(Music plays) >> Religious chaplains in public schools.

Scaling back child labor laws.

Most federal charges against virtual school leaders and more.

From the television studios of WFYI it's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending January 26 ending January 26, 2024.

>> Indiana Week in Review is made possible by the supporters at Indiana public broadcasting stations.

>> This week Republicans on the Senate committee advanced legislation that would allow public schools to hire chaplains to speak with students and staff members during school hours.

Indiana public fraud castings Kiersten students reports lawmakers expressed the rules are not clearly defined in the bill.

Chevys >> Chaplains could help with Indiana school chaplain shorter slice of writing Deckler guidance will said many chapels work as volunteers in schools.

The bill says chapels would only provide with permission unless a student seeks out that guidance themselves.

Senator Shelli Yoder says there are guardrails that would alert parents that their children speaking to chapels.

She says the line should be more clearly defined.

Senator JD Ford also voted against the bill.

>> They have strong concerns with the bill for last session we were all about parental notification.

This session we are just kind of.

>> The bill supported by the Indiana school counselors Association and several other schools associations.

>> Should chaplains service counselors in public schools?

Is the first question for our Indiana Week in Review panel.

Democrat Ann DeLaney.

Republican Jennifer Hallowell.

John Schwantes hosted Indiana Lawmakers, and Niki Kelly editor in chief of the Indiana capital Chronicle.

I'm Indiana Public Broadcasting Statehouse Bureau Chief, Brandon Smith.

Jennifer, we know Indiana has a school counselor shortage.

Is there a reasonable - solution?

>> Absolutely I think it is.

I think we have to explore and be open to any option that makes sense.

In this case chaplains are already accustomed to listening and counseling and providing support.

The legislation would require they have a Masters degree, multiple years of experience in counseling, and I think it is an example that Senator Donato took a thoughtful and collaborative approach in bringing forward this legislation because evidenced by the fact that the Indiana school Board Association, Indiana school counselors Association, Indiana urban school Association, all testified that in support of this bill that it would give them more options, more tools in the toolbox to support students.

>> Are the guardrails around this reasonable?

That this is a good solution?

It's not the only solution.

>> It's not and it's a bad idea.

What you are allowing to have happen here there are two parts of the First Amendment.

You can't interfere with religion, you can't establish religion either.

You can't pay people to come in, and I don't know how any counselor from a religious background could offer advice at all without injecting some part of the religious tenets into it.

And on top of that it's a recurring technique for these churches to come in and then talk to the students, and maybe bring them on board without the parent notification part of this, which has been so sacred for every single other change that the legislature wants to enact.

It is a bad idea.

If we would pay the counselors what we should be paying counselors for their service we would have enough counselrs, okay?

We don't want to do that.

We want to do this on the cheap and higher, which I assume means pay these counselors, okay?

So, we are paying religious leaders to come in and proselytize among students.

It's a bad idea, it's in violation of the Constitution.

>> The bill does say they can only provide secular guidance unless either the parents allow it or the student seeks it out themselves, religious guidance themselves and then the parents don't get to know, I guess I was told by Republicans as an pointed out on many other issues is that they don't know.

That doesn't apply here.

One of the points and just made.

Is it reasonable to expect a religious chaplain to not provide religious guidance even when they are not supposed to?

>> I think it would be hard.

Every religious leader I've ever met with, obviously their faith guides how they respond to things like that.

I think one of the more interesting parts of the bill, and there was some confusion on this, is that if a parent signs their kid up to see the counselor the kid doesn't get any say.

They have to go see the counselor.

And look, I get it you can force your kid to go to church and that's what you do on your own time and that's fine, but forcing kids to go talk to a religious chaplain during the school day just seems a little weird to me.

>> Where do you see this one going the rest of the session?

>> I don't know.

I would think that leadership is not keen on this.

It runs afoul of what they talk about at the beginning of the session which is we are going to get in, ge out and we will deal with third-grade reading and literacy, maybe a little bit of chronic absenteeism but not waiting into this issue.

It seems to me that this is an invitation to litigation from here to eternity for several reasons.

One is how do you define secular instruction?

For the reason we just talked about a lot of people who are clerics it seems to me that they are so imbued with their beliefs, and that's a good thing, >> Is going to say is they should be.

>> How do you say I am turning on my principal guidance and whatever my Northstar is and now turning that off.

Number two, Indiana bands hiring Ridley was -- religious discrimination.

If someone applies to be a counselor and has two years students in the Masters degree but as a rabbi or a mom or even I would guess a Buddhist monk that there are from the Satanic temple there are people who probably have, they give college scholarships incidentally, there might be somebody in the Satanic Temple has a Masters degree.

