Indiana Newsdesk, January 17, 2014 Marriage Amendment & Ag-gag Bill
Articles,  Blog

Indiana Newsdesk, January 17, 2014 Marriage Amendment & Ag-gag Bill


“INDIANA NEWSDESK” IS MADE
POSSIBLE IN PART BY… >>COMING UP NEXT ON “INDIANA
NEWSDESK,” LAWMAKERS ARE NEWSDESK,” LAWMAKERS ARE
DELAYING A VOTE ON THE SAME-SEX DELAYING A VOTE ON THE SAME-SEX
MARRIAGE BAN WHILE THEY CONSIDER MARRIAGE BAN WHILE THEY CONSIDER
HOURS OF PASSIONATE TESTIMONY HOURS OF PASSIONATE TESTIMONY
THEY HEARD THIS WEEK. THEY HEARD THIS WEEK.
>>THERE ARE FINALLY PEOPLE WHO >>THERE ARE FINALLY PEOPLE WHO
REALLY KIND OF GET THIS IS A REALLY KIND OF GET THIS IS A
HUGE, IMPORTANT ISSUE. HUGE, IMPORTANT ISSUE.
NEW IS THE ISSUE HEADED TO THE NEW IS THE ISSUE HEADED TO THE
BALLOT IN NOVEMBER? BALLOT IN NOVEMBER?
WE TALK LIVE TO OUR STATE HOUSE WE TALK LIVE TO OUR STATE HOUSE
REPORTER IN INDIANAPOLIS TO REPORTER IN INDIANAPOLIS TO
DISCUSS WHETHER LAWMAKERS’ VIEWS DISCUSS WHETHER LAWMAKERS’ VIEWS
ON THE AMENDMENT ARE SHIFTING. ON THE AMENDMENT ARE SHIFTING.
AND SOME SAY A BILL DESIGNED TO AND SOME SAY A BILL DESIGNED TO
PROTECT FARMERS WOULD INFRINGE PROTECT FARMERS WOULD INFRINGE
ON PEOPLE’S FIRST AMENDMENT ON PEOPLE’S FIRST AMENDMENT
RIGHTS. RIGHTS.
>>INSTEAD OF TRYING TO HIDE >>INSTEAD OF TRYING TO HIDE
WHAT’S HAPPENING ON THE FARMS WHAT’S HAPPENING ON THE FARMS
THEY SHOULD BE MORE TRANSPARENT. THEY SHOULD BE MORE TRANSPARENT.
BUT THAT’S NOT WHAT’S HAPPENING. BUT THAT’S NOT WHAT’S HAPPENING.
>>AND THE GOVERNOR WANTS >>AND THE GOVERNOR WANTS
INDIANA STANDARDS NOT NATIONALLY INDIANA STANDARDS NOT NATIONALLY
CRAFTED STANDARDS TO DICTATE CRAFTED STANDARDS TO DICTATE
WHAT CHILDREN LEARN IN THE WHAT CHILDREN LEARN IN THE
CLASSROOM. CLASSROOM.
THOSE STORIES AND A LOOK AT THIS THOSE STORIES AND A LOOK AT THIS
WEEK’S HEADLINES RIGHT NOW ON WEEK’S HEADLINES RIGHT NOW ON
“INDIANA NEWSDESK.” >>HELLO, I’M JOE HREN.
WELCOME TO THIS WEEK’S “INDIANA WELCOME TO THIS WEEK’S “INDIANA
NEWSDESK.” NEWSDESK.”
GOVERNOR MIKE PENCE WANTS GOVERNOR MIKE PENCE WANTS
LAWMAKERS TO END THE DEBATE OVER LAWMAKERS TO END THE DEBATE OVER
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE THIS YEAR. SAME-SEX MARRIAGE THIS YEAR.
IN HIS STATE OF THE STATE IN HIS STATE OF THE STATE
ADDRESS THIS WEEK THE GOVERNOR ADDRESS THIS WEEK THE GOVERNOR
ASKED FOR A CIVIL CONVERSATION. ASKED FOR A CIVIL CONVERSATION.
>>LET’S HAVE A DEBATE WORTHY OF>>LET’S HAVE A DEBATE WORTHY OF
OUR PEOPLE WITH CIVILITY AND OUR PEOPLE WITH CIVILITY AND
RESPECT. RESPECT.
LET’S PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF LET’S PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF
HOOSIER EMPLOYERS TO HIRE WHO HOOSIER EMPLOYERS TO HIRE WHO
THEY WANT AND PROVIDE THEM WITH THEY WANT AND PROVIDE THEM WITH
THE BENEFITS THAT THEY DESERVE. THE BENEFITS THAT THEY DESERVE.
AND THEN LET’S RESOLVE THIS AND THEN LET’S RESOLVE THIS
ISSUE. ISSUE.
THIS YEAR. THIS YEAR.
ONCE AND FOR ALL. >>JASHIN LIN REPORTS FROM THE
STATE HOUSE WHERE CONCERNS OVER STATE HOUSE WHERE CONCERNS OVER
THE LEGAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS THE LEGAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS
OF THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL OF THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT ARE DOMINATING THE AMENDMENT ARE DOMINATING THE
DEBATE. DEBATE.
>>WHEN BLOOMINGTON RESIDENT >>WHEN BLOOMINGTON RESIDENT
ELLEN EPSTEIN CONTEMPLATED THE ELLEN EPSTEIN CONTEMPLATED THE
IDEA OF MARRYING HER PARTNER, IDEA OF MARRYING HER PARTNER,
HER FIRST REACTION WAS, NO. HER FIRST REACTION WAS, NO.
I THINK IT’S VERY I THINK IT’S VERY
HETERONORMATIVE, AND I DON’T HETERONORMATIVE, AND I DON’T
LIKE HOW WOMEN ARE VIEWED. LIKE HOW WOMEN ARE VIEWED.
I DON’T EVEN LIKE THE WORD I DON’T EVEN LIKE THE WORD
“WIFE” AND “HUSBAND” FOR THE “WIFE” AND “HUSBAND” FOR THE
MEANING THAT THAT CARRIES. MEANING THAT THAT CARRIES.
>>BUT HER PARTNER WANTED TO PUT>>BUT HER PARTNER WANTED TO PUT
EPSTEIN ON HER HEALTH INSURANCE EPSTEIN ON HER HEALTH INSURANCE
PLAN, WHICH INCLUDED A PLAN, WHICH INCLUDED A
HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNT – WHICH HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNT – WHICH
REQUIRED THAT THE TWO BE REQUIRED THAT THE TWO BE
MARRIED. MARRIED.
>>SO AGAIN, THE FIRST REACTION >>SO AGAIN, THE FIRST REACTION
TO IT WAS PISSING ME OFF, MAKING TO IT WAS PISSING ME OFF, MAKING
ME ANGRY THAT, YOU KNOW, I FEEL ME ANGRY THAT, YOU KNOW, I FEEL
KIND OF BEING TOLD KIND OF HOW I KIND OF BEING TOLD KIND OF HOW I
HAVE TO BE IN MY RELATIONSHIP. HAVE TO BE IN MY RELATIONSHIP.
AND THEN I SAID, OKAY, LET’S DO AND THEN I SAID, OKAY, LET’S DO
IT. IT.
IT WAS ABOUT THAT FAST. IT WAS ABOUT THAT FAST.
>>IN DECEMBER 2013, THE PAIR >>IN DECEMBER 2013, THE PAIR
HEADED OFF TO VERMONT, WHERE HEADED OFF TO VERMONT, WHERE
THEY HAD A FRIEND READY TO THEY HAD A FRIEND READY TO
OFFICIATE THE CEREMONY AND WHERE OFFICIATE THE CEREMONY AND WHERE
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE HAD BEEN SAME-SEX MARRIAGE HAD BEEN
LEGALIZED IN 2009. LEGALIZED IN 2009.
THEY CALL EACH OTHER THEIR THEY CALL EACH OTHER THEIR
SPOUSE, BUT HERE IN INDIANA, SPOUSE, BUT HERE IN INDIANA,
STATE LAW DOESN’T RECOGNIZE STATE LAW DOESN’T RECOGNIZE
THEIR MARRIAGE. THEIR MARRIAGE.
LAW WENT INTO THE BOOKS IN 2004 LAW WENT INTO THE BOOKS IN 2004
– BUT NOW THE STAKES ARE EVEN – BUT NOW THE STAKES ARE EVEN
HIGHER, BECAUSE OF HOUSE JOINT HIGHER, BECAUSE OF HOUSE JOINT
RESOLUTION 3. RESOLUTION 3.
HJR3 IS AN A PROPOSED HJR3 IS AN A PROPOSED
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO THE
STATE CONSTITUTION, WHICH STATE CONSTITUTION, WHICH
READS: VOTERS WILL DECIDE ON WHETHER
HJR3 IS HEADED TO THE BALLOT IN HJR3 IS HEADED TO THE BALLOT IN
NOVEMBER FOR VOTERS TO DECIDE ON NOVEMBER FOR VOTERS TO DECIDE ON
IF IT MAKES IT THROUGH THIS IF IT MAKES IT THROUGH THIS
LEGISLATIVE SESSION. LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
WHILE THE BILL PASSED WITH EASE WHILE THE BILL PASSED WITH EASE
THROUGH THE INDIANA LEGISLATURE THROUGH THE INDIANA LEGISLATURE
BACK IN 2011 AS PART OF THE BACK IN 2011 AS PART OF THE
AMENDMENT PROCESS, THE SECOND AMENDMENT PROCESS, THE SECOND
ROUND IS LESS CERTAIN. ROUND IS LESS CERTAIN.
ON ONE SIDE ARE THE SUPPORTERS. ON ONE SIDE ARE THE SUPPORTERS.
