even said it this week coming out with that and the governor taking action that they've asked the state House to take action and they haven't.

So you know, are they going to now take action to kind of put into law what the governor is already now saying he's going to do?

You know, we'll see what happens when the session starts in January.

But I think even before that, we could end up seeing a lawsuit over this, because this is the governor effectively saying, I know that's law.

I'm just not going to follow that law because my attorney general has now issued this advisory opinion, and I'm just going to go with that.

so it's it's an interesting situation.

that contracts be given to women and minority owned businesses.

As Ben Thorp reports, the decision comes after Attorney General Todd Rokita released an opinion that the practice is unconstitutional.

Since 1983, the state has had goals to award women and minority owned businesses a certain number of contracts every year.

Attorney General Todd Rokita says that law was discriminatory.

Caucasian people have less of an opportunity, right, because you're giving preferential treatment to women or based on gender or race.

So that to it has to be an even playing field.

Braun is expected to announce a small business initiative based on merit to replace existing programs.

Democrats have opposed the move and wonder whether the governor has the authority to undo programs without legislative approval.

So will this decision bring contract equity?

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

Democrat Robin Winston, Republican Mike O'Brien, Ebony Chappel, director of brand and community strategy at Free Press Indiana.

And Lindsey Erdody, editor in chief at a Free Press Indiana News.

I'm Jill Sheridan, managing editor at WFYI.

So, Robin, is this a needed change in Indiana?

No, I don't think it's a needed change at all, particularly announcing during Black Expo.

I think that there could have been a better time to do this.

I don't like when government makes decisions and then doesn't have the answer right away.

The attorney general led by saying that it discriminates against Caucasians.

the fact of the matter is, there are a lot of Caucasian, female, business owners that are part of that.

Just this week, they are just today they announced an incentive for entrepreneurship in the state.

A lot of those firms are run by entrepreneurs, their startup firms that have done that.

this was done in 1983 by a Republican General Assembly Republican governor.

And now we want to roll that back.

I don't think it needs to be rolled back.

I do think there could be some things done to tweak it, like we've done in other communities, where you get an inducement to locate your business in a targeted area that might be distressed, that might be something that should be considered, but just to come in with a cleaver and end it.

You can't even go to the website today to find the firms on there.

We had link to it as well.

And this is does come on the heels of the governor announcing an end to DEI initiatives.

but this has been, as Robin mentioned, state laws since the 1980s.

and it's just a, a goal.

It's not a requirement anyways.

So why put so much, Well, I mean, it is a goal, but it's also, what I like your idea about incentivizing distressed areas.

it's a it's a goal, but we do a lot of this work at, at, at my firm.

or we're helping companies put bid packages together for state services or, you know, selling things to state government.

and there are benefits in that bid process to prior to this That's why I think, well, to have a woman owned business or a minority owned business.

Veteran owned business.

and you, would you would get an advantage to that.

So, I mean, it was a goal, but it was an aspirational goal, of course.

But it was also like it had real consequences.

But long ago, the state stopped.

We used to audit that and we used it.

We as a state used to audit that, and keep track of okay, a major contractor came in, a prime contractor came in to provide a service to government.

Here's their WBE, here's what they commit to spend with that firm.

Here's their MBE.

Here's where they commit to spend that from.

And then we would go check through the course of the or the state.

We go check through the course of the contract to make sure that those benchmarks were being set.

We got rid of that years ago.

so the accounting for the so it's not what it was in 1983.

I struggle with it because it's certainly it not a great look, but I get the argument.

I guess the argument too.

And these aren't like, these aren't a lot of most of the time these aren't startups.

These are multi, multi-million dollar corporations that have strategically put a woman in an ownership position in certain situations where a minority in ownership such in situations to gain that advantage.

so there is a little bit of like gamesmanship in the bidding process and how you, how state government has procured things under this, this process, over time.

So it's it's not quite what it was, but I appreciate I did appreciate the aspirational goal that the state has had now for forty years.

Well over forty years.

Ebony I mean, the AG's saying that this is about opportunity.

And it is true that, you know, some in the state have greater opportunity than others.

