>> BANNING TRANS STUDENTS FROM
SPORTS.
ABSENTEE MAIL-IN VOTING
RESTRICTED.
PLUS, CHANGES TO THE SCHOOL
CURRICULUM BILL AND MORE ON
INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW FOR THE
WEEK ENDING JANUARY 28, 2022.
>> INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW IS
MADE POSSIBLE BY THE SUPPORTERS
OF INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING
STATIONS.
>> THIS WEEK, PROTESTS ERUPTED
IN THE INDIANA HOUSE CHAMBER
FOLLOWING A COMMITTEE'S APPROVAL
OF A BILL RESTRICTING
TRANSGENDER GIRLS' ACCESS TO
SCHOOL SPORTS. THE VOTE CAME
AFTER HOURS OF TESTIMONY FROM
HOOSIERS WHO MOSTLY OPPOSE THE
MEASURE.
>> THE LEGISLATION WOULD
PROHIBIT TRANSGENDER GIRLS FROM
JOINING GIRLS SCHOOL SPORTS
TEAMS. REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE
MICHELLE DAVIS IS ITS AUTHOR.
>> REP. MICHELLE DAVIS
(R-WHITELAND): THE PURPOSE OF
THIS BILL IS TO MAINTAIN FAIR
COMPETITION IN GIRLS SPORTS.
>> BUT MANY PEOPLE OPPOSED TO
THE BILL SAY IT'S ANOTHER WAY TO
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST AN
ESPECIALLY VULNERABLE GROUP OF
CHILDREN. CHRIS PAULSEN FROM
INDIANA YOUTH GROUP JOINED
SEVERAL OTHERS WHO POINTED OUT
THE MENTAL HEALTH RISKS
TRANSGENDER YOUTH FACE,
ESPECIALLY WHEN THEIR IDENTITY
IS TARGETED BY POLITICIANS.
>> CHRIS PAULSEN: THE TREVOR
PROJECT'S 2021 SURVEY OF NEARLY
35 THOUSAND YOUTH AGES 13 TO 24
SHOW THAT MORE THAN 50 PERCENT
OF TRANSGENDER YOUTH HAVE
SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED SUICIDE IN
THE PAST YEAR.
>> THE BILL
PASSED THE FULL HOUSE THURSDAY.
WHAT PROBLEM IS THIS BILL
SOLVING?
IT'S THE FIRST QUESTION FOR OUR
INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW PANE.L
DEMOCRAT ANN DELANEY.
REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIEN.
JON SCHWANTES, HOST OF INDIANA
LAWMAKERS, AND NIKI KELLY,
STATEHOUSE REPORTER FOR THE FORT
WAYNE JOURNAL GAZETTE.
I'M INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING
STATEHOUSE REPORTER BRANDON
SMITH.
ANN DELANEY, DOESN'T THE IHSAA
ALREADY HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE
TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE?
DO THEY NOT?
>> THEY DO.
IT'S A VERY GOOD PROCESS, AS A
MATTER OF FACT.
THIS ISN'T ABOUT FAIRNESS, IT'S
ABOUT HATRED.
I THINK REPRESENTATIVE TONYA
PFAFF SAID IT VERY WELL.
IT'S A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A
PROBLEM.
THEY COULDN'T EVEN POINT TO
SOMEONE DEFINITIVELY WHO FIT
INTO THIS CATEGORY.
AND THE IDEA THAT YOU HAVE
HUNDREDS OF TEENAGE BOYS LINING
UP TO GET SEX CHANGE OPERATIONS,
AND THE TRAUMA THAT THAT
CHANGE -- THE CHANGES THAT THAT
MEANS TO THEIR LIVES GOING
FORWARD, ALL TO PLAY HIGH SCHOOL
BASKETBALL IS RIDICULOUS.
I MEAN, SHE IS SINGLING OUT
PEOPLE JUST TO SHOW THAT SHE IS,
AGAIN, FAR TO THE RIGHT, WHICH
IS WHERE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS
ON THIS.
AND THE DEMOCRATS WERE UNANIMOUS
ON OPPOSING THIS AS THEY SHOULD
BE.
BECAUSE IT DOES DISCRIMINATE.
AND BY THE WAY, IT ONLY
DISCRIMINATES ONE WAY, IT
DISCRIMINATES AGAINST BOYS WHO
HAVE THE SEX CHANGE OPERATION
BECOME GIRLS.
WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER?
THAT DOES OCCUR.
ARE WE GOING TO SAY IT IS OKAY
FOR THEM TO PLAY, OR ARE THEY
SAYING WOMEN AREN'T VERY GOOD AT
SPORTS ANYWAY, SO IT DOESN'T
MATTER IN THAT CONTEXT.
THE WHOLE BILL IS RIDICULOUS.
ALL IT DOES IS STIR UP THE
REPUBLICAN BASE TO HATE ANOTHER
GROUP OF CHILDREN WHO HAVE THEIR
PROBLEMS, AND HAVE THEIR
ADVERSITY TO FACE ON THEIR OWN
WITHOUT THIS ADDITIONAL BURDEN.
>> MIKE O'BRIEN, FAIRNESS AND
COMPETITION IS WHAT WE HEARD
FROM THE PROPONENTS OF THIS
BILL.
ARE YOU BUYING THAT?
>> FIRST, I DON'T THINK THIS IS
DRIVEN BY HATRED AT ALL.
I THINK IT IS DRIVEN BY
MISUNDERSTANDING, FEAR, CONCERN
FOR WHAT'S HAPPENING IN SOME
SCHOOLS.
AND THE POLITICS OF THIS, ANN'S
WRONG, THIS ISN'T FAR RIGHT.
WHAT IS DRIVING THIS ARE
COMMUNITIES THAT ARE
TRADITIONALLY MODERATE, DRIVING
A LOT OF THE CONCERN HERE WHERE
YOU HAVE A VERY VOCAL
TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY.
I THINK IF YOU WENT TO PLACES
THAT WE BELIEVE ARE
TRANSITIONING FROM A REPUBLICAN
TO A DEMOCRAT AREA, MAYBE PURPLE
AREAS, THE -- THEY WERE MAYBE, I
THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE
POLITICAL DIAGRAM OF THESE
PEOPLE, FOR GAY MARRIAGE AND
AGAINST TRANSGENDER ATHLETES.
IS THIS A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF
A PROBLEM?
THERE IS NO EXAMPLES OF THIS
HERE.
I DO THINK REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS
IS CORRECT THAT WE'RE HEADING
THAT DIRECTION WHERE THIS IS
GOING TO BE A PROBLEM.
AGAIN, ANN, I STRUGGLE WITH
THIS.
I WAS WAY OUT IN FRONT ON THE
GAY MARRIAGE ISSUE, WORKED WITH
CHRIS PAULSEN IF YOU LOOK AT
PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THEY ARE NOT
HATEFUL, VERY REASONABLE AND
LOOK AT THIS ISSUE AND SAY I
JUST DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT YET.
>> YOU THINK THAT'S THE
MOTIVATING FACTOR FOR A SEX
CHANGE OPERATION, TO PLAY
SPORTS?
>> I THINK IF -- IT'S HARD
ENOUGH TO BE A TEENAGER, IF
YO'RE TRANSGENDER IT IS
IMPOSSIBLE.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH
THAT PROCESS, IT'S -- THAT'S A
MONUMENTAL THING IN YOUR LIFE, I
DON'T THINK PLAYING MEN'S
BASKETBALL IS THE NEXT THING ON
YOUR LIST.
>> NIKI KELLY, AS WE'VE HEARD
NOW, DEBATE IN THE COMMITTEE,
AND THEN ON THE FLOOR, ARE
REPUBLICANS WHO ARE PUSHING THIS
BILL DOING A GOOD JOB TO
INDICATING THIS IS -- THESE ARE
THE EXACT REASONS WHY WE NEED
IT?
>> WELL, I MEAN, THEY'RE
FOCUSING ON ONE THING ONLY,
WHICH IS THEY'RE SAYING THERE IS
UNFAIR PERFORMANCE EDGES.
THAT SOMEONE WHO IS BORN A MALE,
HAS BETTER LUNG CAPACITY,
TALLER, MORE MUSCLE MASS, THINGS
LIKE THAT.
THEY'RE FOCUSING ON SORT OF THE
ADVANTAGES THAT THAT WOULD GIVE
IF THEY WOULD THEN TRANSITION TO
A FEMALE SPORT.
THE FASCINATING PART ABOUT MOST
OF IT, THERE ARE EXAMPLES OUT
THERE THAT CAUSE ISSUES, BUT
MOSTLY IN COLLEGIATE SPORTS, THE
BILL ORIGINALLY COVERED COLLEGE
SPORTS, THEY TOOK IT OUT WITHOUT
A WORD OF EXPLANATION.
I THINK WE CAN ALL SURMISE THAT
THE NCAA WAS PROBABLY NOT A FAN
OF IT.
THAT'S THE ARENA WHERE WE'RE
SEEING SOME OF THESE ISSUES
HAPPEN MORE THAN IN HIGH SCHOOL.
AND MIDDLE SCHOOL.
>> JON SCHWANTES -- WE'VE
SEEN --
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY THERE IS
NOTHING FAIR, I'M SORRY, GO
AHEAD.
>> WE'VE SEEN OTHER BILLS LIKE
THIS AROUND THE COUNTRY, SOME A
LOT STRICTER THAN THIS ONE.
A LOT OF THOSE BILLS HAVE
RECEIVED A LOT MORE NATIONAL
ATTENTION THAN I FEEL LIKE
INDIANA'S BILL IS GETTING.
