♪♪ PRESIDENT TRUMP IS WRONG.

PRESIDENT TRUMP IS WRONG.

>> MIKE PENCE REBUKES TRUMP OVER JANUARY 6TH.

THE ACLU SUES TODD ROKITA.

PLUS, CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM ROLLBACK AND MORE ON INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW FOR THE WEEK ENDING FEBRUARY 11, 2022.

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

FORMER VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE RECENTLY REBUTTED DONALD TRUMP'S FALSE CLAIMS THAT PENCE SOMEHOW COULD HAVE OVERTURNED THE RESULTS OF THE 2020 ELECTION, SAYING THAT THE FORMER PRESIDENT WAS SIMPLY “WRONG.” IN A SPEECH TO THE CONSERVATIVE FEDERALIST SOCIETY IN FLORIDA, PENCE ADDRESSED TRUMP'S INTENSIFYING RECENT EFFORTS TO ADVANCE THE FALSE NARRATIVE THAT HE COULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING TO PREVENT JOE BIDEN FROM TAKING OFFICE.

PENCE WAS CLEAR AND UNEQUIVOCAL - HE SAID HE HAD NO RIGHT TO OVERTURN THE ELECTION.

>>VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE: THE PRESIDENCY BELONGS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ALONE.

AND FRANKLY, THERE IS NO IDEA MORE UN-AMERICAN THAN THE NOTION THAT ANY ONE PERSON COULD CHOOSE THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT.

>> PENCE IN THE PAST HAS DEFENDED HIS ACTIONS ON JAN. 6 AND SAID THAT HE AND TRUMP WILL LIKELY NEVER SEE “EYE TO EYE” ON WHAT HAPPENED THAT DAY.

>> WHAT EFFECT WILL THIS HAVE ON PENCE'S POLITICAL FUTURE?

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

DEMOCRAT ANN DELANEY.

REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIEN.

JON SCHWANTES, HOST OF INDIANA LAWMAKERS.

AND NIKI KELLY, STATEHOUSE REPORTER FOR THE FORT WAYNE JOURNAL GAZETTE.

I'M INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING STATEHOUSE REPORTER BRANDON SMITH.

MIKE O'BRIEN, HAS MIKE PENCE COST HIMSELF A CHANCE AT THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION FOR PRESIDENT?

>> NO, I DON'T TAKE THAT AS SNARK AT ALL, A LEGITIMATE QUESTION, LESS SO IF YOU LOOK AT JUST THE PAST WEEK AS AN EXAMPLE.

I THOUGHT, ONE, I WAS PROUD OF VICE PRESIDENT PENCE FOR HIS ACTIONS ON JANUARY 6, AND WHAT HE SAID THIS WEEK.

I THOUGHT HE PICKED THE RIGHT FORUM.

THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY WHO BELIEVE IN THE WRITTEN WORD OF THE CONSTITUTION, FIRST AND FOREMOST, WHICH WAS THE DUTY THAT VICE PRESIDENT PENCE AND THE -- WAS ATTEMPTING TO FULFILL JANUARY 6.

I THINK WE'RE STARTING TO SEE, I THINK THE RNC VOTE TO CENSURE LIZ CHENEY WAS PERHAPS A TURNING POINT ON JUST HOW DIVIDED THE PARTY WAS.

MITCH McCONNELL, COMING OUT ON THE BACK END OF THAT VOTE AS HE HAS EVER BEEN BY CALLING IT A VIOLENT INSURRECTION, ONLY PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO PREVENT THE PEACEFUL TRANSFER OF POWER.

HE SAID THAT'S WHAT IT WAS.

IT WAS A BRIEF STATEMENT.

BUT THE MOST SUCCINCT AND ACCURATE WAY IN MY OPINION THAT YOU CAN DEFINE THE ACTIONS THAT DAY.

I THINK OTHERS HAVE DEFENDED THE RNC.

I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THOSE CONCERNED WITH DEMOCRATS GOING TO TAKE THE JANUARY 6 COMMISSION AND GO WELL BEYOND ITS CHARGE.