And this many people are saying sets that opportunity back for women and minorities.

It certainly does.

And I think it is important in this conversation to to dispel a myth that is being perpetually it, and that is that white men are somehow at a disadvantage, as a result of this.

He's doing great.

So many are doing great.

And the fact of the matter is that white men are not the only people capable of doing business in this state.

And furthermore, a lot of the business that's being done in this state is being done in collaboration with these women and minority owned enterprises.

So if you look at the state's, fiscal report from the end of fiscal year 2026, two of the firms that are most highest pay Build Westville, which is building the new correctional facility, is being paid $34.5 million from the state.

They have committed to 7% minority owned businesses and 5% for women owned businesses and sharing that wealth.

Ragle Inc., a firm out of Texas, has gone so far as to on some of their projects, commit to a 30% spend with these women and minority owned businesses.

And these spins are coming in as subcontractors.

So there's this big project that needs to be done, and we need somebody to handle financing.

We need to buy tissue paper and soap, and we need HR services, and we need somebody to help us build this thing.

So the undoing of this is going to be extremely messy.

And I fear that we are halting the progress of multi-million dollar projects to prove an arbitrary point.

To Mike's point, they're not even tracking it.

So how can we justify numerically, that one group is being disadvantaged over another?

And Lindsey, welcome back to the show.

Thank you all.

when you're new role.

But we're hearing a lot, you know, about undoing.

And this is, the AG saying, you know, an unconstitutional law that is on the books.

is is something you think lawmakers will take a look at and try to address now?

Well, it's interesting because, the attorney general t with all of this is that, it was a goal.

It wasn't, you know, you must do it.

And the goals were not that high.

It was like 8% for minority business and 10% for women owned businesses.

So it's not as if minorities and women were getting 100% of the contracts, or 75% of the contracts.

You know, these goals were pretty low numbers.

Yeah.

And I think a lot of people would be back on this issue this week.

Well also of this week.

Indiana is ending the 2026 fiscal year with a budget surplus of about $1.86 billion.

That's an increase of about 174% from last year.

Caroline Beck has more.

Governor Mike Braun attributes this surplus to running state government more efficiently.

He says it gives the state more flexibility on where to spend dollars in the.

Upcoming budget session.

It gives us the option on difficult places like infrastructure, reining in health care costs early childhood and learning to invest give some relief to taxpayers.

But Democrats like Representative Ed Delaney say the state is ignoring the larger problem of losing $2 billion in federal funds this fiscal year.

Are we going to cover those losses?

What we're doing is doubling down.

Uncle Sam cuts Medicaid.

We cut it further.

The state is ending the year with almost $4 billion in reserves.

As collections have increased and state spending cuts have mounted.

So, Mike, how do we get so much money?

Well, it's a number of factors.

I mean, one, if you if you rewind to the last budget session that last forecast predicted we were going to lose over $2 billion in revenue over the biennium, because in that snapshot in time, what was happening at the time was when Trump was putting heavy tariffs in place.

The Dow was down 5 or 6000 points.

you know, it looked like we were heading heading towards a recession.

And so they downgraded the revenue forecast, which never materialized.

So the $2.5 billion that we were going to lose never went away.

And remember, during the reason that Governor Braun and at the federal level, both parties were focused on affordability because when inflation is high, the government benefits because you're paying more in sales tax, you're paying more in income tax.

and so those are those are the dynamics at play.

It does.

It reminds me of 2023 for different reasons.

We had a lot of Covid money coming into the state.

We had we had over $5 billion surplus.

And it really almost became a Delaney's point, almost became like a political liability.

It was like they were they couldn't spend money fast enough at the end of that.

That's the end of that session in big I mean, nine figures at a time, just like with very little like consideration.

They're just like, we gotta get this money out the door.

and so we could, you know, we're clearly heading into, you know, unless something changes, you know, with the war in the Middle East or, you know, something else, some other dynamic changes in the economy, we are heading towards another session where there's going to be there's going to be a lot of money now they're going to have to fill some holes, whether it's I know Ed Delaney would like to fill with fill filled with Medicaid, but they're also going to have to fill a hole that they've created with, the suspension of the sales tax and the excise tax on gasoline, which is cost the state over, you know, and the the road fund, over half $1 billion so far.

we'll see if the legislature comes back next month and, and extends that.

