A STATE SENATE COMMITTEE

VOTES FOR LGB PROTECTIONS BUT

NO T.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

A TAX CUT TOSSED IN WITH A

PAIR OF TAX HIKES, A VOTE FOR

MORE GUNS IN THE STATEHOUSE,

AND A PLAN FOR BETTER

TREATMENT OF MENTALLY ILL

PRISON INMATES.

THAT, PLUS CIVILITY AWARDS FOR

LAWMAKERS AND MORE ON "INDIANA

WEEK IN REVIEW" FOR THE WEEK

THIS WEEK...

THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RELIGIOUS

FREEDOM AND CIVIL RIGHTS LED

TO A FIVE-HOUR HEARING AT THE

STATEHOUSE.

THE SENATE RULES COMMITTEE

APPROVED A BILL TO EXTEND

CIVIL RIGHTS PROTECTIONS TO

GAY, LESBIAN AND BISEXUAL

PEOPLE.

BUT NOT TRANSGENDER MEN AND

WOMEN.

HERE'S THE TESTIMONY BY A

TRANSGENDER WOMAN NAMED

RHIANNON CARLSON FOLLOWED BY A

FLORIST FROM WASHINGTON STATE,

BARONELLE STUTZMAN, WHO SAYS

SHE WAS THREATENED AFTER

DECLINING SERVICE TO A

SAME-SEX COUPLE.

I'M HAPPY TO BE ALIVE TODAY

AS A PROUD TRANSGENDER WOMAN,

BUT MERE SURVIVAL IS STILL A

PART OF MY STORY.

I STILL WAIT FOR THE DAY THAT

I CAN BE MORE FOCUSED ON LIFE,

LIBERTY AND HAPPINESS.

IF YOU VOTE FOR THESE BILLS

YOU WILL BE SENDING A MESSAGE

TO THE CITIZENS OF INDIANA

THAT SHARE MY BELIEFS ABOUT

MARRIAGE.

THAT THEY WILL NOT BE

TOLERATED, THEY WILL BE

THREATENED, DRAGGED INTO

COURT, SUED AND LOSE THEIR

BUSINESS.

WILL THE SENATE SUPPORT NEW

CIVIL RIGHTS PROTECTIONS?

IT'S THE FIRST QUESTION FOR

OUR "INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW"

PANEL.

DEMOCRAT ANN DELANEY.

REPUBLICAN MIKE MCDANIEL.

JON SCHWANTES, THE HOST OF

"INDIANA LAWMAKERS" AND

JOHN KETZENBERGER, PRESIDENT

OF THE INDIANA FISCAL POLICY

INSTITUTE.

I'M WISH-TV STATEHOUSE

REPORTER JIM SHELLA.

ANN DELANEY, NO DEMOCRATS

VOTED FOR THIS BILL.

WHY NOT?

WELL, I MEAN, IT'S A

TERRIBLE BILL.

IT NOT ONLY INCLUDES

TRANSGENDER IF I UNDERSTAND IT

CORRECTLY YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE

IN AN ORGANIZED RELIGION YOU

CAN SAY IT'S YOUR RELIGION

PRINCIPLE AND YOU CAN REFUSE

SERVICE.

IT'S NOT ABOUT RELIGIOUS

FREEDOM, IT'S ABOUT BALANCING

CIVIL RIGHTS AND ENDING

DISCRIMINATION.

MIKE PENCE BROUGHT US TO THIS

POINT.

IT WAS HIS IDEA FOR RFRA AND

HE EMBARRASSED THE ENTIRE

STATE OF INDIANA IN THE

PROCESS OF DOING IT.

THE ONLY WAY TO DO THIS, WHICH

WON'T RESULT IN A NEGATIVE

STORY SOMEPLACE IS TO DO IT

COMPLETELY.

PUT FOUR WORDS AND A COMMA IN

THE CIVIL RIGHTS BILL.

HOUSE SPEAKER BRIAN BOSMA

SAYS HE DOESN'T KNOW ANYBODY

WHO LIKES THE VERSION THAT

IT'S IN NOW.

THIS HAS GOT A LONG WAYS TO GO

BEFORE IT'S GOING TO BECOME

LAW.

THE IMPORTANT THING IS IT'S

STILL GOING.

DAVID LONG HAS PROVIDED

TREMENDOUS LEADERSHIP ON THIS

BECAUSE HE'S KEPT THIS ISSUE

ALIVE AS HE PROMISED HE WOULD.

HE'S PASSED IT OUT OF THE

RULES COMMITTEE.

IT WILL GO TO THE PUBLIC

SAFETY DIRECTOR, WILL BE

AVAILABLE TUESDAY AND HAS TO

BE HEARD I THINK WEDNESDAY,

PASSED THROUGH THE FIRST HALF,

IF IT'S GOING TO PASS, SO --

AND HE HAS SAID THAT HE WANTS

TO KEEP THIS BILL AS CLEAN AS

IT IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE STRUCK

A BALANCE INSIDE THAT CAUCUS

THAT THIS IS WHAT MIGHT BE

ACCEPTABLE AT THIS POINT IN

THE PROCESS.

