Governor Braun's budget proposal.

Braun begins remaking the administrative side of state government.

Plus, the House GOP agenda and more.

From the television studios at WFYI.

It's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending January 17th, 2025.

Indiana Week in Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting stations.

Additional support is provided by the Indy Chamber, working to unite business and community to maintain a strong economy and quality of life.

This week, governor Mike Braun unveiled a state budget proposal that provides nearly $700 million in tax relief, inflationary funding, increases for K-12 schools, and enough money to eliminate child care waitlists.

It's built in part on Braun's promise to cut hundreds of millions in government spending.

The tax relief in Braun's proposal includes increasing income tax deductions to match inflation, eliminating the tax on Tips and retirement income, and creating sales tax holidays for school and youth sports supplies and outdoor recreation equipment.

To help make that funding work in a tight budget, Braun is pledging to cut $700 million in government spending over the next two years.

“And that's not because you're trying to be stingy.

It's because that's called productivity.” The Braun administration provided almost no specifics about what cuts will be made, though the budget proposal does include a $50 million per year cut to the local public health funding program.

Democrats say there are things to applaud in Braun's budget, but questioned how he'll cut government spending without slashing jobs and services.

Is Braun's plan to cut government spending by $700 million achievable?

It's the first question for our Indiana Week in Review panel.

Democrat Ann DeLaney Republican Chris Mitchem.

John, a host of Indiana Lawmakers.

And Niki Kelly, editor in chief of the Indiana Chronicle.

I'm Indiana Public Broadcasting Statehouse bureau chief Brandon Smith Ann DeLaney, can Mike Braun cut that much spending without slashing jobs and services?

Well, my understanding is 500 million that that's coming out of the IEDC budget.

Okay.

So, you know, the legislature's been looking for a way to rein them in.

That would do it.

That would do it.

Definitely do it.

I think the proposal would cut the public health funding is absurd on its face.

And I hope it's going to die quickly.

I mean, we've actually got all 92 counties invested in this now, and we're going to make, hopefully make our population healthier and cut down on the need for more expensive health care services.

The other thing that gets me about this is, you know, he's cutting the spending and then he's doing tax cuts okay.

The tax cuts.

All right.

Fine.

On on tips and and on school supplies and stuff.

I don't care about that.

But not taxing retirement income.

You know almost a quarter of all Hoosiers are on Social Security alone.

And they're the most needy.

And this does absolutely nothing for them.

Okay.

The average pension income in Indiana is 21,600 a year.

Not bad.

Not bad.

But if you're making 200,000 a year from your 401 K retirement plan is going to save you 6000.

It's the same kind of thing Republicans always do.

They give a little bit to some of the needy, but certainly not all of the needy.

And the bulk of the resources go to the people who can afford to pay them in the first place.

We should be taking that money and using it for young families, down payments on houses, childcare, preschool, things that would grow the economy by allowing people to work.

We don't do any of that.

We don't have the vision to plan ahead, to talk about how we're going to make this state more prosperous for everybody.

And not a lot of specifics on what he's going to cut.

Yet.

But he talks a lot about efficiencies, efficiency, squeeze every and you squeeze $700 million of efficiency out of the Indiana state government.

Yeah, I mean, I think the $700 million number is there for a reason.

I think the the budget director and the new, agency share that presented at the budget did pointed out that the state, all the state agencies submitted their budgets back in May.

So as soon as the transition team got in, they got the budgets in November.

So I think between November and now they were able to formulate that $700 million number.

I don't think that's a that's a pie in the sky number.

So I think they do have some plans to potentially implement some of those safety or some of those savings, whether it be through the state contracting power.

You know, there's talks about trying to upgrade technology across agencies that I think can have some long term savings of potentially.

And I mean, when it comes to how the budget looks now, I think they did a pretty good job considering the kind of the landscape they face.

There's so many different moving parts.

You have a road funding bill in the House, you have Medicaid caps in the Senate.

you know, there's a bill to potentially kind of revolutionize how unemployment works in the Senate as well.

So there's a lot of moving pieces.

And we've talked about how you started education.

And then you looked at Medicaid, which is fully funded, by the way.

when it comes to helping those in need when it comes to health care.

There was no cuts there.

despite the Senate potentially capping that, on that side.

So with all of the moving pieces around, I think they did a really good job of using the money that is available whenever it's expected to, you know, flatline over the next.

Couple of years.

I'm sure there isn't any more money available because you're going to give a lot of it back.