But but yeah, I mean, those are all the factors that have led to kind of this largesse of state government.

And, Robin, we are hearing, you know, Democrats say that, you know, well, let's spend now on many needed things, child care, education.

is that something that they should consider going into the next session?

Well, you.

Led by saying the end of the year with so many things, the end of the year with 200 less daycare centers, they end the year with vouchers being curtailed for child care.

They end the year with 45 or 50 schools going out for referenda to get additional tax dollars.

They end the year with people paying more for their Green Egg when they get it, or their lawn furniture because the sales taxes.

So I think if you look at the affordability index, yeah, you got $1.86 billion.

But at what price was that done?

Are people going to be able to afford the fact that we have such a large surplus?

You can probably cut the Green Egg out of the budget.

Okay.

We can probably do that.

Hold off on the green buys one.

Well, Lindsey, also though, you know, we know that we have some of these reserves now because of all the spending cuts that have happened this past year, including Medicaid.

You know, is that something that we should consider moving into the next session?

Democrats certainly want that to be so.

And, you know, we've already heard they want that money to be spent now.

Right?

Because the thing about waiting until the next session is and waiting until the next budget that goes into effect next July.

So you're looking at a year from now that money would be being spent on some of these things.

And that's assuming, you know, we're supporting programs that already exist, right?

What if they put money into a new program?

Well, then you got to create that program and create guardrails around it and set it up.

And so then you're talking about even longer amount of time before the money is being spent.

And at that point, we can have a new forecast that might not look as rosy.

So that's something to consider.

And, you know, with the forecast, though, Indiana lawmakers often do like to hold on to that rainy day fund money and something that we hear so much about.

is this the time maybe to stretch it a little bit, though?

I think it is a time to stretch it.

Honestly, I think if you talk to most Hoosiers who have been impacted by we talked about the the budget cuts, asking departments to cut their or restrict their spending, rather was language by 5%.

So you're thinking about like the department of Child Services and in places like that, getting prepped for today, I was reminded of a book that I read a few years ago called We Should All Be Millionaires, and the title is a little bit trite, but one of the things that the writer her name's Rachel Rogers points out is a difference between $1 million decision, which is thinking with a growth mindset versus a broke word.

I cannot say on the radio decision, that is saving money in the short term, but negatively impacting your long term.

And I think that's something to consider.

I think most Hoosiers would appreciate to have some things invested, especially in early childhood education, Medicaid, some of the areas where they're really being pinched right now.

Well, it's now time for viewer feedback.

Every week, we pause an unscientific online poll question.

This week's question, since there is more money in the reserves, should the state increase funding for needed programs, including education and child care?

Vote yes or no.

Last question posed to viewers do you think the governor should be directly involved in energy rate change decisions?

36% answering yes and 64% saying no.

If you would like to take part in the poll, go to WFYI.org/IWIR and look for the poll.

One Indiana Republican has been holding town halls across the state, pitching his plan to end property taxes.

As Ben Thorp reports, a tax on property would be replaced with a 7% tax on services.

Representative J.D Prescott's plan would put a new service tax on things like haircuts and oil changes.

He said.

That tax would effectively replace the money generated from property taxes.

Speaking at a town hall in Pike Township, Prescott says he believes too many are exempted from property taxes under current law, changing to a service tax would solve that problem.

You're moving from a system that, ends up shrinking your assessed valuation base.

Those that pay pay the property taxes, pay a larger share of the burden year over year, to a system to where everybody pays, based on affordability.

So moving to a, from a from a wealth based tax to a consumption based tax, the effort to eliminate property taxes has seen growing traction in Indiana.

It was recently added to the platform of the state's Republican Party.

So, Lindsey, is this plan feasible for Indiana?

Well, Representative Prescott, we like to think so.

And he does, you know, have a plan with the, tax on services to replace the revenue for it.

But a policy, you know, this massive change in Indiana, you know, he's introduced a bill a couple times.