SO -- AND AS WE ALL KNOW,

POLITICS IS THE ART OF THE

POSSIBLE AND THAT'S CERTAINLY

TRUE OF LEGISLATION AND IN

THIS CASE DAVID LONG HAS MOVED

ALONG AND HE OUGHT TO BE

CREDITED FOR THAT AND IT DOES

HAVE RELIGIOUS PROTECTION AND

BREAKS NEW GROUND IN CIVIL

RIGHTS THAT THEY'VE NEVER BEEN

WILLING TO GO BEFORE.

SO I'M GLAD HE'S KEPT IT

ALIVE, I'M GLAD THE DEBATE'S

GOING ON AND I THINK IT WILL

PASS THE SENATE.

WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND WHAT

DAVID LONG IS SAYING IS THE

SENATE WILL NOT SUPPORT

TRANSGENDER PROTECTION AND

WHAT THE LBGT COMMUNITY IS

SAYING IS THEY WON'T LEAVE

THEM OUT.

SO DO THEY TRY TO KILL IT AT

SOME POINT?

OH, I THINK THAT'S A GIVEN.

I THINK THAT YOU HAVE STRONG

FEELINGS, AND DAVID LONG EVEN

MADE REFERENCE TO THIS, THERE

ARE STRONG, STRONG FEELINGS ON

BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE AT

THE EXTREMES.

AND I DON'T THINK EITHER SIDE

IS NECESSARILY IN A MOOD FOR

COMPROMISE.

RELIGIOUS FREEDOM FOLKS

DON'T WANT ANY PROTECTION --

RIGHT.

SO RIGHT NOW EVERYBODY'S

UNHAPPY.

THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.

YES, THERE HAS BEEN AN ATTEMPT

TO COMPROMISE, BUT SOME OF THE

COMPROMISES SEEM A BIT FORCED

IN THAT THEY MAY CAUSE MORE

TROUBLE THAN ARE INTEND THE.

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE

CORE ISSUE.

BUT THE NOTION OF HOME RULE

AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES,

INITIALLY, YOU KNOW, THIS

WOULD SUPERSEDE EVERYTHING BUT

NOW AS IT'S WRITTEN, AS I

UNDERSTAND IT, YOU WOULD HAVE

ALL ORDINANCES THAT ARE IN

PLACE AS OF DECEMBER 31st

COULD REMAIN IN PLACE BUT NO

NEW ONES WHICH SEEMS TO ME IF

YOU HAVE A CHANGE IN

LEADERSHIP OR A COUNCIL IN A

GIVEN MUNICIPAL AND SAID

EFFECTIVELY IT'S

DISENFRANCHISED ON UNABLE TO

ACT IN A MANNER THAT A

NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY HAS THAT

SEEMS LIKE IT'S RIPE FOR

CHALLENGE.

IT HAS NUMEROUS PROBLEMS.

IT REPEALS RFRA AND THE FIX

FROM LAST YEAR.

RIGHT.

IS THAT A GOOD MOVE?

WELL, I THINK IN THE SCOPE

OF THE BILL, IT MAKES SOME

SENSE BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING

TO REPLACE IT WITH THIS OTHER

LANGUAGE.

BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S GOT

REAL PROBLEMS WHEN IT HITS THE

HOUSE.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO -- I

AGREE WITH MIKE --

IF IT HITS THE HOUSE.

RIGHT.

IF IT HITS THE HOUSE.

BUT

I THINK MIKE IS RIGHT.

TO GET IT TO THIS POINT IS A

REMARKABLE FEAT.

IF IT GOES BEYOND THIS POINT

WE'LL WAIT TO SEE.

BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH

REMEMBERING THAT THE PEOPLE

WHO ARE FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

AND THE PEOPLE ARE FOR LBGTQ

SITUATION, IF THIS BILL DIES

AND NOTHING HAPPENS, THEN WE

REVERT TO WHAT WE'VE BEEN

UNDER IN THE LAST YEAR AND I

THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE

GENERAL ASSEMBLY WOULD BE JUST

FINE WITH THAT.

EVERYBODY ELSE WOULD BE PRETTY

UPSET.

I THINK THE GOVERNOR WOULD

BE JUST FINE WITH THAT.

BUT I THINK EVERYBODY ELSE

WOULD BE PRETTY FINE IF IT

RESULTS AS SENATE BILL 50 AS A

FIX LAST YEAR.

BUT THE PROBLEM IS WE PUT

THIS OUT AS AN ISSUE IN

INDIANA.

I AGREE.

AND EVERYBODY'S GOING

TO FOLLOW WHAT WE'RE DOING

HERE AND EVEN IF OTHER STATES

DON'T HAVE THIS PROTECTION

WE'RE THE STATE THAT OPENED

THE PANDORA'S BOX AND WE HAVE

TO FIX IT AND FIX IT

CORRECTLY.

AND IF THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH

GUMPTION IN THE LEGISLATURE

TO UNDO THE DAMAGE THEY'VE

DONE THEY OUGHT TO RESIGN

THEIR SEATS, THAT'S WHAT THEY

OUGHT TO DO.

WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT

THIS ISSUE OVER THE LAST

COUPLE YEARS ABOUT EVOLVING

AND PEOPLE'S ATTITUDES

CHANGING, I KNOW PEOPLE IN

THIS GROUP WHOSE ATTITUDES

HAVE CHANGED AND -- BUT

DIFFERENT PEOPLE COME TO

CONCLUSIONS AT DIFFERENT

TIMES.