A GROUP OF THEM TRAVELED TO THE A GROUP OF THEM TRAVELED TO THE
STATEHOUSE THIS WEEK TO JOIN THE STATEHOUSE THIS WEEK TO JOIN THE
CROWD AT THE FIRST CROWD AT THE FIRST
COMMITTEE HEARING FOR HJR3. COMMITTEE HEARING FOR HJR3.
THEY CAST THE NEED FOR THE THEY CAST THE NEED FOR THE
AMENDMENT AS A DEMOCRATIC AND AMENDMENT AS A DEMOCRATIC AND
MORAL ISSUE. MORAL ISSUE.
>>IT’S A PASSIONATE ISSUE. >>IT’S A PASSIONATE ISSUE.
THERE’S A COUPLE PASSIONATE THERE’S A COUPLE PASSIONATE
ISSUES, BUT THIS IS ISSUES, BUT THIS IS
DEFINING FAMILIES. DEFINING FAMILIES.
THIS IS DEFINING OUR WAY OF THIS IS DEFINING OUR WAY OF
LIFE. LIFE.
THIS IS DEFINING WHAT CHILDREN – THIS IS DEFINING WHAT CHILDREN –
THE ATMOSPHERE CHILDREN ARE THE ATMOSPHERE CHILDREN ARE
GOING TO GROW UP IN. GOING TO GROW UP IN.
THIS IS PROBABLY THE BIGGEST THIS IS PROBABLY THE BIGGEST
ISSUE EVER BECAUSE THIS IS GOING ISSUE EVER BECAUSE THIS IS GOING
AGAINST BIBLICAL TRUTHS. >>ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE RING
ARE THE OPPONENTS, LED BY A ARE THE OPPONENTS, LED BY A
RELATIVELY NEW GROUP CALLED RELATIVELY NEW GROUP CALLED
FREEDOM INDIANA. FREEDOM INDIANA.
THEY’VE BEEN ACTIVE IN THEY’VE BEEN ACTIVE IN
RECRUITING CORPORATIONS AND RECRUITING CORPORATIONS AND
UNIVERSITIES. UNIVERSITIES.
>>IT JEOPARDIZES OUR ABILITY TO>>IT JEOPARDIZES OUR ABILITY TO
BE COMPETITIVE IN GLOBAL MARKETS BE COMPETITIVE IN GLOBAL MARKETS
AND TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN TOP AND TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN TOP
TALENT TO OUR COMPANY. TALENT TO OUR COMPANY.
>>OPPONENTS ARE ALSO FOCUSING >>OPPONENTS ARE ALSO FOCUSING
ON THE SECOND SENTENCE OF THE ON THE SECOND SENTENCE OF THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENT – THEY SAY THAT IT’S TOO VAGUE AND
COULD THREATEN SAME-SEX BENEFITS COULD THREATEN SAME-SEX BENEFITS
OFFERED BY COMPANIES AND OFFERED BY COMPANIES AND
UNIVERSITIES CURRENTLY OFFER, UNIVERSITIES CURRENTLY OFFER,
OR EVEN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OR EVEN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
PROTECTIONS. PROTECTIONS.
HERE’S WHERE THE DEBATE GETS HERE’S WHERE THE DEBATE GETS
MUDDLED. MUDDLED.
REPUBLICANS INTRODUCED A NEW REPUBLICANS INTRODUCED A NEW
BILL, HOUSE BILL 1153, AS A BILL, HOUSE BILL 1153, AS A
“COMPANION BILL” TO HJR3, “COMPANION BILL” TO HJR3,
INTENDED TO CLARIFY THE INTENDED TO CLARIFY THE
LEGISLATIVE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT OF THE
AMENDMENT. AMENDMENT.
REPRESENTATIVE ERIC TURNER SAYS REPRESENTATIVE ERIC TURNER SAYS
THAT OPPONENTS’ CONCERNS ABOUT THAT OPPONENTS’ CONCERNS ABOUT
THAT SECOND SENTENCE ARE THAT SECOND SENTENCE ARE
UNWARRANTED. UNWARRANTED.
>>THE MARRIAGE AMENDMENT DOES >>THE MARRIAGE AMENDMENT DOES
NOT TAKE AWAY OR IN ANY WAY NOT TAKE AWAY OR IN ANY WAY
CHANGE ELI LILLY’S OR CHANGE ELI LILLY’S OR
INDIANA UNIVERSITY’S, OR ANY INDIANA UNIVERSITY’S, OR ANY
OTHER EMPLOYER, PUBLIC OR OTHER EMPLOYER, PUBLIC OR
PRIVATE, THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE PRIVATE, THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE
HEALTHCARE BENEFITS TO THEIR HEALTHCARE BENEFITS TO THEIR
EMPLOYEES AND WHOEVER THEY WANT EMPLOYEES AND WHOEVER THEY WANT
TO ALLOW EMPLOYEES TO TO ALLOW EMPLOYEES TO
INCLUDE ON THEIR HEALTH PLAN. INCLUDE ON THEIR HEALTH PLAN.
>>BOTH SIDES HAVE PRODUCED >>BOTH SIDES HAVE PRODUCED
ARGUMENTS ON THE ARGUMENTS ON THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF HJR3 BASED CONSTITUTIONALITY OF HJR3 BASED
ON THAT SECOND SENTENCE. ON THAT SECOND SENTENCE.
TESTIMONY AT MONDAY’S HEARING TESTIMONY AT MONDAY’S HEARING
WENT MORE THAN FOUR HOURS, WENT MORE THAN FOUR HOURS,
LONGER THAN THE TIME ALLOTTED. LONGER THAN THE TIME ALLOTTED.
CHAIRMAN GREG STEUERWALD DECIDED CHAIRMAN GREG STEUERWALD DECIDED
TO END THE HEARING WITHOUT TO END THE HEARING WITHOUT
VOTING ON THE BILL, SAYING HE VOTING ON THE BILL, SAYING HE
WANTED TO GIVE LEGISLATORS TIME WANTED TO GIVE LEGISLATORS TIME
TO WEIGH THE TESTIMONY – TO WEIGH THE TESTIMONY –
AT LEAST UNTIL NEXT WEEK. AT LEAST UNTIL NEXT WEEK.
>>I BELIEVE THAT MARRIAGE IS >>I BELIEVE THAT MARRIAGE IS
BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN. BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN.
BUT WITH THIS PARTICULAR PIECE BUT WITH THIS PARTICULAR PIECE
OF LEGISLATION HAD CONCERNS OVER OF LEGISLATION HAD CONCERNS OVER
THE SECOND SENTENCE, AND OTHERS THE SECOND SENTENCE, AND OTHERS
HAVE AS WELL, AND I CONTINUE TO HAVE AS WELL, AND I CONTINUE TO
DIGEST THE INFORMATION I DIGEST THE INFORMATION I
RECEIVED YESTERDAY TO TRY TO PAY RECEIVED YESTERDAY TO TRY TO PAY
ATTENTION TO HOW THAT WOULD ATTENTION TO HOW THAT WOULD
AFFECT US. AFFECT US.
>>MEANWHILE, THE FIGHT OUTSIDE >>MEANWHILE, THE FIGHT OUTSIDE
THE STATEHOUSE RAGES ON THE STATEHOUSE RAGES ON
>>LET ME VOTE! >>LET ME VOTE!
CONSERVATIVE GROUP ADVANCE CONSERVATIVE GROUP ADVANCE
AMERICA HAS BOUGHT TV ADS URGING AMERICA HAS BOUGHT TV ADS URGING
VOTERS TO ENCOURAGE THEIR VOTERS TO ENCOURAGE THEIR
LEGISLATORS TO VOTE YES – WHILE LEGISLATORS TO VOTE YES – WHILE
FREEDOM INDIANA VOLUNTEERS ARE FREEDOM INDIANA VOLUNTEERS ARE
TAKING A GRASSROOTS APPROACH – TAKING A GRASSROOTS APPROACH –
WORKING WORK THE PHONE BANKS WORKING WORK THE PHONE BANKS
URGING VOTERS TO DO THE URGING VOTERS TO DO THE
OPPOSITE. OPPOSITE.
ELLEN EPSTEIN’S PARTNER, JANE ELLEN EPSTEIN’S PARTNER, JANE
ROGAN, SAYS THAT’S WHAT’S ROGAN, SAYS THAT’S WHAT’S
DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS YEAR’S DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS YEAR’S
FIGHT. FIGHT.
>>THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE >>THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE
WHO KNOW GAY PEOPLE WHO REALIZE WHO KNOW GAY PEOPLE WHO REALIZE
THIS AMENDMENT WILL HURT THIS AMENDMENT WILL HURT
THEIR FRIENDS. THEIR FRIENDS.
AND I THINK THAT’S THE STRONGEST AND I THINK THAT’S THE STRONGEST
MESSAGE YOU CAN SEND. MESSAGE YOU CAN SEND.
IF IT’S JUST SIMPLY PEOPLE LIKE IF IT’S JUST SIMPLY PEOPLE LIKE
ME AND ELLEN SAYING, NO, THIS IS ME AND ELLEN SAYING, NO, THIS IS
BAD FOR ME AND ELLEN, THEN IT’S BAD FOR ME AND ELLEN, THEN IT’S
NOT GOING TO GET NOT GOING TO GET
MUCH TRACTION. MUCH TRACTION.
IT’S THOSE PEOPLE WHO I THINK IT’S THOSE PEOPLE WHO I THINK
OVER TIME WHO ARE GOING TO BE OVER TIME WHO ARE GOING TO BE
THE ONES THAT CHANGE PEOPLE’S THE ONES THAT CHANGE PEOPLE’S
MINDS. MINDS.