I can see litigation of the hiring phase.

Then let's go to the part about no secular, or the only secular instruction unless there's permission from.

Salmon employee or student and I can say I want this.

Presumably it's going to happen in school or in a school setting by an employee now of the school district, which seems to violate the Indiana Constitution article 1 section 6 says explicitly no response from the treasury can go!

No funds from the treasury can enhance any religious institution.

Which by definition if you are representing a certain religion it seems to me that's pretty clear-cut.

I would have thought the same thing about the voucher bill.

>> They got around that on the voucher once.

>> That's my.

>> It's a bad idea.

>> Time for viewer feedback.

Each weekly poster question - this question is should chaplains be allowed to serve as counselors in public schools?

A, yes.

B, no.

Last week we asked you will win the race for Indiana Attorney General.

22% of you say Todd Rokita, 70% Democrat candidate.

Who that is we won't know until June.

If you like to take part in coach at WFYI.org/IWIR and look for the pole.

House lawmakers are considering legislation to scale back certain child labor exceptions.

Indiana public broadcaster reports the bill would allow youth workers to work during extended time periods.

>> The bill would provide exemptions from certain hour and time restrictions for 14 to 18-year-olds throughout the state.

Representative Kendell Culp is the author of this bill.

He says it would make state regulations more similar to federal regulations and allow youth workers more opportunities.

>> This bill might simply bring state regulations in line with federal regulations.

Not to exceed but the same.

So, currently by being more stringent we are telling our youth that it's okay to work less then what the federal requirements are.

>> Other proponents of the bill say it would benefit nontraditional schoolchildren including those who are Amish or homeschooled to work on an extended schedule.

Opponents of the bill say it can place minors in more hazardous situations and would remove child labor protections that took decades to put into place.

>> Ann DeLaney, we are aligning state and federal law.

What is the issue?

>> The issue is for once, for once Indiana is a little bit more progressive and we have decided to protect children a little bit better than a federal statute does.

I don't know who is pushing this.

I don't see a parade of moms and dads saying there 14-year-olds want to go out and work extended hours or in risky circumstances.

You already have an exception it's a family business or farm which is where you would find Morse 14-year-olds employed anyway.

I think this is not a good idea.

For years and decades in fact we've provided these protections and it has worked pretty well.

Does some employer out there want to be able to hire someone for less than eight dollars an hour and making a killing, that must be where this is coming from but it's not a good idea.

>> There's been so much talk at the state house for years now about aligning the education system a little better with the workforce pipeline.

There is work on that this year with apprentice issues and all that on work-based learning.

This is not, it seems, work-based learning.

This is just you're in school and now after school you can work a heck of a lot longer than you were previously able to.

Does that line with what we are trying to strengthen the education system?

>> I think it does.

It's just aligning with the federal regulations.

I don't think anyone thinks the federal regulations are putting children at risk.

>> I do.

>> Frankly I think we should encourage more of these kind of work type opportunities for teens, voluntary of course, but frankly I think we have a work ethic problem in this country and I grew up on a farm.

My brother would get up at 5 AM and go work on a neighbor's farm milking cows before going to school, then coming back and working on both farms when we lived off the farm when I was a teenager I worked various jobs that I could ride my bike to.

My friend, Brandon, worked for his family's construction company.

All of those things help prepare you for the real world.

>> They don't have to start at 14.

>> Weathers 14, 15, 16, 17.

The lessons that you learn, the value of a dollar, how to treat people >> All of that is absolutely important.

>> We need more young people to learn.

This is one step >> They can do that from 16 on up.

They don't have to do it at 14.

>> We are also not talking about going from 14-year-olds cannot work up to now they can.

They can already work now they can work a lot longer.

Soft skills is something that employers are still saying is a problem.

We saw it coming out of the last recession, which is all of the jobs that young people can typically work were being taken by people were put out of work, adults were put out of work and now these kids couldn't find jobs.

Those soft skills you just inherently learn by working a job they just didn't have access to.

It is still kind of been a problem even up until today.

Is this the way to get it done by saying, not you can work but, you know that homework you need to do?

Nevermind you have to work eight hours.

>> I should be careful because I don't know what motivated this piece of legislation but I doubt the acquisition of soft skills is what has pushed this or it has to be other issues.

I don't know.

I haven't heard anyone cry over this issue, and maybe I am detached.

One does wonder what prompts this.

If it were to adopt, if the state were to adopt the federal standards were kids be sent into Goldmine schematic know.

I don't think there's much harm here, but it just seems in a session where we talk about wanting to do nothing but get out of Dodge that seems to me to be benign.

We do have a childcare crisis in this state.

>> And were lowering the age.

