned a reputation for finding some areas of bipartisan consensus with Democrats, particularly on foreign policy. That is a reputation that Mourdock appears unlikely to uphold. [ThinkProgress]

- (3) His campaign was investigated for accessing voter data: Mourdock’s campaign manager, Jim Holden, “likely violated a user agreement with the state party when he shared a logon to the database with an outside vendor.” In a March 14 email, Holden told staffers that they should “start pillaging email addresses” from the voter database, prompting the state Republican Party to revoke the Mourdock campaign’s access privileges.[AP]

- (4) Mourdock’s model Supreme Court Justice is anti-woman Judge Robert Bork: Asked on MSNBC about how he would approach Supreme Court nomination votes as senator, Mourdock promised to obstruct nominees who didn’t resemble Robert Bork. Bork’s views are so far outside the mainstream they cannot be fully enumerated here, but a few highlights include his description of a federal ban on employment discrimination and whites-only lunch counters as “unsurpassed ugliness,” his belief that it is “silly” to think that women are discriminated against, and that it’s “utterly specious” to suggest that women have a constitutional right to use contraception. [ThinkProgress]

- (5) His candidacy is fueled by dirty energy money and outside spending groups: It is unlikely Mourdock would have won the primary without an infusion of $1.6 million in spending from the pro-Wall Street Club for Growth, as well as over half a million from FreedomWorks, an astroturf Tea Party group. In addition, Mourdock enjoyed a maxed out contribution from Murray Energy’s PAC, which represents the nation’s largest privately-owned coal company. Mourdock, a former coal company executive, received an additional $18,000 in contributions elsewhere from the coal, oil, and gas industries. [ThinkProgress]

Election

Richard Mourdock: ‘Bipartisanship Ought To Consist Of Democrats Coming To The Republican Point Of View’

Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock (R) crushed Sen. Dick Lugar (R) in yesterday’s GOP Senate primary in Indiana, ending the 36-year career of one of the few Republican senators left in Washington who was interested in working with Democrats to get things done.

Tea Party-backed Mourdock is not just ideological, he is adamantly opposed to bipartisanship. In fact, he’s called for more partisanship in Washington, saying he’s more interested in destroying Democrats than solving the nation’s problems by working with them.

Appearing on MSNBC this morning with host Chuck Todd, Mourdock offered his own definition of bipartisanship:

MOURDOCK: I certainly think bipartisanship ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view. … If we [win the House, Senate, and White House], bipartisanship means they have to come our way, and if we’re successful in getting the numbers, we’ll work towards that.

Watch it:

As TP Justice Editor Ian Millhiser notes, Mourdock’s win means Democrats have no choice but to reform the filibuster: “The parties are too far apart. The Republicans are too eager to obstruct, and the handful of GOPers with a history of bipartisanship [like Lugar] will be too spooked to reach across the aisle. America could go years with one or more Supreme Court seats vacant.”

A couple of years ago when conservative activists were making noise about primarying Lugar, former Republican senator and UN ambassador John Danforth told the New York Times, “If Dick Lugar, having served five terms in the U.S. Senate and being the most respected person in the Senate and the leading authority on foreign policy, is seriously challenged by anybody in the Republican Party, we have gone so far overboard that we are beyond redemption.”

Apparently, that time has come.

Election

Three Key Votes Today: What To Look For In Wisconsin, Indiana, And North Carolina

Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IN)

Progressives will be watching Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Indiana closely today as voters head to polls to decide three key votes.

In Wisconsin, Democrats will decide who their nominee will be to go up against Gov. Scott Walker (R) in his upcoming recall election. The party and labor organizations have been split between two candidates for much of the race, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett and former Dane County executive Kathleen Falk, though Barett is the clear favorite and more likely to beat Walker in the recall. Barrett also served five terms in the U.S. House and lost to Walker narrowly in the 2010 gubernatorial race. Falk has been more closely tied to the protest movement against Walker, however. Labor unions and other progressive activists have vowed to unite behind whoever wins in order to oust Walker on June 5.

