♪ ANOTHER CHALLENGE TO INDIANA'S ABORTION BAN.

STUDENT LOAN DEBT FORGIVENESS TAXED BY THE STATE.

PLUS, THE SPECIAL SESSION'S COST AND MORE ON INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW FOR THE WEEK ENDING SEPTEMBER 9, 2022.

♪ >> INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE SUPPORTERS OF INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING STATIONS.

THIS WEEK, THERE'S ANOTHER LEGAL INDIANA'S NEAR-TOTAL ABORTION BAN.

THIS ONE FILED IN MARION COUNTY COURT THURSDAY, SAYS THE BAN VIOLATES INDIANA'S RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT, RFRA.

RFRA SAYS AN INDIANA LAW CAN'T SUBSTANTIALLY BURDEN A PERSON'S EXERCISE OF RELIGION UNLESS THAT LAW IS DRIVEN BY "COMPELLING GOVERNMENTAL INTEREST" AND IS THE LEAST RESTRICTIVE WAY TO ADVANCE THAT INTEREST.

THE ACLU OF INDIANA, ON BEHALF OF HOOSIER JEWS FOR CHOICE AND FIVE ANONYMOUS CITIZENS FROM ACROSS THE STATE, SAYS THE ABORTION BAN DOESN'T MEET THAT STANDARD.

UNDER THE BAN, ABORTIONS WOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED UP TO 20 WEEKS IF THE PREGNANT PERSON'S SERIOUS HEALTH OR LIFE IS AT RISK OR IF THERE'S A LETHAL FETAL ANOMALY .•AND UP TO 10 WEEKS IN CASES OF RAPE OR INCEST.

THE LAWSUIT SAYS THE JEWISH, MUSLIM, UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST, EPISCOPAL AND PAGAN FAITHS ALL RECOGNIZE A RIGHT TO ABORTIONS THAT WOULD BE BANNED UNDER INDIANA LAW.

AND IN SOME CASES, THE SUIT ARGUES SOME FAITH TRADITIONS EVEN SAY ABORTIONS SHOULD BE PERFORMED IN SITUATIONS THAT INDIANA WILL SOON OUTLAW.

THE SUIT ASKS THE COURTS TO HALT THE LAW BEFORE IT TAKES EFFECT SEPTEMBER 15.

DOES THIS LAWSUIT HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF HALTING INDIANA'S ABORTION BAN?

IT'S THE FIRST QUESTION FOR OUR INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW PANEL DEMOCRAT ANN DELANEY, REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIE, JON SCHWANTES, HOST OF INDIANA LAWMAKERS, AND OSEYE BOYD, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT EDITOR OF THE INDIANAPOLIS STAR I'M INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING STATEHOUSE BUREAU CHIEF BRANDON SMITH.

MIKE O'BRIEN, WILL RFRA, WRITTEN AT THE BEHEST OF INDIANA'S RELIGIOUS RIGHT, SUCCESSFULLY TAKE DOWN THE ABORTION BAN, WRITTEN AT THE BEHEST OF INDIANA'S RELIGIOUS RIGHT?

>> THAT'S A HECK OF A LEAD-IN THERE, BRANDON.

TALK ABOUT ALL-TIME BACKFIRES.

HOW RFRA WAS TALKED ABOUT DURING SESSION BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE GETTING UP TO THE MICROPHONE AND SAYS I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF MY LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST AND I'M VOTING YES.

LAWYERS WERE SAYING WHY DON'T WE MAKE THIS PUBLIC POLICY AND SCIENTIFIC RATIONALE, OF WHICH THERE ARE HOTLY CONTESTED POLLY AND SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTS.

THROUGH RFRA, THE WHOLE POINT IS THE GOVERNMENT CAN'T COMPEL YOU AND YOU CAN'T COMPEL OTHERS WITH SOME EXCEPTIONS.

SO, THIS ARGUMENT, WHICH IN LARGE PART IS RESTED ON A RELIGIOUS ARGUMENT FROM A PART OF ONE RELIGION'S PERSPECTIVE, THEN WE'LL SEE WHAT THE COURTS THINK.

BUT THIS IS KIND OF THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF FIGHTING THESE SOCIAL ISSUES.

WHEN WE TRIED TO BAN GAY MARRIAGE IN THE CONSTITUTION, WE WERE ONE OF THE FIRST STATES IN THE COUNTRY THAT WAS FORCEED TO LEGALIZE IT.