EXAMPLES OF THAT WITH HOW COVID HAS BEEN ADMINISTERED AND REACTED TO AND USED THE LEVERAGE, SOCIAL CHANGE, AND EVERY BAD IDEA THEY'VE HAD FOR THE LAST QUARTER CENTURY WE'VE HAD IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS, I DON'T DEGREE THE COMMISSION IS GOING TO BE USED AS A POLITICAL WEAPON, I THOUGHT VICE PRESIDENT PENCE, MAJORITY LEADER, MINORITY LEADER, RATHER, McCONNELL, THEIR COMMENTS THIS WEEK, HOPEFULLY ARE A WAKE-UP CALL AND SETTING THE PARTY ON THE RIGHT DIRECTION, AND ACCURATELY DEFINING WHAT HAPPENED THAT DAY.

>> ANN DeLANEY, SAME QUESTION, HAS MIKE PENCE COST HIMSELF A SHOT?

>> I DON'T THINK HE HAD A SHOT.

TRUMP CONTROLS THE PARTY.

WHEN YOU HAVE THESE POLLS THAT SAY THAT 70% OF REPUBLICANS BELIEVE THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN, YOU KNOW THEY'RE NO LONGER IN TOUCH WITH REALITY AT ALL.

FRANKLY, MIKE PENCE WAS EXACTLY RIGHT, HE HAD NOTHING OTHER THAN AN ADMINISTRATIVE DUTY TO PERFORM.

HE HAD NO RIGHT TO OVERTURN THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

I THOUGHT HE SHOULD HAVE GONE FARTHER IN HIS COMMENTS, AND SAID, DONALD TRUMP IS WRONG.

ELECTION WAS NOT STOLEN, THE ELECTION WAS LEGITIMATELY JOE BIDEN'S VICTORY.

AND I WOULD HAVE FRANKLY HAD A LOT MORE RESPECT FOR HIM UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES THAN JUST SIMPLY DEFENDING HIS OWN ACTION.

HE'S NOT PUTTING TO BED THE LIE THAT THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP KEEPS REPEATING OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

AND THE INCUR -- INSURRECTION, SAYING THAT IS LEGITIMATE POLITICAL DISCOURSE IS ABSOLUTELY INCREDIBLE.

WHEN YOU HAVE THAT KIND OF THING AND CENSURING THE TWO REPUBLICANS WHO HAD ENOUGH GUMPTION TO SAY THESE PEOPLE TRIED TO OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT, THESE PEOPLE KILLED PEOPLE IN THE PROCESS, THAT HAS TO BE DEALT W THEY HAVE TO BE PROSECUTED.

DONALD TRUMP'S ROLE IN THAT HAS TO BE FERRETED OUT, EVEN IF HE'S WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE, DESTROYING EVIDENCE, RIPPING UP MEMOS, AND TRYING TO GET HIS PEOPLE NOT TO TESTIFY.

I THINK FRANKLY THAT VICE PRESIDENT PENCE OUGHT TO AGREE TO TESTIFY AND SAY EXACTLY WHAT DONALD TRUMP SAID TO HIM TO TRY TO GET HIM TO OVERTURN THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

THIS IS ABOUT THE FATE OF DEMOCRACY, IT REALLY IS, IF THESE PEOPLE CAN DISTORT THE TRUTH TO THE EXTENT TO THE FACT THAT 7 MILLION PEOPLE MORE VOTED FOR JOE BIDEN THAN DONALD TRUMP AND THROW JOE BIDEN OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE, IT IS A THREAT TO OUR DEMOCRACY, AND IT'S TIME FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BE STATESMEN, REGARDING WELL BY HISTORY TO STAND UP.

HE'S RIGHT, MIKE'S RIGHT THAT McCONNELL DID THAT, AND HE IS CORRECT IN THAT.

BUT THAT'S ONE VOICE.

THAT'S ONE VOICE OUT OF A PARTY THAT HAS BEEN CURIOUSLY SILENT ABOUT THE THREAT TO OUR DEMOCRACY POSED BY DONALD TRUMP AND HIS LIES, I THINK MORE NEED TO STAND UP AND BE COUNTED, IT IS CRUCIAL TO OUR COUNTRY.

>> JON SCHWANTES, I THINK WE'VE SEEN A DIVISION, A GROWING, AT LEAST A CLEARER PICTURE OF THE DIVISION OVER THE QUESTION OF THE VERACITY OF THE ELECTION JANUARY 6.

WHICH WAY DO YOU THINK IT'S GOING TO GO?

>>JON SCHWANTES: YOU KNOW, LET ME RESORT TO ONE OF THE OLDEST CLICHES IN THE BOOK, AND GET THE GROANS READY TO GO.