Indiana has another key primary today, this one on the Republican side, where long-time Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IN) is in the fight of his political life against Tea Party-backed state Treasurer Richard Mourdock (R). Most observers expect Lugar to lose today, ending his 36-year career in the Senate. A Lugar loss would likely make it easier for Democrats to pick up the seat in November, which otherwise would have been a cake walk for Republicans to hold.

And in North Carolina, voters will take on an anti-gay ballot measure that has attracted national attention and organization. Marriage equality is already banned in the state, but North Carolina Amendment One would prohibit civil unions and domestic partnerships as well, and is written so broadly that it could even imperil heterosexual couples.

Election

The Slurpee Senator: Dick Lugar Gets Last Minute Boost From 7-Eleven

As well-funded super PACs — including the Club for Growth Action, FreedomWorks for America, and the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund — poured millions of dollars into independent expenditures encouraging Indiana voters to support for State Treasurer Richard Mourdock (R) and against incumbent Sen. Dick Lugar (R) in tomorrow’s Republican primary, one pro-Lugar super PAC cried foul. But their ads decrying out-of-state influence are the height of hypocrisy as they were largely funded also by out-of-state donors.

Hoosiers for Jobs (formerly Hoosiers for Economic Growth & Jobs) has spent at least $175,000 on mailings and television ads in support of Lugar. Two spots by the group attack efforts by outside groups to “buy the election.” One ad, ironically called “Hypocrites,” attacks the Wall Street Club for Growth’s support of Mourdock as a “D.C. special interest bailout of his campaign.” The other, “Not for Sale,” says the Club is “trying to buy our Senate seat by spending millions of dollars of secret Wall Street money” attacking Lugar.

Watch “Hypocrites”:

Watch “Not for Sale”:

But, as the Center for Public Integrity notes, more than two-thirds of the donations reported to date by Hoosiers for Jobs come from outside of Indiana. The group’s filings reveal that through April 18, it received $170,000. Just $55,000 of that came from Hoosiers, whom the group claims to represent.

Who did fund the misnamed “Hoosiers for Jobs?” Former lobbyist Roy Pfautch of St. Louis, Missouri donated $50,000, Swift Boat funder Sam Fox of St. Louis gave $25,000, and the Dallas-based 7-Eleven Inc. kicked in $25,000.

Why is the convenience store franchise helping Lugar? He “understands our issues,” a spokesperson told the CPI. Lugar also supported the Slurpee-seller in a congressional battle against banks, and his daughter-in-law is a lobbyist for a trade association tied to the omnipresent retailer.

As Super PACs spend more and more on statewide and congressional races, voters should take their messages with a shaker of salt. After all, the TV ads calling out out-of-state funding and hypocrisy may well be paid for by out-of-state hypocrites.

Election

Anti-Bailout House Candidate Lobbied For Bank That Took Bailout Money

Lobbyist and Former Rep. David McIntosh (R-IN)

Lobbyist and Former Rep. David McIntosh (R-IN)

Former Rep. David McIntosh (R-IN) is campaigning to return to Congress. On Tuesday, he will face several other Republicans in a primary for the GOP nomination to fill the open seat of retiring Rep. Dan Burton (R). A registered federal lobbyist, he hopes to spin through the revolving door back into the House. One lobbying client reveals a disturbing contradiction between his rhetoric and his actions.

McIntosh, a co-founder of the conservative Federalist Society and the executive director of then-Vice President Dan Quayle’s infamous Council on Competitiveness in first President Bush’s administration, left Congress in January 2001. That year, he became a registered lobbyist at the firm of Mayer Brown LLP (rules now require a one-year “cooling off” period), using his access and connections to advance the interests of a wide array of corporate interests including Pfizer, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Lockheed Martin.

