Getting the issue vetted and resistance identified early doesn't hurt. Letting proposals pick up steam among voters while they marinate in the minds of legislators helps even more.
That's what has been happening in the meetings held since state lawmakers passed a budget and bolted from the Statehouse on June 30. Out-of-session study committees - panels of about a dozen state lawmakers assigned to look into a specific issue or a handful of issues - set the table for the coming months.
Several of the hottest topics of debate in the 2010 legislative session, which starts Jan. 5, are ones that were discussed in study committees this year.
Here's a look at some of those issues.
Once a decade, Indiana lawmakers must redraw the boundaries for the state's nine U.S. House seats, 50 state Senate seats and 100 Indiana House seats.
It's a process rife with political involvement. The majority parties in the state Senate and House, in charge of drawing the maps for their respective chambers, tend to do so in ways that favor incumbents and enhance majorities.
Every 10 years when redistricting time comes, some call for more fairness in the process. And so far, every 10 years, those calls have been ignored by those wielding the map-making pens.
That could change this year.
Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita lit a fire under the debate when he launched a Web site, www.rethinkingredistricting.com, calling for new laws that require legislative districts to be drawn based on opportunities to keep communities together rather than based on political data.
Momentum built when the Census Data Advisory Committee held several hearings this summer about redistricting. While the legislative panel did not make any specific recommendations, its chairwoman, Sen. Sue Landske, R-Cedar Point, broadly endorsed the idea of revamping the map-making process.
Then, this fall, Senate Republicans unveiled their own proposal to do just that. The changes they are proposing would come in three steps:
A resolution would amend the Indiana Constitution to shift map-making responsibility out of the hands of the General Assembly and to an independent commission, which Senate Republicans said likely would not include any lawmakers.
Those aren't the criteria Rokita prefers. He wants a law that would prohibit the consideration of political data during the process. But Senate leaders said the Voting Rights Act of 1965, intended to protect minority voters, makes it impossible to handle the process without looking at some political information.
Those criteria also wouldn't have an independent commission in place to handle redistricting in 2011, after the completion of the 2010 U.S. Census. That's because the Indiana Constitution requires legislators to handle redistricting. Because the process to amend the state's constitution takes several years, the soonest an amendment could be passed is 2012. Some lawmakers, though, believe they can get around that requirement.
Rep. Kreg Battles, D-Vincennes, likely will be among the first lawmakers to have a say on the issue in his chamber, because the Vincennes Democrat chairs the House Elections and Apportionment Committee, the probable starting point for redistricting bills.
He said the idea of reforming the way Indiana's legislative districts are drawn "sounds great," but that working out the details - specifically if an independent commission is involved - could be trickier.
"We all bring a bias," he said. "So how are you going to create an impartial committee? If this only means changing partiality from one source to another, I don't see how anything's gained. But as far as the general concept, I think it's a good one."
Rep. Suzanne Crouch, R-Evansville, said she is "very much" in favor of an independent commission, which she said could be implemented in two steps.
First, she would vote to create one immediately to provide recommendations for lawmakers to vote on, thereby allowing for some change to the process during the 2011 redistricting, Crouch said.
Then, she also would be in favor of amending the Indiana Constitution to hand the duty over to an independent commission permanently, she said.
Crouch pointed out that in 2006, when House Republicans held the majority in that chamber, they passed legislation that would have achieved the first step. Under their legislation, "the public would be part of that process and would have a vested interest in that. It would ensure that it's a fair and open process," she said.
That bill, however, died in the Senate, which was controlled by Republicans, but was under the leadership of then-Senate President Pro Tem Robert Garton, who was seen as much more resistant to changing the map-making process than his successor, Sen. David Long, R-Fort Wayne.
Crouch seems to agree with Senate Minority Leader Vi Simpson, D-Ellettsville, who also suggested that an independent commission could recommend districts for lawmakers to approve in 2011, therefore speeding up the process and preventing another decade of gerrymandered districts.
"I'm fascinated by the whole redistricting argument," said Rep. Trent Van Haaften, D-Mount Vernon.
He said he thinks an independent commission is appropriate, but added: "I want to make sure that we are truly independent and that we are not playing politics."
The question, Van Haaften said, is how best to create an independent panel. One example he cited is Iowa, which handles the redistricting process unlike any other state. There, staff members from the Legislature's nonpartisan research arm, similar to Indiana's Legislative Services Agency, handle the task.
Van Haaften took issue with the secretary of state's involvement. Rokita, a Republican who because of term limits is out of office after the 2010 elections and whose political ambitions are no secret, offered maps intended to serve as examples of what districts could look like if the principles he suggested were followed.
Van Haaften said Rokita violated the very principles he is advocating.
"He talks about not splitting up sense of community," Van Haaften said. "But looking at my district, he takes all of Posey County, goes north, and takes a big portion of Gibson County. I'm thinking to myself, 'Sense of community?' Ask the people in the St. Philips area of Posey County whether they identify with the West Side of Evansville more or with Oakland City more."
Gambling
Like it or not, gambling has become important in Indiana.
The state's 11 casinos, including Casino Aztar in Evansville, and two horse track-casino combination "racinos" in Anderson and Shelbyville, provide jobs and, as part of their requirement under state law, give some of their money to government or nonprofit groups that promote economic development in their areas.