NOT SAYING IT IS GETTING NO
ATTENTION, BUT CERTAINLY NOT ON
THE SCALE OF OTHER STATES.
WHY IS THIS ONE SORT OF FLYING
UNDER THE RADAR?
>> I THINK IF INDIANA HAD BEEN
THE FIRST STATE TO ADDRESS THIS
IN A LEGISLATIVE FASHION OR AT
LEAST THROUGH A PROPOSED
LEGISLATION, IT PROBABLY WOULD
HAVE BEEN A PROMINENT NATIONAL
STORY.
YOU KNOW, WE COULD GET IN
DISCUSSIONS OF WHY VARIOUS
EDITORIAL DECISIONS ARE MADE AND
WHAT CONSTITUTES NEWS.
AS EACH STATE WRESTLES WITH
THIS, IT PROBABLY BECOMES -- I'M
NOT SAYING IT IS ANY LESS
SIGNIFICANT TO THE PEOPLE
AFFECTED BY THE POTENTIAL LAW,
BUT IN TERMS OF IT BEING A
NATIONAL NEWS STORY, IT STARTS
TO DIMINISH A BIT.
AND I THINK IT'S MORE -- IF YOU
LOOK AT IT NARROWLY ABOUT THE
COVERAGE IT RECEIVED, IT IS MORE
ABOUT THAT PROBABLY THAN
ANYTHING MORE NUANCED ABOUT THE
FINE POINTS OF THE BILL HERE ARE
HOW IT'S BEING DEBATED.
>> I WANT TO JUST MAKE ONE
POINT, THERE IS NOTHING FAIR
ABOUT SPORTS RIGHT NOW.
IF YOUR PARENTS HAVE THE MONEY,
THEY PUT YOU ON A TRAVELING TEAM
AND TAKE YOU PLACES, PAY FOR
SUMMER CAMPS, YOU HAVE A
TREMENDOUS ADVANTAGE OVER KIDS
WHOSE PARENTS DON'T HAVE THOSE
RESOURCES.
NOBODY IS WORRIED ABOUT THE
FAIRNESS OF THAT PART OF IT,
WHICH I FIND REALLY KIND OF
IRONIC
>> I AM SURPRISED THAT ANN MADE
THE POINT EARLIER ABOUT HOW THE
BILL IS CRAFTED SO IT DEALS ONLY
WITH INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE ARE
BORN GENETICALLY BORN AS MALES,
AND ARE TRANSITIONING TO FEMALE.
IT DOES SEEM THAT IF IN FACT
THIS IS ALL ABOUT FAIRNESS, ONE
COULD ARGUE THAT THE BILL SHOULD
BE BROADENED, AT LEAST THE
LANGUAGE, TO SAY IF YOU'RE
COMPETING OUTSIDE THE SPORT
CLASSIFICATION IN WHICH YOU WERE
BORN.
I CAN SEE PEOPLE SAYING THIS IS
PICKING -- NARROWLY DEFINING THE
LAW IN A WAY IT SHOULDN'T BE.
>>
TIME NOW FOR VIEWER FEEDBACK.
EACH WEEK WE POSE AN
UNSCIENTIFIC, ONLINE POLL
QUESTION.
THIS WEEK'S QUESTION:
SHOULD TRANSGENDER STUDENTS BE
BANNED FROM PARTICIPATING IN
GIRLS' HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS?
A, YES, OR B, NO.
LAST WEEK'S QUESTION:
WILL THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
ELIMINATE INDIANA'S LICENSE
REQUIREMENT TO CARRY A HANDGUN
THIS YEAR?
THIS ONE WAS CLOSER THAN I WAS
EXPECTING, 44% YES, 56 NO.
I SUGGEST THE CHANCES ARE A LOT
HIGHER THAN THAT, BUT WE'LL FIND
OUT IN THE COMING WEEKS.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE PART
IN THE POLL GO TO WFYI.ORG/IWIR
AND LOOK FOR THE POLL.
CHANGES TO AN ELECTIONS BILL IN
A HOUSE COMMITTEE THIS WEEK WILL
MAKE IT HARDER FOR HOOSIERS TO
VOTE ABSENTEE BY MAIL.
>> THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE
APPROVED LANGUAGE THAT SAYS, IF
YOU WANT TO VOTE ABSENTEE BY
MAIL, YOU MUST ATTEST THAT YOU
WON'T BE AVAILABLE ON ELECTION
DAY OR - AND THIS IS THE NEW
PART - ANY TIME IN THE 28 DAYS
BEFORE THE ELECTION, WHEN EARLY
VOTING IS AVAILABLE.
REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE TIM
WESCO.
>> REP. TIM WESCO (R-OSCEOLA): I
BELIEVE THE BEST POLICY IS TO
ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO VOTE IN
PERSON, WHETHER ON ELECTION DAY
OR IN PERSON EARLY, AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE.
>> DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE ED
DELANEY SAYS THAT PUTS A GREATER
BURDEN ON VOTERS, PARTICULARLY
IN COUNTIES WITH FEW EARLY
VOTING LOCATIONS. AND HE
QUESTIONED WHY THE CHANGE IS
NECESSARY.
>> REP. ED
DELANEY(D-INDIANAPOLIS): I THINK
THE ANSWER'S APPARENT. THE
ANSWER IS, WE WANT TO REDUCE THE
NUMBER OF VOTERS. WHY DON'T YOU
JUST SAY THAT.
>> THE BILL IS UP FOR PASSAGE IN
THE HOUSE NEXT WEEK.
>> MIKE O'BRIEN, WHY NOT JUST
GET RID OF ABSENTEE MAIL-IN
VOTING ENTIRELY?
I'M NOT GOING TO BE AVAILABLE
ELECTION DAY OR 28 DAYS BEFORE.
>> I ALWAYS THOUGHT THIS WAS A
WEIRD DEAL, THIS -- BECAUSE I
ALWAYS VOTED ABSENTEE, OR VOTE
IN PERSON EARLY.
I WAS NEVER AVAILABLE ON
ELECTION DAY.
I WAS ALWAYS WORKING ELECTIONS,
MIGHT AS WELL TAKE THE EASY WAY
OUT HERE AND -- NOW I CAN'T
ANYMORE WITHOUT JUST STRAIGHT UP
BEING -- VIOLATING THE SPIRIT OF
THE LAW BEFORE.
THE ACTUALLY LETTER.
THAT WAS THE POINT BEFORE, BEING
UNAVAILABLE WHEN GIVEN THE
OPPORTUNITY IN PERSON.
I'M A TRADITIONALIST, I
THINK -- I WOULD THINK WE MADE
IT WIDELY AND WILDLY AVAILABLE
VOTING IN THE LAST 20 YEARS IN
THIS STATE, CONTRARY TO WHAT
DEMOCRATS THINK, WHETHER VOTE
CENTERS OR SATELLITE VOTING,
EARLY VOTING FOR 30 DAYS, OR
VOTING ON ELECTION DAY, WHICH IS
WHAT WE DID TO START, IT WASN'T
THAT LONG AGO THAT WE DID THAT.
VAST OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE IN THIS
STATE.
FRANKLY I DON'T HAVE SOME
IDEOLOGICAL RIGID -- AS TIM
WESCO SAID, WE HAVE BEEN LIVING
ON THE HONOR SYSTEM FOREVER, I
THINK IT HAS WORKED.
BOTH PARTIES HAVE THEIR OWN
OPERATIONS THAT RECRUIT THEIR
OWN VOTERS TO VOTE ABSENTEE AND
VOTE EARLY.
SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THAT,
THEY'RE TRADITIONALISTS WHO WANT
VOTING ON ELECTION DAY, THE
ELECTION OSTENSIBLY ENDS 30 DAYS
BEFORE ELECTION DAY FOR A LOT OF
PEOPLE, CAMPAIGNS DON'T LIKE
THAT, CANDIDATES DON'T LIKE
THAT, THE ENVIRONMENT CAN
CHANGE, THIS AND THAT.
I DON'T THINK THIS WAS
NECESSARILY BROKEN IN INDIANA.
BUT I DO THINK CONTRARY TO WHAT
DEMOCRATS THINK, WE HAVE MADE IT
MUCH EASIER TO VOTE IN INDIANA
OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS.
>> [LAUGHTER] HOLD THAT THOUGHT.
>> I KNOW YOU DISAGREE WITH WHAT
MIKE SAID.
TIM WESCO REFERENCED.
INDIANA DOES THIS ABSENTEE
VOTING LARGELY ON THE -- NOBODY
IS CHECKING THIS.
IS THIS REALLY GOING TO AFFECT
HOW VOTERS VOTE?
>> WELL, YOU COULD HAVE A
SITUATION WHERE SOMEBODY FINDS
OUT THAT THE PERSON WHO SENT IN
AN ABSENTEE BALLOT WAS PRESENT
AND HAS A GRUDGE AGAINST THAT
PERSON.
THERE ARE CRIMINALS -- IF YOU
CHANGE YOUR MIND OR YOU THINK
YOU'RE GOING TO BE HERE, OR YOU
THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE GONE
AND YOU'RE HERE, THERE ARE ALL
KINDS OF THINGS WHERE SOMEBODY
COULD MAKE TROUBLE BASED ON A
CRIMINAL PROSECUTION NOW, THE
HONOR SYSTEM APPARENTLY IS NO
LONGER GOOD ENOUGH FOR THIS
STATE REPRESENTATIVE.
HE WANTS CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.