AND I BELIEVE THAT ONE OF THE

REASONS THAT WE'RE WHERE WE

ARE IN THE SENATE RIGHT NOW IS

BECAUSE LEGISLATORS ARE NOT

FEELING THE SAME KIND OF

CHANGE IN SOME OF THEIR OWN

DISTRICTS BECAUSE LEGISLATORS

FOR THE MOST PART -- YOU MAY

BELIEVE THIS OR NOT BELIEVE

THIS -- BUT THEY USUALLY

REFLECT THE PEOPLE THEY

REPRESENT BECAUSE THEY SPEND

MOST OF THEIR TIME DOING JUST

THAT.

SO THERE ARE PARTS OF THE

STATE WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOT UP

TO SPEED ON THIS ON TRYING TO

MAKE THESE KIND OF CHANGES.

I THINK THAT'S COMING THROUGH

RIGHT NOW AND THAT'S WHY DAVID

LONG IS TRYING TO STRIKE A

BALANCE HERE.

WHEN YOU HAVE IT AS AN

INDIVIDUAL -- HOW DO YOU

DETERMINE WHAT SOMEBODY'S

INDIVIDUAL RELIGIOUS BELIEFS

ARE?

WE'LL BE LITIGATING THIS IT

UNTIL THE COWS COME OVER.

IT'S ADVANCING.

ANN, IT'S STILL ALIVE.

I AGREE WITH THAT

IT TOOK COURAGE TO GET IT

WHERE IT IS.

I AGREE IT'S GETTING

DEBATE,

THAT'S A GOOD THING.

BUT AT THE END OF THAT TO

RESOLVE INDIANA'S IMAGE IT HAS

TO BE FIXED.

LONG PROMISED THERE WOULD

BE A DISCUSSION.

HE'S FULFILLED HIS PROMISE.

AND HE'S CONTINUED.

THAT'S UNDER TOUGH

CIRCUMSTANCE FOR HIM TO BE

DOING THIS INSIDE HIS OWN

CAUCUS.

YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT ABOUT

THE EVOLUTION ON THIS ISSUE,

HOW RAPID THE CHANGE HAS BEEN.

THAT'S WHY IT'S A GUARANTEE NO

MATTER WHAT HAPPENS EVEN AS

JOHN SUGGESTS NOTHING HAPPENS

IN THIS SESSION THE ISSUE

AND IT REVERTS BACK TO THE

ISSUE WE HAVE IN PLACE, IT

DOESN'T GO AWAY BECAUSE THIS

WILL BE BACK AND FORTH AS A

PING-PONG BALL AND HOW ABOUT

THE NEXT DECADE.

AS FAR AS THE ELECTION'S

CONCERNED I THINK AT THAT

POINT YOU WILL CLEARLY SEE

WHERE PEOPLE OF INDIANA REALLY

ARE ON THIS ISSUE.

BECAUSE WE'LL FIND OUT IN A

HURRY WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS

HURRY WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS

AN ISSUE IS THE KIND THAT CAN

DETERMINE AN ELECTION FOR A

MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATURE.

INTERESTING TO SEE.

MOVING ON --

A BILL THAT INCLUDES TAX

HIKES ON GAS AND CIGARETTES

NOW INCLUDES A TAX CUT.

THE HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS

COMMITTEE ADDED A PROVISION TO

THE ROAD FUNDING BILL THAT

WOULD REDUCE THE STATE INCOME

TAX OVER A TEN-YEAR PERIOD.

IT'S AN OBVIOUS ATTEMPT TO

SWEETEN THE BILL AND ATTRACT

VOTES FROM TAX HIKE OPPONENTS.

HOUSE SPEAKER BRIAN BOSMA.

IS THAT MY FIRST CHOICE?

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

AM I HOPING TO MAKE THE

PACKAGE A LITTLE MORE

ATTRACTIVE TO OUR SENATE

COLLEAGUES AND MEET ONE OF THE

GOVERNOR'S LONG TERM GOALS?

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

IS THAT PRUDENT?

AND A LOT OF THAT DEPENDS ON

THE ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES OF

THE STATE AT THE TIME WE

CONSIDER PASSING IT, BUT I

THINK THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE

ISSUES.

AND THAT'S SENATE LEADER

DAVID LONG.

MIKE McDANIEL, WHAT MAKES

SENSE ABOUT CUTTING TAXES AT

THE SAME TIME THAT YOU RAISE

THEM?

I THINK POLITICALLY IT MADE

A LOT OF SENSE ON THE

POLITICAL END OF IT TRYING

TO -- AS I SAID BEFORE, LAST

WEEK, WE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF

THE LEGISLATION,

REPRESENTATIVE SOLIDAY PUT A

LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THIS BILL.

ED SOLIDAY.

THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD WORK

THAT'S BEING GOING INTO THIS

LOOKING FOR A LONG-TERM

SOLUTION.

BUT AS WE SAID BEFORE, THE

POLITICS OF A NONBUDGET

ELECTION YEAR, TRYING TO GET

THIS DONE, IS PRETTY DIFFICULT

AT BEST.