>> If we could put everyone who's 14 into 12 hour shifts taking care of kids under 14 that the two for.

Maybe that's was lurking.

>> I want to ask this because John raises the specter when we talk about child welfare which is on the surface may be the bill isn't particularly harmful to kids, but if this bill becomes law and there is a kid who is coming home late from a job and gets into an accident because they were tired that they wouldn't necessarily have gotten into that's what lawmakers are going to have a problem here with potential impact.

>> May be.

Look, I initially reacted similarly to be like I don't understand.

The Senate has a similar bill.

I listen to the full testimony on that the week four and I was surprised that it really does seem to make a lot of sense where business people who spoke how difficult it is and how the kid has to be done by 7 PM on a school night, while their friend is not getting home until 11 PM after high school basketball game.

That's just fine.

It is making it hard to fill some of those jobs.

Also the 14, 15-year-old thing there were several people spoke from the Amish community and that is what that is largely aimed at, is for kids who have finished schooling in eighth grade, which is where they stop in the Amish and Mennonite communities, that they can work during school hours.

At least for me listening to the full debate made it seem far less onerous or concerning then just reading the digest of the bill.

>> If you are worried about the Amish and Mennonites you can make the exception and say if they are finished their schooling because of their religion can go ahead and work.

You don't have to make it as broad.

It's not limited to that.

>> Administrators from troubled virtual schools were arrested this week for an alleged scheme to defraud the Indiana Department of Education.

From WFYI's education desk with Dylan fears reports the federal prosecutor reports the prosecutors received more than $44 million they weren't entitled to.

>> US attorney's office announced the arrest at a press conference Thursday.

Thomas Don, Philip Holden and Percy Clark were released after appearing in court this week.

Eunice attorney Zachary Myers says Indiana fund schools based on enrollment.

If schools have more students they typically get more money from the state.

>> The members of the conspiracy falsely claimed thousands of students were enrolled even though the students were not attending classes or receiving services.

>> Three defendants were charged with many counts related to fraud.

Two were also charged with money laundering.

If the defendants are convicted they could face decades in federal prison.

>> Niki Kelly, the origins of this scandal are several years old now, originally broken I believe.

Does this affect anything in the current education environment?

>> Probably not.

There was a lot that went on back then.

Giving back of contributions, some oversight changes, and how that would work and also we have been a little more tentative on the full, virtual schools obviously feeling burned by this, so I don't see any sort of major changes coming out of it.

>> Should there be any more changes coming out of it?

>> When you put, as they did put a pot of money out there in traditional education and let the education for-profit establishment put their fingers in that and then provide no oversight we were startled that all that money was taken.

I'm not sure how much different that is in the charter schools that don't have any oversight.

How many deals do you have where your brother-in-law owns the building and all the money is going in there is being spent and we don't know how.

That's taxpayer money to.

>> That's all public record though.

>> All of it is public record?

>> Sure.

Charter schools are publicly funded.

>> They have to show for the money comes from and goes?

I stand corrected.

Glad to hear that.

>> We did see some legislation in the immediate aftermath of this scandal.

Like 2017.

We saw I think in 2018 maybe some bills from that.

Are we at a state now where something like this isn't really possible again?

>> I think that's right.

I think they've strengthened all the looks into that and oversights so that this is prevented from this point forward.

It would be terrible to have one really, really bad actor room the good work of a lot of other folks.

>> John, in terms of the larger conversation around transparency in education funding what Democrats now in the statehouse are pointing to is not so much charter schools, but the voucher school program.

>> That's what I meant.

>> It's the voucher school program reduce considerably less transparency.

The voucher program is now nearly universal and we are talking about even potentially changing the way it works in terms of sending and more dollars.

For instance, there was a government editorial forum last night for the major Republican candidates for governor.

They were all asked should Indiana private school vouchers received the exact same funding amount that public school students receive.

Right now they do not.

Every single one of them said yes.

That's something to look out for down the line.

Does something like this affect the conversation around transparency?

>> Arguably it should.

Will it?

No.

Two different issues.

It seems to me fundamentally as long as we are going to put public funding, and forget about schools, any endeavor whether it's medical research or the construction of, I don't know, parks.

Fill in the blanks.

If a private entity is doing something with its funds or with contributors funds, private contributions, and they want to do everything behind closed doors more power to them.

As soonest someone, something, somebody somewhere takes public funds it seems to me that comes with an obligation.

In the obligation is that you need to follow the same sorts of disclosure requirements and adopt and celebrate the same level of transparency that anybody else would, otherwise it makes no sense.

>> Indiana's voter registration and participation numbers have improved in the last couple of statewide election cycles.

The state continues to fall further behind the rest of the country.