BUT IT'S INTERESTING THAT THIS
CAME OUT THE SAME WEEK THAT THE
CIVIC HEALTH INDEX CAME OUT, AND
INDIANA, DESPITE WHAT MIKE SAID,
HAS GONE FROM BEING 41st IN THE
STATE -- AMONG THE STATES TO
46th IN THE STATE.
YEARS AGO, YEARS AGO, WE WERE IN
THE TOP 10 IN TERMS OF TURNOUT.
NOW, NOT ONLY THE BOTTOM 10,
WE'RE IN THE BOTTOM 5.
SO WE HAVE NOT MADE IT EASIER
FOR PEOPLE TO VOTE.
WE HAVE PUT REPEATED OBSTACLES
IN THE WAY OF PEOPLE VOTING.
>> THOSE STATS DON'T MATTER.
>> PARENTS DON'T -- REPUBLICANS
DON'T WANT EVERYONE TO VOTE.
>> WHAT'S THE NUMBER ONE FACTOR
IN VOTER MOTIVATION?
>> AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
AND THE CIVIC HEALTH INDEX
ITSELF SHOWS HOW MUCH WE'VE
SLIPPED.
>> I THINK IT SHOWS HOW WE HAVE
NO COMPETITIVE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
IN INDIANA.
BECAUSE THE NUMBER ONE REASON TO
GO VOTE IS BECAUSE IT'S
COMPETITIVE, NOT BECAUSE OF
GERRYMANDERING.
>> IT IS EXACTLY BECAUSE OF
GERRYMANDERING.
THAT IS WHY THERE IS NO
COMPETITION.
BECAUSE YOU GERRYMANDERED IT SO
WELL.
>> YOU'RE A THIRD PLACE PARTY,
ANN.
WE HAVE TO COMPETE WITH OTHER
CONSERVATIVES
>> YOU WOULD THINK THAT YOU
WOULD BE HAPPY ENOUGH THAT THE
GERRYMANDERING RESULTS THAT YOU
WOULD ALSO HAVE TO RESTRICT
REGISTRATION AND VOTING, BUT
THAT IS NOT ENOUGH FOR YOU GUYS.
>> YOU'RE JUST ABSURD.
>> JON SCHWANTES, DO YOU FEEL
LIKE THIS IS -- I FEEL LIKE I'M
ASKING A SIMILAR QUESTION THAT I
ASKED ON THE LAST TOPIC.
WHAT IS THE NEED FOR THIS
LEGISLATION?
>> PROBABLY NO NEED.
THE MOTIVATION, I THINK, IS CUT
AND DRIED.
REPUBLICANS WANT FEWER PEOPLE TO
VOTE.
THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.
LET'S NOT BEAT AROUND THE BUSH.
IT'S -- I AGREE WITH MIKE THAT
IDEALLY WE'D ALL -- I LOVE THE
TRADITION OF EVERYBODY GOING TO
THE POLLS ON ELECTION DAY.
IN FACT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A
BIPARTISAN COMMISSION, FEDERAL
COMMISSION, I THINK IT WAS
CO-CHAIRED MAYBE BY GERALD FORD
AND JIMMY CARTER, LET'S MAKE
THIS SOMETHING SPECIAL THAT
EVERYBODY WORKS TOGETHER.
I WOULD LOVE THAT, WE DON'T LIVE
IN LA LA LAND.
SEEMS TO ME, WELL, WE CAN DEBATE
THE VOTER SECURITY.
BUT WE CAN'T DEBATE THE
MOTIVATION HERE, WHICH IS TO
REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE
VOTING.
THAT IS PRETTY CLEAR.
>> NIKI KELLY, TIM WESCO KIND OF
INDIRECTLY CAST SOME DOUBT ON
THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF
MAIL-IN VOTING DURING THAT HOUSE
COMMITTEE.
IS THERE ANY WIDE EVIDENCE OF
WIDESPREAD VOTER FRAUD WHEN IT
COMES TO MAIL-IN VOTING.
WE HAVE STATES WHO FOR TWO
DECADES HAVE BEEN DOING
EXCLUSIVELY MAIL-IN VOTING?
>> NO, THERE ISN'T.
SURE, YOU CAN ALWAYS FIND AN
OCCASIONAL INSTANCE HERE OR
THERE.
SOMETIMES IT IS ON THE
REPUBLICAN SIDE AND SOMETIMES ON
THE DEMOCRAT SIDE.
ONE THING I DO WANT TO NOTE WITH
THIS WHOLE NOTION OF THE ENTIRE
MONTH BEFORE YOU CAN VOTE.
THIS 28 DAYS THING.
FOR A LOT OF COUNTIES, THOUGH,
THAT -- YOU CAN'T VOTE ALL 28
DAYS.
A LOT OF COUNTIES JUST HAVE
SATURDAY VOTING.
REALLY THAT'S FOUR ADDITIONAL
DAYS YOU CAN VOTE.
NOT 28.
SO REALLY IS A WIDE VARIETY,
DEPENDING WHERE YOU LIVE.
>> YEAH.
NOT JUST WHAT DAYS, EVEN WHAT
HOURS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SOME DAYS IT'S FOUR HOURS IN THE
MORNING.
>> WE SHOULD PROBABLY POINT OUT
DONALD TRUMP RELIED ON MAIL-IN
VOTING MOST OF HIS LIFE,
CERTAINLY IN THE LAST ELECTION.
>> PROBABLY CORRUPT
>> THE INDIANA HOUSE APPROVED A
CONTROVERSIAL SCHOOL CONTENT AND
CURRICULUM BILL THIS WEEK.
INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING'S
JEANIE LINDSAY REPORTS,
LAWMAKERS PASSED THE MEASURE
AFTER MORE THAN AN HOUR AND A
PHALF OF DISCUSSION ON THE HOUS
FLOOR.
>> LAWMAKERS MADE A FEW CHANGES
TO HOUSE BILL 1134 BEFORE THE
HOUSE APPROVED IT. BILL AUTHOR
REP. TONY COOK SAYS THEY AIM TO
ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT THE BILL
WOULD ADD ONTO SCHOOLS'
WORKLOADS OR PREVENT TEACHERS
FROM CONDEMNING RACISM. BUT
CONCERNS PERSISTED FROM SOME
LAWMAKERS, LIKE REPRESENTATIVE
CAROLYN JACKSON, ABOUT HOW THE
OVERALL LEGISLATION COULD IMPACT
SCHOOLS - ESPECIALLY AS THE
PANDEMIC CONTINUES.
>> REP. CAROLYN JACKSON
(D-HAMMOND): I THINK WE NEED TO
STEP BACK AND LOOK AT THE
SITUATION BEFORE WE CREATE
ANOTHER OBSTACLE AND FALL ON OUR
FACE.
>> MANY LAWMAKERS OPPOSED TO THE
BILL WORRY IT COULD REDUCE THE
NUMBER OF TEACHERS WILLING TO
WORK IN THE STATE. THE HOUSE
APPROVED THE LEGISLATION 60 TO
37. IT NOW HEADS TO THE SENATE.
>> NIKI KELLY, BEFORE THEY
PASSED THE BILL OVER TO THE
SENATE, THEY CHANGED THE BILL IN
A NINE-PAGE AMENDMENT.
ANY TIME YOU HAVE A NINE-PAGE
AMENDMENT TO A PIECE OF
LEGISLATION, THAT'S A GOOD BILL.
CAN YOU GIVE US A SENSE OF THE
CHANGES TO THE BILL?
>> MOST WERE TWEAKING, IT LIMITS
THE DAMAGES, IT WAS TEACHERS
HAVING TO POST CURRICULUM, IF
THEY STUMBLED UPON AN ARTICLE
THE NIGHT BEFORE, DO THEY HAVE
TO RUN IMMEDIATELY AND POST IT
BEFORE CLASS, OR WILL THEY BE IN
VIOLATION OF THE LAW?
THEY BACKED THAT DOWN A LITTLE
TO BE A LITTLE LESS, I GUESS,
ONEROUS, ON THAT SIDE.
BUT FOR ALL INTENTS AND
PURPOSES, IT IS PRETTY MUCH THE
SAME BILL IT'S BEEN THE WHOLE
TIME.
THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN
CHANGING THE DIVISIVE CONCEPT
LANGUAGE IN THE BILL, WHICH IS
THE WHOLE REASON THERE IS
DIVISION ON THE BILL.
>> JON SCHWANTES, TO THAT END,
THE SENATE KILLED OFF ITS
VERSION OF THIS MEASURE.
IT SAID THERE WAS NO PATH
FORWARD.
THAT'S WHAT THE VERY BRIEF 4:00
P.M. ON A FRIDAY STATEMENT SAID.
IF THERE IS NO PATH FORWARD ON
THAT BILL, WHY WOULD THERE BE A
PATH FORWARD ON THIS BILL?
>> THIS ASSUMES THERE IS.
I MEAN, I THINK THE SENATE CAN
MAYBE SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE HERE.
I THINK THERE IS CLEARLY
ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORT.
VARIOUS BILLS HAVE BEEN
INTRODUCED, SOME DEAL WITH
NARROW PORTIONS OF THIS WHOLE
REFORM PACKAGE WITH PARENTAL
INVOLVEMENT AND PARENTAL INPUT.
OTHERS ARE MUCH BROADER.
SO WHAT I THINK WE COULD SEE
COME OUT OF THIS IS ATTEMPTS AT
MORE TRANSPARENCY.
FORMALIZED POSTING OF COURSE
LESSONS AND COURSE MATERIALS,
CURRICULA.
AND INVOLVEMENT, MANDATORY
INVOLVEMENT OF THE PUBLIC AND
SCHOOL BOARD MEETINGS IN TERMS
OF THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A
SAY WITHOUT IMPOSING VERY
SPECIFIC BUT STILL SUBJECT TO
DEBATE GUIDELINES ABOUT WHAT CAN
BE TAUGHT OR THE REVIEW PROCESS.
