Hello everyone, I'm back. A self-imposed moratorium on virtually all politics for 15 days is definitely a good thing. Most of the election dust has settled, and people have made their choices. Indiana is now a one-party state, electing Mitch Daniels, and giving the House back to the GOP. For years, the Republicans have said that if we elect them, they'll make it happen, it being shrinking the size of the state government. I find this hard to believe.
An $800 million budget deficit has to be dealt with somehow. During the campaign, the evil phrase "tax increase" was rarely uttered. It was "cut this, cut that." Now that the election is over, the "cut this, cut that" mentality is switching to "all options are on the table." Now, as a idealist living in the real world *sigh*, I would rather them raise the sales tax 1% with a sunset provision on there that would end in either 2006 or 2008, that way it falls in an election year, holding the entire legislature accountable, be it Democrats or Republicans. That money collected would have to go towards paying off the state's debt, not for some pet project.
Enough about taxes. Another subject picking up steam as the General Assembly reconvenes is the issue about Daylight Savings Time (DST). I personally think that Indiana should be on Central Standard Time (CST), or Chicago time. We are geographically and culturally closer to Chicago than that of New York, Boston, or Washington, DC. I realize that there are several counties on the Ohio River and in southeastern Indiana that observe Eastern time year-round, and that would not change. This just puts the state in line with the rest of the country. My rationale on this is I have family on both coasts, and they forget that Indiana does not "change their clocks."
The issue of gay marriage will likely come to the forefront of Indiana politics again. I just don't think that marriage should be an issue in government. To me, marriage is a sacred and holy institution officiated by an ordained minister of faith. If that denomination accepts two men or two women in matrimony, so be it. A personal choice shouldn't be left to government to decide. To me, it's the same as saying that certain people should not be allowed to have children. It also reminds me of the "black codes" I've studied in American History, including the one where no free-black could marry a white person because they were "inferior." Nowadays, it's common, so what's the big deal???
Remember this, in the first debate between Gov.-elect Daniels, outgoing Gov. Kernan, and Kenn Gividen, Daniels agreed with Gividen five times. He now has four years to prove he won't maintain the status quo for the state.