>>STATE HOUSE REPORTER BRANDON >>STATE HOUSE REPORTER BRANDON
SMITH IS STANDING BY NOW AT THE SMITH IS STANDING BY NOW AT THE
STATE HOUSE FOR MORE. STATE HOUSE FOR MORE.
BRANDON, THE GOVERNOR SAID HE BRANDON, THE GOVERNOR SAID HE
WANTED THE DEBATE OF THE WANTED THE DEBATE OF THE
MARRIAGE AMENDMENT TO BE DONE MARRIAGE AMENDMENT TO BE DONE
THIS YEAR. THIS YEAR.
WHAT’S HIS LOGIC BEHIND THAT? WHAT’S HIS LOGIC BEHIND THAT?
>>WELL, FOR ONE THING, THIS >>WELL, FOR ONE THING, THIS
DEBATE HAS BEEN GOING FOR A LONG DEBATE HAS BEEN GOING FOR A LONG
TIME, SOMETHING LIKE 12 YEARS TIME, SOMETHING LIKE 12 YEARS
AND THE AMENDMENT HAD BEEN AND THE AMENDMENT HAD BEEN
KILLED SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE KILLED SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE
REPUBLICANS GOT IT THROUGH IN REPUBLICANS GOT IT THROUGH IN
2011 FOR THE FIRST TIME. 2011 FOR THE FIRST TIME.
BUT PART OF IT IS THAT IF YOU BUT PART OF IT IS THAT IF YOU
RESTART THE DEBATE THIS YEAR, RESTART THE DEBATE THIS YEAR,
FOR INSTANCE, IF THEY TAKE OUT FOR INSTANCE, IF THEY TAKE OUT
THAT SECOND SENTENCE, THE PEOPLE THAT SECOND SENTENCE, THE PEOPLE
ARE SO CONCERNED ABOUT, THEY ARE SO CONCERNED ABOUT, THEY
WOULD RESTART THE PROCESS, WHICH WOULD RESTART THE PROCESS, WHICH
MEANS IT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE MEANS IT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE
PUT ON THE BALLOT IN 2016, PUT ON THE BALLOT IN 2016,
WHICH, OF COURSE, WOULD BE THE WHICH, OF COURSE, WOULD BE THE
SAME TIME THAT GOVERNOR PENCE IS SAME TIME THAT GOVERNOR PENCE IS
RUNNING FOR REELECTION. RUNNING FOR REELECTION.
HE’S NOT SAID THAT’S WHY HE HE’S NOT SAID THAT’S WHY HE
WANTS THE DEBATE TO END THIS WANTS THE DEBATE TO END THIS
YEAR IT’S WHAT SOME ARE YEAR IT’S WHAT SOME ARE
SPECULATING. SPECULATING.
>>LAWMAKERS DELAYED THAT VOTE >>LAWMAKERS DELAYED THAT VOTE
THIS WEEK. THIS WEEK.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE PATH THIS CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE PATH THIS
LEGISLATION NEEDS TO TAKE IF LEGISLATION NEEDS TO TAKE IF
IT’S GOING TO MAKE IT TO THE IT’S GOING TO MAKE IT TO THE
VOTERS? VOTERS?
>>SURE. >>SURE.
IT WOULD HAVE TO FIRST PASS THIS IT WOULD HAVE TO FIRST PASS THIS
HOUSE COMMITTEE, WHICH AT THIS HOUSE COMMITTEE, WHICH AT THIS
POINT IS NOT A GUARANTEE. POINT IS NOT A GUARANTEE.
THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO PASS THE THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO PASS THE
HOUSE FLOOR. HOUSE FLOOR.
IT WOULD GO OVER TO THE SENATE. IT WOULD GO OVER TO THE SENATE.
IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A
SENATE COMMITTEE. SENATE COMMITTEE.
IF IT’S PASS THERE HAD, IT WOULD IF IT’S PASS THERE HAD, IT WOULD
GO TO THE SENATE FLOOR. GO TO THE SENATE FLOOR.
IF PASSED BY THE FULL SENATE IT IF PASSED BY THE FULL SENATE IT
WOULD THEN GO TO THE VOTERS ON WOULD THEN GO TO THE VOTERS ON
THE BALLOT LATER THIS YEAR. THE BALLOT LATER THIS YEAR.
>>NOW, THE CORNERSTONE MUCH >>NOW, THE CORNERSTONE MUCH
PENCE’S AGENDA IS ELIMINATION OF PENCE’S AGENDA IS ELIMINATION OF
BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX. BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX.
HE FOCUSED HEFERLY ON THE STATE HE FOCUSED HEFERLY ON THE STATE
OF THE STATE OF ADDRESS. OF THE STATE OF ADDRESS.
THIS DOESN’T LOOK LIKE A SLAM THIS DOESN’T LOOK LIKE A SLAM
DUNK FOR HIM, THOUGH, DOES IT? DUNK FOR HIM, THOUGH, DOES IT?
>>NOT AT ALL. >>NOT AT ALL.
THOUGH HE HASN’T BEEN QUITE THOUGH HE HASN’T BEEN QUITE
SO — HE HASN’T BEEN ABSOLUTELY SO — HE HASN’T BEEN ABSOLUTELY
CERTAIN THAT YOU HAVE TO CERTAIN THAT YOU HAVE TO
ELIMINATE IT ENTIRELY THIS YEAR. ELIMINATE IT ENTIRELY THIS YEAR.
HE’S BEEN — HE’S BACKED OFF OF HE’S BEEN — HE’S BACKED OFF OF
THAT SORT OF FORCEFUL TALK, BUT THAT SORT OF FORCEFUL TALK, BUT
BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE
REPUBLICAN PROPOSALS DEALING REPUBLICAN PROPOSALS DEALING
WITH THE BUSINESS PERSONAL WITH THE BUSINESS PERSONAL
PROPERTY TAX FALL WELL SHORT OF PROPERTY TAX FALL WELL SHORT OF
FULLY ELIMINATING IT. FULLY ELIMINATING IT.
>>BRANDON, IN HIS ADDRESS, >>BRANDON, IN HIS ADDRESS,
PENCE TALKED ABOUT HOW INDIANA PENCE TALKED ABOUT HOW INDIANA
WOULD KEEP MOVING FORWARD THIS WOULD KEEP MOVING FORWARD THIS
YEAR. YEAR.
HOOSIERS WOULD THRIVE. HOOSIERS WOULD THRIVE.
DEMOCRATS SAID THE SPEECH WAS DEMOCRATS SAID THE SPEECH WAS
FULL OF RHETORIC. FULL OF RHETORIC.
>>FULL OF RHETORIC, TEPID. >>FULL OF RHETORIC, TEPID.
I THINK HOUSE MINORITY LEADER I THINK HOUSE MINORITY LEADER
SAID GOVERNOR PENCE SOUNDS LIKE SAID GOVERNOR PENCE SOUNDS LIKE
A GOVERNOR, LOOKS LIKE A A GOVERNOR, LOOKS LIKE A
GOVERNOR BUT WHEN IT COMES TO BE GOVERNOR BUT WHEN IT COMES TO BE
GOVERNOR HE DOESN’T SEEM TO WANT GOVERNOR HE DOESN’T SEEM TO WANT
TO VERY MUCH. TO VERY MUCH.
DEMOCRATS SAY THERE WERE NO BIG DEMOCRATS SAY THERE WERE NO BIG
IDEAS, HE’S NOT PROVIDING ANY IDEAS, HE’S NOT PROVIDING ANY
SPECIFICS, HE’S NOT REALLY SPECIFICS, HE’S NOT REALLY
LEADING. LEADING.
>>AND BRANDON, WHAT WERE SOME >>AND BRANDON, WHAT WERE SOME
OF THE OTHER RESPONSES AT THE OF THE OTHER RESPONSES AT THE
STATE HOUSE OVER THE STATE OF STATE HOUSE OVER THE STATE OF
THE STATE ADDRESS? THE STATE ADDRESS?
>>WELL, SENATE REPUBLICANS AND >>WELL, SENATE REPUBLICANS AND
HOUSE REPUBLICANS LIKED THE TONE HOUSE REPUBLICANS LIKED THE TONE
THE GOVERNOR SET. THE GOVERNOR SET.
THEY THOUGHT HE PAINTED WITH A THEY THOUGHT HE PAINTED WITH A
BROADBRUSH, IS WHAT THEY SAID, BROADBRUSH, IS WHAT THEY SAID,
DID THE MORE BIG-PICTURE SET A DID THE MORE BIG-PICTURE SET A
VISION FOR THE STATE AND LEFT IT VISION FOR THE STATE AND LEFT IT
TO LAW MAKERS TO SORT OF FIGURE TO LAW MAKERS TO SORT OF FIGURE
OUT THE DETAILS OF HOW HIS OUT THE DETAILS OF HOW HIS
PROPOSALS WOULD WORK AND PROPOSALS WOULD WORK AND
LAWMAKERS SAY THEY DON’T MIND LAWMAKERS SAY THEY DON’T MIND
THAT APPROACH AT ALL. THAT APPROACH AT ALL.
>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BRANDON.>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BRANDON.
GOVERNOR PENCE’S STATE OF THE GOVERNOR PENCE’S STATE OF THE
STATE ADDRESS ALSO LAYS HOPES STATE ADDRESS ALSO LAYS HOPES
FOR OPPONENTS OF THE COMMON FOR OPPONENTS OF THE COMMON
CORE. CORE.
HIS REMARKS FROM THE NATIONALLY HIS REMARKS FROM THE NATIONALLY
CRAFTED ACADEMIC STANDARDS COME CRAFTED ACADEMIC STANDARDS COME
AS LAWMAKERS AND STATE EDUCATION AS LAWMAKERS AND STATE EDUCATION
OFFICIALS CONTINUE A REVIEW OF OFFICIALS CONTINUE A REVIEW OF
THE MOST BASIC EXPECTATIONS THE MOST BASIC EXPECTATIONS
INDIANA SETS FOR ITS STUDENTS. INDIANA SETS FOR ITS STUDENTS.