AND SO GOING TO THE SENATE, I

DON'T THINK THIS HAS ANY

CHANCE OF HAPPENING OVER THERE

BUT I DO THINK YOU'RE GOING TO

SEE LEGISLATION PASSED THIS

YEAR THAT WILL DEDICATE MONEY

TO ROADS, LOCAL AND STATE, BUT

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A

LONG-TERM FIX.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE THAT

UNTIL THE BUDGET YEAR, PERIOD.

THE HOUSE SPEAKER SAYS THAT

THIS BILL, WITH THE TAX HIKES

AND THE TAX CUT, WOULD BE

REVENUE-NEUTRAL AFTER EIGHT

YEARS.

IT'S RIDICULOUS.

BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT WILL

HAPPEN WITH THIS.

THEY STRETCH IT OVER AN

EIGHT-YEAR PERIOD SO THE NEXT

YEAR OR THE YEAR AFTER WHEN

NOBODY'S PAYING ATTENTION IT

WILL GET REPEALED.

REMEMBER WHEN WE HAD TOO MUCH

IN THE SURPLUS IT WAS GOING TO

GO BACK, GUESS WHAT, THAT GOT

REPEALED AND THIS WILL, TOO.

BUT THE IDEA IS THEY'VE GOT TO

FACE UP TO THE RESPONSIBILITY.

THE RESPONSIBILITY IS TO COME

UP WITH A SENSIBLE WAY FOR

LONG-TERM FUNDING OF ROADS.

AND THE CIGARETTE TAX AND

MOVING THE MONEY AROUND THE

GENERAL FUND AND ARGUABLY

TAKING MONEY FROM HIGHER

EDUCATION AND EDUCATION TO DO

THAT IS NOT THE WAY.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO

INCREASE THE REVENUE.

YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S WHAT

WOULD HAPPEN IF THEY CUT THE

INCOME TAX, WHAT THE

REPUBLICANS ARE SAYING IS IT

WOULD REDUCE THE SURPLUS.

WELL, IT WOULD REDUCE THE

SURPLUS FOR USES IN OTHER

PLACES, AND IF THE SURPLUS

FALLS BELOW A CERTAIN LEVEL

THEN YOU DO HAVE REAL PROBLEMS

WHEN IT COMES TO CASH FLOW FOR

THE BUDGET OVERALL AND YOU DO

SEE --

NOT THE CORPORATE CASH

FLOW.

THE DEMOCRAT PLAN'S NOT A

LONG-TERM SITUATION.

THAT'S NOT THE ARGUMENT

HERE, MIKE.

THE ARGUMENT IS WHETHER OR NOT

IT MAKES SENSE TO REDUCE THE

INCOME TAX AT THE SAME TIME

YOU'RE INCREASING THE GAS TAX.

IT'S A POLITICALLY

UNDERSTANDABLE MOVE.

IT'S BAD PUBLIC POLICY.

RIGHT.

WELL, AND IT'S AIMED

EVENTUALLY AT GETTING THE

GOVERNOR TO SIGN IT.

WILL HE SIGN A BILL WITH TAX

HIKES IN IT?

I THINK HE WOULD BE

RELUCTANT FOR THE VERY REASON

YOU MENTIONED, THIS BEING --

NOVEMBER'S NOT THAT TERRIBLY

FAR AWAY, WHEN VOTERS GO TO

THE POLLS.

IT'S A TOUGH ISSUE.

I MEAN, ULTIMATELY I THINK

THERE'S GOT TO BE A

RECOGNITION -- AND WE CAN CALL

IT WHATEVER YOU WANT, TAX

INCREASE, USER FEE --

WALKS LIKE A DUCK, TALKS

LIKE A DUCK.

WHATEVER IT IS.

REVENUE -- EXPENSES GO UP,

COSTS GO UP, THEY GO UP IN THE

REST OF THE WORLD.

GOVERNMENT DOESN'T OPERATE IN

A VACUUM, AND IF PEOPLE WANT

THE SERVICES AND THE ROADS AND

THE BRIDGES THAT THEY EXPECT

AND DEMAND, SOMEBODY'S GOT TO

PAY FOR IT.

NOW, WHETHER THAT'S BEING

PASSED OFF TO THE LOCALS TO DO

INCREASE OR ADDITIONAL

SURCHARGE WHEEL CHARGE, IT

DOESN'T MATTER IN THE END

SOMEBODY'S GOT TO PRODUCE THE

REVENUE.

WE NEED AN ONGOING SOURCE

THAT'S RELATED TO THE ROADS

AND THAT'S OBVIOUSLY AN

INCREASE IN GAS TAX.

THE MONEY GOING TO THE

RELATED SOURCE.

DUH.

THIS IS MESSY AT THE

MOMENT.

ALL RIGHT.

A BILL THAT WOULD ALLOW 200

STAFF MEMBERS TO CARRY GUNS

INSIDE THE STATEHOUSE IS NOW

ON ITS WAY TO THE INDIANA

HOUSE FLOOR.

THE BILL PASSED THE STATE

SENATE 36-13 THIS WEEK.

LAWMAKERS AND JUDGES CAN

ALREADY CARRY GUNS AND MANY

DO.

STATE SENATOR BRENT STEELE

SAYS OTHERS SHOULD HAVE THE

SAME OPPORTUNITY.

THAT IF YOU CHOOSE NOT TO

CARRY, THAT'S YOUR

PREROGATIVE.

