>>> DIEGO MORALES' NEPOTISM ISSUE.

A TOP SENATE REPUBLICAN PUTS PRIVATE SCHOOLS ON NOTICE.

PLUS A HISTORIC CANNABIS HEARING AND MORE.

FROM THE TELEVISION STUDIOS AT WFYI, IT'S INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW.

THE WEEK ENDING FEBRUARY 17, 2023.

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

>>> THIS WEEK A REPORT FROM THE INDYSTAR'S ARIKA HERRON REVEAL CRITICS ADDRESSING NEPOTISM ACCUSATIONS AGAINST DIEGO MORALES.

AND STORMTRACKER RADAR STORY HOES THAT MORALES HIRED SHAWN GRADY AS CODIRECTOR OF THE AUTO DEALER SERVICES DIVISION.

GRADY WHO PREVIOUS WORKED AS A SALES CONSULTANT AT A CAR DEALERSHIP IS MARRIED TO MORALES' SISTER.

IT DOES NOT BREAK INDIANA LAW, IS IT STATE'S NEPOTISM CODE BAR IT IS HIRING OF A SPOUSE, A PARENT OR STEP PARENT, A CHILD OR STEPCHILD, A BROTHER, SISTER, STEPBROTHER OR STEPSISTER, ANISES OR NEPHEW, ABOUT OR UNCLE AND DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OR SON-IN-LAW.

IS THIS A PROBLEM FOR MORALES?

IT'S A FIRST TIME QUESTION FOR OUR INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW PANEL.

DEMOCRAT ANN DELANEY, REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIEN, JON SCHWANTES, HOST OF INDIANA LAWMAKERS, AND NIKI KELLY, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF OF THE INDIANA CAPITAL CHRONICLE.

I'M INDIANA PUBLIC BROOKING STATE HOUSE BUREAU CHIEF BRANDO SMITH.

ANN DELANEY, THIS ISN'T AGAINST THE LAW SO WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?

>> IT'S NOT AGAINST THE LAW.

HE FOUND THE ONLY MEMBER OF HIS FAMILY THAT HE COULD LEGALLY HIRE, SO THE PROBLEM IS I REMEMBER BACK IN STATE GOVERNMENT THE QUESTION IF YOU WOULD ASK IS NOT JUST WAS IT ETHICAL OR LEGAL, BUT BUT HOW WOULD I WOULD APPEAR ON THE THE FRONT PAGE OF THE NEWSPAPER AND YOU ASK HOOSIERS DO YOU THINK IT'S EASTBOUND FOR AN ELECTED OFFICIAL TO HIRE HIS BROTHER-IN-LAW AT A SEC FIGURE SALARY AND IS THAT NEPOTISM AND YOU KNOW WHAT THEY WOULD SAY?

IT'S NEPOTISM.

BUT IT'S TYPICAL OF MORALES.

I MEAN WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT HE WAS ETHICALLY CHALLENGED AND WOULD EITHER OUT RIGHT FABRICATE OR EMBELLISH DURING THE CAMPAIGN, WHY DO WE THINK HE WOULD CHANGE HIS STRIPES?

HERE'S BEEN THUMBING HIS NOSE AT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND THE VOTERS CAN GET AWAY WITH IT AND THAT'S HE'S DOING HERE.

TALK ABOUT A REVOLVING DOOR, THE IDEA THEY WOULD HIRE A COREGULATOR OF THAT INDUSTRY SOMEBODY WHO WORKED FOR IT SHOULD ALSO RAISE RED FLAGS.

BUT THEY WERE BIG CONTRIBUTORS TO MORALES DURING THE CAMPAIGN SO HE'S TAKING CARE OF THE FAMILY IN THE SAME BREATH.

>> WHAT STRIKES ME ABOUT THIS IS IT'S NOT JUST THAT HE HIRED HIS BROTHER-IN-LAW LEAD A DIVISION, IT'S THAT HE'S CREATED CODIRECTOR POSITIONS THAT DIDN'T PREVIOUSLY EXIST.

NOW THERE'S 21 OF WHICH IS HIS BROTHER-IN-LAW.

IS ANYTHING GOING TO HAPPEN HERE?

>> I THINK NIKI CLEARED THAT UP THIS THE CAPITOL CHRONICLE, THE SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICE CLARIFIED THAT.