LET’S BRING IN STATEIMPACT LET’S BRING IN STATEIMPACT
EDUCATION REPORTER KYLE STOKES. EDUCATION REPORTER KYLE STOKES.
KYLE, WHAT WAS SO SIGNIFICANT KYLE, WHAT WAS SO SIGNIFICANT
ABOUT THE GOVERNOR’S SPEECH THIS ABOUT THE GOVERNOR’S SPEECH THIS
WEEK? WEEK?
>>IT LOOKS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT>>IT LOOKS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT
INDICATION TO DATE GOVERNOR INDICATION TO DATE GOVERNOR
PENCE FAVORS A STEP AWAY FROM PENCE FAVORS A STEP AWAY FROM
THE COMMON CORE. THE COMMON CORE.
BUT ROLL OUT IS ON HOLD AND THE BUT ROLL OUT IS ON HOLD AND THE
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION IS STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION IS
CURRENTLY DECIDING WHETHER TO CURRENTLY DECIDING WHETHER TO
KEEP THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS, KEEP THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS,
CHANGE THEM OR JUST GET RID OF CHANGE THEM OR JUST GET RID OF
THEM. THEM.
A BILL BEFORE THE STATE SENATE A BILL BEFORE THE STATE SENATE
WOULD GIVE THE BOARD ANOTHER WOULD GIVE THE BOARD ANOTHER
YEAR TO COMPLETE THAT TASK EVEN YEAR TO COMPLETE THAT TASK EVEN
IF SEVERAL TOP REPUBLICANS HAVE IF SEVERAL TOP REPUBLICANS HAVE
CALLED THE DEBATE AN ONGOING CALLED THE DEBATE AN ONGOING
DISTRACTION. DISTRACTION.
AGAINST THAT BACKDROP, PENCE AGAINST THAT BACKDROP, PENCE
DELIVERED THIS MESSAGE. DELIVERED THIS MESSAGE.
>>WHEN IT COMES TO SETTING >>WHEN IT COMES TO SETTING
STANDARDS FOR OUR SCHOOLS, LET STANDARDS FOR OUR SCHOOLS, LET
ME BE CLEAR. ME BE CLEAR.
INDIANA’S STANDARDS WILL BE INDIANA’S STANDARDS WILL BE
UNCOMMONLY HIGH. UNCOMMONLY HIGH.
AND THEY WILL BE WRITTEN BY AND THEY WILL BE WRITTEN BY
HOOSIERS FOR HOOSIERS AND BE HOOSIERS FOR HOOSIERS AND BE
AMONG THE BEST IN THE NATION. AMONG THE BEST IN THE NATION.
[APPLAUSE] [APPLAUSE]
>>SOME WHO FAVOR THE COMMON >>SOME WHO FAVOR THE COMMON
CORE POINT OUT PENCE HAS MADE CORE POINT OUT PENCE HAS MADE
SIMILAR STATEMENTS IN THE PAST. SIMILAR STATEMENTS IN THE PAST.
PENCE’S REMARKS WEREN’T A PENCE’S REMARKS WEREN’T A
SURPRISE TO DO STATE SURPRISE TO DO STATE
SUPERINTENDENT GLENDA RITZ SUPERINTENDENT GLENDA RITZ
EITHER. EITHER.
REVIEW THE STANDARDS AND MORE REVIEW THE STANDARDS AND MORE
THAN LIKELY MAKE REVISIONS. THAN LIKELY MAKE REVISIONS.
A PROCESS SHE SAYS THE STATE A PROCESS SHE SAYS THE STATE
BOARD COULD COMPLETE BY APRIL. BOARD COULD COMPLETE BY APRIL.
THAT PLAN DOES RAISE NEW THAT PLAN DOES RAISE NEW
QUESTIONS LIKE WHAT TESTS QUESTIONS LIKE WHAT TESTS
INDIANA STUDENTS WILL TAKE EAFER INDIANA STUDENTS WILL TAKE EAFER
THE I STEP AND HOW STATE THE I STEP AND HOW STATE
OFFICIALS WILL SELL THEIR OFFICIALS WILL SELL THEIR
CHANGES TO FEDERAL EDUCATION CHANGES TO FEDERAL EDUCATION
OFFICIALS. OFFICIALS.
PENCE ALSO AFFIRMED HIS SUPPORT PENCE ALSO AFFIRMED HIS SUPPORT
FOR A PRESCHOOL PROGRAM FOR FOR A PRESCHOOL PROGRAM FOR
LOW-INCOME KIDS DURING HIS STATE LOW-INCOME KIDS DURING HIS STATE
OF THE STATE AND LATER IN THE OF THE STATE AND LATER IN THE
WEEK THE TOP HOUSE DEMOCRAT SAID WEEK THE TOP HOUSE DEMOCRAT SAID
HE WOULD SUPPORT THAT PROPOSAL, HE WOULD SUPPORT THAT PROPOSAL,
TOO, EVEN THOUGH THE PROPOSAL TOO, EVEN THOUGH THE PROPOSAL
WOULD ALSO MAKE ANY WOULD ALSO MAKE ANY
PARTICIPATING PRESCHOOLER PARTICIPATING PRESCHOOLER
AUTOMATICALLY ELIGIBLE FOR THE AUTOMATICALLY ELIGIBLE FOR THE
STATE’S K-12 PRIVATE SCHOOL STATE’S K-12 PRIVATE SCHOOL
VOUCHER PROGRAM. VOUCHER PROGRAM.
MINORITY LEADER MADE THAT MINORITY LEADER MADE THAT
ANNOUNCEMENT AFTER HOUSE MEMBERS ANNOUNCEMENT AFTER HOUSE MEMBERS
PASSED THE BIG ON THURSDAY. PASSED THE BIG ON THURSDAY.
YOU MIGHT REMEMBER GENERAL YOU MIGHT REMEMBER GENERAL
ASSEMBLY DEMOCRATS CALLED FOR A ASSEMBLY DEMOCRATS CALLED FOR A
PROPOSAL TO CREATE A PRE-K PROPOSAL TO CREATE A PRE-K
PROGRAM FOR ALL CHILDREN BEFORE PROGRAM FOR ALL CHILDREN BEFORE
THE SESSION EACH BEGAN BUT EVEN THE SESSION EACH BEGAN BUT EVEN
LIMITED TO LOW INCOME CHILDREN, LIMITED TO LOW INCOME CHILDREN,
EVEN AS A PILOT PROGRAM EVEN AS A PILOT PROGRAM
LEGISLATIVE ANALYSTS SAY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYSTS SAY THE
PROGRAM COULD COST AS MUCH AS PROGRAM COULD COST AS MUCH AS
$25 MILLION. $25 MILLION.
JOE, THAT MIGHT BE A HIGH-END JOE, THAT MIGHT BE A HIGH-END
ESTIMATE BUT IT COULD BE A ESTIMATE BUT IT COULD BE A
TURN-OFF FOR SOME MEMBERS OF THE TURN-OFF FOR SOME MEMBERS OF THE
SENATE WHO HAVE ALREADY SENATE WHO HAVE ALREADY
EXPRESSED SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE EXPRESSED SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE
PROPOSAL THIS YEAR AND LAST YEAR PROPOSAL THIS YEAR AND LAST YEAR
REJECTED A VERY SIMILAR REJECTED A VERY SIMILAR
PROPOSAL. PROPOSAL.
SO WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO KEEP SO WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO KEEP
FOLLOWING THE DEBATE. FOLLOWING THE DEBATE.
THIS ONE IS NOT OVER. THIS ONE IS NOT OVER.
>>A BUSY WEEK AT THE STATE >>A BUSY WEEK AT THE STATE
HOUSE. HOUSE.
>>NEVER A DULL MOMENT. >>NEVER A DULL MOMENT.
>>COMING UP NEXT ON “INDIANA >>COMING UP NEXT ON “INDIANA
NEWSDESK…” NEWSDESK…”
A LOOK AT THIS WEEK’S TOP A LOOK AT THIS WEEK’S TOP
STORIES, INCLUDING A PROPOSAL STORIES, INCLUDING A PROPOSAL
THAT WOULD LET HOOSIERS BUY THAT WOULD LET HOOSIERS BUY
ALCOHOL AT THE STATE FAIR. ALCOHOL AT THE STATE FAIR.
ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS CLASH ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS CLASH
WITH FARMERS OVER A BILL THAT WITH FARMERS OVER A BILL THAT
WOULD CRACKDOWN ON TRESPASSING. WOULD CRACKDOWN ON TRESPASSING.
WHY SOME SAY IT’S A VIOLATION OF WHY SOME SAY IT’S A VIOLATION OF
FREE SPEECH. FREE SPEECH.
AND WE SIT DOWN WITH BLOOMINGTON AND WE SIT DOWN WITH BLOOMINGTON
MAYOR MARK KRUZAN TO TALK ABOUT MAYOR MARK KRUZAN TO TALK ABOUT
A PROPOSED TAX REDUCTION THAT A PROPOSED TAX REDUCTION THAT
WOULD CUT INTO CITY BUDGET. WOULD CUT INTO CITY BUDGET.
THESE STORIES AND MORE RIGHT THESE STORIES AND MORE RIGHT
HERE ON “INDIANA NEWSDESK.” >>WELCOME BACK TO “INDIANA
NEWSDESK.” NEWSDESK.”
I’M JOE HREN. I’M JOE HREN.