GO FOR IT.

I CHOOSE NOT TO BE A VICTIM.

I WOULD CHOOSE THAT MY

LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT HAS THE

RIGHT NOT TO BE A VICTIM.

JOHN KETZENBERGER, WHY NOT

LET EVERYBODY CARRY A GUN IN

THE STATEHOUSE?

USING THE SAME LOGIC THAT

SENATOR STEELE USED THE

QUESTION IS WHY NOT BECAUSE IF

BY DEFAULT HE OR HIS

LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT WILL NOT

BE A VICTIM IF THEY CARRY GUNS

THEN EVERYBODY ELSE WILL BE.

SO WHY NOT LET EVERYBODY ELSE

CARRY GUNS.

I MEAN, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE

LINE OF DEMARCATION AND IT

DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, REALLY.

THIS IS THE NRA --

RUNNING AMOK.

I WASN'T GOING TO SAY THAT.

I'LL SAY IT FOR YOU.

THEIR ANSWER IS NOT FEWER

GUNS, IT'S MORE GUNS.

I THINK THAT'S -- I THINK

THAT'S RIGHT OVERALL.

I MEAN, THIS IS -- SEEMS TO BE

THE ONE AREA WHERE THERE IS

MOVEMENT, OR SUCCESS FOR THE

NRA AND PRO-GUN FACTION THIS

YEAR.

THERE ARE OTHER BILLS THAT

WOULD HAVE EXTENDED

PROTECTIONS ON COLLEGE

CAMPUSES, I'M TALKING ABOUT

SECOND AMENDMENT PROTECTION ON

COLLEGE CAMPUSES FOR PEOPLE

WHO HAVE DRINKING CONVICTIONS

OR ALCOHOL CONVICTIONS.

THERE'S ANOTHER ONE THAT

WOULD ALLOW PRISON GUARDS TO

BRING A GUN TO WORK.

ANOTHER ONE THAT WOULD DO

AWAY WITH ALL HANDGUN

LICENSING REQUIREMENTS.

MAYBE PRISONERS SHOULD HAVE

THEM.

THOSE AREN'T GOING

ANYWHERE.

THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT'S

GOING ANYWHERE.

LET ME SAY THIS, IF YOU LISTEN

TO THE TESTIMONY OR THE

COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE AT THE

ROSTRUM IT PAINTS A PRETTY

BLEAK PICTURE OF THE STATE AND

INDIANAPOLIS BASICALLY IF YOU

GO OUTSITED DOOR, YOU BETTER

BE --

THAT'S THE ARGUMENT THAT

WAS MADE THAT THEY DON'T

NECESSARILY NEED GUNS INSIDE

THE STATEHOUSE BUT THEY MIGHT

NEED THEM WHEN THEY'RE WALKING

TO OR FROM THEIR CAR.

IT'S NEVER BEEN A WORRY FOR

ME.

DO YOU WORRY, MIKE?

NO, I REALLY DON'T.

BUT, LOOK, THERE ARE ABOUT 200

STAFF PEOPLE IN THE

LEGISLATURE.

AND THIS MAY AFFECT FOUR OR

FIVE PEOPLE, AND I DON'T SEE

THIS AS A BIG DEAL IN THE BIG

SCOPE OF THINGS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, IT IS WHAT IT

IS.

AND WE ALWAYS SAID THAT THE

BULLET-PROOF GLASS IN THE

HOUSE WAS NOT TO PROTECT THE

LEGISLATORS, IT'S PROTECT US

IN THE HALLWAY WHEN THE

LEGISLATORS START SHOOTING

AT EACH OTHER.

I THINK REPORTERRED, YOU'RE

GOING TO BE TARGETED

I DRAW THE LINE WITH

REPORTERS HAVING GUNS.

SENATOR SAID HE WAS GOING

TO TRY TO GET REPORTERS IN

NEXT YEAR.

OH, GREAT.

I CANNOT BELIEVE WE'RE WASTING

TIME ON THIS.

I MEAN, WE'VE GOT ADULTS

DYING, ADULT PROTECTIVE

SERVICES IS UNDERFUNDED, WE

DON'T DEBATE ANY OF THAT

STUFF, WE DEBATE THIS

NONSENSE, THE NRA AND THE

REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED AGENDA.

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE

PEN BEING MORE POWERFUL

THAN THE SWORD, WHATEVER

HAPPENED WITH THAT.

DO WELL WHEN THEY SHOOT AT

YOU.

TIME NOW FOR VIEWER

FEEDBACK.

EACH WEEK WE POSE AN

UNSCIENTIFIC, ONLINE POLL

QUESTION IN CONJUNCTION WITH

OUR ICEMILLER E-MAIL AND TEXT

ALERTS.

THIS WEEK'S QUESTION...

SHOULD STATEHOUSE STAFFERS BE

PERMITTED TO CARRY GUNS?

YOUR CHOICES ARE

A. YES.

B. NO.

C. ONLY IF THE PUBLIC CAN,

TOO.

LAST WEEK'S QUESTION...

DO YOU SUPPORT A HIKE IN THE

CIGARETTE TAX?

81% SAID YES, 12% SAID NO, 7%

SAID A DOLLAR IS TOO MUCH.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE PART

IN THE POLL, GO TO

WFYI.ORG/IWIR AND LOOK FOR THE

POLL.

