Challenging ‘Major Moves’

Bill Stant, CAC file suit

Laura McPhee

Green Party candidate Bill Stant has filed suit against the 'Major Moves' initiative.

Gov. Mitch Daniels’ controversial “Major Moves” initiative may have passed the Indiana General Assembly, but a series of court rulings may decide whether or not the plan to privatize significant portions of Indiana’s highways will come to fruition.

Residents were given a 15-day period to file suit after the initial passage of the legislation in mid-March, a period that was supposed to come before the state signed a 75-year, $3.8-billion agreement that leased the Indiana Toll Road to a foreign consortium. But when two separate lawsuits were filed against the plan within the allotted time frame, opponents to “Major Moves” discovered the Governor’s Office had already signed the agreement days earlier than previously announced.

Then the Daniels Administration filed their own lawsuit to force opponents of the Indiana Toll Road lease to post a $3.8 billion bond. That’s the same amount the state expects to receive when it transfers the highway to its new operators by June 30. State attorneys argue that lawsuits filed by the Citizen’s Action Coalition and Green Party candidate Bill Stant are frivolous and are asking the courts to require opponents to either show their suit has merit or post a bond equal to the state’s financial loss if the lease is delayed.

“[Opponents] claim their lawsuit is trying to uphold a constitutional principle,” according to Daniels’ office. “But what it is really attempting to do is block Indiana from putting thousands of Hoosiers to work to build the roads and bridges we need. It’s sad for all of us that one group of Hoosiers would file a lawsuit that would try to deprive their neighbors of job opportunities and the economic development opportunities that ‘Major Moves’ will provide.”

When asked why he has filed a lawsuit against the governor’s “Major Moves” initiative, Green Party 2006 secretary of state candidate Bill Stant cites respect for the Indiana state Constitution, opposition to the new terrain I-69 highway, support for better and longer-lasting Hoosier jobs, poor stewardship of state resources and an opposition to privatizing state assets.

Here, in his words, are his reasons for asking the courts to stop “Major Moves” from moving forward.

Respect for the Indiana state Constitution: Governments founded on the basis of written Constitutions should not pass legislation or implement legislation that violates constitutional principles. Article 10, Section 2 requires that all revenues derived from public works such as the toll road be applied toward the state’s public debt before being spent on anything else. Whether such revenue is derived from the sale, lease or operation of the public works in question is irrelevant.

Opposition to new terrain I-69: The legislation commits proceeds of the lease to starting construction on the new terrain route for the proposed Interstate 69 extension from Indianapolis to Evansville. Given the accelerated timeline for construction of the highway, and the commitment of both major parties to the new terrain route, opponents of the new terrain route for I-69 are left with no legal recourse other than to sue.

Support for good, long-lasting jobs for Hoosiers: Replacing good jobs that pay better than living wages and provide benefits with low-wage-dead-end-pollution-based jobs with little or no benefits is economic development for the wealthy only. Policies that promote alternative energy, public transportation and rail-based commercial transportation will create more long-lasting good jobs than will business as usual.

Poor stewardship, poor leadership: “Major Moves” calls for building more roads, when we need to fix the roads we have. Expending public revenues on expansion of the state’s roadways is simply bad stewardship. There are already more roads per square mile in Indiana than in almost all other states. It fails the test of leadership because it fails to call upon citizens to recognize and act on the need for new and sustainable approaches to how we live, travel and work.

Privatization: Privatization undermines the foundations of our shared citizenship. Hoosier tax payers have worked long and hard to build the public infrastructure we have. Instead of using the proceeds of that infrastructure to enrich private interests, in exchange for a short-term cash infusion to solve a fiscal crisis of our government’s own making, we should retain public control over all of our hard-earned assets. If it remains under public control, the government can be held directly accountable for its management. Toll roads are a profitable asset class. Leasing a profitable toll road to a private entity, and handing over to that entity all of its revenues, at a time when state and local governments are staggering under the legacy of unnecessary tax-cuts, begs the question of whose interests are really being served.

For more information about the legal challenges to “Major Moves,” consult the Citizen Action Coalition Web site at www.majormoves.org or Bill Stant’s Web site at www.citizensforstant.org.