NOW FOR A LOOK AT THIS WEEK’S NOW FOR A LOOK AT THIS WEEK’S
HEADLINES WE GO OVER TO ALEX HEADLINES WE GO OVER TO ALEX
DIERCKMAN. DIERCKMAN.
>>HI, JOE. >>HI, JOE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
U.S. ATTORNEY JOE HOGSETT SAYS U.S. ATTORNEY JOE HOGSETT SAYS
HE WILL NOT RUN FOR INDIANAPOLIS HE WILL NOT RUN FOR INDIANAPOLIS
MAYOR OR ANY STATEWIDE OFFICE IN MAYOR OR ANY STATEWIDE OFFICE IN
THE NEXT TWO YEARS. THE NEXT TWO YEARS.
WHEN FORMER GUBERNATORIAL WHEN FORMER GUBERNATORIAL
HOPEFUL JOHN GREGG ALLOWANCED HOPEFUL JOHN GREGG ALLOWANCED
LAST FALL HE WOULD NOT SEEK LAST FALL HE WOULD NOT SEEK
ANOTHER BID FOR GOVERNMENT HE ANOTHER BID FOR GOVERNMENT HE
NAMED HOGSETT AT SOMEONE HE NAMED HOGSETT AT SOMEONE HE
THOUGHT MIGHT BE A GOOD THOUGHT MIGHT BE A GOOD
DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE. DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE.
OTHER POLITICAL CANDIDATES ALSO OTHER POLITICAL CANDIDATES ALSO
CONSIDERED HIM A POSSIBLE CONSIDERED HIM A POSSIBLE
CANDIDATE FOR THE U.S. SENATE CANDIDATE FOR THE U.S. SENATE
SEAT CURRENTLY HELD BY SENATOR SEAT CURRENTLY HELD BY SENATOR
DAN COATS. DAN COATS.
MORE YOUNG HOOSIERS NEED TO SIGN MORE YOUNG HOOSIERS NEED TO SIGN
UP UNDER THE FEDERAL HEALTH UP UNDER THE FEDERAL HEALTH
EXCHANGE FOR IT TO REMAIN EXCHANGE FOR IT TO REMAIN
ECONOMICALLY VIABLE. ECONOMICALLY VIABLE.
THAT’S THE MESSAGE FROM HEALTH THAT’S THE MESSAGE FROM HEALTH
EXPERTS AFTER THEY REVIEWED THE EXPERTS AFTER THEY REVIEWED THE
LATEST ENROLLMENT NUMBERS LATEST ENROLLMENT NUMBERS
RELEASED THIS WEEK. RELEASED THIS WEEK.
THE DATA SHOWS AS OF JANUARY THE DATA SHOWS AS OF JANUARY
1st 30,500 HOOSIERS SIGNED UP. 1st 30,500 HOOSIERS SIGNED UP.
39% ARE BETWEEN THE AGES OF 45 39% ARE BETWEEN THE AGES OF 45
AND 64. AND 64.
JUST 21% ARE BETWEEN THE AGES OF JUST 21% ARE BETWEEN THE AGES OF
16 AND 34. 16 AND 34.
HEALTHCARE ANALYSTS SAY THAT HEALTHCARE ANALYSTS SAY THAT
SECOND NUMBER NEEDS TO BE CLOSER SECOND NUMBER NEEDS TO BE CLOSER
TO 35% TO MAKE IT SUSTAINABLE TO 35% TO MAKE IT SUSTAINABLE
FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES. FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES.
THAT’S BECAUSE IF NOT ENOUGH THAT’S BECAUSE IF NOT ENOUGH
YOUNG PEOPLE SIGN UP INSURANCE YOUNG PEOPLE SIGN UP INSURANCE
COMPANIES WILL BE PAYING OUT COMPANIES WILL BE PAYING OUT
MORE FOR OLDER PEOPLE WHO ARE MORE FOR OLDER PEOPLE WHO ARE
RECEIVING A LOT MORE MEDICAL RECEIVING A LOT MORE MEDICAL
CARE. CARE.
A SPOKESMAN FOR INDIANA HOSPITAL A SPOKESMAN FOR INDIANA HOSPITAL
ASSOCIATION SAYS HEALTHCARE ASSOCIATION SAYS HEALTHCARE
PROVIDERS ARE WORKING TO TARGET PROVIDERS ARE WORKING TO TARGET
YOUNG PEOPLE THROUGH ADS AND YOUNG PEOPLE THROUGH ADS AND
SOCIAL MEDIA. SOCIAL MEDIA.
THE STRAIN OF FLU THAT CAUSED THE STRAIN OF FLU THAT CAUSED
THE PANDEMIC FIVE YEARS AGO THE PANDEMIC FIVE YEARS AGO
KILLING 40 HOOSIERS IS STRONG KILLING 40 HOOSIERS IS STRONG
AGAIN THIS SEASON. AGAIN THIS SEASON.
HON1 HAS BEEN REPORTED IN HON1 HAS BEEN REPORTED IN
INDIANA. INDIANA.
IT ISN’T ONLY THE FLU STRAIN IT ISN’T ONLY THE FLU STRAIN
GOING AROUND, H3N2 CONTINUE TO GOING AROUND, H3N2 CONTINUE TO
PRESENT THEMSELVES. PRESENT THEMSELVES.
ALL THOSE FLU STRAINS ARE PART ALL THOSE FLU STRAINS ARE PART
OF THIS YEAR’S FLU SHOT. OF THIS YEAR’S FLU SHOT.
IN HIS ANNUAL STATE OF THE IN HIS ANNUAL STATE OF THE
JUDICIARY ADDRESS INDIANA JUDICIARY ADDRESS INDIANA
SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE
BRENT DICKSON HIGHLIGHTED THE BRENT DICKSON HIGHLIGHTED THE
RESULTS OF A RECENT STUDY RESULTS OF A RECENT STUDY
LOOKING AT HOOSIERS WHO DON’T LOOKING AT HOOSIERS WHO DON’T
HAVE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE LEGAL HAVE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE LEGAL
SERVICES CALLED THE DATA SERVICES CALLED THE DATA
SHOCKING. SHOCKING.
HE SAID THE COURT SYSTEM HE SAID THE COURT SYSTEM
COMPLETED THE STUDY TWO WEEKS COMPLETED THE STUDY TWO WEEKS
AGO LOOKING AT LAWSUITS FOR AGO LOOKING AT LAWSUITS FOR
2013. 2013.
ABOUT 63% OF PARTIES IN THOSE ABOUT 63% OF PARTIES IN THOSE
SUITS DID NOT HAVE A LAWYER AND SUITS DID NOT HAVE A LAWYER AND
FAMILY LAW CASES ALONE, 60% OF FAMILY LAW CASES ALONE, 60% OF
PEOPLE WENT UNREPRESENTED. PEOPLE WENT UNREPRESENTED.
>>WHEN PEOPLE ARE IN COURT >>WHEN PEOPLE ARE IN COURT
WITHOUT A LAWYER, BAD THINGS WITHOUT A LAWYER, BAD THINGS
HAPPEN. HAPPEN.
IN PLACES — IT PLACES IN PLACES — IT PLACES
UNREPRESENTED LITIGANTS UNDER UNREPRESENTED LITIGANTS UNDER
GREAT DISADVANTAGE AND IS ALMOST GREAT DISADVANTAGE AND IS ALMOST
ALWAYS DETRIMENTAL TO THEIR ALWAYS DETRIMENTAL TO THEIR
INTERESTS. INTERESTS.
IT DEPRIVES JUDGES FROM IT DEPRIVES JUDGES FROM
RECEIVING ALL THE INFORMATION RECEIVING ALL THE INFORMATION
THEY NEED TO MAKE JUST AND FAIR THEY NEED TO MAKE JUST AND FAIR
DECISIONS. DECISIONS.
AND IT CLOGS COURT DOCKETS AND AND IT CLOGS COURT DOCKETS AND
DELAYS JUSTICE FOR ALL COURT DELAYS JUSTICE FOR ALL COURT
USERS. USERS.
>>DICKSON SAYS PART OF THE WAY >>DICKSON SAYS PART OF THE WAY
TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM IS FOR TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM IS FOR
INDIANA LAWYERS TO STEP UP TO INDIANA LAWYERS TO STEP UP TO
THE PLATE AND PROVIDE MORE PRO THE PLATE AND PROVIDE MORE PRO
BONO SERVICES. BONO SERVICES.
FAMILY AND SOCIAL SERVICE FOR FAMILY AND SOCIAL SERVICE FOR
INCARCERATED MINORS COULD HELP INCARCERATED MINORS COULD HELP
IMPROVE BEHAVIOR AND INDIANA IMPROVE BEHAVIOR AND INDIANA
JUVENILE CORRECTIONS FACILITIES. JUVENILE CORRECTIONS FACILITIES.
AN OFFICIAL SAYS HE SAW DRAMATIC AN OFFICIAL SAYS HE SAW DRAMATIC
MANY PROVEMENTS IN BEHAVIOR MANY PROVEMENTS IN BEHAVIOR
AFTER THE STATE EXPANDED AFTER THE STATE EXPANDED
VISITING HOURS. VISITING HOURS.
BECAUSE OF THE SUCCESS OF A BECAUSE OF THE SUCCESS OF A
NATIONAL NONPROFIT IS PLANNING NATIONAL NONPROFIT IS PLANNING
TO STUDY THE ISSUE. TO STUDY THE ISSUE.
THE RESEARCH WILL FOCUS ON THE RESEARCH WILL FOCUS ON
BEHAVE AND RECIDIVISM RATES. BEHAVE AND RECIDIVISM RATES.
THE INDIANA STATE FAIR IS THE INDIANA STATE FAIR IS
CONSIDERING ADDING ALCOHOL CONSIDERING ADDING ALCOHOL
SALES. SALES.
