The argument is that the rules of construction may contradict the legislator's intent. The legislator's intent is found in the journal. If they didn't state it, then the rules of construction do applies. You can also read the legislator's intent in court cases. IC 1-1-4-1 Rules Sec. 1. The construction of all statutes of this state shall be by the following rules, unless the construction is plainly repugnant to the intent of the legislature or of the context of the statute: (1) Words and phrases shall be taken in their plain, or ordinary and usual, sense. Technical words and phrases having a peculiar and appropriate meaning in law shall be understood according to their technical import. (2) Words importing joint authority to three (3) or more persons shall be construed as authority to a majority of the persons, unless otherwise declared in the statute giving authority. (3) Words importing the singular number only may be also applied to the plural of persons and things. (4) Words importing the masculine gender only may be extended to females also. (5) When a statute requires an act to be done which, by law, an agent or deputy as well may do as the principal, the requisition is satisfied by the performance of the act by an authorized agent or deputy. (6) When a person is required to be disinterested or indifferent in acting on any question or matter affecting other parties, consanguinity or affinity within the sixth degree, inclusive, by the civil law rules, or within the degree of second cousin, inclusive, disqualifies the person from acting, except by consent of parties.