BIG CHANGES ARE ON THE WAY

FOR THE MENTALLY ILL INMATES

WHO MAKE UP AS MUCH AS

20% OF THE INDIANA PRISON

POPULATION.

THE ACLU OF INDIANA AND

INDIANA PROTECTION AND

ADVOCACY SERVICES ANNOUNCED A

SETTLEMENT WITH THE INDIANA

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION THIS

WEEK.

THE TWO GROUPS SUED OVER THE

WAY THE STATE TREATS MENTALLY

ILL PRISONERS.

A SETTLEMENT REQUIRES STATE

CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES TO

HAVE INDIVIDUALIZED TREATMENT

PLANS FOR INMATES, CREATED BY

MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS

WHO ARE FAMILIAR WITH EACH

PRISONER.

KEN FALK OF THE ACLU SAYS

ISOLATION CAN NO LONGER BE

USED AS A PUNISHMENT IN MOST

CASES.

ONE OF THE THINGS THE

SETTLEMENT DOES, IS IT SAYS

THAT BEFORE A PRISONER WHO IS

MENTALLY ILL CAN BE

DISCIPLINED, THE TREATMENT

STAFF HAVE TO BE CONSULTED AND

SAY, HEY, IS THE REASON THAT

SO AND SO DID THIS IS BECAUSE

THEY ARE MENTALLY ILL.

JON SCHWANTES, HOW WILL

THIS AFFECT THE STATE'S

PRISONS?

I THINK IT WILL IMPROVE THE

SITUATION AND KEN FALK AND

OTHERS WITH THE ACLU POINTED

OUT THAT THE STATE HAS ALREADY

BEEN QUICK TO INCORPORATE SOME

OF THESE CHANGES EVEN BEFORE

THE FORMALIZATION OF THIS --

BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT.

BUT THE LAWSUIT'S SEVEN YEARS

OLD.

RIGHT, RIGHT, WELL, THERE'S

PLENTY OF TIME FOR CHANGES TO

BE MADE.

BUT THIS IS A SIGN I THINK OF

A POSITIVE THING.

YOU LOOK AT THE FACT THAT THE

LARGEST PROVIDER OF MENTAL

HEALTH SERVICES IN THE STATE

OF INDIANA IS THE DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTION, YOU HAVE

ROUGHLY ONE IN FIVE INMATES

HAVE BEEN DIAGNOSED AS HAVING

A MENTAL ILLNESS AND GUESS

WHAT, MOST OF THOSE

INDIVIDUALS WILL BE GETTING

BACK OUT INTO SOCIETY.

SO DO YOU WANT PEOPLE WHO HAVE

HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET CARE

FOR THEIR ILLNESSES?

YOU COUPLE THIS WITH WHAT WAS

BEING DONE AT COMMUNITY

HOSPITAL WITH THE NEW FACILITY

THAT THE PENCE ADMINISTRATION

, VERY POSITIVE, AND ALSO IN

KEEPING WITH

BARACK OBAMA'S ANNOUNCEMENT

THAT HE WOULD EFFECTIVELY DO

AWAY WITH LARGE ASPECTS OF

SOLITARY CONFINEMENT.

FOR JUVENILES, JUVENILES.

OR FOR MENTAL HEALTH.

AND MENTAL HEALTH.

IT'S ALSO A SIGN OF HOW

POORLY WE'RE DEALING WITH

MENTAL ILLNESS ON THE OUTSIDE.

WELL, I THINK THERE HAS TO

BE EVEN MORE UNDERSTANDING

THAN WE ALREADY HAVE ABOUT

MENTAL ILLNESS.

FOR THE LONGEST TIME IT WAS

OFTEN DISMISSED,

MISUNDERSTOOD, AND WE ARE

COMING AROUND ON THAT,

FINALLY.

I'M VERY ENCOURAGED, FOR ALL

THE REASONS THAT JON

MENTIONED, ABOUT THE APPROACH

THAT THE STATE IS TAKING AND I

THINK THAT WILL HELP THE REST

OF THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND.

LOOK, MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES ARE

VERY REAL AND THEY NEED TO BE

DEALT WITH THE SAME WAY OTHER

MEDICAL CONDITIONS ARE DEALT

WITH.

AND THE SOONER WE DO THAT,

THEN THE FEWER PROBLEMS WE'LL

HAVE IN SOCIETY.

IT'S ALSO, THIS IS A

STATEMENT ON WHAT WAS BEING

DONE PREVIOUSLY.

RIGHT, RIGHT, AND IT'S

GOOD.

IT'S GOOD THAT THE ATTITUDES

TOWARD MENTAL HEALTH HAVE

EVOLVED AS THEY HAVE IN RECENT

YEARS.

AND YOU'RE RIGHT, THIS IS A

VERY GOOD, POSITIVE STEP

FORWARD AND I THINK THE ICLU

DESERVES A LOT OF CREDIT TO

BRING THIS TO EVERYONE'S

ATTENTION AND FORCING A CHANGE

AND I THINK IT'S FOR THE

BETTER.

DID IT NEED -- IT TOOK THE

ACLU TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.

I DON'T THINK THIS IS A

GOOD AGREEMENT, I THINK THIS

IS A GREAT AGREEMENT AND THE

REASON IS FOR THE VERY REASON

YOU JUST CITED.

