Can You Say Nepotism?

Let us start with a simple definition of the term.

nep·o·tism / ˈnepəˌtizəm/
noun
the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs.

synonyms:favoritism, preferential treatment, the old boy network, looking after one's own, bias, partiality, partisanship

"hiring my daughter was not nepotism—it was just good business"

Now, lets look at Indiana's "nepotism law" effective July 1 2012.

Ind. Code § 4-15-7-1 : Indiana Code - Section 4-15-7-1: Nepotism

(a) No person being related to any member of any state board or commission, or to the head of any state office or department or institution, as father, mother, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, a husband or wife, son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, niece or nephew, shall be eligible to any position in any such state board, commission, office, or department or institution, as the case may be, nor shall any such relative be entitled to receive any compensation for his or her services out of any appropriation provided by law.

(b) This section shall not apply if such person has been employed in the same position in such office or department or institution for at least twelve (12) consecutive months immediately preceding the appointment of his relative as a board member or head of such office, department, or institution.

(c) This section does not apply to the authority of the board of trustees of a state educational institution to employ any person the board considers necessary under IC 21-38-3-1.

(d) No persons related as father, mother, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, husband, wife, son, daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, niece, or nephew may be placed in a direct supervisory-subordinate relationship.

(Formerly: Acts 1941, c.16, s.1; Acts 1961, c.8, s.1.) As amended by Acts 1982, P.L.23, SEC.35; P.L.36-1995, SEC.1; P.L.2-2007, SEC.44; P.L.3-2008, SEC.8.

With this background information, let's take a look at the reappointment of Sarah O'Brien to the Indiana State Board of Education and her recent election as the board's Vice-Chair.  How does this appointment and Vice-Chair position relate to a possible violation of this "nepotism" law, along with a variety of potential ethics violations?  Mrs. O'Brien isn't just a 4th grade teacher from Avon who, as a Republican, was appointed to the SBOE and recently reappointed after legislative changes to the boards structure, she is also the daughter of Republican State Representative Bill Fine of Munster.  This is where the possible violation occurs.  Representative Fine is a Republican member of the House Education Committee who pushed the passage of legislation that changed the structure of the SBOE and co-authored key language that created the Vice-Chair position to share powers with the Elected Superintendent of Public Instruction, Glenda Ritz.

With the passage of this legislation, Governor Pence re-appointed O'Brien to the Board and set up her opportunity to be elected as Vice-Chair.   This selection was rumored before the SBOE met for their restructuring meeting.  The "election" of O'Brien appears to have been a done deal as part of Pence's plan when he made his recent appointments and refused to reappoint certain members who might have been more viable possibilities to be named Vice-Chair.

This may not be a clear violation of Indiana Law, but it appears to set up potential questions regarding "nepotism", board appointments, committee selections, and legislative ethics.

Indiana voters need to be vigilant in monitoring recent SBOE actions, the Governor's continued education agenda, and the co-mingling of legislators and appointed board members.  Raise questions, raise your voices, and demand transparency in all aspects of government activity.  Most importantly,  voters in Indiana need to get to the polls and vote to save our PUBLIC schools from the continued destruction and privatization planned by Pence and his wealthy corporate "reform" supporters.

TUESDAY TATTLER 8

Former Indiana Governor and new Purdue University President, Mitch Daniels implemented $300 million in education funding cuts in 2010 and 2011 as the recession forced the state to slash its budget across the board: K-12 education, higher education, and unemployment benefits. As the 2012 fiscal year came to a close with nearly $2 billion in reserves, constituent said the surplus should be used to restore funding to programs and budgets that were cut.

Shouldn't any surplus be used to reinstate funding to those programs?  One would think that this idea would make sense, but to the politicians it apparently means nothing.  The legislature has recently set out to continue to destroy Public education in Indiana through bills to strip the power of newly elected Superintendent of Public Instruction, Glenda Ritz, and by attempting to push through a huge fiscally irresponsible voucher expansion bill.

It appears that newly elected Governor Mike Pence has no desire to increase funding for education or reinstate the $300 million that was cut.  Governor Pence has made it clear that he supports voucher expansion, and his budget does not appear to establish any fiscal improvement for Indiana's K-12 PUBLIC education.  Pence is seeking approval of his proposed budget that includes a cut in Indiana's state income tax rate by 10 percent over the next two years.

What appears fortunate for Indiana's Public schools, is the fact that prominent Republican lawmakers in Indiana are lukewarm at best on the new governor's tax cut plan. Some are even on record as wishing to replenish funding to programs the recession forced them to cut and shore up Indiana's budget for the long haul.  Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma and some other Republican legislative leaders would rather return the budget surplus to the state's public schools.

The current debate is over how much money to restore — and to what programs. Pence's budget would increase K-12 funding by $137 million over the next two years, but this increase only makes up for the gap in  the funding of Indiana's new full-day kindergarten program.  Some Indiana Democrats say Pence's budget falls short of reinstating the education dollars the Daniels administration cut; we're not even halfway there. Speaker Bosma says he'd prefer to restore even more money to public schools, although he declines to say how much and by what means. 

While all this looks good on paper, and while Mitch Daniels laughs from West Lafayette at the debate taking place, Pence's propsed increases in education look to be undercut even more by his push for voucher expansion.  Expanding the state's voucher program looks to rob a significant amount of funding from the very PUBLIC schools still reeling from those $300 million in cuts suffered under the Daniels administration's last budget.  While Daniels secured his future job by appointing the very people who eventually hired him at Purdue, he has set himself up in a comfortable seat to view Pence's battle to make a name for himself in the State House. 

While Pence and Daniels have proven to be on the same page with regard to destroying public education through their "reformist" tactics and vouchers to support their private school cronies and corporate sponsors, it is now time for Hoosier PUBLIC school supporters to continue to stand up to these politicians.  We must push for proper funding for K-12 education to be restored, and for the voucher expansion wagon to be derailed.  It is time for the Daniels era to end and for Pence to understand that the voters sent a loud message in November and will continue to do so throughout his term, which could easily end after 4 years if he continues to scoff at PUBLIC schools as second rate to his precious charter and private schools.  We must let our voices be heard loudly as we procliam that we want funding restored from the previous cuts and more support for PUBLIC education in Indiana.  We must demand our $300 million to be returned to our PUBLIC schools without adding extra unfunded expenses on top.