BECAUSE WE'RE FOCUSED SO MUCH ON
SOCIAL STUDIES, AND LANGUAGE
ARTS IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT THAT
WAY.
IF YOU PUT THE WHOLE CURRICULA
TO AN ADVISORY PANEL, I CAN SEE
CREATIONISM VERSUS EVOLUTION
CREEPING IN.
I CAN SEE WHEN YOU HAVE A
PERSONAL FINANCE CLASS AND
STUDENTS ARE GIVEN A FAKE POT OF
MONEY TO LEARN HOW TO INVEST IN
THE STOCK MARKET, THERE ARE
PEOPLE WHO SAY YOU ARE CREATING
A BUNCH OF CUTTHROAT CAPITALISTS
WITH NO HEART.
THIS WHOLE THING POTENTIALLY,
THAT'S A BIT OF AN EXAGGERATION
IN TERMS OF REALITY.
IT DOES SEEM THAT CRITICS ARE
WORRIED A LOT ABOUT GRIDLOCK
HERE, AND THE BURDEN THAT WOULD
BE CREATED BY THIS MULTI-LAYERED
APPROACH TO CURRICULUM APPROVAL.
>> MIKE O'BRIEN, IF THE SENATE
TOOK OUT THE DIVISIVE CONCEPTS
LANGUAGE AND WE WERE LEFT WITH A
LITTLE MORE TRANSPARENCY FROM
TEACHERS IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY
HAVE TO POST ONLINE AND THESE
PARENT -- THESE CURRICULUM
COMMITTEES THAT PARENTS WOULD
PLAY A MAJOR ROLE IN AT THE
SCHOOL BOARD AND DISTRICT LEVEL.
IF THAT'S ALL THE BILL WAS LEFT
WITH, DOES THIS HAVE IS A MUCH
EASIER PATH FORWARD?
>> PROBABLY.
BUT I THINK THE GOAL NEEDS TO BE
TRANSPARENCY AND NOT CONTROL FOR
PARENTS.
AND TAKE THIS OFF THE TEACHER'S
PLATE ENTIRELY.
MOVE THIS ENTIRELY TO A SCHOOL
BOARD, YOU KNOW, SOME KIND OF
PARENTAL COMMITTEE ADVISORY
ROLE.
BUT WHERE ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE
ELECTED SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS
ULTIMATELY.
LET THEM POST WHAT -- LET THEM
DIRECT THE CORPORATION POST WHAT
THEY WANT TO POST IN THE LEAST
ONEROUS WAY POSSIBLE.
PUTTING TEACHERS IN THIS
SITUATION, THEY AREN'T PREPPING
MONTHS IN ADVANCE, THEY ARE
PREPPING THE NIGHT BEFORE, 11:00
OR 12:00 AT NIGHT, ONCE THEY GET
THEIR OWN KIDS TO BED.
THIS HAS GOT TO BE ON
TRANSPARENCY.
THE ONEROUS HAS GOT TO BE ON THE
PARENTS TO DO THE WORK TO GO ASK
THOSE QUESTIONS, A LOT OF THEM
ARE DOING THAT.
THEY'RE DOING IT IN A PRETTY
HOSTILE WAY, I WISH IT WAS MORE
THOUGHTFUL AND CONSTRUCTIVE.
TO PUT THIS ON TEACHER'S PLATE
IS TOO MUCH.
>> ANN DeLANEY, TO WHAT MIKE
JUST TALKED ABOUT, IF THE SENATE
CANGES THE BILL TO BE WHAT MIKE
JUST INDICATED, TAKING IT OFF
THE TEACHERS, FOCUSING ON
TRANSPARENCY, IS THAT A GOOD
PIECE OF LEGISLATION?
>> CERTAINLY BETTER PIECE OF
LEGISLATION.
THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE GOING TO
HAVE THOUGHT CONTROL, AN EQUAL
APPROACH TO ANY ISSUE NO MATTER
HOW HORRIFIC THAT HAS BEEN IN
THE PAST HISTORY OF THE WORLD IS
RIDICULOUS.
I AGREE WITH MIKE.
WE'VE PUT ENOUGH BURDEN ON
TEACHERS.
IT IS ALREADY A DIFFICULT ENOUGH
PROFESSION, MADE MUCH MORE
DIFFICULT BY THE PANDEMIC, NOW
WE'RE GOING TO ADD ANOTHER LAYER
ON THAT, IT'S CRAZY.
IF PARENTS WANT TO HAVE A
CURRICULUM ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN
THEIR DISTRICT WHERE THEY CAN
DISCUSS A TIME, PARENTS CAN
ALREADY PICK UP THE TEXTBOOK,
THEY CAN ALREADY TALK TO THE
TEACHERS, OR EMAIL THE TEACHERS
AND ASK ABOUT THE CURRICULUM.
THERE IS NO BARRIER TO THAT NOW.
AND IF THEY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH
IT, THEY CAN GO TO THE PRINCIPAL
OR THE SUPERINTENDENT, OR THEY
CAN GO TO THE SCHOOL BOARD.
WHY THE LEGISLATURE HAS TO GET
IN THE MIDDLE OF ISSUES WHERE
THEY CAN BE DEALT WITH ON A
LOCAL LEVEL IS BEYOND ME.
AND ANYTHING THAT PUTS MORE ON
THE TEACHERS' PLATE IS A BAD
IDEA.
WITH THIS BILL AND THIS CONCEPT,
WE'RE ALREADY THE LAUGHINGSTOCK
OF THE COUNTRY.
WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THAT AT
THE SAME TIME WE'RE TRYING TO
RECRUIT NEW BUSINESS INTO THIS
STATE.
LOTS OF LUCK WITH THAT.
>>
INDIANA LEGISLATIVE LEADERS
INDICATED RECENTLY THE GENERAL
ASSEMBLY WILL LIKELY HOLD OFF ON
ANY MAJOR ANTI-ABORTION
LEGISLATION THIS SESSION.
LAWMAKERS WANT TO WAIT FOR THE
US SUPREME COURT TO RULE ON THE
ISSUE LATER THIS YEAR BEFORE
TAKING ACTION.
>> THE FUTURE OF ABORTION RIGHTS
MAY BE DECIDED BY THE SUPREME
COURT THIS YEAR. AND INDIANA
SENATE PRESIDENT PRO TEM RODRIC
BRAY SAYS IT'S BEST TO WAIT FOR
THE DECISION BEFORE PASSING
LEGISLATION.
>> SEN. RODRIC BRAY
(R-MARTINSVILLE): TO TRY AND
ANTICIPATE WHAT THAT MIGHT SAY
AND DRAFT LEGISLATION TO
ANTICIPATE EVERY POSSIBLE
SOLUTION OR OPINION THAT THEY
COULD COME OUT WITH JUST LOOKS
COMPLETELY UNDOABLE TO ME. SO, I
DON'T THINK IT'S WISE TO TRY.
>> BUT ONCE THE COURT RULES,
BRAY SAYS HE MIGHT ASK THE
GOVERNOR TO CALL A SPECIAL
SESSION.
>> SEN. RODRIC BRAY
(R-MARTINSVILLE): I THINK WE'LL
HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE ADVOCATING
THAT WE DON'T WANT TO WAIT ANY
LONGER THAN WE HAVE TO TO MAKE A
CHANGE HERE IN THE STATE, IF
THERE'S A POSSIBILITY.
>> THE COURT'S RULINGS COULD
MEAN EVERYTHING FROM BANNING
ABORTION OUTRIGHT TO RESTRICTING
HOW LONG INTO PREGNANCY PEOPLE
CAN ACCESS ABORTION CARE.
>> JON SCHWANTES, WILL GOP
CONSTITUENTS FOR WHOM ABORTION
IS ONE OF, IF NOT THE MOST
IMPORTANT ISSUE BE OKAY WITH
THIS WAIT-AND-SEE APPROACH?
>> THEY'LL BE DISAPPOINTED.
IF THERE WERE LEGISLATION, IT
WOULDN'T TAKE EFFECT UNTIL JULY
1.
THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IS
EXPECTED IN LATE JUNE.
AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, IT MAKES
SENSE TO WAIT AND SEE.
>> NIKI KELLY, CHANCES VERY HIGH
WE'LL HAVE A SPECIAL SESSION
LATER THIS YEAR ON ABORTION?
>> WELL, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY ALL
DEPENDS ON HOW THAT RULING COMES
DOWN.
IF THEY IN ANY WAY GIVE STATES
MORE RIGHT TO CURTAIL ABORTION,
ABSOLUTELY.
THAT'S INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW
FOR THIS WEEK.
OUR PANEL IS DEMOCRAT ANN
DELANEY.
REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIEN.
JON SCHWANTES OF INDIANA
LAWMAKERS.
AND NIKI KELLY OF THE FORT WAYNE
JOURNAL GAZETTE.
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 AND ON THE
WFYI APP.
I'M BRANDON SMITH OF INDIANA
PUBLIC BROADCASTING.
STAY SAFE, STAY HEALTHY, PLEASE
GET VACCINATED IF YOU CAN.
JOIN US NEXT TIME BECAUSE A LOT
CAN HAPPEN IN AN INDIANA WEEK.
♪♪
♪♪
>> THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED ARE
SOLELY THOSE OF THE PANELISTS,
INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW IS A WFYI
PRODUCTION IN ASSOCIATION WITH
INDIANA'S PUBLIC BROADCASTING
STATIONS.