THEY DID REORGANIZE THE DIVISION BUT THEY DIDN'T JUST BRING HIM ON AND STICK HIM IN THERE.

THEY ELIMINATEED THE DEM SECRETARY OF STATE POSITION IN THAT OFFICE AND I THINK NIKI CLEARED THAT UP AFTER THE SECRETARY OF STATE CLARIFIED IT.

BUT LOOK THE GUY HAS -- YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT TWO WAYS.

HE'S GOT A RESUMÉ TO BACK IT UP, THIS ISN'T GHOST EMPLOYMENT.

HE HAS A RESUMÉ TO BACK UP THE POSITION HE'S FILLING AND YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT AND SAY HE HAS I IN FOR THE DEALERS BUT THAT'S ALL OVER STATE GOVERNMENT.

THAT'S A DELANEY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, IT'S EFFORT EDUCATORS IN THE LEGISLATURE SO IT'S NOT UNCOMMON AND YOU CAN'T LOOK AT THAT AND GO -- IF HE HAD NO EXPERIENCE IN AUTO DEALERSHIPS YOU WOULD BE HAMMERING HIM FOR THAT.

>> BOTH OF THOSE POSITIONS WERE OCCUPIED BY LAWYERS BEFORE BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF REGULATORY CONSENTS THAT GO WITH THAT AND THE THOUGHT WAS THAT YOU NEED LAWYERSER HE IS NOT A LAWYER AND WHATEVER A SALES CONSULTANT IS, IS THAT A EUPHEMISM FOR A USED CAR SALESMAN?

>> IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT SO YOU REMEMBERED AS BAD AS YOU CAN THEN SURE.

>> JOHN, I TO ASK THIS, WHICH IS IT FEELS LIKE FIVE YEARS AGO THIS MIGHT HAVE MATTERED, IS THERE ANY REASON TO EXPECT THAT NOW?

>> I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THERE SEEMED TO BE MUCH MORE ACCOUNTABILITY F. A NEWS ORGANIZATION IN THE CAPITOL CITY RAISED AN ISSUE OF THIS SORT IT AT THE PRESENT TIMED TO GET MOMENT UP AND PEOPLE -- WATCHDOG GROUPS TENDED TO CALL FOUL OR EVEN LEADERSHIP IN THE PARTY.

>>> I'M NOTE SAYING THE SPEAKER, THE PRO-TEM, NOBODY CAN SAY CHAIN YOUR MIAMI-DADE BUT THERE ALSO COULD HAVE BEEN PEOPLE SAYING THAT'S A BAD IDEA.

MAYBE YOU COULD DO THIS.

I WOULDN'T DO THAT BUT THAT SEEMS SORT OF QUAINT -- DAYS OF OLD.

>> I WILL SAY -- LOOK, THERE ARE PEOPLE -- LET'S USE THE KENNEDY -- I MEAN, MONTH PEOPLE WOULD SAY ROBERT KENNEDY WAS THE ATTORNEY AND I KNOW THAT'S FEDERAL LAW, THIS IS STATE LAW.

THERE ARE PROBABLY INSTANCES WHERE A BROTHER OR SISTER-IN-LAW ARE IMMINENTLY QUALIFIED AND WE PROBABLY SHOULDN'T HAVE A BLANKET PROHIBITION AGAINST THE HIRING OF SOMEBODY WHO CAN BRING TREMENDOUS VALUE TO THE STATE OF INDIANA.

>> SALES CONSULTANT?

>> I DIDN'T FINISH MY THOUGHT.

BUT THIS MIGHT NOT BE ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS.

>> WE ASKED SPEAKER TODD HUHS TON ABOUT THAT AND HE WANTED TO LISTEN MORE ABOUT THISH.

>> DUCK AND WEAVE.

>> AS CLOSE AS HE CAN CAN TO A COMMON ANSWER, IN FAIR NECESSARY I THINK HE SAID HE HADN'T READ THE STORY YET BUT IT'S PRETTY HARD FOR A REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE TO SAY LET'S PASS A NEW LAW BECAUSE OF SOMETHING A REPUBLICAN -- ELECTED OFFICIAL IF I BELIEVING MADE SO I THINK IT WOULD LOOK LIKE A DIRECT TARGETS OF DIEGO MORALES AND AT THIS APPOINTMENT WE'VE SEEN, SURE HE HAD PROBLEMS DURING THE CAMPAIGN BUT REPUBLICANS BY AND LARGE SEEM TO HAVE MOSTLY GOTTEN BEHIND DIEGO.