TIME WILL TELL.

I THINK A LOT OF THIS WILL DEPEND ON WHAT THE AFOREMENTIONED JANUARY 6 COMMITTEE REPORT TURNS OUT TO BE, AND THERE MAY BE SOME VERY DAMMING EVIDENCE THAT THAT BODY, THAT PANEL COMES FORWARD WITH THAT WOULD PERHAPS SHAKE THE CONFIDENCE OF SOME OF THAT 70% THAT ANN MENTIONED IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AMONG ITS CORE ELECTORATE STILL THINKS THERE WAS SOMETHING UNTOWARD ABOUT THE OUTCOME OF THE ELECTION IN TERMS OF HOW IT WAS MANAGED OR MANIPULATED.

SO AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT ONE WOULD THINK WOULD HAPPEN.

IF SOME VERY DAMMING EVIDENCE COMES OUT.

IT IS SURPRISING TO ME THAT THE FORMER PRESIDENT HAS BEEN ABLE TO MAINTAIN THIS SORT OF CONTROL OVER SO MANY ELECTED OFFICIALS WITHIN HIS PARTY AND SO MANY RANK AND FILE VOTERS.

BUT YOU ARE STARTING TO SEE SOME CRACKS, SOME FISSURES IN THAT MONOLITH.

THAT'S WHY I RESORT TO THE CLICHE TIME WILL TELL.

NEXT FEW MONTHS WILL BE VERY TELLING.

WE'LL SEE A PRELIMINARY REPORT FROM THE JANUARY 6 REPORT, FINAL REPORT, PRESUMABLY BEFORE THE MID TERMS.

I THINK A LOT -- THAT WILL BE VERY TELLING.

SOME PEOPLE MAY JUST YAWN AND MOVE ON.

BUT I THINK THAT THAT IS THE BEST INDICATOR PERHAPS OF WHERE THIS HEADS.

>> TIME NOW FOR VIEWER FEEDBACK.

EACH WEEK WE POSE AN UNSCIENTIFIC, ONLINE POLL QUESTION.

THIS WEEK'S QUESTION: WILL MIKE PENCE BE THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT IN 2024?

A YES, B, NO.

LAST WEEK'S QUESTION: WOULD PART-TIME, “ADJUNCT” TEACHERS WITHOUT TEACHER TRAINING HELP ADDRESS INDIANA'S TEACHER SHORTAGE?

JUST 21% OF YOU SAY YES.

79% SAY NO.

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

THE ACLU OF INDIANA IS SUING ATTORNEY GENERAL TODD ROKITA, ALLEGING HE'S VIOLATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

FOR THE LAST FEW MONTHS, ROKITA HAS BANNED ABDUL-HAKIM SHABAZZ FROM HIS PRESS CONFERENCES.

SHABAZZ IS A LONGTIME INDIANA POLITICAL COMMENTATOR AND WRITER, WHICH INCLUDES RUNNING THE WEBSITE INDY POLITICS.

>> ROKITA CLAIMS SHABAZZ IS NOT A “REAL” JOURNALIST, CALLING HIM A GOSSIP COLUMNIST.

SHABAZZ HAS LONG HAD MEDIA CREDENTIALS THAT GIVE HIM ACCESS TO THE STATE GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS IN DOWNTOWN INDIANAPOLIS.

THE ACLU IS SUING ROKITA ON SHABAZZ'S BEHALF, ARGUING THE STATE'S HIGHEST LEGAL AUTHORITY IS IN “CLEAR VIOLATION” OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

IT ALSO SAYS ROKITA'S ANIMOSITY TOWARDS SHABAZZ GOES BACK TO 2018, WHEN ROKITA OBJECTED TO HIM MODERATING A US SENATE PRIMARY DEBATE THAT ROKITA WAS PARTICIPATING IN, CALLING SHABAZZ A “LIBERAL” MEDIA FIGURE.

SHABAZZ IS WIDELY CONSIDERED TO HAVE A CONSERVATIVE BENT.

>> NIKI KELLY, I ACTUALLY WANT TO START WITH YOU HERE.

BECAUSE YOU'VE ALSO WRITTEN IN THE LAST COUPLE WEEKS ABOUT TODD ROKITA.

THIS ISN'T THE ONLY SORT OF CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AT THIS MOMENT, IS THERE?

>> NO.