WHEN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT MADE A DECISION, RFRA BLEW UP.

CRITICAL RACE THEORY, TEACHING BIAS, DEFENDING THE NAZIS.

THERE'S UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES TO THESE STICKY SOCIAL ISSUES WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO FORCE ONE PERSPECTIVE.

>> THE GOVERNMENT HAS TO ASSERT A COMPELLING INTEREST AND THE LEAST RESTRICTIVE POSSIBLE.

BUT I DON'T THINK THEY'LL HAVE TO GO TOO FAR IN PROTECTING THE LIVES OF FETUSES OR THE UNBORN.

>> WELL, THAT DEPENDS ON WHAT RELIGIOUS DEFINITION OF WHEN LIFE BEGINS AND THERE ARE MANY FAITHS THAT DON'T BELIEVE LIFE BEGINS UNTIL BIRTH.

THE IRONY OF THIS IS, MIKE IS EXACTLY RIGHT.

WHEN THEY GOT UP THERE AND THEY SAID GOD IS TELLING THEM TO DO THIS OR THEIR RELIGION IS TELLING THEM.

MOST OF THEM SAY THAT THEY'RE CHRISTIAN.

AND I DEFY ANY ONE OF THEM TO SHOW MANY WHERE JESUS CHRIST SAID ONE WORD ABOUT ABORTION IN HIS LIFETIME OR WHERE IN THE BIBLE, OLD TESTAMENT OR NEW TESTAMENT, THE WORD IS USED.

WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS TAKE THEIR RELIGION, OF WHICH WE HAVE MANY IN THE STATE OF INDIANA AND CODIFY IT AND MAKE IT THE LAW OF THE LAND.

AND THAT, THAT INTERFERES WITH OTHER PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO PRACTICE THEIR RELIGION AND I THINK IT'S UNCONSCIOUSABLE.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SEE CHANGES AT THE VERY LEAST MADE TO THAT LAW.

I MEAN THEY DIDN'T EVEN THINK, THEY RUSHED SO FAST THROUGH.

THEY DIDN'T EVEN THINK ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES.

ALL RIGHT, SO YOU'RE A VICTIM OF RAPE.

YOU CAN GET AN ABORTION UP TO A CERTAIN TIME.

BUT YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SILLY HOOPS.

YOU HAVE TO GO TWO TIMES.

GET AN ULTRASOUND AND BE TOLD UNRELIABLY THAT THE FETUS FEELS PAIN AND ON AND ON.

THEY DIDN'T TAKE THE TIME TO THINK ABOUT WHAT MONUMENTAL CHANGES IN THE LAW.

>> IS SEEKING AN ABORTION PRACTICING A RELIGION?

>> YES.

>> IN SOME INTERPRETATIONS OF THE FAITH THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS TO HAVE AN ABORTION.

>> IF THE WOMAN'S LIFE IS THREATENED.

>> BUT THE WAY THEY DEFINE THAT IS DIFFERENT.

>> WHICH IS PART OF THIS LAWSUIT.

>> CORRECT.

>> I WANT TO ASK YOU HAVE HOOSIERS OUT THERE WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR HEALTHCARE OPTIONS ARE GOING TO BE IN ABOUT A WEEK FROM NOW.

WE HAVE CLINICS WHO ARE WONDERING IF THEY CAN STAY OPEN.

IF THEY STAY OPEN, IF THEY SHUT DOWN, CAN THEY OPEN BACK UP AGAIN?

ARE WE LEFT IN A HUGE PILE OF UNCERTAINTY?

>> A HUGE QUAGMIRE, YES.

THE REPUBLICANS KNEW THERE WERE GOING TO BE LAWSUITS.

WHO DIDN'T KNOW THIS.

WE KNEW IT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.

ANN AND MIKE HAVE SAID IT SO ELOQUENTLY, BUT MINE IS WHY NOT HAVE GONE BACK OVER THIS AND LOOKED AT HOW RFRA COULD PLAY A ROLE IN THIS?

YOU'VE BEEN WANTING TO OVERTURN AND BAN ABORTIONS FOR YEARS, DECADES.

SO, INSTEAD OF RUSHING, WHY HASN'T THIS BEEN DONE ALREADY?

SO, IN THIS TWO-WEEK SESSION, YOU SHOULD HAVE ALREADY HAD YOUR HOMEWORK DONE AND RESEARCH AND MADE THINGS AIRTIGHT.