I want to, I want to, I want to ask about education funding in Braun's budget.

So I called him inflationary, but it was we were just talking about it.

That's normal inflation at 2% increases.

We haven't been in normal inflation for quite some time.

And, Brian's budget director said the, he thought that Braun was being more than generous to schools when if you couple this with property tax reform that Braun wants, let's just say that happened.

Schools would lose money.

in the next budget cycle is our school.

And then and then Braun says, you know, if schools need more money than he's prepared to give them, they've mismanaged their budgets.

Do you think public schools out there have been mismanaging their budgets when they're asking for more than a 2% increase?

There are so many parts of that.

I, talked about moving pieces and parts.

Sure.

I think the vast majority of Hoosier schools probably are good stewards of their finances and resources.

they recognize that if they're going to go to voters and ask for money through a referendum, that they need to show that they have been good stewards.

otherwise, I don't think a lot of voters are going to be saying yes to districts that have sort of let's throw a little bit here.

Let's throw a little bit there.

you know, it's it used to be easier.

They come budget time because Lawmakers could say I support K through 12 education and tuition support.

You know, I'm there.

Now that question comes with an asterisk.

Or certainly the answer does because there you have divisions that are competing to a certain extent in a very real sense for dollars.

It's the traditional public schools.

It's the charter schools which seem to have really flex their muscles, and are poised to do more.

So in this, in this coming session for a number of reasons.

And then the parochial schools that have through vouchers.

So this is one of those things where you can you can attach when all is said and done, any label, I'm sure you can find a way to justify it.

You know, we've seen some we always joke and we're we have often in recent years about historic.

The word historic increases for K through 12 education.

And we've become so accustomed to that if in fact it ends up being flatlined.

I think that's that meets the definition of historic, because.

That's not the way we want.

Not in a way you want.

But I guess, technically speaking.

Obviously any governor's budget proposal is going to get changed a lot by the two houses of the General Assembly.

By the end of the process.

What did you hear?

Do you think Lawmakers are really going to like and try to keep?

Well, I think a 2% increase for schools is not.

I mean, I think a lot of them would be happy with that, especially in the second year in which the entire revenue forecast shows the state getting hardly any new money.

So I'm not even sure.

The amount that it needs for Medicaid right now.

Right.

More than eclipses, whatever.

I'm not even sure how under broad budget.

That's a balanced budget in the second year, balanced overall, but because there's not any new money going to be coming in the second year, while Medicaid's growing and now at least 2% the second year for for school.

So I think that's actually something that Lawmakers could, could get around at.

I'll be interested to hear how they react to the third of a cut to the public health funding.

That's that's very intriguing.

And also, it did fully fund the Medicaid.

And and the Senate is obviously hoping to curb Medicaid costs.

So maybe that's one at the end where they just assume the full cost of Medicaid the whole way.

And then at the very end, if they're close on a bill that could make them some savings, that helps reach the five, the 700 billion.

I will say, Senator Porter had or Senator Porter, Representative Greg Porter had a good point of saying the day that the April revenue forecast is supposed to come out, I think they're going to have maybe a week to take all of those new numbers and apply it to the new budget.

So, I mean, I think more than ever, the governor's budget is going to be a good basis moving forward.

You know, the other thing you could do, too, is you don't have to take away income tax on retirement income, especially when things are as tight as they are.

I mean, that's going to cost us $700 million by the fourth year.

And the how much money we're going to save in.

We've discussed here there's not a lot of appetite for new expenditures.

it's just the opposite.

But one thing I think to your question, well, enjoy support is, is in a way, it was already on the books, but it will be funded potentially.

And that is the housing fund that I mean, we do have a little extra money for the housing crisis.

And it goes from being a concept, theoretically, to being something that communities.

And this is about providing communities with funding to do infrastructure, water, sewer, those types of things, so that developers can then come in and build, neighborhoods in a more affordable.

Fashion, and the education scholarship fund for special needs.

Of getting a very large.

I can see that also being part of the final budget package.

All right.

Speaking of governor Mike Braun, he also signed a series of executive orders this week to begin to remake the administrative side of state government.

Braun says he wants to streamline government to ensure it works better for Hoosiers.

We want to make sure we're maximizing the impact of taxpayer dollars that state agencies are making smart, efficient decisions.

The executive orders include plans to eliminate 25% of state regulations over the next four years, eliminate degree requirements for state jobs wherever possible.