HE'S OBVIOUSLY FACING THIS FIRST AMENDMENT FIGHT.

ON TOP OF THAT HE TOOK A TRIP DOWN TO THE BORDER, INVITED BY THE TEXAS GOVERNOR, ALONG WITH SOME OTHER REPUBLICAN ATTORNEY GENERALS, THEY GOT A BORDER BRIEFING, GOT A TOUR ON THE RIO GRANDE, THINGS LIKE THAT.

THEY DID FILE A LAWSUIT WHILE THEY WERE DOWN THERE.

SO THERE WAS SOME WORK BEING DONE.

BUT, UNFORTUNATELY, HE ALSO TOOK HIS SON ALONG WITH HIM.

AND WENT TO A TRUMP RALLY ON THE WAY BACK.

OH, AND STOPPED AT BILL CLINTON'S BOYHOOD HOME IN ARKANSAS.

SO, YOU KNOW, HE SAID THAT IT WAS STATE-FUNDED.

THEY -- THE OFFICE HAS NOT GIVEN OUT THE EXACT COSTS THAT MANY OF US HAVE ASKED FOR YET.

AND SO HE'S DEFINITELY FACING A LITTLE BACKLASH ON THAT, TOO.

>> ANN DELANEY, IS STUFF LIKE THIS FROM ROKITA A SIDESHOW - OR DOES IT HAVE AN ACTUAL EFFECT ON HOOSIERS?

>> THIS ISN'T A SIDE SHOW.

THIS IS THE MAIN EVENT, TODD ROKITA.

ALL HE HAS DONE SINCE HE'S BEEN IN ELECTIVE OFFICE WHEN HE GOT ELECTED ON THE FOURTH BALLOT FOR SECRETARY OF STATE, GETS ELECTED IN A REPUBLICAN STATE, AND STARTS TAKING OUT ADS TO RAISE HIS NAME RECOGNITION.

HE'S FERRETED OUT THE -- IN VALPO UNIVERSITY.

THIS IS ALL -- HE IS ALL ABOUT HEADLINES.

HE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE.

ALL HE CARES ABOUT IS GENERATING HIMSELF, HIS NEXT RUN, WHICH WILL BE FOR GOVERNOR.

THE IRONY OF THIS IS THE LEGISLATURE HASN'T PASSED THE LATEST ROUND OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS THAT THEY'RE GOING, LOOK LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO PASS WHEN THEY GET THROUGH THE SENATE, IF SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR.

SO MEANWHILE, THIS WILL JUST FUND THE ACLU IN INDIANA FOR ANOTHER YEAR, BECAUSE, BETWEEN THE LEGISLATURE AND NOW TODD ROKITA, THEY KEEP PASSING AND TRYING TO HAVE THESE CLEARLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL PIECES OF LEGISLATION, AND THE ACLU FILES SUIT, AND THE ACL WINS, AND IS AWARDED FEE, THEY PROBABLY DON'T HAVE TO DO FUNDRAISERS ANYMORE, THE STATE OF INDIANA IS FUNDING THEM.

IT IS NOT A SIDE SHOW FOR HIM, THAT'S THE MAIN ABOUT, ALL HE'S EVER BEEN ABOUT, TWO CLOWNS BUTTING HEADS BETWEEN -- ABDUL AND TODD ROKITA.

IT'S KIND BEFORE AMUSING, ACTUALLY.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN, IS THIS STUFF FROM TODD ROKITA SOMETHING THAT SHOULD MATTER TO EVERYDAY HOOSIERS?

>> WELL, THE PESKY PART ABOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO LISTEN TO PEOPLE YOU DON'T AGREE WITH AND BE ASKED QUESTIONS BY PEOPLE YOU DON'T LIKE, ELECTED OFFICIALS -- PICK AND CHOOSE WHO THE MEDIA IS IS NOT.

THERE ARE CLEAR STANDARD FOR THAT.

THE COURT IS GOING TO FIGURE THAT OUT.

REGARDING THE TRIP, I THINK, YOU KNOW, I THINK A LOT OF THESE TRIPS ARE BOTH.

WE SEE THIS CONFLICT ALL THE TIME WHEN ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE RUNNING FOR OFFICE, BUT ALSO SERVING IN OFFICE.

AND THE LINES THAT YOU HAVE TO MIND, AND HOW CAREFUL YOU HAVE TO BE IN THAT.