>>> THERE IS A SENSE OF IMPUNITY.

IN THE OLD DAY DAYS SOMEBODY LIKE MORALES WHAT HAD QUESTIONABLE EMPLOYMENT HISTORY WITH OTHER STATE AGENCIES THAT PEOPLE COULD POINT TO, THEY MIGHT BE ON SORT OF THEIR BEST BEHAVIOR -- I DON'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING THAT EVEN COULD BE QUESTIONED.

AND THAT'S AGAIN DAYS OF OLD.

>>> TILE NOW FOR VIEWER FEEDBACK.

EACH WEEK WE POST AN ONLINE POLL QUESTION AND THIS WE CAN'S QUESTION IS IS IT COLORADAN WRONG FOR A STATE OFFICIAL TO HIRE THEIR BROTHER-IN-LAW?

LAST WEEK WE ASKED WHERE IT'S OKAY TO PASS PROPERTY TAX RELIEF THAT HURTS HOMEOWNERS BUT HELPS SCHOOL AND LOANING REVENUE.

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

SENATE APPROPRIATION COMMITTEE CHAIR RYAN MISHLER ISSUED A STERN WARNING FOR THE DISTRICT.

>> IN AN OPEN LETTER TO CONSTITUENTS MISHLER DETAILED ALLEGATIONS OF BULLYING AND MISTREATMENT OF STUDENTS AT A PRIVATE SCHOOL THAT RECEIVES PUBLIC DOLLARS BROUGHT TO HIM BY PARENTS OF THE SCHOOL.

MISHLER'S SON ALSO ATTENDSES THAT INSTITUTION.

THE GNAT REPUBLICAN SAID THE CONCERNS HE AND THE PREYS RAISEs WERE DISMISSED AND I GO NOIRED.

HE DESCRIBED THE SITUATION AS THE MOST DISGUSTING HERE'S ENCOUNTERED IN HIS 20 YEARS IN THE SENATE.

HE PLEDGED TO PARENTS HE WOULD NOT SUPPORT ANOTHER DOLLAR FOR INDIANA SCHOOL VOUCHER PROGRAM UNTIL THERE ARE POLICIES PUT IN PLACE TO PROTECT KIDS FROM ABUSE OF BEHAVIOR AND MISTREATMENT.

HOUSE SPEAK HERB TODD HOUSTON SAID HE WAS DISAPPOINTED IN THE LETTER.

>> I'M SORRY HE HAD A BAD EXPERIENCE, IT'S A MISTAKE AND THIS CAUCUS, OUR CAUCUS REMAINS COMMITTED TO PROVIDING PARENTS OPTION.

>>> THE HOUSE BUDGET IS EXPECTED TO INCLUDE AN EXPANSION OF THE SCHOOL VOUCHER PROGRAM.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN HOW SHOCKING IS THIS TO HEAR FROM A REPUBLICAN AT THE IS IT STATEHOUSE?

>> I THINK IT WAS A PERSONAL SITUATION, IT'S SOMEWHAT OUT OF CHARACTER FOR RYAN MISHLER WHO IS A DISCIPLINED GUY.

IT WAS A PERSONAL SITUATION THAT HE'S BEEN PARRYING WITH.

WHAT HE REALLY BELIEVES, WHICH IS THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE ACCOUNTABILITY IN CHARTER SCHOOLS.

INCREMENT INCREMENTALISM IS IMPORTANT, WE SAW THAT LAST YEAR WITH THE SAVINGS ACCOUNTS AND WE WHITTLED IT BACK THE NOTHING JUST TO INCREMENTALLY INTRODUCE THAT CONCEPT TO THE SYSTEM AT LARGE, SO WHATEVER HAPPENED WE'LL PROBABLY FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THIS BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE HIG SCHOOL, BUT I DON'T KNOWING -- I DON'T THINK IT WAS SHOCKING, AND AGAIN THIS IS JUST UNDERLYING POSITION ON SCHOOL CHOICE AND HOW WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD CAR ACCIDENTLY.