Meanwhile, hundreds of millions of dollars in gambling revenue line state coffers.
The industry is an important cash cow, especially now that Indiana's total tax collections have dropped more than 10 percent less than estimates.
But those who benefit from the gambling industry are feeling the walls closing in.
Ohio voters recently green-lighted four casinos, including two - one in Cincinnati and one in Columbus - that are expected to pose a major threat to Indiana casinos.
Meanwhile, in Kentucky, many political observers say it's just a matter of time before that state, too, decides to allow expanded gambling.
That could harm Casino Aztar, because 38 percent of the people within a 50-mile radius of Aztar live in Kentucky and might prefer Ellis Park if greater gambling options are allowed there.
Gambling executives, who spent more than any other industry lobbying lawmakers last year, asked for a host of changes during the summer meetings of the Gaming Study Committee. The committee was looking into issues its members raised over the course of several meetings in the second half of 2009.
One issue is a casino for Fort Wayne. However, state lawmakers have rejected the idea of approving a 14th license, so that idea isn't going anywhere fast.
Another request they will make is that one of two Lake Michigan casinos in northwestern Indiana be allowed to move away from increased competition in Michigan to a more profitable location.
Most interesting could be debate over whether to allow casinos to move onto land. Some lawmakers have argued that expecting Indiana's gambling boats to keep their engines firing and their navigational equipment up-to-date is senseless.
"Our (Aztar) casino is somewhat land-based as it is, even though it's on a boat," Crouch said.
Van Haaften chairs the House Public Policy Committee, which is the starting point for most gambling-related legislation.
"Obviously, there's going to be a lot of talk because gaming operators, like everyone else in this economy, are struggling," Van Haaften said. "But that's just it. They're like everybody else. We're all struggling. So I do not anticipate seeing any tax breaks or anything of that nature."
He said the state, however, could consider changes that don't come at any cost, such as allowing land-based gambling.
"People hear land-based and think, 'You're going to put a casino out on Green River Road,'" Van Haaften said. "But that's just not going to happen. ... Going land-based means removing maritime requirements, letting them take out their engines and either anchor to shore or move onto shore."
The prospect of land-based gambling prompted Casino Aztar's executives to begin looking into onshore possibilities should the boat need expensive repairs in the future.
Lawmakers, though, say casinos will have to make a strong case if they expect any of their requests to be granted.
"I certainly am not in favor of expanding gambling," Crouch said. "I guess I'd have to hear the reason and the case would have to be made as to why (land-based gambling) would be a positive."
Battles said legislators are "going to have to be careful" with gambling-related legislation.
"That's a well we continue to go to, but there does come a point where we can't go to that well anymore," he said. "I'm going to be incredibly leery about expanding gambling. I am going in with a little bit of nervousness about the issue."
Other gambling-related legislation is likely to surface, as well.
Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller made his case this summer for legislation that would demand more detailed accounting from organizations that receive casino revenue under local development agreements.
That change, if made, would not affect Casino Aztar, which simply gives some of its money to local government.
It would, though, affect nonprofits that receive money from Southern Indiana casinos such as those in French Lick and Harrison County.
Social services
The battle over Indiana's human services agency's attempt to update the way it processes welfare applications has been fought for more than a year now.
As some critics called for Gov. Mitch Daniels to cancel the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration's $1.34 billion contract with a team of vendors led by Armonk, N.Y.-based IBM Corp., momentum built over the summer in a State Budget Committee hearing and eventually led to Daniels' decision to heed those requests and fire IBM.
At a committee meeting in September, Rep. Gail Riecken, D-Evansville, told her colleagues that she wanted to see the contract canceled completely.
She wasn't satisfied when, the next month, Daniels canceled the deal with IBM but kept subcontractors such as Dallas-based Affiliated Computer Services Inc. on board.
Riecken filed legislation, which is due for a hearing at a House Ways and Means Committee meeting in December, that would require the state to eliminate the rest of those contracts.
She was met with resistance from the Family and Social Services Administration.
Officials there say they are concerned that Riecken's bill would force the cancellation of far more contracts than she intended.
Alcohol sales
Don't expect state lawmakers to change Indiana's law that prohibits the Sunday alcohol sales.
In spite of lobbying efforts, Southwestern Indiana legislators say the public just isn't asking for change.
The Interim Study Committee on Alcoholic Beverage Issues voted against recommending Sunday sales.
It also voted against allowing grocery and convenience stores to sell cold beer - something those stores had lobbied for, arguing that current laws unfairly favor liquor stores.
Lobbyists say they'll continue pressing for the changes during the 2010 session, even without the committee's endorsement.
The committee did, though, recommend doing away with Indiana's law that prohibits Election Day liquor sales.
Its decision, according to the committee's report, was based on the way voting has changed over the years.
Hoosiers now cast ballots in five elections: general elections, primary elections, municipal elections, school district elections and special elections.
Furthermore, rather than voting on a single day, Hoosiers can vote via absentee ballot or can vote early at satellite locations or at government offices.
The committee recommended reducing confusion over the law by eliminating it entirely.