YOU DIDN'T DO THAT.

IT'S JUST A MESS.

AND WE'RE GOING THE SEE MORE LAWSUITS, I'M PRETTY SURE.

I'M PRETTY SURE WE'RE GOING TO SEE, IT'S GOING TO BE THE REVERSE OF WHAT IT WAS BEFORE.

SEPTEMBER 15TH IS NEXT WEEK.

NOW, YEAH, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN?

NO ONE KNOWS WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> LOOKING EVEN FURTHER AHEAD TO NEXT SESSION, WHICH IS NOT THE END.

I MEAN EVERYBODY ACKNOWLEDGES THIS IS NOT THE END OF THE DEBATE OVER ABORTION AT THE STATEHOUSE WHEN IT COMES TO STATE LAWS.

EVEN IF THIS LAW IS KEPT ENTIRELY IN TACT BY THE COURTS, THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A SEGMENT OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY THAT WANTS IT TO GO FURTHER TO GET RID OF THE EXCEPTIONS FOR RAPE AND INCEST AND LETHAL FETAL ANOMALIES, FOR EXAMPLE.

THERE ARE FOLKS FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE LAW GET LESS RESTRICTIVE.

I'M STILL OF THE OPINION IF THE LAW IS CHANGING IT'S GOING TO GET MORE RESTRICTIVE, BUT THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION.

DO THESE LAWSUITS CHANGE AT ALL OR AFFECT AT ALL WHAT THE CHANGES TO THE LAW WILL BE IN THE FUTURE?

>> YOU'RE SAYING IF THE COURTS -— CLEARLY IF THEY SAY YES IT HAS A PROFOUND EFFECT.

>> SURE.

>> OBVIOUSLY.

I THINK THEY HAVE AN EFFECT BUT THE BIGGER EFFECT WOULD BE POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES AT THE BALLOT BOX.

IF IN FACT WHAT WE'VE SEEN AND, YOU KNOW, KANSAS WE OFTEN POINT TO KANSAS.

NOW THAT WAS NOT A CANDIDATE VERSUS A CANDIDATE.

BUT THE ISSUE ABOUT WHETHER THAT SHOULD BE A LEGAL PRACTICE, ABORTION BEING THE PRACTICE, IN KANSAS, OVERWHELMING, AND SURPRISING.

AND YOU'VE SEEN SIMILAR SORTS OF SPECIAL ELECTIONS IN NEW YORK AND OTHER PLACES WHERE I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT'S THE ONLY ISSUE, BUT CLEARLY IT'S A DRIVER.

IF YOU LOOK AT VOTER REGISTRATIONS AMONG WOMEN, A LOT OF EXCITEMENT AND ENERGY THERE AND AMONG YOUNG MEN WHO ARE STATISTICALLY AS SUPPORTIVE OF ABORTION RIGHTS AS ALMOST ANY OTHER DEMOGRAPHIC SEGMENT.

IF THERE ARE REPUBLICANS WHO IN FACT THOUGHT THIS WAS A CAKEWALK COME NOVEMBER EITHER AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL OR STATE LEVEL, THAT WILL HAVE A BIGGER IMPACT.

AND TO THE POINT ABOUT OTHER LITIGATION, I WOULD JUST POINT OUT RFRA HAS MADE IT EASY IN INDIANA TO TARGET A STATUTE.

BUT IT IS TO OSEYE'S POINT ALREADY UNFOLDING IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS.

WE'VE SEEN TWO FEDERAL LAWSUITS FILED IN FLORIDA, THE FIRST IN JUNE, THE RABBI, FORMER STATE LAW MAKEER.

AND NOW ANOTHER ONE OUT OF TAMPA WITH TWO MORE RABBIS AND A BUDDHIST, IT SOUNDS LIKE A SETUP FOR A JOKE, BUT NOTHING TO LAUGH ABOUT.

AND A SATANIST TEMPLE IN TEXAS AND SIMILAR LITIGATION IN OHIO.

IT'S GOING TO GO AND GO AND GO.

IT WILL HAVE PROBABLY AN EFFECT.

BUT THIS IS THE COURTS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

IT WILL TAKE A LONG TIME FOR THAT TO UNFOLD.

THE BIGGER IMPACT WILL COME.

>> THIS NOVEMBER.

>> FIRST WEEK IN NOVEMBER.