>> DEMOCRATS BEEN SAYING THE SORT OF THINGS THAT RYAN MISHLER HAS BEEN SAYING WHAT WAS INTERESTING THIS ME ABOUT THIS WAS IN THE DETAILING OF THE PERSONAL EXPERIENCE HE HAD AND HIS CONSTITUENTS HAVE BECAUSE CLEARLY THIS HAS BEEN BUILDING FOR A PERIODS OF YEARS AND HE'S VERY ANGRY ABOUT IT SO I GET KIND OF VOICING THAT FRUSTRATION WITH HIS EXPERIENCE.

WHAT WAS SURPRISING TO ME WAS TO TAKE IT TO THE SYSTEM WIDE AND SAY THIS IS HAPPENING TO ME HERE AND THESE PEOPLE HERE, AND WE CAN'T LET IT HAPPEN ANYWHERE.

DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN SAYING IS THAT FOR LONG TIME.

DO YOU THINK THIS IS THE SORT OF THING THAT CAN >> IT CERTAINLY HIGHLIGHTS THE PROBLEMs.

WHEN REPUBLICAN TALK ABOUT CHOICE THEY ONLY TALK ABOUT GLOWING TERMS.

YOU DON'T REALIZE WHEN YOU GO TO THESE PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS WITH TACK MONEY, YOU GIVE UP A LOT OF THE PROTECTIONS THAT THE STATE PROVIDES FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION, YOU GIVE THEM UP FOR STUDENTS, PARENTS CAN TEACHERS AND YOU DON'T HAVE THE ACCOUNTABILITY.

YOU SIMPLY DON'T, THEY DON'T HAVE TOE TAKE CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES, THEY CAN DO ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT ARE NOT PERMITTED IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND IT'S ABOUT TIME SOMEBODY TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE'RE PUTTING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF STATE MONEY INTO THESE INSTITUTIONS WITHOUT THE SAFEGUARDS.

HIS EXPERIENCE MAY BE PERSONAL BUT HIS EXPERIENCE COULD BE REPLICATED EVERY SINGLE -- AND THAT'S THE POINT.

>> I AGREE WITH MIKE IN THAT SOME OF THE SURPRISE HERE IS BECAUSE OF WHO WROTE THIS LETTER.

RYAN MISHLER -- >> JIM LUCAS DOES THIS NO ONE GOES OH MY GOD INDIANA HE DID THAT.

>> MISHLER IS A CHILL GUY.

SIMILARLY I WOULD TO TALK ABOUT THE RESPONSE TO THIS BECAUSE TODD DOESN'T GET ANGRY IN PUBLIC VERY OFTEN AND THAT WAS ABOUT AS POINTED A RESPONSE AS I'VE HEARD FROM HIM.

>> HE WAS VERY CRITICAL OF SENATOR MISHLER.

I THINK THE THING TO KEEP IN MIND IS THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS WANT TO EXPAND SCHOOL CHOICE, THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE DOING RIGHT NOW.

TODAY WE'RE GOING TO HEAR WHAT'S IN THE BUDGET AND WE EXPECT TO SEE SCHOOL CHOICE DOLLARS SO YOU HAVE TO THINK THE LETTER COMES OUT THE SAME WEEK THAT THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS ARE PLANNING TO UNVEIL THEIR PLAN, SO I THINK OBVIOUSLY HE'S PROBABLY MAD ABOUT THAT.

>> RYAN MISHLER IS JUST ONE SENATOR ALBEIT A PRETTY POWERFUL SENATOR IN THE POSITION HE'S IN, THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE WHICH WILL TAKE THE BUDGET OVER FROM THE HOUSE BUT IF HIS CAULK WANTS SOMETHING HIS CAUCUS WILL DETERMINE THAT SO HOW MUCH CAN RYAN MISHLER DRIVE THE DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO EXPAND THE PROGRAM.

>> HE CAN HAVE AN IMPACT BECAUSE OF HIS STANDING BECAUSE IT'S NOT SOMEBODY LEVELING THESE KIND OF CONCERNS ALL THE TIME.

THE FACT THAT THIS IS OUT OF CHARACTER FOR HIM.