NOT ONLY DOES IT DEAL WITH THE

SITUATION INSIDE THE

CORRECTIONS FACILITIES BUT

ALSO HIGHLIGHTS THE GENERAL

NEED.

AND THE PRISONS WERE NEVER

DESIGNED TO BE MENTAL HEALTH

HOSPITALS.

THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE

SUPPOSED TO BE.

AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE BECOME

BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF

FACILITIES ON THE OUTSIDE.

YEP.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, THIS WILL

ONLY HELP THE ENTIRE SITUATION

BY SHINING A BRIGHT LIGHT ON

IT, AND, AS I SAID, CHANGES

ARE ALREADY BEING MADE AND

WE'RE ALL BETTER OFF FOR THAT.

DEMOCRAT GLENDA RITZ IS

RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION AS

STATE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT

AND A REPUBLICAN ANNOUNCED

PLANS TO CHALLENGE HER THIS

WEEK.

JENNIFER MCCORMICK IS THE

SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS IN

YORKTOWN AND A FIRST-TIME

CANDIDATE.

SHE TOLD REPORTERS AT THE

STATEHOUSE THAT SHE HOPES TO

TAKE THE POLITICS OUT OF

EDUCATION.

I HAVE EXPERIENCE IN THE

CLASSROOM AS A SPECIAL ED

TEACHER.

I'VE LED BUILDINGS AND I'VE

LED DISTRICTS.

I KNOW WHAT IT TAKES TO BE A

LEADER IN EDUCATION.

I HAVE DONE IT AND I WILL

CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

THAT SETS ME APART FROM OUR

CURRENT SUPERINTENDENT.

MIKE MCDANIEL, SHE WAS A

DEMOCRAT UNTIL JUST RECENTLY.

WHAT WILL THAT MEAN TO GOP

CONVENTION DELEGATES?

ONE, IT MEANS SHE'S EVOLVED

INTO A HIGHER BEING.

[LAUGHTER]

I KNOW, THAT'S KIND OF A

THEME HERE.

I THINK IT'S GREAT.

SHE'S CLEARLY -- SHE'S BEEN

A TEACHER, SPECIAL ED TEACHER,

JUNIOR HIGH TEACHER, ASSISTANT

SUPERINTENDENT,

SUPERINTENDENT.

SHE'S DONE ALL THE THINGS THAT

YOU NEED TO DO TO HAVE THE

RESUME TO MOVE FORWARD AND

SHOW THE KIND OF LEADERSHIP

THAT WE NEED IN THE STATE.

I THINK SHE'S GOING TO BE A

GOOD CANDIDATE.

NOW WE ALSO HAVE ANOTHER LADY

FROM FORT WAYNE NAMED WOOTEN

WHO IS ALSO AN INSTRUCTOR UP

THERE, A COLLEGE INSTRUCTOR

AND SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A

CONTEST FOR SUPERINTENDENT AND

I THINK THAT'S GOOD, IT'S

HEALTHY MOVING FORWARD.

GLENDA RITZ IS VIEWED AS

VULNERABLE.

SHE'S THE ONLY STATE-WIDE

DEMOCRAT BUT -- EXCEPT FOR,

OBVIOUSLY, ON STATE ELECTIONS.

BUT I THINK SHE'S GOING TO BE

VERY STRONG.

MIKE PENCE AND HIS ECHO

CHAMBER AT THE STATE BOARD OF

EDUCATION HAVE DONE EVERYTHING

THEY CAN DO TO MESS UP

EDUCATION IN THIS STATE.

I MEAN, THE ISTEP IS A PERFECT

EXAMPLE.

GLENDA RITZ HAS BEEN TALKING

FOR TWO YEARS ABOUT HOW BAD

THAT TEST WAS AND ONLY

RECENTLY DID THEY START

LISTENING TO HER.

HAVING ALL OF THEM IN THE SAME

ECHO CHAMBER IS BAD FOR

EDUCATION.

SHE'S DOING A VERY POSITIVE

JOB OF PROTECTING THE TEACHERS

AND POINTING OUT THE FALLACY

OF THEIR ARGUMENTS.

I THINK SHE'S GOING TO BE

REELECTED.

THIS WILL BE A REFERENDUM

ON GLENDA RITZ.

I THINK IT WILL.

AND MIKE PENCE.

WELL, IT'S GOING TO BE A

REFERENDUM ON EDUCATION ISSUES

AND WHO IN INDIANA BELIEVES

HAS THE RIGHT WAY FORWARD.

GLENDA RITZ BURST ON THE SCENE

BECAUSE SHE RAN A GREAT

CAMPAIGN.

WE'LL SEE IF SHE CAN NOW, AS A

KNOWN CANDIDATE, WITH A RECORD

OF HER OWN, RUN A CAMPAIGN

THAT IS ABLE TO DO WHAT ANN

SAYS AND BECOME VICTORIOUS AND

THAT'S NOT -- IT'S A MUCH

DIFFERENT THING AND IT'S NOT

AN EASY TASK.

RIGHT,

SHE'S HIGHLY VULNERABLE AND

AT RISK.

SHE'S GOT A PROBLEM.

SO DOES MIKE PENCE.