That's from the latest edition of the Indiana civic health index, and effort of the Indiana bar foundation in Indiana sent coalition.

>> The percentage interest of Hoosiers who are registered to vote improved between the last two presidential years, 2016 to 2020, and voters registrations went up between the last two midterms.

But compared to other states Indiana got worse.

It's voter turnout in 2020 was 46th in the country and in 2022 Indiana was dead last.

Why does Indiana struggle so much?

The health index indicates is down to two areas.

Competitive elections and policy choices.

Many races in Indiana feature either no competition or have lopsided outcomes, and Indiana Republican lawmakers have refused to consider any of the policy proposals suggested by the index including same-day voter registration and unrestricted absentee voting.

First I want to correct something from that.

The data in the report says that in 2022 the voter turnout number was 50th in the country.

That's action not dead last because, thank you for pointing out that does include the District of Columbia.

We are actually one up from dead last, West Virginia is worse.

Something to celebrate I suppose there.

We've seen these reports every couple of years.

It feels like the story is pretty much the same.

Is this just Indiana's reality?

>> I sure hope not.

It's sad.

I feel like in so many instances today we've discussed set the stage for this.

In many cases a healthy dose of Civics understanding and engagement early in the process would do wonders for our state it seems to me.

And it is important to point out, because this wasn't in the broadcast version of my story, but I did point out the report lauds lawmakers for making Indiana leader and Civics education.

>> Were going to have a Civics B.

>> There are a lot of good things happening.

>> That requirement only started relatively recently.

You won't see a payoff from that for years.

>> The big thing here is they feel like it doesn't matter they get off the couch and vote because it wouldn't matter anyway, and I presume one of the reasons for that is a lack of contested races and we are one of the fifth most gerrymandered states in the country.

And whether you say it's for political advantage of this and that, if the result is that you have voters looking at their ballot and seeing only one candidate in the general election it probably doesn't spur enthusiasm.

I mean I understand some apathy.

I don't apologize for it, but let's start with education.

Let's hope that moves us in the right direction, and thank goodness the Association in coalition has put this together.

Randy Shepard, Lee Hamilton sort of envision this.

Two people whose commitment to Civics is unquestionable.

>> It is also important to point out that there is some good news in the report in that the surveys that have been done in Indiana, done elsewhere as well, show that engagement with other people is going up.

More people contacting their local elected officials, more people talking about politics either with coworkers or family, going to public meetings, those are all up over the last couple of enters a good sign because people are engaging in the process and then hopefully realizing if I am angry or happy about the decision I'm going to this local meeting to talk to public officials about the next time they are on the ballot maybe I want to weigh in on that process.

But we talked recently about this on the show about the turnover in the congressional delegation.

Some see it as reflective of the fact that why would you want to serve in Congress right now?

I think that speaks to a little bit of how do we have competitive elections when what is the argument you can make to someone to say, yeah you should go run for office right now.

>> I don't think we should judge all of these by just the congressional races.

We have so many elections in this state.

School board, city Council, county commissioner, statehouse, city Council where you can make an actual difference voting and there are smaller races but they are very important to their everyday life.

I hope we're not judging everything based on dysfunction at one level.

>> Is that a big part of the problem?

Study after study says what people think about politics is what they see at the federal level and not anywhere below?

>> Sure.

But that doesn't expand how we wind up where we are.

At the bottom of the heat stop a good part of it is the gerrymandering and the other part is the states that have advanced the involvement of people in elections.

They point to about 10 different things you can do.

Indiana won't do any of them.

Expand voting hours, same-day registration, automatic registry.

All these things we could do to make it easier and encourage people to vote by consideration the Republican majority won't do because they don't want more people voting.

>> What is the message coming out of the statehouse and Republicans in the statehouse these things are proposed and they just go now.

They see the numbers.

Why does not seem like a problem for them?

>> We have done some things.

Frankly I think it's ridiculous to act like it's hard to vote in Indiana.

You have 30 days to vote in our elections.

>> You can't do absentee unless you have a reason.

>> In most cases you have two weeks in multiple locations, satellite voting for two weeks before the election all up to election day.

In the competitive races things doesn't hold true either because we have very competitive races and municipals this year and the turnout was still rough.

>> That's Indiana Week in Review for this week.

Our panel is Democrat, Ann DeLaney.

Republican, Jennifer Hallowell stop John Schwantes of Indiana lawmakers and Niki Kelly of the Indiana capital Chronicle.

You can find Indiana Week in Review podcast and episodes at WFYI.org/IWIR fire or on the PBS App.

join us next time because a lot can happen in an Indiana week.

(Music plays) >> The opinions expressed are solely those of the panelists.

Indiana Week in Review was WFYI production in association with Indiana's public broadcasting station