>> WELL, HOOSIERS WHO GET STUDENT LOAN DEBT FORGIVEN UNDER THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S RECENT INITIATIVE COULD FACE UP TO $1,000 IN STATE AND LOCAL TAXES.

INDIANA, LIKE SOME OTHER STATES, TAXES THE LOAN FORGIVENESS AS INCOME.

BORROWERS EARNING LESS THAN 125 THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR CAN GET UP TO 10 THOUSAND DOLLARS OF STUDENT DEBT WIPED AWAY - AND BE ON THE HOOK FOR $323 IN STATE TAXES.

PELL GRANT RECIPIENTS CAN GET UP TO $20,000 CANCELED, A $646 STATE TAX BILL.

THERE'S ALSO COUNTY TAXES, WHICH IN MARION COUNTY, THE STATE'S LARGEST, WOULD AMOUNT TO BETWEEN $200 AND $400.

DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE GREG PORTER SAYS HE'LL FILE LEGISLATION IN 2023 SESSION TO SHIELD STUDENT DEBT FORGIVENESS FROM TAXATION.

REPUBLICAN HOUSE SPEAKER TODD HUSTON SAID ONLY THAT HE EXPECTS THE CONVERSATION TO CONTINUE HEADING INTO THE SESSION.

>> ANN DELANEY, WILL STUDENT DEBT FORGIVENESS BE TAXED BY THE STATE?

>> WELL, I THINK THEY NEED TO ADDRESS THIS, BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD BE UNCONSCIOUSABLE TO TAX THIS BECAUSE WHEN THE WHOLE POINT IS TO HELP PEOPLE WHO NEED THE HELP TO GET OUT OF THIS ABYSS OF STUDENT LOANS.

THEY NEED TO ADDRESS THAT.

AND THERE WILL BE A NUMBER OF HOOSIERS SURPRISED WHEN THEY FIND OUT THE CHECKS THEY GOT FROM THE STATE ARE GOING TO BE TAXED BECAUSE NOBODY THOUGHT THAT THROUGH EITHER.

THEY JUST RUSHED TO THE STATEHOUSE.

THEY DON'T THINK, THEY DON'T PLAN.

THEY DON'T THINK THROUGH WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

THEY'RE JUST SO SURE OF THEIR OWN RELIGION AND THEIR OWN THOUGHT PATTERN AND THEIR OWN LIFESTYLE THAT THEY DON'T NEED ANYTHING ELSE.

IT'S REALLY PRETTY FRIGHTENING, BUT THEY BETTER FIX THIS.

>> WE TALKED A COUPLE WEEKS AGO WHEN WE ORIGINALLY TALKED ABOUT THE BIDEN PLAN THAT REPUBLICANS DON'T LOOK GREAT OPPOSING IT.

ARE REPUBLICANS IN THE INDIANA STATEHOUSE GOING TO LOOK GREAT IF THEY SAY WE'RE GOING TO TAX THIS STUFF.

THAT'S NOT AN INSIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EITHER.

>> NO, BUT LOOK, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT BENEFIT WAS DESERVED OR THE PEOPLE THAT, THE 900,000 HOOSIERS WHO ARE CARRYING STUDENT LOAN DEBT?

THE ANSWER FOR MOST REPUBLICANS WAS NO.

THE REACTION FROM REPUBLICANS IS WE HAVE A BROKEN STUDENT LOAN BOROUGH -— BORROWING SYSTEM.

OF COURSE THAT'S TRUE.

THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION DIDN'T ADDRESS THAT.

THEY JUST CUT THE CHECKS.

>> YET, YET.

>> WE'RE GOING TO BE IN THE SAME PROBLEM.

I THINK ABOUT IT LIKE IMMIGRATION REFORM ALMOST.

WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THIS EXPANSIVE PERIOD OF STUDENT LOAN POLICY THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE AND DRIVES CRIPPLING AMOUNTS OF DEBT AND PUTS IT ON STUDENTS.

WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE STUDENTS THAT ARE IN THAT NEED SOME HELP WHILE ALSO REFORMING THE SYSTEM SO IT DOESN'T KEEP HAPPENING.

>> SO IT DOESN'T KEEP HAPPENING.

>> MAYBE IT MEANS THE STATE HAS TO PICK UP ALL OF THE SUPPORT OF HIGHER EDUCATION THAT THEY'VE ABDICATED OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS.

>> THAT'S NOT HAPPENING, OF COURSE.