NOBODY KNOWS WHO SHE IS FOR

STARTERS, IN A POLL THAT CAME

OUT THIS WEEK, AND THAT'S A

PROBLEM FOR HER.

GLENDA RITZ'S NAME ID IS

SURPRISINGLY LOW STATE-WIDE.

>IS WEEK, AND THAT'S A

PROBLEM FOR HER.

GLENDA RITZ'S NAME ID IS

SURPRISINGLY LOW STATE-WIDE.

RIGHT.

MIKE PENCE'S ISN'T AND

PEOPLE HAVE FORMED A OPINION,

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT

VULNERABILITY.

IS IT POSSIBLE TO TAKE THE

POLITICS OUT OF EDUCATION AS

JENNIFER MCCORMICK SAID?

SADLY, NO, BECAUSE WHEN

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A SUBJECT

AREA THAT CONSTITUTES MORE

THAN HALF OF THE STATE'S

BUDGET AND THERE IS NOTHING

AUSEE FUNDAMENTAL THAN THE

PHILOSOPHY ABOUT HOW TO

EDUCATE THE NEXT GENERATION OF

HOOSIERS.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT IN ANY

CYNICAL WAY, I'S JUST IN PART

POLITICS I DON'T THINK IS

INHERENTLY BAD, YOU CAN'T

SEPARATE THE TWO.

FINALLY, A NEWLY FORMED

GROUP OF RETIRED LAWMAKERS IS

TRYING TO ENCOURAGE MORE

CIVILITY IN THE GENERAL

ASSEMBLY.

IT CREATED AN AWARD THAT IS

BELIEVED TO BE THE FIRST OF

ITS KIND IN THE COUNTRY.

IT WAS GIVEN TO THREE

SENATORS -- LUKE KENLEY OF

NOBLESVILLE, VANETA BECKER OF

EVANSVILLE, AND EARLINE ROGERS

OF GARY.

STATE REPRESENTATIVES TIM

BROWN OF CRAWFORDSVILLE AND

CHARLIE BROWN OF GARY WERE

ALSO RECOGNIZED FOR, AMONG

OTHER THINGS, SETTING GOOD

EXAMPLES.

HERE'S FORMER LAWMAKER RALPH

FOLEY.

SO AS TO REFLECT PT HOTIVELY

ON AND TO GENEK IE RESPECT FOR

THEKERNERAL ASSEMBLY.

WITH THE ACRIMONY AND THE

FIGHTING AND THE CIRCULAR

Q&ISG SQE O WAS UEAM TW

AND THAT'S FORMER LAWMAKER

DALE GRUBB.

ANN DELANEY, WILL THAT LEAD TO

MORE CIVILITY?

I HOPE SO BECAUSE WE NEED

IT, I MEAN, THERE'S NO

QUESTION ABOUT IT THAT WE NEED

IT AND I GIVE THEM CREDIT FOR

THINKING OF THIS IDEA AND, OF

COURSE, PUTTING DISTINGUISHED

PERSONNEL LIKE YOURSELF ON THE

COMMITTEE, JIM.

BUT --

I TRIED.

I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA, I

REALLY DO.

IS THERE A PROBLEM WITH

CIVILITY?

SURE, I THINK THERE IS.

I THINK IT'S BECOME SO

PARTISAN THAT IT'S

COUNTERPRODUCTIVE IN A LOT OF

WAYS AND WE'RE GOING TO LOSE

GOOD PEOPLE TO RETIREMENT THIS

TIME AROUND LIKE EARLINE

ROGERS WHO JUST WON THAT AWARD

AND WE'RE GOING TO MISS HAVING

THAT KIND OF CIVILITY IN THE

PROCESS.

SO THE ATTITUDES AND THE

ATMOSPHERE THAT WE HAVE NOW

HAS GOT TO CHANGE FOR THE

BETTER, AND IT'S HARD TO DO

WHEN YOU'RE LOSING PEOPLE LIKE

HER.

POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT.

OH, ABSOLUTELY.

AND THIS ISN'T JUST AN INDIANA

PROBLEM.

IT'S NOTHING --

THEY GOT IN A FIST FIGHT.

AND EVEN AT THE FEDERAL

LEVEL, THE STORIES ABOUT HOW

TIP O'NEIL, LEADING DEMOCRAT

IN THE HOUSE

AND PRESIDENT REAGAN USED TO

ARGUE, YOU KNOW, VIGOROUSLY

DURING THE DAY BUT THEN GET

TOGETHER, RETIRE TO THE

CONFINES --

GOT TO GO, IT'S NOT LIKE

ANY MORE.

THAT'S "INDIANA WEEK IN

REVIEW" FOR THIS WEEK.

OUR PANEL IS DEMOCRAT ANN

DELANEY.

REPUBLICAN MIKE MCDANIEL.

JON SCHWANTES OF "INDIANA

LAWMAKERS" AND JOHN

KETZENBERGER OF THE INDIANA

FISCAL POLICY INSTITUTE.

IF YOU'D LIKE A PODCAST OF

THIS PROGRAM YOU CAN FIND IT

AT

WFYI.ORG/IWIR, OR STARTING

MONDAY YOU CAN STREAM IT OR

GET IT ON DEMAND FROM XFINITY

OR BRIGHT HOUSE NETWORKS.

I'M JIM SHELLA OF WISH-TV.