SO WE'LL FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS WHAT FOR THE ROKITA TRIP.

THAT'S NOT A BALANCE NEW TO REPUBLICANS OR DEMOCRATS AT ANY LEVEL.

>> ALL RIGHT.

WELL INDIANA LAWMAKERS ARE POISED TO UNDO A MAJOR PILLAR OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM THEY UNDERTOOK NEARLY A DECADE AGO.

THE REVERSAL COMES AS A LACK OF A LOCAL MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION TREATMENT RESOURCES HAVE LEFT COUNTY JAILS OVERCROWDED.

>> THE 2013 REFORM EFFORT AIMED TO KEEP PEOPLE CONVICTED OF LOW-LEVEL, NONVIOLENT FELONIES OUT OF THE STATE'S PRISON SYSTEM.

INSTEAD, THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO GO TO COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS AND TREATMENT PROGRAMS.

BUT MANY COUNTIES DON'T HAVE SUCH PROGRAMS, LEAVING OFFENDERS IN COUNTY JAILS.

AND JASPER COUNTY SHERIFF PAT WILLIAMSON SAYS JAILS AREN'T EQUIPPED TO PROVIDE NECESSARY HELP.

>>SHERIFF PAT WILLIAMSON: SO, I DON'T HAVE MY PSYCHOLOGIST OR ANY OF THAT STUFF IN THE JAIL.

AND I HAVE A MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL THAT COMES MAYBE EVERY TWO OR THREE WEEKS.

>> THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION SAYS IT DOES HAVE THE PROGRAMS TO HELP THOSE IN NEED OF MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION TREATMENT.

AND SO A BILL THIS SESSION WOULD GIVE JUDGES THE DISCRETION TO SEND PEOPLE WITH LOW-LEVEL FELONY CONVICTIONS TO STATE PRISONS.

BUT ANGELA PHELPS, A FORMER OFFENDER, SAYS IN HER EXPERIENCE, THERE'S A WAIT JUST TO GET INTO ONE OF THE DOC PROGRAMS LEAVING LITTLE TIME FOR A LOW-LEVEL FELON TO GET HELP BEFORE THEY'RE RELEASED.

>>ANGELA PHELPS: FROM MY STANDPOINT, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET TREATMENT.

AND THEN, THE MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES - THAT'S STILL VOLUNTARY.

>> THE BILL CLEARED A SENATE COMMITTEE TUESDAY.

>> JON SCHWANTES, DURING THE HOUSE FLOOR DEBATE, MATT PIERCE SAID THIS BILL WAS AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO FUND LOCAL TREATMENT PROGRAMS.

IS HE RIGHT?

>> HE'S RIGHT ABOUT THEY'RE NOT BEING SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS.

SADLY THIS IS NOT JUST AN ISSUE FOR THOSE INCARCERATED OR THOSE FACING CHARGES.

MENTAL HEALTH IN THIS STATE, SERVICES ARE WOEFULLY INSUFFICIENT, THEY ARE IN MOST OTHER STATES, AS WELL.

SAD COMMENTARY, BECAUSE THAT IS A HEALTH CRISIS PROBABLY ON PAR WITH COVID IN MANY WAYS.

CERTAINLY EXACERBATED BY COVID.

WE CAN START BY STIPULATING THAT, YES, THERE IS A SHORTAGE OF THOSE SERVICES AT THE LOCAL LEVEL THAT OFFENDERS WHO WERE SENT TO COUNTY JAILS FOR WHATEVER REASON ARE NOT -- WERE NOT GETTING THOSE SERVICES, AND PRESUMABLY IT IS BECAUSE THERE WAS NO MONEY TO FUND THOSE SERVICES.

I THINK THAT'S CLEAR.

I THINK THE REASON THERE IS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL IS THE NOTION THAT, YES, BACK IN 2013 WHEN THIS PASSED WITH BROAD BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, THAT WAS THE HOPE.

IT DID MATERIALIZE.

SO I GUESS THERE REALLY IS ONLY ONE OPTION TO KEEP THE COUNTY JAILS FROM BURSTING AT THE SEAMS, AND THAT IS GO BACK TO THE OLD WAY, AND MAKE SURE THAT LEVEL 6 FELONS ARE ROUTED POTENTIALLY BACK TO STATE -- THE STATE SYSTEM.

>> I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER WAY, JON.

I WANT TO MAKE ONE POINT ON THIS, BRANDON.

