The Indiana Way

I don't flinch nearly as much as the average Libertarian when rocks are cast our way. While folks usually throw gravel, I tend to believe we deserve #9 aggregate dropped overhead by a front-end loader. Why? The usual public M.O. for a Libertarian candidate or official is to loudly squawk about how things are wrong, unfair, suck, or stupid... and then go on to the next complaint. We've come to recognize to obvious her in Indiana- complaining only goes so far, offering an alternative will make you viable.

So it came to pass that an amalgam of regional leaders- mayors, county and city councilors- came together to agree to begin the funding of light rail system. After much negotiation, they unanimously agreed to get behind a starter system that would run from downtown Indianapolis to Fishers, a well-to-do suburb on Indy's northeast side in Hamilton County. The idea was to get the starter up and running with the intention of adding to it in the future towards making a more complete network.

The cost for the starter system? $850 million. The cost was proposed to be bourne by everyone in the country. It is hoped that up to $425 million in Federal money can be earned when the regional leaders make their pitch to a variety of Federal agencies for grant money. The rest of the money, which could be anywhere from $425 million to $750 million, would be supplied by the counties of Central Indiana- Marion (Indy), Hamilton (Fishers), Hancock, Shelby, Morgan, Johnson, and Hendricks via property taxes; also by a hike in the gasoline tax, statewide.
The rationale for the system is that the trains would take car traffic off of the highly congested stretch of I-69 in Fishers, not only to relieve congestion, but to improve air quality. The anticipated usage would result in, optimistically, the diversion of 1% to 4% of commuters from cars to the trains.

This is where the usual Libertarian complaining would come in. Let me try my hand: "1% to 4% of cars dispalced? For nearly a billion dollars? Are ye mad? Back to the drawing board!" -or- "It is unfair and unjust to levy taxes against the good people of Johnson and Hendricks counties for the purpose of providing a benefit to a very small percentage of the people in Marion and Hamilton counties".

While this rhetoric is a useful tool in showing the people of these other locations that Libertarians are the ones defending them while the Democrats and Republicans are the ones taking advantage of them, it won't make a bit of difference towards stopping the proposal. We will win the war of words and lose the battle of the budget. I am not a man of zero sum games! I want to win both battles!

In response, The Libertarian Party of Hamilton County held a press conference to offer an alternative.
We pointed to the corridor chosen for the route. It is the old Nickel Plate railroad, and it still has track on it. We asked the question, "Is light rail the best possible use for this corridor?" We said no, that the best use for the corridor is to convert it into a trail and greenway.

Regional leaders never considered the best use of a resource they govern. They looked at it only as a solution to a problem- congestion and pollution.

We pointed to the extremely successful Monon Trail, running from Indy to Carmel. The Trail is on the former Monon railroad. It has transformed a significant area from a run-down, trash and graffiti catching slum into some of the most desirable real estate in Indianapolis. It elevated hot property in Carmel to ultra-hot. Neighborhoods have been revitalized and small businesses have bloomed along the Monon. The Trail is jammed full of bicyclists, joggers, skaters, and families, all participating in healthy activity.

We asked the question, if it was good for the Monon, why not bring this benefit to the Nickel Plate?
We expect a huge response. We had excellent media coverage for the press conference, with the state's largest radio station (WIBC) and TV covering. We have launched a petition drive designed to show that the Nickel Plate Trail idea has greater support than the light rail system. This is a democracy, isn't it?

Oh, that's right. The regional leaders didn't bother to ask the people who live and own businesses near the corridor which they would prefer. The Libertarians are doing this. Bridges are already being built between us and the supporters of parks and green space. You thought that never happened, didn't you?

Please do continue to cast your rocks at the LP affiliates in other states. They are rhetorically correct, but words do not win the war. Superior policy proposals that are pitched correctly are hard to ignore.

Signs Available!

Well, they say that timing is everything, so who am I to argue?

I have yard signs and bumper stickers supporting Michael Badnarik and Richard Campagna, the Libertarian candidates for President and Vice President, ready and available for Hamilton County members, free of charge.

Let's challenge the laws in Fishers and Noblesville and support our team at the same time. There is no downside- if the law is not enforced, it may as well not exist, and you exercise your rights to free speech and property. If the law is enforced, we get free publicity for the county party and the Presidential ticket.

Contact me with your request for a sign and bumper sticker by email: mikekole@insightbb.com. I'll deliver, but you have to be an Libertarian Party of Indiana member. Now's a good time to renew your membership if it has lapsed, or to become a member if you had been thinking about doing so/

Letters Fun

The Indianapolis Star printed my letter addressing the laws regarding political signs in today's edition. Having a letter printed is always good, so I am without complaint. I do find it an interesting and fun exercise to compare the original letter with what was printed.

There was some editing here, but there were some main points I wanted addressed, and they pretty much showed up:

1. Signs in one's yard are not only a free speech issue, but also a property rights issue.
2. As such, any kind of sign should be permitted, so long as it does not create a hazardous situation, such as blocking traffic visibility.
3. As such, the signs should be permitted at any time. Current laws should be repealed.
4. Make sure the phrase 'Libertarian Party' is included prominently.

Here is my original letter. Deleted passages have been italicized:

"The Star described the Libertarian Party's yard sign lawsuit against the City of Indianapolis as a defense of free speech, but it is also an important defense of property rights. Residential property is not owned by the City, but by the homeowner, and City policy-makers should always keep that respectfully in mind.

So, it should be a cause of concern that the City's solution to this issue is to set a limit on the number of signs homeowners can place in their yard. Will there now be sign police to make sure everyone obeys? It is safe to say that most residents would rather see City resources used in more productive and sensible ways than having sign police driving up and down streets counting the signs.

As the Star reported, Indianapolis is not the only municipality with restrictions on signs. My hometown of Fishers is among those that restricts free speech and property rights by ordinance.

Upon moving to Fishers, I found it odd that parents with children in athletics, cheerleading, or music had tacked signs to their garages rather than placing them in the front yard where all could see them more plainly. I was stunned to learn that a family's pride in their student had to take a backseat to compliance with the law, as do political signs. Curiously, 'for sale' signs are permitted.

What message does this send our children? That it's okay to sell the home, but not to control its use? That it is more important to obey than it is to express family pride or political views?

The municipalities are sending the wrong message. Indiana communities need to do the respectful thing by repealing the ordinances and regulations against political and other yard signs in homeowner properties."

For context, here is the letter as printed by the Star:

"The Star described the Libertarian Party's yard sign lawsuit against the city of Indianapolis as a defense of free speech, but it is also an important defense of property rights. Residential property is not owned by the city, but by the homeowner, and city policy-makers should always keep that respectfully in mind.

It should be a cause of concern that the city's solution is to set a limit on the number of signs homeowners can place in their yards. Will there now be sign police to make sure everyone obeys? It is safe to say that most residents would rather see city resources used in more productive and sensible ways than having police driving up and down streets counting the signs.

As The Star reported, Indianapolis is not the only municipality with restrictions on signs. My hometown of Fishers is among those that restrict free speech and property rights by ordinance.

The municipalities are sending the wrong message. Indiana communities need to do the respectful thing by repealing the ordinances and regulations against political and other yard signs in homeowner properties."

It is a shame that the really tasty paragraphs were chopped. Not only is it fine rhetoric, but it is factual that the school related signs are relegated to the garage while for sale signs are permitted in the front yard. I chose to highlight these fact for consideration by parents. They will immediately get the absurdity of the laws and regulations when they see them in this light.