FOR INSTANCE -- YOU WERE JOKING ABOUT JIM LUCAS WHO IS A SECOND AMENDMENT ABSOLUTE I GUESS, IF HE SAID I RECONSIDER -- THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT THE WAY THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL FIRED A GUN THAT'S TROUBLING TO ME, PEOPLE WOULD NOTICE.

THAT HAS MORE IMPACT THAN IF HE SAYS WE SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO GUNS.

IT'S OF CHARACTER.

THE OTHER THING IS THERE'S NO RULE FORMAL OR IN FORMAL HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE TO ENCOUNTER A PROBLEM BEFORE IT RIDESSED TO THE LEVEL OF LEGISLATIVE ACTION.

IN FACT, I THINK MUCH MORE COMMON AT LEAST NOW WE SEE A LOT OF NATIONAL AGENDA TYPE OF THINGS BUT LET'S GO BACK TO THE POINT -- >> YOU STILL SEE -- >> HAVE YOU STILL SEE WHERE YOU SAY MY CONSTITUENT, ONE PERSON HAD THIS HORRIBLE EXPERIENCE AND GUESS WHAT THAT'S ENOUGH TO MOTIVATE% SPONSORSHIP AUTHORSHIP OF A BILL AND PERHAPS IF THE STORY IS EGREGIOUS ENOUGH OR THERE'S AN ARGUMENT TO BE MADE IT CAN EVEN IN A SINGLE SESSION.

>> OR EVEN SOMETHING THAT'S NOT PATERNAL THING, THIS IS A BUSINESS IN MY DISTRICT WANTS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE PEOPLE HAVE THROWING STAR AT THE BAR AND NOW WE'RE.

>> NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT.

>> CAN I DISCLOSE THAT MY HIGH SCHOOL PEP RALLIES WE DECIDE HAVE DID HAVE THROWING STARS AT A DUMMY OF THE FAMILY.

>> BEFORE OR AFTER?

>> I CAN DISCLOSE NOTHING.

BUT ONE OF THE SUPPOSED VIRTUES IS THEY EXPERIENCE WHAT ALL HOOSIERS EXPERIENCE AND THEREFORE NOT LIVING IN SOME SORT OF ISOLATION, SO IF HE'S HAD A BAD EXPERIENCE ONE CAN DEDUCE THAT OTHERS HAVE TOO.

>> THE BILL DO DECRIMINALIZE POSSESSION OF SMALL AMOUNTS OF CANNABIS DOT GOT IF FIRST COMMITTEE HEARING AT THE STATEHOUSE BUT THAT'S AS FAR AS THE ISSUE IS LIKELY TO GO.

>> THE BILL IS SIMPLE, HAVING TWO OUNCES OF LESS OF CANNABIS WOULD NO LONGER BE A CRIME.

KEITH JOHNSON IS AN INDIANA HEAD REDUCE PRODUCER AND HE SAYS HE PLY SUPPLIES PEOPLE CAN LEGAL PRODUCTS LIKE CBD.

HE SAYS HE KNOWS CANNABIS WOULD HELP THEM MORE.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE DECRIM HAPPEN OUT OF GOOD CONS SENSE AND CARING.

>>> THE INDIANA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, PROSECUTORS CAN AND STATE POLICE OPPOSE THE BILL, SAYING THERE ARE TRAFFIC SAFETY CONCERNS.

>> WE ARE CONCERNED THAT WITH MORE PEOPLE USING MARIJUANA AND GETTING ON THE ROADS THAT THAT WILL INCREASE FATALITIES AND ACCIDENTS ON THE ROADWAY.

>> HOUSE COMMITTEE SHARE SAID THE BILL WILL NOT GET A VOTE THIS SESSION.

>> HOW IMPORTANT IS A STEP WAS THIS FOR THE CANNABIS DEBATE?

