Welcome to Politically Speaking.

I'm Elizabeth Bennion, chancellor's professor of political science and director of Community Engagement at Indiana University South Bend.

Indiana.

Lawmakers have wrapped up the first half of the 2023 legislative session.

Only a quarter of the bills proposed in the state House of Representatives have made it past the midpoint and the chamber's deadline to actually be considered during the second half of the session.

Joining us today to discuss proposed legislation are Fifth District Representative Dale DeVon and 21st District Representative Timothy Wesco.

Thank you both for being here.

Representative Wesco, I want to start with you and ask if there are a couple of bills that you are really working on or focused on heading into this second half of the session?

Well, of course, as you know, this is our budget session, so the budget is certainly the biggest piece of legislation we're dealing with.

And I know we'll talk a little bit more about that as we go through our time today.

But a lot of different items.

The budget touches just about everything.

And so a lot to talk about there.

But as the chair on the House Elections Committee, we've been working a lot with the Indiana election division on various elections related bills.

And so I've had a number of those bills moving through the process, and that's been really exciting.

But I've also had the opportunity to serve for the first time in Indiana on the Energy and Utilities Committee in the House and have been learning so much there and really exciting things coming in the future, but yet a lot of big challenges.

And so that's been a really neat new committee assignment for me.

And I'm also serving newly appointed to the Natural Resources Committee.

So of learning about different things out there, something I'm very passionate about for our state and natural resources and protecting them.

But in relationship to election laws, I have a few bills that we call omnibus bills that have a lot of different provisions.

One of those is House Bill 1336, and we worked a lot with the Brad King with the Indiana Election Division and the secretary of state's office.

And we really brought everybody together around the table, Republicans and Democrats.

Let's work through all of these and make sure we get them all right.

And it was really pleased to see that legislation passed out unanimously out of both the House Elections Committee and off the House floor and move over to the Senate.

So we're able to bring everybody together, work through the differences, find some good compromises on some different things.

And so I was excited about that.

Other big changes as a result of that.

If it passes that Hoosiers should expect.

So in relationship to that bill, I don't think there's anything in particular.

It's just really cleaning up the election code, making changes that reconcile on problems that arose or questions that really weren't clearly answered in the code.

One of the bills that is probably the most impactful bill is House Bill 1334, and that's a little bit of a more controversial one.

And that's in relationship to voter ID.

Indiana has voter ID laws now for 20 years, and what House Bill 1334 attempts to do is to bring the requirement, the standard of voter ID to every every form of voting.

So whether you're voting in person early, whether you're voting in person, Election Day, whether you're voting, applying to vote absentee by mail online, all of which currently require some form of proof of identification, whether a photo ID or a driver's license number last four social security number, but also make that applicable to applying to vote absentee by mail.

So we have House Bill 1334 essentially would require either it's kind of provide all the options so that it makes it so if you can't do one or the other, whichever you prefer, either a photocopy of your photo ID, But we realize not everybody's going to have a copy machine.

So you could just write your driver's license number or last for your social security number just to add an extra level of verification that the person requesting the absentee ballot is the person they say they are.

Would this then be included both with the ballot application and with the ballot itself?

How does that work?

No just with the ballot application?

And then there is still the signature requirement on the ballot application and on the absentee ballot.

Now, if somebody chose to use the last four of their Social Security, how would that be later verified?

That's just used by the office so they can pick any of those that wouldn't.

Yes.

Currently the application form actually has an optional place where you can include the last four of Social Security.

So we would ask for both the last four of Social Security and the driver's license number.

You only have to include one, but we ask for both so that whichever happens to be on your voter registration file, we could most likely make a match there with one of those numbers.

So people used to regularly register to vote with the last for the Social Security number and more common, actually, almost universally, it's you use the driver's license number or state issued identification number.

So if the person provided the last four of the social but it was a driver's license in the file would then election officials still make that match, you wouldn't necessarily need to know what was on the file or what it needed.

If they create if they were able to make a match.

If not, then they would reach out to the applicant and explain that they didn't have a number match there and what they needed.

And and then you would resubmit an application.

So there's a carrying process there.

We want everybody to be able to vote.

We just want to make sure it's hard to cheat, easy to vote, that the people voting are the people they say they are always balancing access and security there with energy.

I suppose it's the same wanting to have all kinds of energy options while also working on preserving natural resources and the environment.

Sounds like you're doing a lot of balancing and all of these are all of course, there's always a lot of balancing in lawmaking.

Yes.

Well, Representative DeVon, what about you?

Any bills that you're really focused on?