WHEN THEY PASSED THIS BILL IN 2013, I THOUGHT THEY PUT MONEY IN THERE FOR REGIONAL JAILS TO BE DONE.

AND THE SHERIFFS IN THESE VARIOUS SMALLER COUNTIES COULDN'T AGREE WHERE THE REGIONAL JAIL WAS GOING TO BE.

BUT I THOUGHT THEY ADVOCATED FUNDS FOR THAT -- ALLOCATED FUND.

>> THEY DELEGATED AUTHORITY.

COORDINATE AND BUILD -- >> AND THEY'RE NOT COORDINATED.

OF COURSE IT IS EXPENSIVE.

>> IT'S HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, AND THESE LOCALS HAVE TO FIGURE OUT -- >> SO IS IT TO BUILD A NEW PRISON.

>> THE POLITICS ARE DIFFERENT.

>> YEAH, BECAUSE SOME SHERIFF MAY LOSE SOME JOBS IN HIS LOCAL JAIL...IT MAY BE A REAL THING, BUT IT IS NOT THE FIRST CONSIDERATION.

>> TO BE FAIR, REPRESENTATIVE RANDY FRY, THE AUTHOR OF THIS BILL, SAID YES, THIS BILL, AS MORE LOW-LEVEL NON-VIOLENT FELONS ARE MOVED TO DOC AS OPPOSED TO LOCAL JAILS, YES, THERE IS A COST SAVINGS, HE SAID THAT IS NOT THE REASON.

THE REASON TO DO THIS, WE NEED TO GET THESE PEOPLE TREATMENT.

NIKI, JON TALKED ABOUT GOING BACK TO THE OLD WAY.

IS SOME OF THE PROGRESS HERE THAT THE DOC HAS PROGRAMS THAT THEY'VE NEVER HAD BEFORE OR AT LEAST NOT WHEN THIS 2013 LAW WAS PASSED?

>> YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW.

THEY DEFINITELY HAVE PROGRAMS.

BUT I THINK IT WAS MADE VERY CLEAR IN THE HEARING THAT -- WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LOW LEVEL FELONS, MOST ARE ONLY GOING TO GET A YEAR SENTENCE, SERVE SIX MONTHS, YOU SPEND SIX WEEKS IN INTAKE.

THERE IS PHYSICALLY NOT ENOUGH TIME TO GET THEM INTO THE PROGRAMS.

THEN THEY'RE OUT IN ANOTHER FOUR WEEKS, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW OUR SYSTEM WORKS FOR THESE LOW LEVEL OFFENSES.

I DO THINK THERE IS A REAL QUESTION WHETHER THE DOC HAS THE PROGRAMS OR NOT, WHETHER THESE PEOPLE ARE IN THERE LONG ENOUGH TO MAKE USE OF THEM.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN, IS THIS A FAILURE BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO NOT FUND ENOUGH OF THE -- AND HELP CREATE ENOUGH OF THESE LOCAL MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION TREATMENT PROGRAMS SO THAT THE 2013 LAW COULD HAVE WORKED AS IT WAS DESIGNED?

>> THE LAW CREATED A NEW FELONY CLASS, AND CREATED THIS LOWER TIME WAS CONCERNED WAS GOING TO OVERWHELM THEIR NETWORK.

SO THE COMPROMISE AT THE TIME WAS TO KEEP THEM AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.

AND OF COURSE -- THERE WAS CONVERSATION FROM SHERIFFS AND THE DOC AND THAT CONVERSATION ABOUT WHO DO WE RESOURCE IN THIS TO ADDRESS MENTAL HEALTH?

AND IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT MENTAL HEALTH AND AWARENESS, IN 2022 IS NOT WHAT IT WAS IN 2010 OR 11, OR 12 WHEN HOUSE BILL 1006 BACK IN 2013 FIRST TOOK EFFECT.

IN PART, YOU'RE CONSTANTLY REVISITING THIS TO TRY TO DRIVE RESOURCES AND POPULATIONS IN THE PROPOSE FACILITIES AND NOT PUT TOO MUCH OF A STRAIN ON ONE PART OR THE OTHER.

>> IT IS VITAL TO NOTE THIS IS DISCRETIONARY, NOT AUTOMATIC, THE JUDGE CAN LOOK AT EACH INDIVIDUAL CASE AND DECIDE THE BEST PLACE TO PUT THIS INDIVIDUAL PERSON.

