Legislators lock on tax, budget decisions

INDIANAPOLIS -- There is fallout from every session of the Indiana General Assembly.\nDuring this one, lawmakers stiffened penalties for animal cruelty, got tougher on potential terrorists and passed a new law making it a crime, in case police have the time to pursue such offenses, to flick lit cigarettes out the window of a moving vehicle.\nRep. Richard Bodiker, D-Richmond, pushed the need for the latter legislation. He was driving home one night with his car window down and got nailed in the face with a lit cigarette butt from a careless trucker barreling down the road in front of him.\nThere's gotta be a law.\nThe littering statute didn't cover it, because its provisions imply something hitting the ground. That distinction counts in a court of law, and legislators addressed it. They are experts at cleaning up the criminal code.\nBut Indiana lawmakers failed to compromise on the bigger picture -- balancing the state budget and overhauling the tax system.\nNow it's up to voters to sort out the blame game.\nOne poll of Indianapolis-area residents showed a majority favored a special session. That might say something, but there are four million people in Indiana who don't live in or next door to the state's biggest city.\n"No taxpayer wants us to come back here for a special session," said House Minority Leader Brian Bosma, who lives in Indianapolis. "In my 16 years here…I've never heard anyone say, 'Go get 'em in a special session."'\nHouse Speaker John Gregg, D-Sandborn, played up the session's accomplishments when talking to the Statehouse press corps for perhaps the last time. Gregg announced last month that he was not seeking re-election.\nAmong other things, lawmakers passed an anti-terrorism bill and came up with a funding source -- Bureau of Motor Vehicle fees -- to start paying for a telecommunications system that will allow emergency personnel to talk to each other on the same frequency.\nInstead of casting a total net of blame on the session, Gregg acknowledged that there were true philosophical differences between Republicans and Democrats in the Indiana General Assembly.\nRepublicans were mostly interested in restructuring taxes. Democrats were interested in that, but they also wanted to increase taxes on cigarettes and casinos to shore up the state's $1.3 billion budget shortfall.\nDemocratic Gov. Frank O'Bannon wanted both fixes, but he spent the legislative session giving mixed messages.\nBefore the session, he insisted that balancing the budget and restructuring taxes were two completely separate subjects. When Democrats who control the House merged them, he insisted until the end that they were part of one package that would sink or swim as one.\nO'Bannon changed his definition of dockside gambling, saying he could now accept riverboat casinos being docked permanently.\nBoth political parties sent out mixed messages during this legislative session, and neither party created a public outcry for action.\nGregg isn't surprised about that.\n"We spent six years, and this is something all of us have to shoulder"