>> THIS WAS HUGE, THERE'S ABOUT A DOZEN OR SO BILLS FILED I EVER YEAR THAT EITHER LEGALIZE MARIJUANA OR DECRIMINALIZE IT AND NEVER BEFORE HAVE THEY GOTTEN A HEARING SO IT'S A BIG FIRST STEP, A LOT OF TIMES IN THE LEGISLATURE IT TAKES A FEW YEARS TO GET A BILL ACROSS THE FINISH LINE, SO IT IS A HUGE DEAL BUT I WOULDN'T GET TOO EXCITED IF YOU'RE WANTING TO HAVE MARIJUANA LEGALIZEs IN THE NEXT YEAR OR TO OR THREE BECAUSE THE LEADERS IN BOTH CHAMBERS HAVE BEEN REWILL YOU BE TENANT TO LEGALIZE IT BEFORE THE FEDERAL LEVEL DOES AND HOLCOMB HAS BEEN IN THAT SAME VEIN.

IT SOUNDED LIKE QUITE A FEW LAWMAKERS SEEPED TO SUPPORT THE IDEA SO IT'S POSSIBLE IF IT HAD COME UP FOR A VET IT WOULD HAVE PASSED THE COMMITTEE BUT AGAIN IT HAS TO PASS THE WHOLE CHAMBER AND THEN THE SENATE SO I THINK WE'RE STILL A LONG WAYS OFF.

>> WE DO A LOT OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.

WE HAVE A COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT TOOL WHERE PEOPLE CAN E-MAIL US AND WE GET SO MANY PEOPLE ASKING ABOUT CANNABIS AND THIS WEEK WHEN THEY READ THE STORY FRUSTRATED THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO GO ANY FARTHER, WHY DOESN'T THAT TRANSLATE TO ACTION AT THE SEDATE HOUSE OR IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT IT IS STARTING -- >> THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT IT SEEMS TO BE A POTENT ISSUE.

LOOK AT THE STATE DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE A COUPLE YEARS AGO SAID THEY MADE I WOULD IT NUMBER ONE, TWO AND THREE TO BE AGENDA, I THINK OUT OF SOME GUT SENSE THAT THAT WOULD MOVE NUMBERS AND ACTUALLY NOW THEY'VE BANGED AWAY.

I THINK THEY HAVE OTHER ISSUES THAT -- >> (SPEAKING SIMULTANEOUSLY.)

>> YOUR POINT IS THAT YES IT'S CHANGED AND YOU HAVE GROUPS THAT FORMALLY WERE ALIGNED WITH CONSERVE TIFF CLAUSES, YOU HAVE VETERANS OF FOREIGN THE WARS AND AMERICAN LEGION AND A LOT OF FOLK SEEING THIS AS A MEDICAL ISSUE FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE ACQUIRE VARIOUS ILLNESSES AND AILMENTS FOR WHICH MARIJUANA SEEMS TO PROVIDE SOME RELIEF.

BUT HAVING SAID ALL THAT IF YOU'RE IN THE CAMP OF PEOPLE ABOUT TO GET EXCITED, YOU'RE BEST BET IS TO MOVE TO A COUNTY WHERE THE PROSECUTOR SAID HE OR SHE WON'T PROSECUTE.

>> I THINK I KNOW OF ONE.

>> YOU'RE SITTING IN ONE RIGHT NOW BUT SHE'S RIGHT.

IN THE MEANTIME UNTIL THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CHANGES THE POLICIES OR WE HAVE A DIFFERENT GOVERNOR WHO IS WILLING TO SIGN -- IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> TO A POINT JOHN MADE ABOUT BRINGING TOGETHER A LOT OF GROUPS, KATIE BLARE GOT UP TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS BILL DURING THE HEARING AND SHE STARTED WITH IT'S NOT OFTEN THAT I GET TO SPEAK SANDWICH BETWEEN JIM LUCAS WHO'S BEEN ON THE SHOW AND AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY BUT I'M EXCITED ABOUT THAT.

SO IS THAT KIND OF POINT TO THE INEVITABILITY OF THIS.

>> SURE, LOOK THESE STEP ARE REALLY IMPORTANT ON BIG ISSUES LIKE THIS AND ESPECIALLY -- THIS IS THE SAME VEIN AS ALCOHOL ISSUES AND GAMING ISSUES.

WE TAKE CAUTIOUS STEPS FORWARD TO DO THIS AND IT'S JUST TIME TO DO IT.

IT'S SO MUCH MONEY, JUST GO DO IT.

ALL THE OTHER STATES -- THERE'S ANOTHER SIDE TO THAT STORY.

THERE ARE REAL PROBLEMS WITH THE BLACK MARKET?