In 2011, he registered as a lobbyist for the Royal Bank of Canada and, over the course of the year, the bank paid McIntosh and his Mayer Brown colleagues $300,000 to represent its interests.

Now, McIntosh is focusing much of his campaign message on his opposition to bailouts for banks such as President George W. Bush’s 2008 Toxic Asset Relief Program (TARP). He attacks two opponents for supporting “federal bailouts” and promises he’ll “never vote for a bailout.”

In one spot, he focuses on what he calls “really bad ideas” after the 2008 economic meltdown such as “bailing out companies, bailing out Wall Street with taxpayer dollars.” Watch the video:

The only problem: the Royal Bank of Canada’s American subsidiary, RBC America was among those banks receiving bailout funds. According to TARP records, RBC USA received a commitment of $270,000 in Incentive Payments for Home Loan Modification. At least $43,500 has already been given to the bank.

Either McIntosh is being insincere with his fiery anti-bailout bluster…or he was just happy to profit from that which he finds reprehensible.

Election

IN Sen. Candidate Mourdock Fueled With Contributions From Oil & Gas Industry, Investors, And ‘Slumlord’

Richard Mourdock and Dick Lugar

Richard Mourdock and Dick Lugar (AP Photo/Darron Cummings, Pool)

Federal election law requires candidates to disclose not just the names and addresses of all donors contributing more than $200 to a candidate, but also (where possible) the donor’s employer and occupation. Of the more than 750 donations received by Richard Mourdock’s primary campaign for Indiana Senate to date, one stands out. Earl Pendleton Holt, whose three reported contributions to Mourdock total $1,000, identifies himself as a self-employed “slumlord.”

Holt’s candor — be it serious or self-deprecating — is refreshing. Indeed, he has listed the same occupation on contributions this cycle to Senate hopeful Ted Cruz (R-TX), Congressional hopeful and former Rep. Charles Djou (R-HI), and unsuccessful Presidential hopeful Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN). But the interests of scores of other donors to Mourdock’s campaign — and its “independent” supporters — may be less obvious.

Tuesday’s closely watched Indiana Senate Republican primary will not just determine whether six-term Sen. Dick Lugar or state Treasurer Mourdock will face Rep. Joe Donnelly (D) this November. It will also mean the end of a $4.4 million independent expenditure war between a wide array of Super PACs and 501(c)(4)s — the largest amount of any non-presidential race so far this cycle. Though Lugar’s campaign, at of the last reporting period, had outspent Mourdock’s $6.6 million to $2 million, Murdock’s haul fundraising is impressive for a primary challenger and the gap has been partially made up by the $2.6 million to $1.8 million advantage he’s enjoyed in outside group spending.

Among the biggest forces backing Mourdock:

  • The Club for Growth — led by former Rep. Chris Chocola (R-IN), the Club’s 501(c)(4), traditional PAC, and its Club for Growth Action Super PAC have spent at least $1.6 million on ads backing Mourdock and blasting Lugar. The group calls Lugar a “R.I.N.O.” (Republican In Name Only) despite his 63 percent lifetime record of voting with the group’s anti-government agenda.
  • FreedomWorks for America — former Rep. Dick Armey’s (R-TX) “astroturf” group has done mailings and run ads saying Lugar has “lost touch with Indiana values,” spending over $545,000.
  • Gun rights groups — The National Rifle Association has spent more than $322,000 on independent expenditures, criticizing Lugar’s votes to confirm President Obama’s Supreme Court appointments. A trio of pro-gun political action committees have donated about $10,000 to Mourdock’s campaign.
  • The financial sector — although Lugar voted against the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform bill, political action committees for banks and related interests contributed over $17,500 to Moudorck’s campaign and individuals listed as working in the industry kicked in another $35,000-plus.
  • Wealthy investors — About $20,000 of Mourdock’s donations came from wealthy investors and investment management executives.
  • Big polluters — Mourock, himself a former coal company executive, got $5,000 from Murray Energy’s PAC (representing the nation’s largest privately-owned coal company) and more than $18,000 in individual contributions from employees and executives at Murray and other coal, oil, and gas companies.