Reduce or eliminate background checks for professional licenses unless related to the job responsibilities, and prioritize work based experience like apprenticeships over degree and training requirements for professional licenses.

Braun acknowledges there is risk to his approach.

I can tell you if you're naturally risk averse, you're going to be in a broad band of mediocrity.

Braun's orders also include a public dashboard with performance metrics for his cabinet and senior staff.

Chris Mitchem Does Braun's approach risk compromising safety and quality in both state employees and licensed professionals?

If you ask Governor Braun, it might I mean, he just said it right there that he knows there's some risk associated with this, but I think it lands in his that executive order in particular, lands in a good area because we all know of, you know, the entry level positions out there that might require three years of experience.

That's hard to fill.

We all know people that are really good at their jobs because they've lived in it.

They've worked in it for a long time, but they may not have a bachelor's degree.

And if you're on an application website that says if you have a bachelor's degree, you're out or you don't, then you're out, then you're out.

So, know, listen, I think the branch administration knows that, you know, the head of the, you know, public health department should probably be a medical professional, right?

Like, I don't think they're.

Yeah, exactly.

Yeah.

so I the executive order is good because it doesn't just do mass cuts across the board of slashing requirements.

It's an agency by agency position.

Look at what your agency does best and cancel it out that way and that way.

I think you can get a lot more qualified people that are actually living it with the work experience, without that initial cut off of just having a certain education requirement.

Yeah, with a few exceptions, a lot of these executive orders weren't black and white mandates.

You must do this, this and this.

It's we should explore the things we just I you know, we just heard in that video package are these good goals to sort of relook at state employee qualifications and state licensing professional licenses?

I think it's always good to look at those.

But the danger on this is you're taking you're taking objective criteria for a position and replacing it with subjective criteria, you know, is my experience exactly what what the kind of experience you need for that job that's going to be debated.

I don't know how many different ways.

If it can be done.

Fine.

I'd like to talk about the other executive orders.

I got a.

Feeling the putting the flag up false, all the MAGA things he wanted to do, the flags and taking away diversity and and the the Office of Diversity and and then what was again?

Oh, they can't work at home anymore.

There's that applied to the Secretary of state's office to does the brother in law have to come in then if he's not?

I, I'm not sure.

I'm not sure that does qualify, but I want to ask the.

Elected office, so no it.

Doesn't.

Yeah.

I don't think it does.

The executive order, it did get a lot of attention.

Was closing the chief Equity, Inclusion and Opportunity office and banning FDI in state government.

Does that do you think that will have a meaningful impact on the way state government runs?

Probably not.

Not to the average person.

It gets a lot of like sexy headlines, you know?

But the fact is it's going to affect some training that I think new employees were offered.

the office itself was paid for by an outside grant, so it doesn't even save state dollars.

I think it's more symbolic than the not the actual work from home executive order I found to be the more interesting one.

And having especially watched Governor Holcomb go through it, you know, they had a bunch of people working from home during Covid, then post Covid, he tried to get them all back and there was like a revolt.

And then there was like such huge turnover.

They then had to come up with these remote and hybrid options because everyone back then you got to remember two years ago, people were like, no, I can find a different job where I can, you know, have my.

And so now I think Governor Braun has seen a little bit more of a pendulum.

Back to the work now, work from, you know, your office space.

And so I think that's a more fascinating look for a state that has occasionally had turnover issues with state employees.

I, I agree on the idea of, I think closing the the Equity Inclusion Opportunity Office and banning Dei is more symbolic.

The flag I don't I'm not I don't is what I, I don't want to spend a lot of time talking about the flag of the country.

I just I want to I want to talk.

Yes, it's symbolic, but I want to talk about something the Black Caucus raised with that issue, which is he's saying you're replacing DEI and state government with MEI, which is merit, excellence and, innovation.

Yeah.

As if being diverse and being excellent aren't the same thing.

Is that is that a problem?

I mean, that certainly begs that question.

And you're raising it right now.

And certainly you would like to think that that they're synonymous, that diversity and an a meritocracy, can are one in the same.

Ideally it's about opportunity and the ability to advance.

I don't think on this issue on that executive order.

You're right.

Hoosiers, the average Hoosier, no impact average Hoosier to the extent it has any impact, it'll be economic development.

Because remember, it's all about the image of a state.

some employers might say that's a plus.

Other employers might say more evidence that Indiana is whatever stereotype we thought Indiana was.

And it's not the kind of welcoming environment that we want for our workforce.

So that could be problematic.