>> BANNING TRANS STUDENTS FROM
SPORTS.
ABSENTEE MAIL-IN VOTING
RESTRICTED.
PLUS, CHANGES TO THE SCHOOL
CURRICULUM BILL AND MORE ON
INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW FOR THE
WEEK ENDING JANUARY 28, 2022.
>> INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW IS
MADE POSSIBLE BY THE SUPPORTERS
OF INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING
STATIONS.
>> THIS WEEK, PROTESTS ERUPTED
IN THE INDIANA HOUSE CHAMBER
FOLLOWING A COMMITTEE'S APPROVAL
OF A BILL RESTRICTING
TRANSGENDER GIRLS' ACCESS TO
SCHOOL SPORTS. THE VOTE CAME
AFTER HOURS OF TESTIMONY FROM
HOOSIERS WHO MOSTLY OPPOSE THE
MEASURE.
>> THE LEGISLATION WOULD
PROHIBIT TRANSGENDER GIRLS FROM
JOINING GIRLS SCHOOL SPORTS
TEAMS. REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE
MICHELLE DAVIS IS ITS AUTHOR.
>> REP. MICHELLE DAVIS
(R-WHITELAND): THE PURPOSE OF
THIS BILL IS TO MAINTAIN FAIR
COMPETITION IN GIRLS SPORTS.
>> BUT MANY PEOPLE OPPOSED TO
THE BILL SAY IT'S ANOTHER WAY TO
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST AN
ESPECIALLY VULNERABLE GROUP OF
CHILDREN. CHRIS PAULSEN FROM
INDIANA YOUTH GROUP JOINED
SEVERAL OTHERS WHO POINTED OUT
THE MENTAL HEALTH RISKS
TRANSGENDER YOUTH FACE,
ESPECIALLY WHEN THEIR IDENTITY
IS TARGETED BY POLITICIANS.
>> CHRIS PAULSEN: THE TREVOR
PROJECT'S 2021 SURVEY OF NEARLY
35 THOUSAND YOUTH AGES 13 TO 24
SHOW THAT MORE THAN 50 PERCENT
OF TRANSGENDER YOUTH HAVE
SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED SUICIDE IN
THE PAST YEAR.
>> THE BILL
PASSED THE FULL HOUSE THURSDAY.
WHAT PROBLEM IS THIS BILL
SOLVING?
IT'S THE FIRST QUESTION FOR OUR
INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW PANE.L
DEMOCRAT ANN DELANEY.
REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIEN.
JON SCHWANTES, HOST OF INDIANA
LAWMAKERS, AND NIKI KELLY,
STATEHOUSE REPORTER FOR THE FORT
WAYNE JOURNAL GAZETTE.
I'M INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING
STATEHOUSE REPORTER BRANDON
SMITH.
ANN DELANEY, DOESN'T THE IHSAA
ALREADY HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE
TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE?
DO THEY NOT?
>> THEY DO.
IT'S A VERY GOOD PROCESS, AS A
MATTER OF FACT.
THIS ISN'T ABOUT FAIRNESS, IT'S
ABOUT HATRED.
I THINK REPRESENTATIVE TONYA
PFAFF SAID IT VERY WELL.
IT'S A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A
PROBLEM.
THEY COULDN'T EVEN POINT TO
SOMEONE DEFINITIVELY WHO FIT
INTO THIS CATEGORY.
AND THE IDEA THAT YOU HAVE
HUNDREDS OF TEENAGE BOYS LINING
UP TO GET SEX CHANGE OPERATIONS,
AND THE TRAUMA THAT THAT
CHANGE -- THE CHANGES THAT THAT
MEANS TO THEIR LIVES GOING
FORWARD, ALL TO PLAY HIGH SCHOOL
BASKETBALL IS RIDICULOUS.
I MEAN, SHE IS SINGLING OUT
PEOPLE JUST TO SHOW THAT SHE IS,
AGAIN, FAR TO THE RIGHT, WHICH
IS WHERE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS
ON THIS.
AND THE DEMOCRATS WERE UNANIMOUS
ON OPPOSING THIS AS THEY SHOULD
BE.
BECAUSE IT DOES DISCRIMINATE.
AND BY THE WAY, IT ONLY
DISCRIMINATES ONE WAY, IT
DISCRIMINATES AGAINST BOYS WHO
HAVE THE SEX CHANGE OPERATION
BECOME GIRLS.
WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER?
THAT DOES OCCUR.
ARE WE GOING TO SAY IT IS OKAY
FOR THEM TO PLAY, OR ARE THEY
SAYING WOMEN AREN'T VERY GOOD AT
SPORTS ANYWAY, SO IT DOESN'T
MATTER IN THAT CONTEXT.
THE WHOLE BILL IS RIDICULOUS.
ALL IT DOES IS STIR UP THE
REPUBLICAN BASE TO HATE ANOTHER
GROUP OF CHILDREN WHO HAVE THEIR
PROBLEMS, AND HAVE THEIR
ADVERSITY TO FACE ON THEIR OWN
WITHOUT THIS ADDITIONAL BURDEN.
>> MIKE O'BRIEN, FAIRNESS AND
COMPETITION IS WHAT WE HEARD
FROM THE PROPONENTS OF THIS
BILL.
ARE YOU BUYING THAT?
>> FIRST, I DON'T THINK THIS IS
DRIVEN BY HATRED AT ALL.
I THINK IT IS DRIVEN BY
MISUNDERSTANDING, FEAR, CONCERN
FOR WHAT'S HAPPENING IN SOME
SCHOOLS.
AND THE POLITICS OF THIS, ANN'S
WRONG, THIS ISN'T FAR RIGHT.
WHAT IS DRIVING THIS ARE
COMMUNITIES THAT ARE
TRADITIONALLY MODERATE, DRIVING
A LOT OF THE CONCERN HERE WHERE
YOU HAVE A VERY VOCAL
TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY.
I THINK IF YOU WENT TO PLACES
THAT WE BELIEVE ARE
TRANSITIONING FROM A REPUBLICAN
TO A DEMOCRAT AREA, MAYBE PURPLE
AREAS, THE -- THEY WERE MAYBE, I
THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE
POLITICAL DIAGRAM OF THESE
PEOPLE, FOR GAY MARRIAGE AND
AGAINST TRANSGENDER ATHLETES.
IS THIS A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF
A PROBLEM?
THERE IS NO EXAMPLES OF THIS
HERE.
I DO THINK REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS
IS CORRECT THAT WE'RE HEADING
THAT DIRECTION WHERE THIS IS
GOING TO BE A PROBLEM.
AGAIN, ANN, I STRUGGLE WITH
THIS.
I WAS WAY OUT IN FRONT ON THE
GAY MARRIAGE ISSUE, WORKED WITH
CHRIS PAULSEN IF YOU LOOK AT
PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THEY ARE NOT
HATEFUL, VERY REASONABLE AND
LOOK AT THIS ISSUE AND SAY I
JUST DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT YET.
>> YOU THINK THAT'S THE
MOTIVATING FACTOR FOR A SEX
CHANGE OPERATION, TO PLAY
SPORTS?
>> I THINK IF -- IT'S HARD
ENOUGH TO BE A TEENAGER, IF
YO'RE TRANSGENDER IT IS
IMPOSSIBLE.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH
THAT PROCESS, IT'S -- THAT'S A
MONUMENTAL THING IN YOUR LIFE, I
DON'T THINK PLAYING MEN'S
BASKETBALL IS THE NEXT THING ON
YOUR LIST.
>> NIKI KELLY, AS WE'VE HEARD
NOW, DEBATE IN THE COMMITTEE,
AND THEN ON THE FLOOR, ARE
REPUBLICANS WHO ARE PUSHING THIS
BILL DOING A GOOD JOB TO
INDICATING THIS IS -- THESE ARE
THE EXACT REASONS WHY WE NEED
IT?
>> WELL, I MEAN, THEY'RE
FOCUSING ON ONE THING ONLY,
WHICH IS THEY'RE SAYING THERE IS
UNFAIR PERFORMANCE EDGES.
THAT SOMEONE WHO IS BORN A MALE,
HAS BETTER LUNG CAPACITY,
TALLER, MORE MUSCLE MASS, THINGS
LIKE THAT.
THEY'RE FOCUSING ON SORT OF THE
ADVANTAGES THAT THAT WOULD GIVE
IF THEY WOULD THEN TRANSITION TO
A FEMALE SPORT.
THE FASCINATING PART ABOUT MOST
OF IT, THERE ARE EXAMPLES OUT
THERE THAT CAUSE ISSUES, BUT
MOSTLY IN COLLEGIATE SPORTS, THE
BILL ORIGINALLY COVERED COLLEGE
SPORTS, THEY TOOK IT OUT WITHOUT
A WORD OF EXPLANATION.
I THINK WE CAN ALL SURMISE THAT
THE NCAA WAS PROBABLY NOT A FAN
OF IT.
THAT'S THE ARENA WHERE WE'RE
SEEING SOME OF THESE ISSUES
HAPPEN MORE THAN IN HIGH SCHOOL.
AND MIDDLE SCHOOL.
>> JON SCHWANTES -- WE'VE
SEEN --
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY THERE IS
NOTHING FAIR, I'M SORRY, GO
AHEAD.
>> WE'VE SEEN OTHER BILLS LIKE
THIS AROUND THE COUNTRY, SOME A
LOT STRICTER THAN THIS ONE.
A LOT OF THOSE BILLS HAVE
RECEIVED A LOT MORE NATIONAL
ATTENTION THAN I FEEL LIKE
INDIANA'S BILL IS GETTING.