>> NO, IT'S NOT HAPPENING.

>> SO, THE QUESTION WILL THEY FIX THE TAX PIECE?

NOT IF THEIR POSITION DOESN'T CHANGE THAT THEY DON'T THINK THIS SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED TO BEGIN WITH.

>> WOW.

>> TO THAT POINT, ANN JUST BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT THE MONEY THAT HOOSIERS ARE GETTING FROM THE STATE FOR THE SECOND ROUND OF TAXPAYER REFUNDS OR INFLATION RELIEF IS GOING TO BE TAXED.

IF LAWMAKERS DECIDE TO COME BACK IN JANUARY AND SAY WE DIDN'T MEAN FOR THAT TO BE TAXED, THIS WAS MEANT TO HELP PEOPLE, WE'LL LET THAT GO, CAN YOU DO THAT WHILE ALSO SAYING, COULD YOU DO THAT WHILE ALSO SAYING BUT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE YOU PAY TAX?

>> IT'S FEDERALLY TAXED, TOO.

>> NO IT ISN'T.

>> BUT I THOUGHT THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

>> SURE IT IS.

>> THEY COULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT AT THE STATE LEVEL.

IF THEY DECIDE TO DO THAT, WILL THEY HAVE TO DO THE STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS.

>> DO YOU EXPECT CONSISTENCY?

[LAUGHING] >> PUT IT THIS WAY, GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT'S HARDER TO, IT'S EASIER TO TAKE, POLITICALLY.

[LAUGHTER] >> I'M STARTING TO TRACK.

DO YOU HAVE A TRIP TICK ABOUT HOW THIS QUESTION UNFOLDS?

IT WOULD BE TOUGHER TO SEEK A STATUTORY CHANGE THAT IMPOSES A TAX THAT'S NOT THERE THAN TO -— IT'S EASIER TO JUST PRETEND THIS IS WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE.

WE'RE NOT DEPARTING FROM PRACTICE.

IT'S ALREADY THERE.

SO, IT'S EASIER FOR REPUBLICANS TO LET IT STAY, INCLUDING THOSE MANY PEOPLE WHO DON'T BELIEVE THERE SHOULD BE THIS BENEFIT EXTENDED IN THE FIRST PLACE THAN IT IS TO GO AFTER IT.

BUT IT REMINDS ME OF THE DEBATES WE'VE SEEN AGAIN HERE AND ELSEWHERE DURING COVID WHEN PEOPLE WERE OUT OF WORK.

WHEN THEY WERE DESPERATE.

DO WE TAX COVID BENEFITS OR THESE BENEFITS?

AND OFTENTIMES IT DOES SEEM WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PARTIES, GENERALLY SPEAKING, EXCEPTIONS, REPUBLICANS WOULD SAY TAXES ARE BAD IN THOSE INSTANCES WHETHER IT'S A CORPORATION OR STATE TAXES.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WHERE TAXES ARE GOOD?

WHEN YOU HAVE THE DOWN AND OUT.

>> WHO ARE DOWN AND OUT.

>> THAT'S AN OVERSIMPLIFICATION.

BUT I SAY THE ISSUE HERE IS THEY DO LOOK EBENEZER SCROOGE OR MARLEY, WELL, MARLEY HAS BEEN REFORMED, BUT THEY LOOK LIKE EBENEZER SCROOGE.

>> THAT'S THE POINT THAT WAS MADE AMONG MIKE BRAUN AND OTHERS THAT THIS IS A BAND-AID ON A GAPING WOUND AND YOU'RE NOT ADDRESSING THE GAPING WOUND.

BUT THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF HOOSIERS WHO ARE GOING TO HAVE THEIR STUDENT LOANS WIPED AWAY.

>> I HEARD A LOT OF YOU TOOK ON THOSE LOANS YOU SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT IT.

>> YOU WERE 17 YEARS OLD.

>> I'M TOLD THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

>> MAYBE YOU DIDN'T DESERVE TO GO TO COLLEGE.

YOU SHOULD HAVE TOOK A TRADE OR DONE SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

SO, I THINK PEOPLE ARE OUT OF TOUCH WITH HOW THIS WHOLE STUDENT LOAN GAME WORKS FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE.

THAT'S THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN GO TO COLLEGE FOR SO MANY PEOPLE.

NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH COLLEGE COSTS.

WHY ARES SO EXORBITANT?