For me, you know, serving as chairman of family and children and working with at risk kids, trying to strengthen families anywhere we can and help a lot of kids that maybe grow up in a dysfunctional family of some sort and so I work a lot with DCS and FSSA and 1340 is the DCS agency bill that I carried this year for them.

And it does several things.

And so technology's changing, right?

So as Tim talked about going paperless earlier.

You know, it's the same thing.

So electronic formats and stuff that we have to change a lot of things.

Getting foster care is still a big issue.

And, you know, I love Terry Stigdon our DCS, state director, she has a dream of letting no child age out of foster care.

You know that everybody would come from a loving household of some sort, right, at some point in their life.

But so she's got some great programs that we're working with her in allowing foster parents to use them as a tax deduction as well.

So that's something that hasn't been around before that we're trying to bring forward.

I know our biggest budget item is, you know, children is K through 12 funding.

We've increased that about $2 billion.

This year, though it's one of the biggest ever that we've ever done in the state of Indiana.

And about $9 billion a year now goes to K-12 funding.

And so and with that, I know we've got a lot of other you know, with the special session that we had last year trying to help mothers and single mothers care for their children in a great program that we're working on this year that I'm working on, besides the legislation that we're able to put in, the budget is a program called All Pro Dads and it's Tony Dungy was the coach for the Indianapolis Colts and has a program down in Florida that they've created tax credits for.

We haven't got to the tax credit.

We're hoping to work that on the second half, but we've appropriated about 300,000 for all pro dad programs to kind of come in, partnering with philanthropic communities and to help young men learn how to be a father, to be a parent.

And through, you know, the pregnancy stage all the way through childbirth.

I know you mentioned this special session and certainly some folks who were concerned about the results of the restrictions on abortion in the state of Indiana asked the question of what will happen to low income moms.

It seems like there are several things that you've been working on in terms of getting the dads legally involved, financially involved, as well as the program you just mentioned to get them more prepared.

Right.

Do you see some of that moving forward or additional supports for those mothers?

There was quite a bit actually.

We have increased dependent for child exemption.

So for first time parents, $3,000 exemption, the first year funds, we have a commission to improve the status of children and increased sexual assault victims assistance up to $4 million.

It expanded from my on my way pre-K from 100 and or 127%, up 138%.

So we're looking at things and issues that might be stumbling blocks for young parents to be able to succeed.

We have a whole lot more that we're dealing with.

And I know and most of it's educational minded, but it's also working with grants and things to help mothers on their first time children.

And Represenstative Wesco I know another thing you were interested in was affordable daycare, other kinds of access to resources.

Are we seeing much support in that area?

I know something that I focus on a little bit more of an adoption and a costs for adoption and so forth, and we've got a lot of focus and attention on that.

So some legislation that's moving in that respect, making adoption more affordable so that that's it's been a few years since I was focused on the daycare things as I was chair of the Child Care Summer Study Commission.

But that still continues to be a challenge that many people are recognizing and seeking to address.

And you both mentioned education.

Of course, that is the biggest ticket item in any budget.

I wonder if you could talk a little bit about what you expect.

Do you expect a big increase in the education budget and what might that look like, Representative?

DeVon.

Sure, so we're going to increase the foundation for grants by 4% to 7%, increases the complexity grant by 1%, increases the special education grants by 5%, increased high value CTE grants by 5%, increases non-English speaking programs per student grants by 23%, adds new incentives for credentials and in completion of early literacy and then invest in operations of funding and partly students and public schools.

So we also one thing that we did many years ago, probably eight years ago, we brought an adult high school here to South Bend with the Excel Center now overseen by Goodwill Industries.

And we're expanding that program across the state now.

And so we're, you know, just trying to get folks that maybe with the success that we've had here in other Excel centers across the state, to open that up to more folks now with CTE, career and technical education, you also mentioned that complexity grant for schools that may have children with more challenges that are more expensive to educate.

You mentioned the Excel Center and that model of helping people who may have trouble finishing their degree actually finish high school and in some cases get a certificate or some college education as well.

I know you're both very supportive of moving toward more opportunities for work based education.

Representative Wesco, could you talk a little bit about what you'd like to see there?

Our number two agenda item in the House is House Bill 1002, which would create career scholarship accounts to support apprenticeship and internship opportunities for high school students.

That's something I'm really passionate about having been able to be a part of a family business where I had that opportunity to be in a real workplace environment, gained some great skills in my grandfather's piano factory, and I think it's just a really great opportunity when students can really get out into a workforce situation and and and and develop some great skills.

So that's something that we're really going to be putting more resources to and providing resources for those for those apprenticeships and for those careers.

There's some great careers out there for students that we have to educate them about and get them engaged with earlier so that they can really go out and have a great future for themselves and their families and and provide these needed positions for our community.