Just one other observation about the first topic with the notion of, lessening the lowering licensing requirements and so forth.

It may work the, the risk, though, and, and the governor talked about risk if, if you've lowered the standards or the requirements and something you got a bad apple and something happens, then inevitably the stories are this person occupied a position that in the past he or she would not have been eligible for.

You know, you never get dinged for upping the licensure requirements.

If then if you have a bad apple, you say, this is precisely why we put those standards in place.

So this is a risk that goes as long as he's governor, because that doesn't go away.

It just takes one bad apple who wouldn't have followed by Fide before to screw things up.

All right, time now for viewer feedback.

Each week we post an unscientific online poll question.

And this week's question is, do you support Governor Brown's decision to close Indiana's equity, Inclusion and Opportunity Office?

A yes or b no?

Last week we asked you whether to curb Medicaid spending.

Lawmakers should, limit the number of people allowed on the Healthy Indiana plan.

15% of you say yes, 85% say no.

If you'd like to take part in the poll.

Got to WFYI.org/IWIR and look for the poll.

The Indiana House GOP's 2025 legislative priorities unveiled this week.

Hope to build on previous initiatives that aim to bring down health care and housing costs.

Representative Martin Carbaugh's legislation would examine what nonprofit hospitals are charging for services compared to the Medicare, reimburses rate.

If you're charging over a certain level and we have a starting point in the bill.

are you really a not for profit hospital anymore?

Are you for profit hospital?

The measure would revoke nonprofit status for hospitals charging more than 200% of the Medicare reimbursement rate on housing.

Representative Doug Miller's bill would put more money into a previously created housing infrastructure loan fund for local governments, and it also encourages, our communities to, work with housing providers to to meet needs across the state.

The legislation would prioritize loans for communities focused on policies like multifamily and higher density housing, counties that nobody wants.

Boundaries reach Niki Kelley on revoking the nonprofit status of these hospitals.

We've seen state House Republicans propose really bold health care bills before, only to weaken or even abandon them later in session.

Does that start to change this year?

I think we're at the the sort of we either have to do something strident and strict or give up at this point, because we've tried all the sort of steps up to it.

We've tried approvals of mergers and monitoring and transparency of your prices.

And, you know, nothing's really working.

And so, I, you know, I'm not going to use a phrase my dad would say from growing up, but like, it's either move forward with some real strict and new rules or just give up.

I think I know exactly what that phrase is, and my grandfather used to use the same one I, we just talked we actually talked about the Housing infrastructure loan program.

I think that is something that that a lot of people on both sides of the aisle support.

It's making sure it's targeted to building homes that are affordable for people on the lower end of the income scale, but on the hospital stuff and the health care stuff, they're trying to build more on the transparency.

But at some point, do you have to crack the whip a little bit.

If something's going to happen?

As long as Hoosiers, you know, you know, I'll look at my midsection are not the healthiest lot.

Generally, statistically speaking, that's going to add on to cost.

The problem, I think with this ongoing debate and the reason we don't have resolution is if this were a Western, we wouldn't know who is the villain, who's wearing the black hat and who's wearing the white hat, because it's a lot of this and everybody has a good point.

You can't just sort hospitals, hospitals.

A lot of the smaller ones have really taken it on the chin, which is why what more than a half of Indiana counties don't even have a hospital anymore, so you can't paint with a broad brush.

A lot of this is a shot across the bow and then sometimes works.

We saw one of the large nonprofit hospitals that ponied up a half $1 billion voluntarily to education of medical students, in our state.

And I think that was largely not only that.

Was clear, that was to clear some of the reserves on there, but.

It wasn't just out.

That was that wasn't altruism.

That was a response to like, okay, we're going to placate you a little bit.

So that but that only goes so far to your point.

But but again, I don't we don't know who's to blame Hoosiers for being unhealthy hospitals a few for overcharging insurance companies benefit benefit managers.

Maybe everybody's to blame.

I don't know.

I think the answer is probably everybody's to blame.

But we're starting to see action on all of those signs.

We saw the prior authorization reform that ended up dying a quick death last session get brought back up this session, so we'll see if it goes further this year.

But yeah, to be continued.

A cannabis legalization coalition says moving Indiana directly to full adult legal use is the best way to ensure a regulated market that also addresses public safety concerns.

Some state Lawmakers, including Republican Heath VanNatter, are part of the new coalition.

To be clear, this is not about promoting cannabis use.