SO IS THAT GOING TO BE THE IMPORTANT PART OF HOW THIS -- WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS EFFECTIVE?

>> WELL, I THINK -- I FRANKLY THINK GIVING THE JUDGE'S DISCRETION IS ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA.

IN FEDERAL, THE JUDGES HAD SO LITTLE DISCRETION, THEY'RE IN A BETTER POSITION TO EVALUATE WHETHER SOMEONE COULD BE PERHAPS RELEASED AS LONG AS THEY SOUGHT OUT TREATMENT ON THEIR OWN.

THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS.

IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT DEALING WITH MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION ISSUES ON THIS, WE PROBABLY NEED TO GET TO FACILITIES THAT ARE DESIGNED JUST FOR THESE.

MAY TAKE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

BUT SO BE IT.

DO WE WANT TO KEEP HAVING RECIDIVISM OR HELP THEM OVERCOME OR GET TREATMENT.

AND WE AS A COMMUNITY, AS A STATE, NEED TO DECIDE THAT.

AND IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT IT, THAT MEANS YOU PUT MONEY INTO IT, YOU DON'T JUST MOVE THEM FROM A TO B.

YOU PUT MONEY INTO GETTING THEM WHAT THEY NEED TO GET SO THEY DON'T COME BACK AGAIN.

AND FRANKLY, WOULD OUR LEGISLATURE, I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> ALL RIGHT.

HOUSE SPEAKER TODD HUSTON THIS WEEK RESIGNED HIS EXECUTIVE POSITION WITH THE COLLEGE BOARD, THE ORGANIZATION THAT RUNS THE SAT COLLEGE ADMISSIONS TEST.

>> HUSTON HAS BEEN SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT WITH THE COLLEGE BOARD SINCE 2012, WHEN HE WAS FIRST ELECTED TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

HUSTON HAS FACED SOME CRITICISM FOR HIS COLLEGE BOARD ROLE WHILE INDIANA HOUSE REPUBLICANS PUSHED THROUGH A BILL LAST MONTH MANDATING THAT CLASSROOM MATERIALS BE VETTED BY PARENT REVIEW COMMITTEES AND PLACING RESTRICTIONS ON TEACHING ABOUT RACISM AND POLITICAL TOPICS.

BUT THE SPEAKER INSISTS THE LEGISLATION HAD NO IMPACT ON HIS DECISION TO RESIGN HIS NEARLY HALF A MILLION DOLLAR A YEAR JOB.

>>SPEAKER TODD HUSTON (R-FISHERS): THESE SHORT SESSIONS ARE INTENSE; THEY'RE TIME-CONSUMING.

AND I JUST WANTED TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO FOCUS ON THIS, CATCH MY BREATH POST-SESSION AND LOOK FORWARD TO KINDA HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK.

>> IN A STATEMENT, THE INDIANA DEMOCRATIC PARTY CALLED HUSTON A “WALKING CONFLICT OF INTEREST.” >> NIKI KELLY, I'LL AGREE WITH HUSTON THIS SESSION HAS BEEN INTENSE.

ARE YOU BUYING THAT THIS YEAR'S LEGISLATURE HAD NO IMPACT?

>> I DID ASK HIM, SEEMS COINCIDENTAL, BASICALLY SOME ACTIVISTS REALLY WENT AFTER HIM A FEW DAYS BEFORE ON TWITTER AND REALLY PULLING THE COLLEGE BOARD INTO IT, AND BASICALLY SAYING YOU SHOULD CONTACT THE COLLEGE BOARD AND LOOK AT WHAT THIS GUY IS DOING.

ON MONDAY HE RESIGNS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, NO NOTICE.

SO I MEAN, AND YOU'RE RESIGNING A $460,000 JOB FOR -- FULL-TIME JOB FOR A $76,000 PART-TIME JOB.

I MEAN, I'LL TAKE HIM AT HIS WORD, BUT IT DEFINITELY SEEMS A LITTLE HARD TO BELIEVE.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN, TO THAT POINT, IS THIS A LITTLE HARD TO BELIEVE THAT THIS LEGISLATION THAT IS SO CONTROVERSIAL HAS NO IMPACT ON THIS JOB?

>> I KNOW TODD, I'M FRIENDS WITH TODD, I KNOW HE'S BEEN THINKING ABOUT MAKING A CHANGE FOR SOME TIME NOW.