It hasn't gotten hearings.

So, you know, certainly will introduce a bill again this year.

But are we going to see that come to fruition?

I'm skeptical.

You know, I think maybe there's a little bit more support for it.

But I think even people who are saying, yeah, I don't want I don't want property taxes, sounds like a great idea, are also saying, well, that's not actually feasible because we do need money to fund, state government services.

Well, we are hearing, you know, that more members of the Republican Party are making this a priority in the, in the, and their platform for the upcoming session.

And and now.

Well, look, I mean, this is this isn't the first time this has come up.

It's been, you know, when we originally did kind of in the modern era, a major property tax overhaul in 2008, there was a push for for the elimination of property taxes, at least for people that already paid their home off for the argument there.

There was always, but it was always looked at.

It was also looked at skeptically because you couldn't pay for it.

And at least you know.

So give JD some credit here that he's actually like, here's how you pay for it.

And it's not it's not without controversy how to pay for it when you're putting a tax on people that have never paid one.

That idea's not even novel, though.

Representative Tim Brown, the former Ways and Means chairman, was long, long an advocate for for balancing out the tax code that that would require a sales tax on on services and the politically it's it's difficult at least at least he's out there pitching a plan where the math might work, you know, or there's at least a recognition that, like, we can't just rhetorically eliminate your property taxes.

We ought to raise your taxes over here, too.

And that's what we did in 2008.

We raised the sales tax offset, the the, the, the 1 to 3% caps on, on property taxes.

And that's how we made the math work.

So, you know, credit where credit's due is he's he's coming up with a it's like being honest about the fact that we're going to raise taxes if we're going to eliminate property taxes, which is what nobody else has been willing to do in the last like 12 months and talk about it.

Well, Robin if you are, you know, raising one tax and letting go and another, you know, I've heard people worried about where that new tax might land and who that new tax might impact the most.

Well, it's going to impact people to get a haircut, pay their taxes, go see a CPA, go do all the things that, you know, lobbyist, lobbyist, which will be hard getting that passed.

so the bottom line is, is that the guy is gutsy enough to go out and do his meetings.

I mean, he went to Glendale Mall in Washington Township.

He went to Pike Township.

So he can't say that he isn't trying to be transparent, but I'm more concerned about, you know, schools now are going to be in competition for students.

So now we're going to turn them into recruitment and things.

I'm concerned about the instability of it.

We simply can't take any more instability and finances for schools and for government than we already have.

I mean, other states are doing this Ebony and we have seen that, you know, some success, I guess across the board.

You have varying levels of success, for sure.

I think that, you know, Hoosiers who have experienced issues with their property taxes getting higher year over year, would welcome some relief.

But I do question the methodology of the things that we're taxing, because if a haircut or an oil change or legal services are too expensive, people that can't afford them are simply not going to be purchasing them anymore.

So relying on that as the sole driver of where we're going to get this money from, I think is is challenging.

And I share the skepticism in how exactly that's going to work.

I think something that would be more beneficial is what you were saying.

That's already been done before.

So doing a balance of what that looks like between property taxes and sales taxes, I think would be a, a better route to to.

Explore what we do already have.

one of the highest sales taxes is that not true?

Yeah, but you can you can one off.

You could one off, pick off one thing and go, look, we have the highest sales taxes in the country.

It's like, okay, we also have like really low property taxes.

You know, we also have cap property taxes.

So it's not a it's not really an apples to apples comparison.

Illinois for example, has not only state statewide sales tax, they have county based sales tax and community based sales taxes.

you know, so if you just compare like it's not apples to apples, you can't you got to take the whole tax picture into, into account if you're going to start comparing these things.

Well, lawmakers were having a lot of fun next session.

And a new nuclear readiness program aims to prepare communities interested in nuclear power.

As Ben Thorp reports, officials say part of the effort is to bring more energy to the grid.

State officials, including governor Mike Braun and Energy Secretary Suzanne Jaworowski, announced the new program at a forum about the future of nuclear energy and artificial intelligence.

Jaworowski says the vision is to bring both data centers and nuclear energy to select communities that have shown interest.