NOT SAYING IT IS GETTING NO
ATTENTION, BUT CERTAINLY NOT ON
THE SCALE OF OTHER STATES.
WHY IS THIS ONE SORT OF FLYING
UNDER THE RADAR?
>> I THINK IF INDIANA HAD BEEN
THE FIRST STATE TO ADDRESS THIS
IN A LEGISLATIVE FASHION OR AT
LEAST THROUGH A PROPOSED
LEGISLATION, IT PROBABLY WOULD
HAVE BEEN A PROMINENT NATIONAL
STORY.
YOU KNOW, WE COULD GET IN
DISCUSSIONS OF WHY VARIOUS
EDITORIAL DECISIONS ARE MADE AND
WHAT CONSTITUTES NEWS.
AS EACH STATE WRESTLES WITH
THIS, IT PROBABLY BECOMES -- I'M
NOT SAYING IT IS ANY LESS
SIGNIFICANT TO THE PEOPLE
AFFECTED BY THE POTENTIAL LAW,
BUT IN TERMS OF IT BEING A
NATIONAL NEWS STORY, IT STARTS
TO DIMINISH A BIT.
AND I THINK IT'S MORE -- IF YOU
LOOK AT IT NARROWLY ABOUT THE
COVERAGE IT RECEIVED, IT IS MORE
ABOUT THAT PROBABLY THAN
ANYTHING MORE NUANCED ABOUT THE
FINE POINTS OF THE BILL HERE ARE
HOW IT'S BEING DEBATED.
>> I WANT TO JUST MAKE ONE
POINT, THERE IS NOTHING FAIR
ABOUT SPORTS RIGHT NOW.
IF YOUR PARENTS HAVE THE MONEY,
THEY PUT YOU ON A TRAVELING TEAM
AND TAKE YOU PLACES, PAY FOR
SUMMER CAMPS, YOU HAVE A
TREMENDOUS ADVANTAGE OVER KIDS
WHOSE PARENTS DON'T HAVE THOSE
RESOURCES.
NOBODY IS WORRIED ABOUT THE
FAIRNESS OF THAT PART OF IT,
WHICH I FIND REALLY KIND OF
IRONIC
>> I AM SURPRISED THAT ANN MADE
THE POINT EARLIER ABOUT HOW THE
BILL IS CRAFTED SO IT DEALS ONLY
WITH INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE ARE
BORN GENETICALLY BORN AS MALES,
AND ARE TRANSITIONING TO FEMALE.
IT DOES SEEM THAT IF IN FACT
THIS IS ALL ABOUT FAIRNESS, ONE
COULD ARGUE THAT THE BILL SHOULD
BE BROADENED, AT LEAST THE
LANGUAGE, TO SAY IF YOU'RE
COMPETING OUTSIDE THE SPORT
CLASSIFICATION IN WHICH YOU WERE
BORN.
I CAN SEE PEOPLE SAYING THIS IS
PICKING -- NARROWLY DEFINING THE
LAW IN A WAY IT SHOULDN'T BE.
>>
TIME NOW FOR VIEWER FEEDBACK.
EACH WEEK WE POSE AN
UNSCIENTIFIC, ONLINE POLL
QUESTION.
THIS WEEK'S QUESTION:
SHOULD TRANSGENDER STUDENTS BE
BANNED FROM PARTICIPATING IN
GIRLS' HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS?
A, YES, OR B, NO.
LAST WEEK'S QUESTION:
WILL THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
ELIMINATE INDIANA'S LICENSE
REQUIREMENT TO CARRY A HANDGUN
THIS YEAR?
THIS ONE WAS CLOSER THAN I WAS
EXPECTING, 44% YES, 56 NO.
I SUGGEST THE CHANCES ARE A LOT
HIGHER THAN THAT, BUT WE'LL FIND
OUT IN THE COMING WEEKS.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE PART
IN THE POLL GO TO WFYI.ORG/IWIR
AND LOOK FOR THE POLL.
CHANGES TO AN ELECTIONS BILL IN
A HOUSE COMMITTEE THIS WEEK WILL
MAKE IT HARDER FOR HOOSIERS TO
VOTE ABSENTEE BY MAIL.
>> THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE
APPROVED LANGUAGE THAT SAYS, IF
YOU WANT TO VOTE ABSENTEE BY
MAIL, YOU MUST ATTEST THAT YOU
WON'T BE AVAILABLE ON ELECTION
DAY OR - AND THIS IS THE NEW
PART - ANY TIME IN THE 28 DAYS
BEFORE THE ELECTION, WHEN EARLY
VOTING IS AVAILABLE.
REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE TIM
WESCO.
>> REP. TIM WESCO (R-OSCEOLA): I
BELIEVE THE BEST POLICY IS TO
ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO VOTE IN
PERSON, WHETHER ON ELECTION DAY
OR IN PERSON EARLY, AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE.
>> DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE ED
DELANEY SAYS THAT PUTS A GREATER
BURDEN ON VOTERS, PARTICULARLY
IN COUNTIES WITH FEW EARLY
VOTING LOCATIONS. AND HE
QUESTIONED WHY THE CHANGE IS
NECESSARY.
>> REP. ED
DELANEY(D-INDIANAPOLIS): I THINK
THE ANSWER'S APPARENT. THE
ANSWER IS, WE WANT TO REDUCE THE
NUMBER OF VOTERS. WHY DON'T YOU
JUST SAY THAT.
>> THE BILL IS UP FOR PASSAGE IN
THE HOUSE NEXT WEEK.
>> MIKE O'BRIEN, WHY NOT JUST
GET RID OF ABSENTEE MAIL-IN
VOTING ENTIRELY?
I'M NOT GOING TO BE AVAILABLE
ELECTION DAY OR 28 DAYS BEFORE.
>> I ALWAYS THOUGHT THIS WAS A
WEIRD DEAL, THIS -- BECAUSE I
ALWAYS VOTED ABSENTEE, OR VOTE
IN PERSON EARLY.
I WAS NEVER AVAILABLE ON
ELECTION DAY.
I WAS ALWAYS WORKING ELECTIONS,
MIGHT AS WELL TAKE THE EASY WAY
OUT HERE AND -- NOW I CAN'T
ANYMORE WITHOUT JUST STRAIGHT UP
BEING -- VIOLATING THE SPIRIT OF
THE LAW BEFORE.
THE ACTUALLY LETTER.
THAT WAS THE POINT BEFORE, BEING
UNAVAILABLE WHEN GIVEN THE
OPPORTUNITY IN PERSON.
I'M A TRADITIONALIST, I
THINK -- I WOULD THINK WE MADE
IT WIDELY AND WILDLY AVAILABLE
VOTING IN THE LAST 20 YEARS IN
THIS STATE, CONTRARY TO WHAT
DEMOCRATS THINK, WHETHER VOTE
CENTERS OR SATELLITE VOTING,
EARLY VOTING FOR 30 DAYS, OR
VOTING ON ELECTION DAY, WHICH IS
WHAT WE DID TO START, IT WASN'T
THAT LONG AGO THAT WE DID THAT.
VAST OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE IN THIS
STATE.
FRANKLY I DON'T HAVE SOME
IDEOLOGICAL RIGID -- AS TIM
WESCO SAID, WE HAVE BEEN LIVING
ON THE HONOR SYSTEM FOREVER, I
THINK IT HAS WORKED.
BOTH PARTIES HAVE THEIR OWN
OPERATIONS THAT RECRUIT THEIR
OWN VOTERS TO VOTE ABSENTEE AND
VOTE EARLY.
SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THAT,
THEY'RE TRADITIONALISTS WHO WANT
VOTING ON ELECTION DAY, THE
ELECTION OSTENSIBLY ENDS 30 DAYS
BEFORE ELECTION DAY FOR A LOT OF
PEOPLE, CAMPAIGNS DON'T LIKE
THAT, CANDIDATES DON'T LIKE
THAT, THE ENVIRONMENT CAN
CHANGE, THIS AND THAT.
I DON'T THINK THIS WAS
NECESSARILY BROKEN IN INDIANA.
BUT I DO THINK CONTRARY TO WHAT
DEMOCRATS THINK, WE HAVE MADE IT
MUCH EASIER TO VOTE IN INDIANA
OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS.
>> [LAUGHTER] HOLD THAT THOUGHT.
>> I KNOW YOU DISAGREE WITH WHAT
MIKE SAID.
TIM WESCO REFERENCED.
INDIANA DOES THIS ABSENTEE
VOTING LARGELY ON THE -- NOBODY
IS CHECKING THIS.
IS THIS REALLY GOING TO AFFECT
HOW VOTERS VOTE?
>> WELL, YOU COULD HAVE A
SITUATION WHERE SOMEBODY FINDS
OUT THAT THE PERSON WHO SENT IN
AN ABSENTEE BALLOT WAS PRESENT
AND HAS A GRUDGE AGAINST THAT
PERSON.
THERE ARE CRIMINALS -- IF YOU
CHANGE YOUR MIND OR YOU THINK
YOU'RE GOING TO BE HERE, OR YOU
THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE GONE
AND YOU'RE HERE, THERE ARE ALL
KINDS OF THINGS WHERE SOMEBODY
COULD MAKE TROUBLE BASED ON A
CRIMINAL PROSECUTION NOW, THE
HONOR SYSTEM APPARENTLY IS NO
LONGER GOOD ENOUGH FOR THIS
STATE REPRESENTATIVE.
HE WANTS CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.