STATES THAT HAVE LEGALIZED.

THERE ARE REAL SOCIAL SERVICE PROBLEMS, ADDICTION PROBLEMS THAT THIS EXACERBATES AND THAT COSTS MUNCH FOR EVERY DOLLAR WE'RE BRINGING IN IN REVENUE ON AVERAGE YOU'RE SPENDING TWO, THREE SOMETIMES $4 ON OTHER SERVICES, CRIMINAL LAW ENFORCEMENT, TRYING TO CONTROL AND REIN IN THE BLACK MARKET, SO THE LEGISLATURE KNOWS THAT SO WHEN THE PUBLIC SAYS JUST LEGALIZE IT ALREADY, LET'S SLOW DOWN AND DO THIS THE RIGHT WAY GYRE TO THAT POINT WE HEARD PEOPLE ADVOCATING FOR THIS BILL WHO SAID DECRIMINALIZATION IS GOOD AND IMPORTANT, WE ALSO NEED REGULATION, IS THAT WHAT IS GOING TO TAKE THE MOST -- NOW THAT IT SEEMS THE BALL HAS GOT GOTTEN ROLLING IN A SERIOUS WAY IS THAT -- >> YOU NEED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO ACT.

THAT'S WHERE YOU COME DOWN.

THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN DO IT BUT THIS PARTICIPATE IT, DECRIMINALIZING IT SAFES MONEY.

AND WHEN YOU ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT THE FACT THAT PEOPLE WANT IT, WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THE SUPER MAJORITY CARES WHAT THE VOTERS WANT?

LOOK AT WHAT THEY DID ON ABORTION?

LOOK WHAT DOING WITH GUNS.

LOOK AT THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS SO THEY DON'T CARE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ACCOUNTABLE.

>> I'LL SAY TOO ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THERE ARE THINGS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN DO OTHER THAN LEGALIZE IT.

ONE OF THE BIGGEST OBSTACLES IS IS IT PROHIBITION ON BANKS.

BANKS CAN'T WORK WITH THE BUSINESS -- >> STOP THE ROBBERIES AND ALL OF OF THAT.

>> LAWMAKERS, PARENTS AND ECTOS ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENTED FOR HOURS THIS WEEK OVER A SENATE BILL THAT WOULD STRIP SCHOOL LIBRARIANS AND TEACHERS OF LIABILITY.

>>> UNDER THE BILL IF A TEACHER OR SCHOOL LIBRARIAN WERE CHARGED WITH GIVING HARMFUL MATERIAL TO A MINOR THEY COULDN'T USE THE EDUCATIONAL VALUE AS A LAW SCHOOL DEFENSE.

BRET CARPENTER IS ONE PARENT WHO SUPPORTS THE MEASURE.

>> PUBLIC SCHOOLS HAVE BECOME THE PRINCIPLE PLACE OF SEXUALIZING CHILDREN IN OUR SOCIETY.

IT'S NOT THE CELL PHONE -- >> OPPONENTS INCLUDED LIBRARIANS, DIRECTOR OF THE ELKHART PUBLIC LIBRARY.

>> TO ALWAYS EQUALITY PEDESTAL FILL YA TO BOOK IS A FALSE NARRATIVE >>> THE BILL NOW MOVEs TO THE FULL SENATE.

>> JOHN YOU'VE HAD GUIDANCES K-12 SCHOOLS.

IS PORN RAMPANT IN OUR SCHOOLS?

>> EVERYWHERE.

>> NOT THAT IDENTIFY IDENTIFY I'VE SEEN.

THE SHELVES FULL OF "NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC" IS GATHERING DUST BUT NO I DON'T THINK SO.

OF COURSE NOT IS THE ANSWER AND EVEN IF THERE IS -- COULD I FIREARM SOME CASE?

COULD SOMEBODY GO OUT AND PULL SOMETHING OFF A SHELF?

ABSOLUTELY, BUT AS I'VE SAID BEFORE AND I PRESUME THIS IS WHY YOU'RE ASKING THE QUESTION BECAUSE I THROW ASIDE IMPARTIALITY ON FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUES, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS WHERE THERE IS NO AGREED UPON AGENDA.