WE'RE NOT HAVING THAT CONVERSATION.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUNISHING PEOPLE FOR TRYING TO BETTER THEMSELVES.

AND NOW WE'RE SAYING OKAY BECAUSE YOU TRIED TO BETTER YOURSELF IT'S UNFAIR TO EVERYONE ELSE SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO PUNISH YOU WITH TAXES.

I THINK THEY'RE NOT REALLY UNDERSTANDING WHO THEIR CONSTITUENTS ARE.

YOU SAY 900,000 PEOPLE, THAT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO I'M SURE ARE NOT ALL DEMOCRATS.

>> YES.

AND THEY'RE NOT ALL YOUNG.

A LOT OF OLDER PEOPLE ARE STILL PAYING STUDENT LOANS.

TIME NOW FOR VIEWER FEEDBACK.

EACH WEEK WE POSE AN UNSCIENTIFIC, ONLINE POLL QUESTION.

THIS WEEK'S QUESTION: SHOULD INDIANA TAX STUDENT LOAN DEBT FORGIVENESS AS INCOME?

A.

YES B.

NO LAST WEEK'S QUESTION: WHO WILL WIN INDIANA'S U.S. SENATE RACE?

44% SAID TODD YOUNG.

34% SAID TOM McDERMOTT, AND 22% SAID JAMES SCENIAK.

WE HAD MORE RESPONSES TO THAT QUESTION THAN USUAL.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE PART IN THE POLL GO TO WFYI.ORG/IWIR AND LOOK FOR THE POLL.

THE LIBERTARIAN GETS 22%, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING IN THE STATE OF INDIANA.

THAT'S RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT.

ABOUT $240,000 - THAT WAS THE PRICE TAG FOR INDIANA'S SPECIAL LEGISLATIVE SESSION, ACCORDING TO A STORY BY THE INDIANA CAPITAL CHRONICLE.

THE PRIMARY COST TO TAXPAYERS FOR THE TWO-WEEK SPECIAL SESSION WAS IN LAWMAKERS' PER DIEM - MORE THAN $208,000.

THAT MONEY - ABOUT $183 PER LAWMAKER PER DAY - IS MEANT TO COVER MEALS AND LODGING, THOUGH IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.

THE ADDITIONAL COST WAS FOR TRAVEL EXPENSES - 57 CENTS PER MILE TRAVELED BY LEGISLATORS.

THE CAPITAL CHRONICLE REPORTED THAT INDIANA SENATE REPUBLICAN SPOKESPERSON MOLLY FISHELL NOTED THAT THE REGULAR LEGISLATIVE SESSION EARLIER THIS YEAR ENDED EARLY, WHICH SAVED TAXPAYERS SOME MONEY.

OSEYE BOYD, DOES THE AVERAGE HOOSIER CARE ABOUT THIS COST?

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT THE AVERAGE HOOSIER IS EVEN THINKING ABOUT THIS.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THE AVERAGE HOOSIER IS AWARE OF THE COST.

WE JUST FINISHED TALKING ABOUT STUDENT LOANS.

THESE ARE THINGS THAT ARE BEING PUSHED UPON PEOPLE.

NOT HOW MUCH IT COSTS FOR THIS SPECIAL SESSION.

I DON'T THINK PUBLIC OFFICIALS WANT US TO TALK ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THEN WE HAVE TO START HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE AND START ASKING SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT, OKAY, YOU DON'T WANT TO FORGIVE STUDENT LOANS.

(CHUCKLING) FOR PEOPLE WHO REALLY NEED IT, BUT YET HOW MUCH ARE WE PAYING YOU TO COME HERE FOR TWO WEEKS?

PER DIEM, FOOD, LODGING, ALL THESE.

I THINK WE DON'T TRACK GOVERNMENT SPENDING THE WAY WE NEED TO BECAUSE WHO THINKS ABOUT THAT, RIGHT?

WHO THINKS ABOUT THAT?

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE HEADLINE ISSUES, BUT THIS IS WHERE WE NEED TO BE PAYING ATTENTION.

>> $240,000 FOR A TWO-WEEK SPECIAL SESSION IN THE SCHEME OF A $36 BILLION TWO-YEAR BUDGET DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A LOT OF MONEY.

IF THE AVERAGE HOOSIER DOES FIND OUT THAT INFORMATION DO THEY GO YEAH, OKAY, THEY CAME IN FOR A SPECIAL SESSION.

OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A COST TO THAT.

THIS ISN'T THAT BAD.

>> THEY SHOULD HAVE STAYED HOME.

>> I THINK THIS ASSESSMENT IS ACCURATE.

A LOT OF PEOPLE AREN'T THINKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE.

AS I SAY SO OFTEN IS THE CASE THE EXTENT TO WHICH PEOPLE CARE IS ONLY, IT DEPENDS ENTIRELY UPON THE ABILITY OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO MAKE IT AN ISSUE, THEIR WHEREWITHAL AND THEIR DESIRE TO MAKE IT AN ISSUE.

COULD SOMEBODY SOMEWHERE, AND I'M NOT SURE WHO THIS PERSON COULD BE, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T REALLY GAIN ANYTHING, DROPS A BUNDLE OF SPOTS ON DIRECT MAIL PIECES THAT HAVE THIS $240,000 "DUANG" ON THERE.

THAT'S THE SOUND EFFECT.

IT'S FREE.

WASTEFUL.

GOVERNMENT COSTS MONEY.

LAWMAKERS DON'T MAKE ENOUGH.

I MAY BE THE MINORITY.

I THINK PUBLIC SERVICE IS HONORABLE, TOO.

I KEEP DIGGING MYSELF INTO A MINORITY POSITION.

>> THE BIGGER THING IS HOW MUCH DAMAGE THAT SPECIAL SESSION DID.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

>> WAS IT NECESSARY?

>> THEY COULD HAVE SPENT THE SIX MONTHS LOOKING AT THE ISSUE AND DEALING WITH THE ISSUE.

>> DOLLARS AND CENTS.

>> A BIGGER EXPENSE.

>> THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT.

THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT.

>> YEAH.

>> IF YOU AGREE WITH THE OUTCOME, YOU DON'T CARE WHAT IT COST.

IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THE OUTCOME, HOW DARE WE SPEND A QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS.

>> WE SENT HOOSIERS A BILLION AND IT ONLY COST $240,000.

IF WE HAVE A SPECIAL SESSION FOR ABORTION RIGHTS, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THIS.

>> THIS WAS NOT WELL THOUGHT OUT LITIGATION.

>> MIKE BELF TWEETED THAT HE THOUGHT THE ABORTION ISSUE SHOULD HAVE WAITED FOR THE REGULAR SESSION.

IF HE THINKS THAT, WHERE ARE WE?

>> WEST LAFAYETTE CITY COUNCILMAN DAVID SANDERS ANNOUNCED THIS WEEK HE WILL DEDICATE HIS COUNCIL SALARY TO CITY EMPLOYEES WHO NEED TO TRAVEL FOR ABORTION CARE.

SANDERS SAID IT WAS UNCLEAR WHETHER WEST LAFAYETTE COULD OFFER REIMBURSEMENT THROUGH ITS INSURANCE - BUT HE WAS LOOKING INTO OPTIONS.

DAVID SANDERS: I'M INTERESTED IN TRYING TO HELP CITY EMPLOYEES FIND A WAY TO GET THEIR TRANSPORTATION PAID FOR PREGNANCY-RELATED HEALTH SERVICES THAT THEY WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO TAKE IN THE STATE OF INDIANA.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER TED HARDESTY, WHO REPRESENTS STUDENTS AT PURDUE, ADDED THAT STUDENTS ARE AFRAID OF THE IMPACT INDIANA'S NEW LAW WILL HAVE ON THEIR LIVES.

HE CALLED ON TIPPECANOE COUNTY PROSECUTOR PATRICK HARRINGTON TO ANNOUNCE WHETHER HE PLANS TO ENFORCE THE STATE'S NEAR-TOTAL ABORTION BAN.

TED HARDESTY: MANY STUDENTS HAVE BEEN ORGANIZING THE LAST FEW WEEKS TRYING TO GET PROSECUTOR HARRINGTON TO MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT SB1.

SO FAR WE HAVE HEARD NOTHING FROM HIS OFFICE.

>> INDIANA'S ABORTION RESTRICTIONS TAKE EFFECT ON SEPTEMBER 15TH.

JON SCHWANTES, STATE LAW SAYS "NEITHER THE STATE NOR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE MAY MAKE A PAYMENT FROM ANY FUND UNDER ITS CONTROL FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF AN ABORTION UNLESS THE ABORTION IS NECESSARY TO PRESERVE THE LIFE OF THE PREGNANT WOMAN."