BUT IT'S INTERESTING THAT THIS
CAME OUT THE SAME WEEK THAT THE
CIVIC HEALTH INDEX CAME OUT, AND
INDIANA, DESPITE WHAT MIKE SAID,
HAS GONE FROM BEING 41st IN THE
STATE -- AMONG THE STATES TO
46th IN THE STATE.
YEARS AGO, YEARS AGO, WE WERE IN
THE TOP 10 IN TERMS OF TURNOUT.
NOW, NOT ONLY THE BOTTOM 10,
WE'RE IN THE BOTTOM 5.
SO WE HAVE NOT MADE IT EASIER
FOR PEOPLE TO VOTE.
WE HAVE PUT REPEATED OBSTACLES
IN THE WAY OF PEOPLE VOTING.
>> THOSE STATS DON'T MATTER.
>> PARENTS DON'T -- REPUBLICANS
DON'T WANT EVERYONE TO VOTE.
>> WHAT'S THE NUMBER ONE FACTOR
IN VOTER MOTIVATION?
>> AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
AND THE CIVIC HEALTH INDEX
ITSELF SHOWS HOW MUCH WE'VE
SLIPPED.
>> I THINK IT SHOWS HOW WE HAVE
NO COMPETITIVE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
IN INDIANA.
BECAUSE THE NUMBER ONE REASON TO
GO VOTE IS BECAUSE IT'S
COMPETITIVE, NOT BECAUSE OF
GERRYMANDERING.
>> IT IS EXACTLY BECAUSE OF
GERRYMANDERING.
THAT IS WHY THERE IS NO
COMPETITION.
BECAUSE YOU GERRYMANDERED IT SO
WELL.
>> YOU'RE A THIRD PLACE PARTY,
ANN.
WE HAVE TO COMPETE WITH OTHER
CONSERVATIVES
>> YOU WOULD THINK THAT YOU
WOULD BE HAPPY ENOUGH THAT THE
GERRYMANDERING RESULTS THAT YOU
WOULD ALSO HAVE TO RESTRICT
REGISTRATION AND VOTING, BUT
THAT IS NOT ENOUGH FOR YOU GUYS.
>> YOU'RE JUST ABSURD.
>> JON SCHWANTES, DO YOU FEEL
LIKE THIS IS -- I FEEL LIKE I'M
ASKING A SIMILAR QUESTION THAT I
ASKED ON THE LAST TOPIC.
WHAT IS THE NEED FOR THIS
LEGISLATION?
>> PROBABLY NO NEED.
THE MOTIVATION, I THINK, IS CUT
AND DRIED.
REPUBLICANS WANT FEWER PEOPLE TO
VOTE.
THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.
LET'S NOT BEAT AROUND THE BUSH.
IT'S -- I AGREE WITH MIKE THAT
IDEALLY WE'D ALL -- I LOVE THE
TRADITION OF EVERYBODY GOING TO
THE POLLS ON ELECTION DAY.
IN FACT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A
BIPARTISAN COMMISSION, FEDERAL
COMMISSION, I THINK IT WAS
CO-CHAIRED MAYBE BY GERALD FORD
AND JIMMY CARTER, LET'S MAKE
THIS SOMETHING SPECIAL THAT
EVERYBODY WORKS TOGETHER.
I WOULD LOVE THAT, WE DON'T LIVE
IN LA LA LAND.
SEEMS TO ME, WELL, WE CAN DEBATE
THE VOTER SECURITY.
BUT WE CAN'T DEBATE THE
MOTIVATION HERE, WHICH IS TO
REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE
VOTING.
THAT IS PRETTY CLEAR.
>> NIKI KELLY, TIM WESCO KIND OF
INDIRECTLY CAST SOME DOUBT ON
THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF
MAIL-IN VOTING DURING THAT HOUSE
COMMITTEE.
IS THERE ANY WIDE EVIDENCE OF
WIDESPREAD VOTER FRAUD WHEN IT
COMES TO MAIL-IN VOTING.
WE HAVE STATES WHO FOR TWO
DECADES HAVE BEEN DOING
EXCLUSIVELY MAIL-IN VOTING?
>> NO, THERE ISN'T.
SURE, YOU CAN ALWAYS FIND AN
OCCASIONAL INSTANCE HERE OR
THERE.
SOMETIMES IT IS ON THE
REPUBLICAN SIDE AND SOMETIMES ON
THE DEMOCRAT SIDE.
ONE THING I DO WANT TO NOTE WITH
THIS WHOLE NOTION OF THE ENTIRE
MONTH BEFORE YOU CAN VOTE.
THIS 28 DAYS THING.
FOR A LOT OF COUNTIES, THOUGH,
THAT -- YOU CAN'T VOTE ALL 28
DAYS.
A LOT OF COUNTIES JUST HAVE
SATURDAY VOTING.
REALLY THAT'S FOUR ADDITIONAL
DAYS YOU CAN VOTE.
NOT 28.
SO REALLY IS A WIDE VARIETY,
DEPENDING WHERE YOU LIVE.
>> YEAH.
NOT JUST WHAT DAYS, EVEN WHAT
HOURS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SOME DAYS IT'S FOUR HOURS IN THE
MORNING.
>> WE SHOULD PROBABLY POINT OUT
DONALD TRUMP RELIED ON MAIL-IN
VOTING MOST OF HIS LIFE,
CERTAINLY IN THE LAST ELECTION.
>> PROBABLY CORRUPT
>> THE INDIANA HOUSE APPROVED A
CONTROVERSIAL SCHOOL CONTENT AND
CURRICULUM BILL THIS WEEK.
INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING'S
JEANIE LINDSAY REPORTS,
LAWMAKERS PASSED THE MEASURE
AFTER MORE THAN AN HOUR AND A
PHALF OF DISCUSSION ON THE HOUS
FLOOR.
>> LAWMAKERS MADE A FEW CHANGES
TO HOUSE BILL 1134 BEFORE THE
HOUSE APPROVED IT. BILL AUTHOR
REP. TONY COOK SAYS THEY AIM TO
ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT THE BILL
WOULD ADD ONTO SCHOOLS'
WORKLOADS OR PREVENT TEACHERS
FROM CONDEMNING RACISM. BUT
CONCERNS PERSISTED FROM SOME
LAWMAKERS, LIKE REPRESENTATIVE
CAROLYN JACKSON, ABOUT HOW THE
OVERALL LEGISLATION COULD IMPACT
SCHOOLS - ESPECIALLY AS THE
PANDEMIC CONTINUES.
>> REP. CAROLYN JACKSON
(D-HAMMOND): I THINK WE NEED TO
STEP BACK AND LOOK AT THE
SITUATION BEFORE WE CREATE
ANOTHER OBSTACLE AND FALL ON OUR
FACE.
>> MANY LAWMAKERS OPPOSED TO THE
BILL WORRY IT COULD REDUCE THE
NUMBER OF TEACHERS WILLING TO
WORK IN THE STATE. THE HOUSE
APPROVED THE LEGISLATION 60 TO
37. IT NOW HEADS TO THE SENATE.
>> NIKI KELLY, BEFORE THEY
PASSED THE BILL OVER TO THE
SENATE, THEY CHANGED THE BILL IN
A NINE-PAGE AMENDMENT.
ANY TIME YOU HAVE A NINE-PAGE
AMENDMENT TO A PIECE OF
LEGISLATION, THAT'S A GOOD BILL.
CAN YOU GIVE US A SENSE OF THE
CHANGES TO THE BILL?
>> MOST WERE TWEAKING, IT LIMITS
THE DAMAGES, IT WAS TEACHERS
HAVING TO POST CURRICULUM, IF
THEY STUMBLED UPON AN ARTICLE
THE NIGHT BEFORE, DO THEY HAVE
TO RUN IMMEDIATELY AND POST IT
BEFORE CLASS, OR WILL THEY BE IN
VIOLATION OF THE LAW?
THEY BACKED THAT DOWN A LITTLE
TO BE A LITTLE LESS, I GUESS,
ONEROUS, ON THAT SIDE.
BUT FOR ALL INTENTS AND
PURPOSES, IT IS PRETTY MUCH THE
SAME BILL IT'S BEEN THE WHOLE
TIME.
THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN
CHANGING THE DIVISIVE CONCEPT
LANGUAGE IN THE BILL, WHICH IS
THE WHOLE REASON THERE IS
DIVISION ON THE BILL.
>> JON SCHWANTES, TO THAT END,
THE SENATE KILLED OFF ITS
VERSION OF THIS MEASURE.
IT SAID THERE WAS NO PATH
FORWARD.
THAT'S WHAT THE VERY BRIEF 4:00
P.M. ON A FRIDAY STATEMENT SAID.
IF THERE IS NO PATH FORWARD ON
THAT BILL, WHY WOULD THERE BE A
PATH FORWARD ON THIS BILL?
>> THIS ASSUMES THERE IS.
I MEAN, I THINK THE SENATE CAN
MAYBE SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE HERE.
I THINK THERE IS CLEARLY
ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORT.
VARIOUS BILLS HAVE BEEN
INTRODUCED, SOME DEAL WITH
NARROW PORTIONS OF THIS WHOLE
REFORM PACKAGE WITH PARENTAL
INVOLVEMENT AND PARENTAL INPUT.
OTHERS ARE MUCH BROADER.
SO WHAT I THINK WE COULD SEE
COME OUT OF THIS IS ATTEMPTS AT
MORE TRANSPARENCY.
FORMALIZED POSTING OF COURSE
LESSONS AND COURSE MATERIALS,
CURRICULA.