ALCOHOL HAS BEEN BANNED SINCE ALCOHOL HAS BEEN BANNED SINCE
1947 BUT NOW THERE IS A BILL 1947 BUT NOW THERE IS A BILL
MAKING IT THROUGH THE MAKING IT THROUGH THE
LEGISLATURE THAT WOULD CHANGE LEGISLATURE THAT WOULD CHANGE
THAT. THAT.
A STATE FAIR SPOKESPERSON SAYS A STATE FAIR SPOKESPERSON SAYS
ALCOHOL SALES COULD BRING IN ALCOHOL SALES COULD BRING IN
ABOUT $200,000 EACH YEAR. ABOUT $200,000 EACH YEAR.
THE BILL’S SPONSOR SAYS SALES THE BILL’S SPONSOR SAYS SALES
WOULD BE LIMITED TO MAINTAIN THE WOULD BE LIMITED TO MAINTAIN THE
FAIR’S FAMILY-FRIENDLY FAIR’S FAMILY-FRIENDLY
ENVIRONMENT. ENVIRONMENT.
AND THE JENNINGS COUNTY PUBLIC AND THE JENNINGS COUNTY PUBLIC
LIBRARY IS HOPING TO SCAIF LIBRARY IS HOPING TO SCAIF
$60,000 A YEAR BY INSTALLING $60,000 A YEAR BY INSTALLING
SOLAR PANELS ON ITS ROOF. SOLAR PANELS ON ITS ROOF.
THE LIBRARY WILL CIRCULATE THE THE LIBRARY WILL CIRCULATE THE
ENERGY PRODUCED BY SOLAR PANELS ENERGY PRODUCED BY SOLAR PANELS
BACK INTO THE BUILDING. BACK INTO THE BUILDING.
THE LIBRARY DIRECTOR SAYS IF THE LIBRARY DIRECTOR SAYS IF
ENOUGH ENERGY IS PRODUCED THE ENOUGH ENERGY IS PRODUCED THE
LIBRARY SHOULD HAVE NO ELECTRIC LIBRARY SHOULD HAVE NO ELECTRIC
EXPENSES. EXPENSES.
>>WE’RE HOPING TO SET A >>WE’RE HOPING TO SET A
BENCHMARK TO GO OUT AND SAY LOOK BENCHMARK TO GO OUT AND SAY LOOK
AT WHAT WE DID, LOOK HOW WE’RE AT WHAT WE DID, LOOK HOW WE’RE
SAVING TAXPAYERS’ MONEY. SAVING TAXPAYERS’ MONEY.
FOLLOW OUR LEAD. FOLLOW OUR LEAD.
YOU CAN DO IT TOO. YOU CAN DO IT TOO.
>>IF THE PROJECT IS SUCCESSFUL >>IF THE PROJECT IS SUCCESSFUL
JENNINGS COUNTY OFFICIALS COULD JENNINGS COUNTY OFFICIALS COULD
LOOK INTO OTHER POTENTIAL WAYS LOOK INTO OTHER POTENTIAL WAYS
TO SAVE ENERGY AND MONEY. TO SAVE ENERGY AND MONEY.
>>WE’VE SEEN WINE MAKERS, >>WE’VE SEEN WINE MAKERS,
BREWPUBS, NOW SCHOOLS AND BREWPUBS, NOW SCHOOLS AND
LIBRARIES OPINION THE SO-CALLED LIBRARIES OPINION THE SO-CALLED
AG GAG BILL IS BACK AND CRITICS AG GAG BILL IS BACK AND CRITICS
SAY IT HAS THE SAME PROBLEMS SAY IT HAS THE SAME PROBLEMS
THAT PREVENTED LAWMAKERS FROM THAT PREVENTED LAWMAKERS FROM
PASSING IT LAST SESSION. PASSING IT LAST SESSION.
AS JIMMY JENKINS REPORTS SOME AS JIMMY JENKINS REPORTS SOME
SAY THE MEASURE THAT’S DESIGNED SAY THE MEASURE THAT’S DESIGNED
TO LIMIT TRESPASSING ON FARMS IS TO LIMIT TRESPASSING ON FARMS IS
REALLY AN ATTACK ON REALLY AN ATTACK ON
WHISTLEBLOWERS AND IMPEDES FREE WHISTLEBLOWERS AND IMPEDES FREE
SPEECH. SPEECH.
>>DAVID HARDIN OWNS ABOUT >>DAVID HARDIN OWNS ABOUT
12,000 PIGS AT HIS FARM IN 12,000 PIGS AT HIS FARM IN
DANVILLE, INDIANA. DANVILLE, INDIANA.
HE CALLS IT A SMALL FAMILY FARM HE CALLS IT A SMALL FAMILY FARM
BUT TECHNICALLY IT IS A CONFINED BUT TECHNICALLY IT IS A CONFINED
ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATION. ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATION.
>>WHICH IS IN CERTAIN CIRCLES >>WHICH IS IN CERTAIN CIRCLES
IS KIND OF A — IT’S A IS KIND OF A — IT’S A
FOUR-LETTER WORD, BUT IT JUST FOUR-LETTER WORD, BUT IT JUST
STRICTLY DESIGNATES HOW MANY STRICTLY DESIGNATES HOW MANY
ANIMALS YOU HAVE ON YOUR FARM AT ANIMALS YOU HAVE ON YOUR FARM AT
ONE TIME. ONE TIME.
>>WHILE HARDIN’S LIVESTOCK IS >>WHILE HARDIN’S LIVESTOCK IS
CONTAINED IN A SMALL AREA HE CONTAINED IN A SMALL AREA HE
SAYS HIS PIGS ARE KEPT AT A SAYS HIS PIGS ARE KEPT AT A
COMFORTABLE TEMP AND SUPPLIED COMFORTABLE TEMP AND SUPPLIED
WITH FOOD AND WATER. WITH FOOD AND WATER.
HARDIN SAYS THE NATURE OF HARDIN SAYS THE NATURE OF
AGRICULTURE HAS CHANGED AND HE AGRICULTURE HAS CHANGED AND HE
UNDERSTANDS IMAGES PEOPLE SEE OF UNDERSTANDS IMAGES PEOPLE SEE OF
AN INDUSTRY OPERATION MIGHT BE AN INDUSTRY OPERATION MIGHT BE
UNSETTLING. UNSETTLING.
>>WHAT A LOT OF PEOPLE — WHEN >>WHAT A LOT OF PEOPLE — WHEN
THEY THINK OF CLASSIC AMERICAN THEY THINK OF CLASSIC AMERICAN
AGRICULTURE, MAYBE A NORMAN AGRICULTURE, MAYBE A NORMAN
ROCKWELL PAINTED RED BARN. ROCKWELL PAINTED RED BARN.
IT DOESN’T LOOK LIKE THAT TODAY. IT DOESN’T LOOK LIKE THAT TODAY.
BUT WE TRY AND USE TECHNOLOGY TO BUT WE TRY AND USE TECHNOLOGY TO
ACTUALLY CARE FOR THE ANIMALS ACTUALLY CARE FOR THE ANIMALS
BETTER AND GIVE THEM A BETTER BETTER AND GIVE THEM A BETTER
LIFE THAN THEY WOULD HAVE LIFE THAN THEY WOULD HAVE
OTHERWISE HAD. OTHERWISE HAD.
>>HARDIN SUPPORTS THE BILL >>HARDIN SUPPORTS THE BILL
BECAUSE HE SAYS IT GIVES BECAUSE HE SAYS IT GIVES
PRODUCERS LIKE HIM EXTRA PRODUCERS LIKE HIM EXTRA
PROTECTION. PROTECTION.
>>IN THIS DAY AND AGE IT >>IN THIS DAY AND AGE IT
DOESN’T TAKE MUCH FOR A PRODUCER DOESN’T TAKE MUCH FOR A PRODUCER
TO BE PUT OUT OF BUSINESS IF TO BE PUT OUT OF BUSINESS IF
THEY GET SOME VERY BAD PUBLICITY THEY GET SOME VERY BAD PUBLICITY
ABOUT THINGS THAT HAVE GONE ON ABOUT THINGS THAT HAVE GONE ON
ON THEIR FARM AND IT MAY NOT BE ON THEIR FARM AND IT MAY NOT BE
SOMETHING THAT IS NECESSARILY SOMETHING THAT IS NECESSARILY
BAD, BUT TO THE PUBLIC TODAY BAD, BUT TO THE PUBLIC TODAY
THAT HASN’T GROWN UP WITH THAT HASN’T GROWN UP WITH
PRODUCTION AGRICULTURE AND PRODUCTION AGRICULTURE AND
DOESN’T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY’RE DOESN’T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY’RE
LOOKING AT IT MAY NOT — MAY NOT LOOKING AT IT MAY NOT — MAY NOT
LOOK LIKE SOMETHING GOOD, BUT IT LOOK LIKE SOMETHING GOOD, BUT IT
COULD BE A VETERINARY APPROVED COULD BE A VETERINARY APPROVED
PRACTICE, BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE, BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICE THAT WE HAVE ON THE PRACTICE THAT WE HAVE ON THE
FARMS TODAY. FARMS TODAY.
>>SENATE BILL 101 CREATES A NEW>>SENATE BILL 101 CREATES A NEW
CRIME CALLED AGRICULTURAL CRIME CALLED AGRICULTURAL
MISCHIEF WHICH ENHANCES MISCHIEF WHICH ENHANCES
PENALTIES FOR TRESPASSING. PENALTIES FOR TRESPASSING.