IS THAT GOING TO TRIP UP SANDERS HERE?

>> I DON'T THINK SO.

THE MONEY IS NOT BEING ALLOCATED BY THE CITY OFFICIALS.

IT'S HIS MONEY.

I THINK WE NEED ONLY LOOK TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT WITH THE CITIZENS UNITED CASE IN 2010, WHICH SAID MONEY IS A FORM OF FREE SPEECH.

SO, ONCE THAT'S IN HIS POCKET, I THINK HE CAN DO ANYTHING HE WANTS WITH IT AND PROBABY YOU CAN MAKE THE SAME CASE FOR COMPANIES.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE, THEY SAID SO.

>> IS THIS, WHAT HE'S DOING, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD A STUNT?

>> IT SEEMS PERFORMATIVE TO ME.

I'M GOING TO GO OUT HERE AND SHOW THEM HOW WE'RE GOING TO BUCK THE SYSTEM AND FIND A WAY TO HELP THESE WOMEN.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH HIS SALARY IS, BUT ARE YOU REALLY GOING TO PAY FOR ALL THE WOMEN?

IF THE NUMBER EXCEEDS YOUR SALARY?

IT JUST SEEMS VERY PERFORMATIVE IN A WAY TO JUST GET ATTENTION.

>> SPEAKING OF THE LARGER ISSUE OF IF STATE LAW DOESN'T ALREADY BAN THIS.

I DON'T THINK IT DOES.

I AGREE WITH JON.

>> OH DEAR.

>> ARE WE ABOUT TO SEE LEGISLATION MOVE NEXT SESSION THAT DOES BAN THIS?

>> THE SUPREME COURT IN CITIZENS UNITED SAID MONEY WAS SPEECH AND THEY ALSO SAID THAT CORPORATIONS WERE PEOPLE.

SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT RFRA (CHUCKLING) UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

>> I THINK WE'LL SEE LEGISLATION LIKE THAT AUTHORED.

DO YOU THINK IT WILL MOVE.

>> I DON'T THINK SO.

I THINK WE'LL SEE A LOT.

I THINK WE'LL SEE ENFORCEMENT AND TRAVEL BANS AND ALL OF THAT.

>> TRAVEL BANS?

>> TRAVEL TO ANOTHER STATE TO ACCESS -— .

>> YEAH, YOU'RE SEEING THAT.

>> BUT THIS IS GOING TO BE REMARKABLE.

THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE REMARKABLE TO INDIANA.

>> HANDMAID'S TALE.

>> YOU DON'T THINK IT WILL MOVE?

>> I DON'T THINK IT WILL MOVE.

I THINK THERE WILL BE AN INCREASED FOCUS ON LEGISLATION AND WOMEN'S HEALTH AND CONTRACEPTION.

FINALLY, THE NFL HAS STARTED ITS NEW SEASON THIS WEEK.

THE COLTS WILL BEGIN THE SEASON WITH THE FOURTH DIFFERENT STARTING QUARTERBACK IN THE FOUR YEARS SINCE ANDREW LUCK RETIRED - MATT RYAN, A 37-YEAR-OLD, 14-YEAR VETERAN ACQUIRED BY INDY FROM THE ATLANTA FALCONS.

ANN DELANEY, IS MATT RYAN (FINALLY) THE BEST MAN FOR THE JOB?

>> THEY SAY THREE TIME'S IS A CHARM.

THIS IS FOUR.

I HAVE NO IDEA.

THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING.

>> WHO IS GOING TO BE BETTER THIS YEAR, THE COLTS OR THE BEARS?

>> THE BEARS.

>> WOW.

>> I SAY GO OUT AND FIND A QUARTERBACK THAT LOOKS, IN THE NFL NOW THAT LOOKS THE MOST LIKE MIKE O'BRIEN.

AUTOGRAPHS WILL BE AVAILABLE AFTER THIS TAPING.

>> ARE THE COLTS GOING TO MAKE THE PLAY OFFS.

>> NO CLUE.

MY SON PLAYED FOOTBALL IN HIGH SCHOOL.

OTHER THAN THAT I HAVE NO IDEA.

>> I'M WITH HER.

>> NO, THEY DID NOT.

MY BROTHERS PLAYED FOOTBALL AND THAT WAS NOT A GOOD IDEA.

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 OSEYE BOYD OF THE INDY STAR.

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.

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.