It's about addressing the reality of US presence in our society with a responsible, conservative solution that upholds our principles of limited government, law and order, and the protection of families.

Then that or is authoring a bill this session that would fully legalize cannabis for adult use and establish a regulatory framework for its sale in Indiana.

Republican leaders in both the House and Senate remain unconvinced about the benefits of cannabis legalization.

New governor Mike Braun has said he's open to discussing medical cannabis.

That's as we've talked for so long about cannabis legislation in Indiana.

Making progress is progress alone with celebration anymore, or is it time to do it?

Or is also, depending on what side you're on, there was a lot of momentum.

You had groups that traditionally weren't supportive, like the veterans groups, the American Legion.

Now they're saying our members are not crazed hippies.

They want this for pain control and pain management.

And we saw a number of Republicans come forward.

We saw the Democratic state chair a few years ago say our three-part priority is marijuana legalization.

Marijuana legalization, marijuana legalization.

I kind of think, though, that was that last, and it'll probably happen.

Don't get me wrong, it's going to happen eventually, but not this session, because I think it was the high watermark, sort of in terms of that enthusiasm, maybe last biennium, last session, and now I'm actually seeing legislation I hadn't seen as frequently before, which is limiting putting restrictions on advertising.

Some one, it would be a complete ban on advertising in all platforms, others would be a more traditional away from schools, away from churches, etc..

These are the objections of people like Rob Bray and particularly Todd Huston, who's really opposed to this.

Is that going to be the thing that stops it for the foreseeable future?

Yeah, absolutely.

I mean, you have you know, a body in the Senate Republicans in particular, that have historically been against a simple cigarette tax increase when we've been, you know, the lowest in our region for four years now.

So I think and there's also a point, there's a reason why they want to go from 0 to 100 when it comes to full scale legalization.

Skip the medical part, because just procedurally, if you go from this to medical, you're going to have that 3 or 4 years where we let medical play out.

Let's get the research before we even consider going to, which is going to be another 2 or 3 years of advocacy strategy.

Yeah.

All right.

Finally, it's Indiana versus Ohio in the inaugural College Football Playoff National championship game on Monday, as the Notre Dame Fighting Irish face off against the Buckeyes of Ohio State.

Chris Mitchum as an Ohio State Buckeyes fan.

We know who you're rooting for, but do you think the Irish have a chance?

yeah.

Let's, you just out in one of my deepest, darkest secrets as somebody who loves Indiana and off the pin.

I think so much less of, you know.

Just give it away.

listen, Notre Dame Irish fans, I love Marcus Freeman.

My girlfriend loves Marcus Freeman, and he has them playing very, very well.

He did it definitely more than.

But, I'd be lying if I said I didn't think Ohio State was the more talented team.

If we play our game, we should get the win.

I think as a lifelong Notre Dame Irish Fighting Irish fan, I think I agree with you.

I do think Ohio State is going to win.

I'm hoping for a good competitive game, but it's.

No surprise.

You can be Irish for that.

I hope so, ordinarily, I root for the big Ten.

If there's a Big Ten but not Ohio State.

Oh, how I hate Ohio State.

I'm a I'm for the, for Notre Dame, no question.

We saw Ohio Governor Mike DeWine and new governor Mike Braun make a little wager on social media this morning to Niki.

And as both a Hoosier and a Buckeye, because I grew up in Ohio, but I went to the real Ohio University, so I cannot in any manner root for that state.

So this is an easy one.

For the Irish.

I'm not sure.

I would quibble with the framing of your question, because I think the big winner here is Indiana University football, because they're the only they lost two games this season, right.

If you look at regular season and the playoffs, who were those two teams they lost to?

Let's think about that.

Oh yeah.

These two.

Teams.

And our loss to Notre Dame was the closest of all of those play offs.

Yeah.

And I will also say this, before the show, a couple people told me that we should mention that Indiana only lost those two teams.

And I said, don't worry, John, I'll do it for us.

That's Indiana Week in review for this week.

Our panel is Democrat Ann DeLaney, Republican Chris Mitchum, Jon Schwantes of Indiana Lawmakers and Niki Kelly of the Indiana Capital Chronicle.

You can find Indiana Week reviews, podcast and episodes at WFYI.org/IWIR or on the PBS app.

I'm Brandon Smith of Indiana Public Broadcasting.

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

The views expressed are solely those of the panelists.

Indiana Week in Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting stations.

Additional support is provided by the Indy Chamber, working to unite business and community to maintain a strong economy and quality of life.