DEMOCRATS BETTER BE CAREFUL WHEN START THROWING WALKING CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS ON CITIZEN LAWMAKERS.

ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, IT IS VERY COMMON FOR TEACHERS IN REAL LIFE TO SET TEACHING POLICY AND LAWYERS TO SET JUDICIAL POLICY AND INSURANCE AGENTED -- THAT IS A CONSEQUENCE AND A CITIZEN LEGISLATURE.

AND IT IS GETTING MORE INTENSE.

IT IS CONSUMING MORE TIME IN THESE LEGISLATOR'S LIVES.

BUT IT'S REALLY -- IT STARTS TO GET PRETTY HARD TO GET GOOD PEOPLE TO SERVE IN THESE POSITIONS WHO HAVE TO MAKE A LIVING IN REAL LIFE AND HAVE ARROWS THROWN AT THEM FOR CONFLICTS OF INTEREST WHEN THEY HAVE TO VOTE ON ANY NUMBER OF THINGS WHICH MAY OVERLAP WITH OTHER PARTS OF LIFE.

>> ANN DeLANEY, LET'S SAY HUSTON DID RESIGN BECAUSE OF THIS LEGISLATURE AND IT WAS INCOMPATIBLE WITH WHAT THE COLLEGE BOARD WANTED, IS THAT A BAD THING, HE MADE A DECISION TO DEVOTE HIMSELF TO THE LEGISLATURE?

IS THAT SO BAD?

>> WELL, IF YOU TAKE WHAT HE SAID ON FACE VALUE, NO, IT'S NOT SO BAD.

AND MIKE IS RIGHT, WHENEVER YOU HAVE THIS PART-TIME LEGISLATURE, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

WHAT I FIND MOST INTERESTING ABOUT THIS IS THE FACT THAT TODD HUSTON VOTES ON MANY OF THESE.

I DON'T REMEMBER BRIAN BOSMA, OR PHILLIPS VOTING UNLESS IT WAS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.

WHY WOULD YOU GO OUT OF YOUR WAY TO VOTE ON SOMETHING THAT YOU KNEW WAS GOING TO PASS OVERWHELMINGLY TO BEGIN WITH, AND THEN -- AND ARGUABLY, AT LEAST, ON THE PART OF SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE CONTACTING THE COLLEGE BOARDS, OBVIOUSLY -- TO AN INSTITUTION THAT FOSTERS LEARNING AND FOSTERS HIGHER EDUCATION.

I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND WHY HE DOES THAT EXCEPT THAT THE BASE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS SO MUCH CONTROL THAT YOU DO THINGS THAT ARE AGAINST YOUR OWN SELF-INTERESTS.

>> MOST OF THOSE FORMER SPEAKERS WERE TRYING TO STAY A LITTLE CLEAN ON THE CONTROVERSIAL STUFF, BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO RUN FOR SOMETHING LATER.

THAT WAS NOT UNCOMMON.

>> I DON'T THINK -- THAT WAS NEVER -- MIKE PHILLIPS NEVER HAD ASPIRATIONS.

>> MIKE PHILLIPS OF ALL PEOPLE.

>> ALL RIGHT.

IT IS SUPER BOWL WEEKEND, WE HAVE THE BENGALS AND THE RAMS REALLY QUICKLY, WE'LL START WITH NIKI KELLY BECAUSE WE NEED TO START WITH NIKI KELLY, WHO IS GOING TO WIN SUNDAY?

>> OBVIOUSLY, I'M ROUTING FOR THE BENGALS AND EVERYBODY ELSE SHOULD BE, TOO.

>> JON SCHWANTES.

>> BENGALS.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN?

>> BENGALS.

>> ANN DeLANEY.

>> NIKI SAID SHE WOULD BEAT US UP IF WE DIDN'T GO FOR BENGALS.

>> FIVE FOR FIVE, LET'S GO BENGALS THIS SUNDAY.

THAT IS "INDIANA WEEK IN REIEW."

OUR PANEL IS: DEMOCRAT ANN DeLANEY, REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIEN.

JON SCHWANTES, HOST OF INDIANA LAWMAKERS.

AND NIKI KELLY, STATEHOUSE REPORTER FOR THE FORT WAYNE JOURNAL GAZETTE.

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.

STAY SAFE, STAY HEALTHY, PLEASE GET VACCINATED IF YOU CAN.

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.