We had a couple of superintendents from South Bend and also Penn-Harris on, and they suggested that they would like to see career programs run through their schools rather than having many follow the students to individual workplaces.

I wonder what your response is there and how do you balance that?

I think, the career work that a lot of our schools do.

The career academy, that the career center in Elkhart is a great example of a great career focus where they're really getting some good skill sets.

But I think we can expand upon that, grow it to industries beyond what the school is capable of having opportunities in to represent the entire local economy and businesses in a way that one corporation could never meet all of those unique opportunities.

And so I think I think it's not an either or.

I think it's a both.

And I really appreciate the career focus opportunities that students have in our in our career centers and want those to continue.

Now, it sounds like what you want is choice for the children as well as for their parents.

Representative DeVon, another proposal is to expand the school choice voucher program to include more people and open that up.

I wonder if you could talk a little bit about that and what you think will happen, why you think it's important.

And I know vouchers are sometimes can be a touchy subject with some folks and others.

It's you know, it's a way out of a situation that they may not have ever had before.

So I think, you know, the more we give people choices and outcomes for kids, we've changed from more college ready to career ready and, you know, to do both.

So the career pathways, we've got several programs through career pathways that I think are really critical.

I think the vouchers allow more kids to have more choices in their future and trying to succeed in life regardless of what direction they're going.

And I think, you know, we're excited.

I know Chuck Goodrich is a legislator from Noblesville, and he has a robotics grant that he was successful and actually last weekend I got invited over to Penn High School.

They had like 34 schools come from northern Indiana and Lower Michigan to compete.

And they're creating about I think it's a $15 million grant to expand on the robotics and getting kids more involved in engineering.

You know, the Legos are such my grand kids love Legos, right?

And I can see some of those kids and opening up avenues and but vouchers, some schools don't have those type of programs where sometimes these vouchers can expand kids to go to and be involved in other programs like the robotics and different things that they're doing.

Representative Wesco, some of the Senate Republicans have said maybe we need more guardrails.

We need to watch our price tag, that it may not be time to do this.

Now what would you say to those folks and what do you think will happen out of those negotiations?

I have no idea.

It's it's an interesting thing.

Of course, Republicans are in the majority in both the House and Senate, but they're still very different ideas and philosophies and people, they come from different parts of the state and that's good.

It's a good check and balance thing for us.

And I think that there is going to be a growth in opportunities for families to to have choice scholarships and send their families.

What it's going to look like at the end of the day is anybody's guess.

There's certainly some hesitation in some parts, but, you know, there's going to be issues here, there in this school that school, all schools face some issues from time to time.

And you think I think you need to be really careful about taking one situation where, you know, oh, there's a problem in this school.

We need to put the brakes on in the whole state, that you need to be careful about that, because just taking one situation in one place and making that generalizing it.

So it's a common thing across the state I don't think is fair.

You may be referring to one of our local senators, Senator Mishler, and his recent writings about one particular school and telling people to be careful and also making him have some reservations about the program as a whole.

Folks can look that up or we can have Senator Mishler around to share his point of view on that.

Representative DeVon you mentioned for some people it's a way out of a difficult situation.

Some folks, particularly critics of school choice scholarships, say, you know, it was designed for poor people to have more choices to get out of a failing school system.

But now it's used mostly by middle class and potentially upper middle class people who would have paid on their own.

They don't deserve or shouldn't be given taxpayer money.

How do you respond to that?

Is it just the idea that it's their money?

They should have the choice, right?

You know, my first bill that I ever drafted was letting the money follow the child.

So, you know, and so taxpayers.

Right.

I'll pay into a tax base.

I think our A.T.M.

is up to about 8 to $9000 per child.

Now, when I came in ten years ago, it was about $4500.

So it's about double what people pay into the ADM for the school gets for a child coming to their school.

And so should that tax dollars that a parent pays, would it allow them to let their child go where it's chosen based on where their district is or not?

So, you know, I think we're just trying to get education where we can eliminate the dropout rates, right.

Where everybody has an ability to get educated in some type of form or fashion to where they can succeed in life.

Now, one of the issues that comes up and seems to be mentioned and it certainly draws at least as much public attention often as education, but never really quite seem to go anywhere legislatively.

Is this issue of marijuana.

We get lots of questions about it and whether Indiana will change its policy to be more similar to Michigan, and it doesn't look like there are going to be any changes this session.

No, none of the bills are moving this session and it's something I think you'd be really careful about.

And I know the Chief Justice Rush had a symposium this past summer dealing with mental health.

There was over a thousand people from all 92 counties.

That and a lot of that discussion was, you know, marijuana and drug abuse and different types of addictions that might be out there.