THERE ARE PEOPLE FOR WHOM GUNS -- BOOKS ON GUNS WOULD BE -- THEY DON'T WANT THEIR KIDS AROUND THEM AND THAT'S HARMFUL TO A YOUNG PERSON PERHAPS.

THERE ARE PEOPLE WHOSE RELIGION WOULD SUGGEST THAT CERTAIN TYPES OF MODERN MEDICINE ARE NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS SO WOULD SOME SORT OF BOOK ON WHAT HAPPENED -- IF YOU WANT TO BE A DOCTOR OR NURSE AND THESE ARE THE PROCEDURES, THAT MIGHT RUN AFOUL OF SOMEBODY'S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.

AND OF COURSE WE GET THE CLASS YOU BE EXAMPLE, WHAT ABOUT A BOOK THAT SHOWS MALE OR FEMALE AGNAT ANATOMY?

DO YOU RIP THOSE OUT -- WHATEVER THE MODERN EQUIVALENT IS OF THAT.

SO MY IS THAT IS THIS -- >> THIS IS MY QUESTION -- >> IF YOU'RE A PRIVATE SCHOOL AND YOU WANT TO HAVE A ONE BOOK LIBRARY, THE KORAN, THE BIBLE, THAT'S YOUR PREROGATIVE BUT IF YOU'RE A PUBLICLY FUNDED THE INSTITUTION I'M SORRY IT'S PUBLIC FOR A REASON.

>> NO, NOT IF YOU -- >> THIS IS MY THING.

I'VE LISTENED -- I EVER WAITING TO TALK TO THE CHAIRMANING OF THIS COMMITTEE AFTER THE COMMITTEE WAS OVER SO I LISTENED TO THIS BILL MAYBE MORE THAN I WANTED TO.

LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE WHOMP SAYING THERE'S PORN IN ALL OUR SCHOOLS, DO THEY KNOW WHAT THE INTERNET IS?

ISN'T THAT IS IT PROBLEM WHICH SCHOOLS REALLY ARE NO CONTROL OVER?

>> DEFINITELY AND YOU THINK ALL THE CHILDREN ARE DONSBACH THEIR HOMEWORK ONLINE THESE DAYS.

THEY'RE GETTING ACCESS TO IT ELSEWHERE, THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

EVERYBODY HAS TEXTS -- >> I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE LITERATURE IN MY KID'S SCHOOL.

>> I'M WORRIED ABOUT WHAT HE'S DOING ON HIS PHONE.

>> IF YOU'RE WORRIED ABOUT A BOOK, WHY DON'T YOU JUST GO TO THE SCHOOL.

>> WE TALK ABOUT THAT ALL THE TIME.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT YOU'RE CHILD IS READING TELL THE CHILD NOT TO READ IT BUT THE PROBLEM WITH THIS IS WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET INTO THE -- 50 YEARS AGO WE DEALT WITH THIS AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S IMMUNITY ON THIS.

ARE WE GOING TO HAVE SENSORS?

ARE WE GOING TO HAVE EVERYBODY SIT DOWN AND READ EVERY NEW BOOK TO SEE IF IT'SOABLE OBJECTIONABLE?

>> WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THAT DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION POLL WHERE IT'S A VERY SMALL MINORITY OF PEOPLE WHO ARE ANGRY THIS.

THAT SORT OF CASE WHERE IT'S A VERY TINY GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE VERY LOUD?

>> AND ANURIA.

>> MATT PIERSON IN ONE OF HIS MORE POIGNANT MOMENTS WAS TESTIFYING ON -- SPEAKING ON HOUSE FLOOR ABOUT A BILL WHICH IS THE SEX SHOP.

>> WE HAVE TO WRAP UNFORTUNATELY.

SORRY AROUND THAT MIKE.

THAT'S INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW FOR THIS WEEK.

OUR PANEL IS DEMOCRAT ANN DELANEY, REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIEN, JON SCHWANTES, HOST OF INDIANA LAWMAKERS, AND NIKI KELLY, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF OF THE INDIANA CAPITAL CHRONICLE.

YOU CAN FIND INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW'S PODCAST AT WEB WFYI.ORG/IWIR.

I'M BRANDON SMITH OF INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING.

JOIN US NEXT TIME BECAUSE A LOT CAN HAPPEN IN AN INDIANA WEEK