THE SENATOR DECLINED TO BE THE SENATOR DECLINED TO BE
INTERVIEWED BUT TESTIFYING INTERVIEWED BUT TESTIFYING
BEFORE THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE BEFORE THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE
LAST WEEK HE SAID THE BILL WAS LAST WEEK HE SAID THE BILL WAS
NECESSARY TO PROTECT INDIANA’S NECESSARY TO PROTECT INDIANA’S
AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY. AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY.
>>WE HAVE GOT TO PROTECT OUR >>WE HAVE GOT TO PROTECT OUR
FARMS ANDING A CULTURAL FARMS ANDING A CULTURAL
OPERATIONS IN THIS STATE, WHICH OPERATIONS IN THIS STATE, WHICH
IS A HUGE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS A HUGE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
DRIVER IN THE STATE OF INDIANA DRIVER IN THE STATE OF INDIANA
AND TO PROTECT THOSE FOLKS FROM AND TO PROTECT THOSE FOLKS FROM
FOLKS WHO WOULD ACTUALLY COME ON FOLKS WHO WOULD ACTUALLY COME ON
PROPERTY AND ATTEMPT TO DO HARM PROPERTY AND ATTEMPT TO DO HARM
TO THE OPERATION. TO THE OPERATION.
>>HOWEVER, THOSE AGAINST THE >>HOWEVER, THOSE AGAINST THE
MEASURE TESTIFIED CONSUMERS MEASURE TESTIFIED CONSUMERS
SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE HOW THEIR SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE HOW THEIR
FOOD IS PRODUCED. FOOD IS PRODUCED.
>>INSTEAD OF TRYING TO HIDE >>INSTEAD OF TRYING TO HIDE
WHAT’S HAPPENING ON THE FARMS WHAT’S HAPPENING ON THE FARMS
THEY SHOULD BE MORE TRANSPARENT. THEY SHOULD BE MORE TRANSPARENT.
BUT THAT’S NOT WHAT’S HAPPENING. BUT THAT’S NOT WHAT’S HAPPENING.
THEY’RE PUSHING BACK HARDER TO THEY’RE PUSHING BACK HARDER TO
TRY TO KEEP US IN THE DARK. TRY TO KEEP US IN THE DARK.
>>AFTER THAT THE BIRDS ARE >>AFTER THAT THE BIRDS ARE
MOVED TO CAGES WHERE THEY WILL MOVED TO CAGES WHERE THEY WILL
SPEND THE REST OF THEIR LIVES — SPEND THE REST OF THEIR LIVES —
>>. >>.
HUANG SAYS THE BILL IS AN HUANG SAYS THE BILL IS AN
ATTEMPT TO FRIGHTEN ACTIVISTS. ATTEMPT TO FRIGHTEN ACTIVISTS.
A VERSION OF THE BILL FAILED A VERSION OF THE BILL FAILED
LAST YEAR BECAUSE LEGISLATORS LAST YEAR BECAUSE LEGISLATORS
SAID IT WAS TOO BROAD. SAID IT WAS TOO BROAD.
SENATOR HOLDEMAN AMENDED THE SENATOR HOLDEMAN AMENDED THE
BILL BUT DETRACTORS SAID IT BILL BUT DETRACTORS SAID IT
COULD IMPEDE FREE SPEECH. COULD IMPEDE FREE SPEECH.
SENATOR MARK STOOPS ON THE SENATOR MARK STOOPS ON THE
COMMITTEE HEARING THE BILL. COMMITTEE HEARING THE BILL.
HE SAID THE CURRENT VERSION IS HE SAID THE CURRENT VERSION IS
WORSE BECAUSE THE PENALTIES ARE WORSE BECAUSE THE PENALTIES ARE
MORE SEVERE. MORE SEVERE.
THIS IS DEFINITELY A FREEDOM OF THIS IS DEFINITELY A FREEDOM OF
SPEECH ISSUE, AND IN THIS BILL, SPEECH ISSUE, AND IN THIS BILL,
CURRENT BILL, THERE’S NO — NOT CURRENT BILL, THERE’S NO — NOT
EVEN ANY LANGUAGE THAT IF EVEN ANY LANGUAGE THAT IF
SOMEBODY ACTUALLY DOCUMENTS SOMEBODY ACTUALLY DOCUMENTS
ILLEGAL ACTIVITY AND TURNS IT ILLEGAL ACTIVITY AND TURNS IT
OVER TO THE AUTHORITIES THERE IS OVER TO THE AUTHORITIES THERE IS
ANY PROTECTION. ANY PROTECTION.
THEY WILL STILL SUBJECT TO A THEY WILL STILL SUBJECT TO A
FELONY CHARGE AND TIME IN FELONY CHARGE AND TIME IN
PRISON. PRISON.
>>SENATOR HOLDEMAN TESTIFIED >>SENATOR HOLDEMAN TESTIFIED
THAT INDIANA’S SHIELD LAW WOULD THAT INDIANA’S SHIELD LAW WOULD
PROTECT THE MEAD YAWD AND THOSE PROTECT THE MEAD YAWD AND THOSE
LOOKING TO EXPOSE ILLEGAL LOOKING TO EXPOSE ILLEGAL
ACTIVITY. ACTIVITY.
>>INDIANA’S LAW ONLY PROTECTS >>INDIANA’S LAW ONLY PROTECTS
THE JOURNALISTS FROM HAVING TO THE JOURNALISTS FROM HAVING TO
REVEAL THE NAME OF A REVEAL THE NAME OF A
CONFIDENTIAL SOURCE THEY HAVE CONFIDENTIAL SOURCE THEY HAVE
USED IN NEWS GATHERING. USED IN NEWS GATHERING.
I’M NOT CLEAR ON HOW THE SENATOR I’M NOT CLEAR ON HOW THE SENATOR
BELIEVES THAT THAT LAW WOULD BELIEVES THAT THAT LAW WOULD
ACTUALLY EVEN APPLY TO AN AG GAG ACTUALLY EVEN APPLY TO AN AG GAG
RELATED SITUATION. RELATED SITUATION.
>>FARGO SAYS THE BILL RAISES >>FARGO SAYS THE BILL RAISES
DISTURBING POLICY QUESTIONS DISTURBING POLICY QUESTIONS
ABOUT DISCOURAGING WHISTLE ABOUT DISCOURAGING WHISTLE
BLOWING IN ONE SPECIFIC BLOWING IN ONE SPECIFIC
INDUSTRY. INDUSTRY.
>>IF ANYTHING I THINK SOUND >>IF ANYTHING I THINK SOUND
PUBLIC POLICY WOULD SAY SHE PUBLIC POLICY WOULD SAY SHE
WOULD SHOULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO WOULD SHOULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO
EXPOSE ONETHICAL AND ILLEGAL AND EXPOSE ONETHICAL AND ILLEGAL AND
UNSAFE BEHAVIOR IN THESE TYPES UNSAFE BEHAVIOR IN THESE TYPES
OF ESTABLISHMENTS. OF ESTABLISHMENTS.
>>SENATE BILL 101 IS STILL IN A>>SENATE BILL 101 IS STILL IN A
SENATE COMMITTEE. SENATE COMMITTEE.
IT COULD BE SENT TO THE FULL IT COULD BE SENT TO THE FULL
SENT AS EARLY AS NEXT WEEK. SENT AS EARLY AS NEXT WEEK.
>>>NOW IT’S TIME FOR “ASK THE >>>NOW IT’S TIME FOR “ASK THE
MAYOR.” MAYOR.”
THIS WEEK WE SAT DOWN WITH THIS WEEK WE SAT DOWN WITH
BLOOMINGTON MAYOR MARK KRUZAN. BLOOMINGTON MAYOR MARK KRUZAN.
I BEGAN BY ASKING HIM ABOUT THE I BEGAN BY ASKING HIM ABOUT THE
PROPOSED LEGISLATION OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION OF
ELIMINATING THE BUSINESS ELIMINATING THE BUSINESS
PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX AND HOW PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX AND HOW
THAT WOULD AFFECT BUDGET OF THAT WOULD AFFECT BUDGET OF
INDIANA TOWNS. INDIANA TOWNS.
>>I THINK BOTH THE HOUSE AND >>I THINK BOTH THE HOUSE AND
THE SENATE HAVE REJECTED THE THE SENATE HAVE REJECTED THE
GOVERNOR’S PROPOSAL. GOVERNOR’S PROPOSAL.
IF YOU LOOK AT BOTH THEIR BILLS, IF YOU LOOK AT BOTH THEIR BILLS,
ALTHOUGH THEY ARE DIFFERENT, ALTHOUGH THEY ARE DIFFERENT,
EACH VERSION IS A REJECTION OF EACH VERSION IS A REJECTION OF
THE INITIAL PROCESS. THE INITIAL PROCESS.
THEY’RE SCALED BACK. THEY’RE SCALED BACK.
THE HOUSE WOULD PROVIDE THE THE HOUSE WOULD PROVIDE THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR A COUNTY OPT IN OPPORTUNITY FOR A COUNTY OPT IN
TO THAT KIND OF PLAN AND THE TO THAT KIND OF PLAN AND THE
SENATE VERSION IS A SENATE VERSION IS A
SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED FISCAL SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED FISCAL
IMPACT, AND SO I DON’T WORRY IMPACT, AND SO I DON’T WORRY
ABOUT T IT TOO MUCH. ABOUT T IT TOO MUCH.
I’VE NOT HEARD THE GOVERNOR’S I’VE NOT HEARD THE GOVERNOR’S
OSTLES CRITICIZE EITHER OF THE OSTLES CRITICIZE EITHER OF THE
PLANS. PLANS.
IN SOME WAY IT MAY HAVE SAVED IN SOME WAY IT MAY HAVE SAVED
HIM FROM HIMSELF. HIM FROM HIMSELF.