And now the mental health industry is getting a whole lot more attention now than it ever has in the past.

And it's something that we need to you know, if the brain is being developed up until it's 25 years old, what do those drugs do?

And, you know, how do we deal with that?

You know, and it's we want to help everybody succeed in life, Right?

So mental health care was a big item for the governor when he was talking about what he would like to see.

It looks like we may be having some bills to try to provide more support for people seeking mental health services and also to make sure people in crisis don't end up in a jail where they won't get the help that they need.

Could either of you talk a little bit about what you expect to matter?

I know our law enforcement, it's critical that a lot of times when somebody is acting up with a mental issue and they tend to create some chaos in an area, maybe even a crime, but they're being affected by their mental health abilities or disabilities that might be there.

And sometimes we lock them up.

Right.

And so we're really not getting them help.

We're just protecting the public, but we're really not giving the folks help.

So we're really trying to put a lot of funding towards mental health issues.

I know even for our law enforcement, there are about 200 law statewide law enforcement short.

We're increasing the starting salary for state policemen, up to $70,000, starting salary for 70 for those police to try to entice more people to get involved in that issue.

And I know mental health, though, is a critical in how officers are trained to treat people and how to respect and do so.

A lot of training is going towards that to identify when people are dealing with mental health issues.

Mental health is the focus of House Bill 1006 one of our agenda bills in the House, which would just enable law enforcement to practice a compassionate lead, be able to take people that are having a mental health crisis rather than take them to jail, allow them to take them to a facility where they can get the help for whatever they're going through and and keep them in that facility a longer period of time or extending the period of time, adding some flexibility there.

So rather than just taking the approach of here, we've got somebody acting out.

We know it's a mental health reaction, we're going to throw them in jail and said allow for them to get the help that they need.

I know we've had some folks from Faith in Indiana on and they have suggested that it's not law enforcement who should be responding in these situations, but instead somebody trained as a mental health professional.

Is this an either or is this another both And having a separate line that people would call for someone like that, but also having more training for law enforcement?

You can't ignore the fact is, people are sometimes legitimately dangerous, a threat to themselves or to other people.

And so I think law enforcement oftentimes has to be involved now where someone's not an actual imminent threat to themselves or to someone else.

Maybe in that situation you can have a non law enforcement entity, but you know, then.

Right.

So it's not as simple as just saying, oh, yeah, there's somebody and we've had a real tragedy here in South Bend with, with an individual going through a mental health situation.

And so just it's difficult.

It's difficult out in the field sometimes knowing when someone is a threat or a genuine threat to themselves or others or not.

And so this is difficult.

So this is one reason I'd like to see more training so that if it is law enforcement who responds, they're able to assess like teachers.

A lot of times, you know, they're raising a lot of these kids in the classroom and law enforcement.

We need to identify when when it's a crime or when it's somebody is crying out for help.

Right.

And so, you know, even at the state house, two weeks ago, we had a guy on the ledge and, you know, he was he had officers up for about three or 4 hours out there on the outside of the state house and was having a mental issue.

Right.

But they treated it with kid gloves and tried to talk him down.

And I'm not sure how it turned out, but, you know, ended up good.

Reality is law enforcement are dealing with people struggling with mental health issues every day after more money in the budget for both inpatient and outpatient treatment for folks with mental health.

Is that a plan?

That was the key so that these mental health facilities could be geared up for more.

You know, and it's hard, right?

So every industry is struggling and teachers are struggling to find new teachers.

Policemen are having trouble, you know, in the building industry that I work in, that, you know, we're having trouble finding, you know, carpenters and people to get engaged.

And in the health industry, it's no different.

We need to get people that people that are trained and equipped to deal with some of the circumstances, because I, I think our problems are going to get worse before they get better.

You know, whatever happens in a conference this year that dealt with homeless youth, and right now in the United Stat 4.2 million.

And thank you.

And and that number is growing by the day.

And so I think and when you don't have adults and parents and in people's lives or carrying people in it, you know, there's a lot of trouble and drugs and addictions and many, many issues to tackle.

And I know you're tackling them and working with these complex issues every day.

We thank you for being on.

Unfortunately, that's all the time we have for this week's episode of Politically Speaking.

I want to thank my guests, Representative Dale DeVon and Representative Timothy Wesco of the Indiana House of Representatives.

And Democratic Republic is a representative democracy and we at Politically Speaking, appreciate our elected officials for keeping us up to date on what's happening in Indianapolis, I'm Elizabeth Bennion, reminding you that it takes all of us to make democracy work.

We'll see you next time.

This WNIT local production has been made possible in part by viewers like you.

Thank you.