With one of the key pro-Lugar groups pulling its ads over the weekend, it is quite possible that the man tied with Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) for the longest tenure of any current Senate Republican may see his political career ended by the man backed by those groups — and a self-described “slumlord.”

Justice

NRA Drops $200K Against Republican Dick Lugar After Lugar Supports Sotomayor and Kagan

NRA Website Banner

NRA "Defeat Lugar" Website Banner

With a fiercely contested May 8 primary looming, the National Rifle Association’s Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) is making a big investment in support of Indiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock (R) in his efforts to unseat sixth-term U.S. Sen. Richard “Dick” Lugar (R). The group has so far reported $199,058.19 in expenditures for their new pro-Mourdock, anti-Lugar campaign — and they may well spend more. But while the gun-rights group’s attack ads say Lugar has “changed,” it appears that it is actually the NRA that has shifted its priorities – from legislative dominance to judicial control.

With a new website, television ad, and radio spot, the NRA-PVF highlights what it terms Lugar’s “anti-gun record.” The 30-second TV spot says:

Some things shouldn’t change. Our Indiana values, stewardship of the land, and the protection of our Second Amendment and hunting rights. But over his 36 years in Washington, Dick Lugar HAS changed. He’s become the only Republican candidate in Indiana with an F-rating from the NRA. It’s time for another change. Time to elect a senator who will protect our rights. Time to elect Richard Murdouck for Senate.

Watch the video:

The radio ad is more explicit with the group’s grievances, claiming that Lugar voted for gun bans, a hunting ban, and to confirm “both of Barack Obama’s anti-gun nominees to the Supreme Court.”

But Lugar’s record of supporting some gun-safety legislation is hardly a change. He voted Brady Bill and the assault weapons ban in 1993. He even ran a TV ad during his unsuccessful 1996 presidential run highlighting his assault weapons vote, explaining “being a conservative doesn’t mean you have to lose your common sense.” His 1994 NRA score was 50 percent and his lifetime NRA score as of 2000 was a C-.

In recent years, Lugar has actually cast several key votes with gun rights advocates, backing a 2009 amendment to allow Amtrak riders to check their guns on trains and 2004 and 2005 bills to shield gun manufacturers from liability and lawsuits. In 2006, the Gun Owners of America gave Lugar a 100 percent rating.

Now the NRA gives Lugar an “F,” which it says means he is a “true enemy of gun owners’ rights,” and “a consistent anti-gun candidate who always opposes gun owners’ rights and/or actively leads anti-gun legislative efforts, or sponsors anti-gun legislation.” Why did they sour on Lugar even as backed a number of gun lobby priorities? It appears that it isn’t Dick Lugar whose changed, but rather the NRA itself.

The top complaint on the anti-Lugar website is: “He voted to confirm both Elena Kagan, and Sonya Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, one of only four Republican Senators to vote for both. (Vote 262, 8/6/2009, and Vote 229, 8/5/2010).” Yet, prior to the Obama administration, the NRA had never jumped into a Supreme Court nomination battle. The group came out against Sotomayor’s confirmation and announced it would count the vote on its legislative scorecard. Some reports suggested that Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and the Senate Republican leadership pushed the NRA to score the vote. The group similarly opposed and scored the 2010 confirmation of Kagan. Both were confirmed easily, despite the NRA’s efforts.

So rather than really being about his record on legislation, the NRA-PVF appears to be punishing Sen. Lugar for not giving it a veto over judicial nominations — and betting that a Sen. Mourdock would.

Ultimately, however, it’s not clear how many potential judicial nominees could ever satisfy the NRA’s absurd standards — in its brief history in the business of judicial politics, the NRA has routinely opposed nominees who did nothing more than refuse to ignore binding legal precedents that the NRA doesn’t like. In other words, lawmakers who support judges who faithfully follow the law could be subject to the same attacks that Lugar now faces, while supporters of conservative judicial activism will get off scot free.

Election

Former Republican Senator Warned Conservatives Challenging Lugar Would Mean GOP ‘Beyond Redemption’

Dick Lugar and Ronald Reagan

Two years ago, former Missouri Republican Senator John Danforth, who also served as George W. Bush’s ambassador the U.N., told the New York Times that he worried about his party’s swerve to the hard-right.

Specifically, he said, “If Dick Lugar, having served five terms in the U.S. Senate and being the most respected person in the Senate and the leading authority on foreign policy, is seriously challenged by anybody in the Republican Party, we have gone so far overboard that we are beyond redemption.”

That day, it seems, has come. Today, as early voting begins in Indiana’s GOP Senate primary, two mainstream conservative organizations are opening fire on Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IN) and backing his opponent, State Treasurer Richard Mourdock (R).

The Wall Street-backed Club for Growth Action is airing a 30-second TV ad and two 60-second radio ads tomorrow going after Lugar for being too willing to compromise with Democrats. “Dick Lugar might be a statesman, but he’s not a conservative,” one ad warns. “Indiana conservaties deserve better than Obama’s favorite Republican.”

Meanwhile, the National Rifle Association (NRA) is opening up on Lugar with a six-figure buy of TV, radio, and online ads, along with a direct mail campaign.

Mourdock has already been endorsed by a host of prominent conservative groups.

A new poll shows Lugar is still clinging to lead over Mourdock, but barely. The incumbent leads 42 percent to 35 percent, with pollster Christine Matthews warning the result should “be of significant concern.”

The fact that the man who literally wrote the book on the beneficence of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and helped foment support for Bill Clinton’s impeachment, is warning that his party has drifted too far to the right should give pause to Indiana Republican voters.

Justice

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels Picks Co-Author Of Strict Voter ID Law As New Secretary Of State

New Secretary of State Connie Lawson (R-IN)

New Secretary of State Connie Lawson (R-IN)

With the recent felony conviction of then-Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White (R), the task fell upon Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) to select a replacement for the chief elections officer of his state. Friday, he announced his pick: state Senator Connie Lawson (R).

Lawson, who served in the state senate since 1996 and as clerk of the Hendricks County Circuit Court for seven years before that, was one of the two original authors of Senate Bill 483. That law, enacted in 2005 and upheld by a divided U.S. Supreme Court in 2008, was among the nation’s first laws mandating strict photo identification requirements for voters.

Lawson’s concern about election integrity was also evident in another key vote — in 2010, she voted against the bill that made it legal for alcohol to be sold on election day in Indiana.

Along with Georgia, Indiana’s voter ID rules were the strictest in the nation until 2011 — making it significantly more difficult for voters without valid driver’s licenses to exercise their constitutional right to vote. Since the 2010 elections, Republican legislatures around the country, pushed by their allies at the right-wing corporate front group American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), have been passing similar laws in an organized “war on voting.” These measures, of course, disproportionately disenfranchise minority voters who are less likely to have valid photo identification — and, probably not coincidentally, are most likely to vote for Democratic candidates. Daniels himself signed Lawson’s bill into law; her co-author said at the time that it was needed to guard against voter fraud.

Actual cases of voting fraud are so rare that a voter is much more likely to be struck by lightning than to commit fraud at the polls, though White proved to be the rare exception. He registered and voted in the wrong district, falsely claiming his ex-wife’s residence as his own. Lawson’s law and voter ID laws like it do nothing to prevent that kind of fraud. White had ironically campaigned on election integrity and a pledge to “protect and defend Indiana’s Voter ID law to ensure our elections are fair and protect the most basic and precious right and responsibility of our democracy-voting.”

Hopefully, at least Lawson will oversee the state’s voter suppression without the hypocrisy White demonstrated.

Older

Switch to Mobile