This is what we want to do so that these hubs are placed in local areas where they want them, they're celebrated and they can thrive and bring the jobs, prosperity and energy security to our state.

Jaworowski says it's part of Indiana's all of the above approach to bringing more energy to the grid.

State officials also say the readiness program will reduce risk for developers by ensuring communities are open to nuclear investment before projects move forward.

So Ebony, do you think communities are ready and willing to accept nuclear?

I think that it will be an uphill battle.

based on the responses that we've seen across the state from the building of data centers, which is driving this trend toward embracing nuclear power.

The more AI powered data centers that we need, they need more energy.

So people are looking for opportunities to bring more energy to the grid.

And nuclear is known for having clean emissions, for having like a smaller footprint compared to other energy sources.

However, it doesn't come without its issues.

You have a place like Minnesota who has banned nuclear power from new nuclear power plants, from being built for over 30 years.

Now they're entering into a study to see whether or not they can bring it.

But the issue is, what do we do with the radioactive waste?

What do we do with the storing of the nuclear waste?

People are savvy and they're paying attention to these things.

So I don't think this is just going to be an easy everybody jumps on board.

I look through the plan, and a lot of it has to do with community engagement, which I find very interesting.

So it's like what kind of messaging goes along with this that is supposed to prepare people and make them feel like they want to embrace this more.

So that's a key point of the plan, Lindsey, is to make sure that communities are aware and are interested before we even consider, you know, that community for our nuclear power plant.

Does that make sense?

Is that smart?

Yeah, I think so.

And I'm curious to see, you know, which communities end up being interested in it.

you know, I think everybody is looking for a way to lower energy costs, right.

Like, we've heard a lot about this at FDA news already that like, it is one of the top concerns people have, especially related to data centers.

And this is almost like it is directly tied to getting energy for data centers.

And so it's all kind of like wrapped up in this, controversial issue that people have a lot of feelings about.

And even when people are paying attention to it.

And so I don't think it's going to be as easy as telling a community, look, this new investments coming and everyone's going to raise their hand and want it, because I think people are questioning things more.

Well, we have seen Ebony mention such a pushback from many communities on these data centers.

And as they are tied together, you know, do you expect we'll see the state legislatures, you know, make more effort to make bringing nuclear easier?

I don't know who wants it in their backyard.

I mean, you know, they did Marble Hill 40 years ago down near Madison, still a big concrete slab.

Nothing move forward on that.

There have been disasters when you've had nuclear power.

They generate a lot of water, a lot of water needs.

If you think the LEAP project needs a lot of water.

Look at what nuclear plants are going to need.

But we've abandoned.

If you go to Fowler and look at all the windmills we have, look at the solar that we could use.

Both of these things are very passive forms.

Then they're very clean, and they've already been on the scale in Indiana, were going to expand more to that.

Well, real quick, Mike, though, I do want you to weigh in as well.

You know, this is something that the governor said is a priority.

We've got to grow up as a state.

whether it's water policy, energy policy, and this cannot be town by town making these colony shots.

So we're getting community engagement cool for data centers or whatever, whatever it is, whatever people are foaming at the mouth about, we cannot let local BZAa and local town councils and the people who are waving pitchforks decide statewide energy policy.

We have got to grow up and say these are important things that need to happen.

The people need data center, no data center.

We're going to need more power.

Like don't build another one.

We're going to we need 50.

We need 50% or the natural gas that we have right now in the next 25 years.

So what's your community standing up first?

No, I'm saying the community.

I'm saying take it out of the community's hand.

The community doesn't get to decide.

Got it.

The state gets to decide what our statewide water policy is.

Our statewide energy policy is where we're putting massive investment, billions of dollars into.

The surface, for sure.

I'm sure our next session, we'll hear a lot about it.

And that is the Indiana Week in Review for this week.

Our panel has been Democrat Robin Winston, Republican Mike O'Brien, Ebony Chappel, director of brand and community strategy of Free Press Indiana.

And Lindsey Erdody, editor in chief at Free Press Indiana News.

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

I'm Jill Sheridan, managing editor at WFYI.

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 ParrRichey.