AND INVOLVEMENT, MANDATORY
INVOLVEMENT OF THE PUBLIC AND
SCHOOL BOARD MEETINGS IN TERMS
OF THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A
SAY WITHOUT IMPOSING VERY
SPECIFIC BUT STILL SUBJECT TO
DEBATE GUIDELINES ABOUT WHAT CAN
BE TAUGHT OR THE REVIEW PROCESS.
BECAUSE WE'RE FOCUSED SO MUCH ON
SOCIAL STUDIES, AND LANGUAGE
ARTS IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT THAT
WAY.
IF YOU PUT THE WHOLE CURRICULA
TO AN ADVISORY PANEL, I CAN SEE
CREATIONISM VERSUS EVOLUTION
CREEPING IN.
I CAN SEE WHEN YOU HAVE A
PERSONAL FINANCE CLASS AND
STUDENTS ARE GIVEN A FAKE POT OF
MONEY TO LEARN HOW TO INVEST IN
THE STOCK MARKET, THERE ARE
PEOPLE WHO SAY YOU ARE CREATING
A BUNCH OF CUTTHROAT CAPITALISTS
WITH NO HEART.
THIS WHOLE THING POTENTIALLY,
THAT'S A BIT OF AN EXAGGERATION
IN TERMS OF REALITY.
IT DOES SEEM THAT CRITICS ARE
WORRIED A LOT ABOUT GRIDLOCK
HERE, AND THE BURDEN THAT WOULD
BE CREATED BY THIS MULTI-LAYERED
APPROACH TO CURRICULUM APPROVAL.
>> MIKE O'BRIEN, IF THE SENATE
TOOK OUT THE DIVISIVE CONCEPTS
LANGUAGE AND WE WERE LEFT WITH A
LITTLE MORE TRANSPARENCY FROM
TEACHERS IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY
HAVE TO POST ONLINE AND THESE
PARENT -- THESE CURRICULUM
COMMITTEES THAT PARENTS WOULD
PLAY A MAJOR ROLE IN AT THE
SCHOOL BOARD AND DISTRICT LEVEL.
IF THAT'S ALL THE BILL WAS LEFT
WITH, DOES THIS HAVE IS A MUCH
EASIER PATH FORWARD?
>> PROBABLY.
BUT I THINK THE GOAL NEEDS TO BE
TRANSPARENCY AND NOT CONTROL FOR
PARENTS.
AND TAKE THIS OFF THE TEACHER'S
PLATE ENTIRELY.
MOVE THIS ENTIRELY TO A SCHOOL
BOARD, YOU KNOW, SOME KIND OF
PARENTAL COMMITTEE ADVISORY
ROLE.
BUT WHERE ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE
ELECTED SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS
ULTIMATELY.
LET THEM POST WHAT -- LET THEM
DIRECT THE CORPORATION POST WHAT
THEY WANT TO POST IN THE LEAST
ONEROUS WAY POSSIBLE.
PUTTING TEACHERS IN THIS
SITUATION, THEY AREN'T PREPPING
MONTHS IN ADVANCE, THEY ARE
PREPPING THE NIGHT BEFORE, 11:00
OR 12:00 AT NIGHT, ONCE THEY GET
THEIR OWN KIDS TO BED.
THIS HAS GOT TO BE ON
TRANSPARENCY.
THE ONEROUS HAS GOT TO BE ON THE
PARENTS TO DO THE WORK TO GO ASK
THOSE QUESTIONS, A LOT OF THEM
ARE DOING THAT.
THEY'RE DOING IT IN A PRETTY
HOSTILE WAY, I WISH IT WAS MORE
THOUGHTFUL AND CONSTRUCTIVE.
TO PUT THIS ON TEACHER'S PLATE
IS TOO MUCH.
>> ANN DeLANEY, TO WHAT MIKE
JUST TALKED ABOUT, IF THE SENATE
CANGES THE BILL TO BE WHAT MIKE
JUST INDICATED, TAKING IT OFF
THE TEACHERS, FOCUSING ON
TRANSPARENCY, IS THAT A GOOD
PIECE OF LEGISLATION?
>> CERTAINLY BETTER PIECE OF
LEGISLATION.
THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE GOING TO
HAVE THOUGHT CONTROL, AN EQUAL
APPROACH TO ANY ISSUE NO MATTER
HOW HORRIFIC THAT HAS BEEN IN
THE PAST HISTORY OF THE WORLD IS
RIDICULOUS.
I AGREE WITH MIKE.
WE'VE PUT ENOUGH BURDEN ON
TEACHERS.
IT IS ALREADY A DIFFICULT ENOUGH
PROFESSION, MADE MUCH MORE
DIFFICULT BY THE PANDEMIC, NOW
WE'RE GOING TO ADD ANOTHER LAYER
ON THAT, IT'S CRAZY.
IF PARENTS WANT TO HAVE A
CURRICULUM ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN
THEIR DISTRICT WHERE THEY CAN
DISCUSS A TIME, PARENTS CAN
ALREADY PICK UP THE TEXTBOOK,
THEY CAN ALREADY TALK TO THE
TEACHERS, OR EMAIL THE TEACHERS
AND ASK ABOUT THE CURRICULUM.
THERE IS NO BARRIER TO THAT NOW.
AND IF THEY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH
IT, THEY CAN GO TO THE PRINCIPAL
OR THE SUPERINTENDENT, OR THEY
CAN GO TO THE SCHOOL BOARD.
WHY THE LEGISLATURE HAS TO GET
IN THE MIDDLE OF ISSUES WHERE
THEY CAN BE DEALT WITH ON A
LOCAL LEVEL IS BEYOND ME.
AND ANYTHING THAT PUTS MORE ON
THE TEACHERS' PLATE IS A BAD
IDEA.
WITH THIS BILL AND THIS CONCEPT,
WE'RE ALREADY THE LAUGHINGSTOCK
OF THE COUNTRY.
WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THAT AT
THE SAME TIME WE'RE TRYING TO
RECRUIT NEW BUSINESS INTO THIS
STATE.
LOTS OF LUCK WITH THAT.
>>
INDIANA LEGISLATIVE LEADERS
INDICATED RECENTLY THE GENERAL
ASSEMBLY WILL LIKELY HOLD OFF ON
ANY MAJOR ANTI-ABORTION
LEGISLATION THIS SESSION.
LAWMAKERS WANT TO WAIT FOR THE
US SUPREME COURT TO RULE ON THE
ISSUE LATER THIS YEAR BEFORE
TAKING ACTION.
>> THE FUTURE OF ABORTION RIGHTS
MAY BE DECIDED BY THE SUPREME
COURT THIS YEAR. AND INDIANA
SENATE PRESIDENT PRO TEM RODRIC
BRAY SAYS IT'S BEST TO WAIT FOR
THE DECISION BEFORE PASSING
LEGISLATION.
>> SEN. RODRIC BRAY
(R-MARTINSVILLE): TO TRY AND
ANTICIPATE WHAT THAT MIGHT SAY
AND DRAFT LEGISLATION TO
ANTICIPATE EVERY POSSIBLE
SOLUTION OR OPINION THAT THEY
COULD COME OUT WITH JUST LOOKS
COMPLETELY UNDOABLE TO ME. SO, I
DON'T THINK IT'S WISE TO TRY.
>> BUT ONCE THE COURT RULES,
BRAY SAYS HE MIGHT ASK THE
GOVERNOR TO CALL A SPECIAL
SESSION.
>> SEN. RODRIC BRAY
(R-MARTINSVILLE): I THINK WE'LL
HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE ADVOCATING
THAT WE DON'T WANT TO WAIT ANY
LONGER THAN WE HAVE TO TO MAKE A
CHANGE HERE IN THE STATE, IF
THERE'S A POSSIBILITY.
>> THE COURT'S RULINGS COULD
MEAN EVERYTHING FROM BANNING
ABORTION OUTRIGHT TO RESTRICTING
HOW LONG INTO PREGNANCY PEOPLE
CAN ACCESS ABORTION CARE.
>> JON SCHWANTES, WILL GOP
CONSTITUENTS FOR WHOM ABORTION
IS ONE OF, IF NOT THE MOST
IMPORTANT ISSUE BE OKAY WITH
THIS WAIT-AND-SEE APPROACH?
>> THEY'LL BE DISAPPOINTED.
IF THERE WERE LEGISLATION, IT
WOULDN'T TAKE EFFECT UNTIL JULY
1.
THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IS
EXPECTED IN LATE JUNE.
AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, IT MAKES
SENSE TO WAIT AND SEE.
>> NIKI KELLY, CHANCES VERY HIGH
WE'LL HAVE A SPECIAL SESSION
LATER THIS YEAR ON ABORTION?
>> WELL, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY ALL
DEPENDS ON HOW THAT RULING COMES
DOWN.
IF THEY IN ANY WAY GIVE STATES
MORE RIGHT TO CURTAIL ABORTION,
ABSOLUTELY.
THAT'S INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW
FOR THIS WEEK.
OUR PANEL IS DEMOCRAT ANN
DELANEY.
REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIEN.
JON SCHWANTES OF INDIANA
LAWMAKERS.
AND NIKI KELLY OF THE FORT WAYNE
JOURNAL GAZETTE.
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 AND ON THE
WFYI APP.
I'M BRANDON SMITH OF INDIANA
PUBLIC BROADCASTING.
STAY SAFE, STAY HEALTHY, PLEASE
GET VACCINATED IF YOU CAN.
JOIN US NEXT TIME BECAUSE A LOT
CAN HAPPEN IN AN INDIANA WEEK.
♪♪
♪♪
>> THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED ARE
SOLELY THOSE OF THE PANELISTS,
INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW IS A WFYI
PRODUCTION IN ASSOCIATION WITH
INDIANA'S PUBLIC BROADCASTING