BLOOMINGTON, INTERESTINGLY, BLOOMINGTON, INTERESTINGLY,
WOULD NOT BE HORRIBLY IMPACTED WOULD NOT BE HORRIBLY IMPACTED
LIEKS MANY OTHER CITIES. LIEKS MANY OTHER CITIES.
MANY OF THE CITIES THAT — THAT MANY OF THE CITIES THAT — THAT
WTIU, WFIU COVERS BECAUSE WE WTIU, WFIU COVERS BECAUSE WE
HAVEN’T BEEN IMPACTED AS HARSHLY HAVEN’T BEEN IMPACTED AS HARSHLY
BY PROPERTY TAX CAPS. BY PROPERTY TAX CAPS.
THOSE CITIES THAT HAVE BEEN THOSE CITIES THAT HAVE BEEN
WOULD SUFFER ALMOST UNAIMAGINE WOULD SUFFER ALMOST UNAIMAGINE
NAHABLY. NAHABLY.
>>BUT THERE ARE DIFFERENT >>BUT THERE ARE DIFFERENT
LEVELS OR DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF LEVELS OR DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF
THIS BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY THIS BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY
TAX OUT THERE, ONE OF THEM IS TAX OUT THERE, ONE OF THEM IS
ELIMINATING JUST NEW BUSINESS ELIMINATING JUST NEW BUSINESS
TAX. TAX.
HOW WOULD THAT AFFECT THE CITY HOW WOULD THAT AFFECT THE CITY
OF BLOOMINGTON? OF BLOOMINGTON?
>>WE DON’T KNOW EXACTLY HOW >>WE DON’T KNOW EXACTLY HOW
BECAUSE THOSE NUMBERS HAVEN’T BECAUSE THOSE NUMBERS HAVEN’T
BEEN RUN BY THE LEGISLATIVE BEEN RUN BY THE LEGISLATIVE
SERVICES AGENCY, THE NONPARTISAN SERVICES AGENCY, THE NONPARTISAN
ENTITY OF THE LEGISLATURE BUT ENTITY OF THE LEGISLATURE BUT
WHAT WE’RE SEEING IS THE WHAT WE’RE SEEING IS THE
GOVERNOR PROPOSING ELIMINATING GOVERNOR PROPOSING ELIMINATING
THE TAX ENTIRELY. THE TAX ENTIRELY.
I WANT TO BE FAIR TO HIM. I WANT TO BE FAIR TO HIM.
HE DIDN’T SAY IT HAD TO BE DONE HE DIDN’T SAY IT HAD TO BE DONE
IN A YEAR. IN A YEAR.
I THINK THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, I THINK THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
OTHERS HAVE DONE IT OVER A 10, OTHERS HAVE DONE IT OVER A 10,
12 YEAR PERIOD. 12 YEAR PERIOD.
IN THE END IT’S A $1.1 BILLION IN THE END IT’S A $1.1 BILLION
FISCAL IMPACT, MONEY TAKEN AWAY FISCAL IMPACT, MONEY TAKEN AWAY
FROM LOCAL MEU NIS PALG TEASE. FROM LOCAL MEU NIS PALG TEASE.
AGAIN, THE QUESTION IS, IS IT AGAIN, THE QUESTION IS, IS IT
NEEDED, HAVE WE LET ALL THE NEEDED, HAVE WE LET ALL THE
OTHER TAX MEASURES THAT HAVE OTHER TAX MEASURES THAT HAVE
BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN THE LAST FEW BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN THE LAST FEW
YEARS FULLY GO INTO EFFECT TO YEARS FULLY GO INTO EFFECT TO
KNOW WHAT THE BENEFIT OR KNOW WHAT THE BENEFIT OR
DETRIMENT OF THOSE MIGHT BE? DETRIMENT OF THOSE MIGHT BE?
WE’VE — THE REPUBLICANS SAID WE’VE — THE REPUBLICANS SAID
THEY WANTED THIS TO BE A RIGHT THEY WANTED THIS TO BE A RIGHT
TO WORK STATE BECAUSE IT WOULD TO WORK STATE BECAUSE IT WOULD
IMPACT THE ECONOMY FAVORABLY. IMPACT THE ECONOMY FAVORABLY.
THE PREVIOUS GOVERNOR TALKED THE PREVIOUS GOVERNOR TALKED
ABOUT DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME WAS ABOUT DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME WAS
GOING TO LEAD TO THIS ECONOMIC GOING TO LEAD TO THIS ECONOMIC
BOON. BOON.
SO MAYBE THEY OUGHT TO TAKE A SO MAYBE THEY OUGHT TO TAKE A
LOOK AT THE IDEAS THEY HAVE LOOK AT THE IDEAS THEY HAVE
ALREADY IMPLEMENTED AND SEE HOW ALREADY IMPLEMENTED AND SEE HOW
THEY’RE WORKING BEFORE WE PLOW THEY’RE WORKING BEFORE WE PLOW
AHEAD. AHEAD.
>>I FOUND IT INTERESTING LAST >>I FOUND IT INTERESTING LAST
TIME — LAST MONTH WE TALKED TIME — LAST MONTH WE TALKED
ABOUT THERE’S REALLY NO BUDGET ABOUT THERE’S REALLY NO BUDGET
LINE FOR SNOW REMOVAL, SALT AND LINE FOR SNOW REMOVAL, SALT AND
SO FORTH AND HERE WE THE NEXT SO FORTH AND HERE WE THE NEXT
MONTH ANOTHER SNOWSTORM. MONTH ANOTHER SNOWSTORM.
HOW IS THE CITY BUDGETING HOW IS THE CITY BUDGETING
HANDLING THAT? HANDLING THAT?
>>YOU’RE RIGHT, THE BUDGET IS >>YOU’RE RIGHT, THE BUDGET IS
NOT DEDICATED TO WINTER STORMS. NOT DEDICATED TO WINTER STORMS.
IT’S DEDICATED TO SUPPLIES, IT’S DEDICATED TO SUPPLIES,
CAPITAL AND IN THIS CASE, BOTH CAPITAL AND IN THIS CASE, BOTH
IN 2013 AND IN 2014, THAT SUPPLY IN 2013 AND IN 2014, THAT SUPPLY
LINE IS ALSO DEDICATED FOR, FOR LINE IS ALSO DEDICATED FOR, FOR
INSTANCE, ASPHALT. INSTANCE, ASPHALT.
SO THE MORE WE HAVE TO USE MONEY SO THE MORE WE HAVE TO USE MONEY
TO COMBAT SNOW EVENTS, IT’S THAT TO COMBAT SNOW EVENTS, IT’S THAT
MUCH LESS MONEY WE HAVE TO MUCH LESS MONEY WE HAVE TO
REPAIR POTHOLES. REPAIR POTHOLES.
IT’S NOT INCONCEIVABLE THAT WE IT’S NOT INCONCEIVABLE THAT WE
WILL HAVE SPENT A HALF MILLION WILL HAVE SPENT A HALF MILLION
DOLLARS ON SNOW CONTROL FOR THIS DOLLARS ON SNOW CONTROL FOR THIS
WINTER. WINTER.
>>WE’LL BE MAKING OUR WAY >>WE’LL BE MAKING OUR WAY
ACROSS THE STATE VISITING ACROSS THE STATE VISITING
MAYORS. MAYORS.
YOU CAN SUBMIT YOUR QUESTIONS YOU CAN SUBMIT YOUR QUESTIONS
FOR THE MAYOR OF YOUR TOWN AT FOR THE MAYOR OF YOUR TOWN AT
wtiunews.org. wtiunews.org.
>>>AND THE IU MEN’S BASKETBALL >>>AND THE IU MEN’S BASKETBALL
TEAM UPSET THE NUMBER 3 RANKED TEAM UPSET THE NUMBER 3 RANKED
WISCONSIN BADGERS TUESDAY 75-72 WISCONSIN BADGERS TUESDAY 75-72
GIVING THE BADGERS THEIR FIRST GIVING THE BADGERS THEIR FIRST
LOSS OF THE SEASON. LOSS OF THE SEASON.
BUT IT SEEMS THE BIGGER NEWS WAS BUT IT SEEMS THE BIGGER NEWS WAS
WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THE GAME. WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THE GAME.
THE STUDENTS STORMED THE COURT THE STUDENTS STORMED THE COURT
AND CELEBRATED THE BIG WIN, AND CELEBRATED THE BIG WIN,
BRINGING UP THE DEBATE ON BRINGING UP THE DEBATE ON
WHETHER COURT STORMING IS WHETHER COURT STORMING IS
APPROPRIATE AT SCHOOLS WITH A APPROPRIATE AT SCHOOLS WITH A
TRADITION LIKE IU. TRADITION LIKE IU.
“USA TODAY” AND ESPN.COM WEIGHED “USA TODAY” AND ESPN.COM WEIGHED
IN ON THE ISSUE. IN ON THE ISSUE.
HAVE YOU EVER STORMED THE COURT? HAVE YOU EVER STORMED THE COURT?
>>NOT A COURT. >>NOT A COURT.
IT WAS A FOOTBALL FIELD. IT WAS A FOOTBALL FIELD.
BUT WHY NOT MP IT’S TOO MUCH BUT WHY NOT MP IT’S TOO MUCH
FUN. FUN.
>>THAT’S THE END OF OUR >>THAT’S THE END OF OUR
PROGRAM. PROGRAM.
BUT OUR WORK CONTINUES ON LINE BUT OUR WORK CONTINUES ON LINE
AS WE COVER THE NEW IN SOUTHERN AS WE COVER THE NEW IN SOUTHERN
INDIANA THROUGHOUT THE WEEK AT INDIANA THROUGHOUT THE WEEK AT
wtiunews.org. wtiunews.org.
HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND! >>”INDIANA NEWSDESK” IS MADE
POSSIBLE IN PART BY…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *