>>JON: HI, I'M JON SCHWANTES, AND ON THIS EDITION OF INDIANA LAWMAKERS, WE EXAMINE THE LEGISLATIVE PUSH TO SHIELD BUSINESSES, CHURCHES, HEALTHCARE FACILITIES, AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS FROM VIRTUALLY ALL LIABILITY OVER THE NOVEL CORONAVIRUS.

BACKERS MAINTAIN THAT SUCH A MEASURE IS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF THE STATE'S POST-PANDEMIC RECOVERY.

CRITICS INSIST THAT IT'S A MISGUIDED EXAMPLE OF LEGISLATIVE OVERREACH - THE LEGAL EQUIVALENT OF AMPUTATING THE ARM.

FOR A HEALTHY DOSE OF DEBATE, IT'S INDIANA LAWMAKERS - FROM THE STATEHOUSE TO YOUR HOUSE.

[MUSIC] >>JON: JOINING ME TO TALK ABOUT WHAT HAS TO BE ONE OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S TIMELIEST ISSUES ARE: REPUBLICAN SENATOR MARK MESSMER OF JASPER, THE SENATE'S MAJORITY LEADER AND THE AUTHOR OF SENATE BILL 1, AN IMMUNITY MEASURE BACKED BY MUCH OF THE STATE'S BUSINESS SECTOR...DEMOCRATIC SENATOR DAVID NIEZGODSKI OF SOUTH BEND, A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND A LONGTIME CHAMPION OF WORKER RIGHTS, BARBARA QUANDT, STATE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES, AND INDIANAPOLIS ATTORNEY KATHY FARINAS, A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE INDIANA TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION.

>>: I THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE TO TALK ABOUT NOT ONLY TIMELY, BUT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE FUNDS THAT SEEMS TO BE A PRIORITY FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE AND GETTING A LOT OF ATTENTION EARLY ON AND ACTUALLY ONE OF THE BILLS THAT'S ALREADY BEEN HEARD BY COMMITTEE JUDICIARY COMMITTEES RECEIVED A DO PASS OF RECOMMENDATION.

IT IS, OF COURSE, BEARING SENATE BILL ONE WHICH I DON'T NEED TO TELL YOU IT'S A DESIGNATION RESERVED FOR SENATE LEADERSHIP AND THE MAJORITY OF THE CHAMBERS ARE A PRIORITY.

YOU ARE THE MAJORITY LEADER AND YOU HAVE SENATE BILL ONE.

WE WILL STIPULATE YOU THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.

WHY DO YOU THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO?

>>: AS WE TOURED THE STATE AND FROM THE START OF THE PANDEMIC WITH THE MEETINGS WITH THE GOVERNOR, ONE OF THE EARLY CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE WERE IN ESSENTIAL BUSINESSES THAT NEEDED TO STAY OPEN DURING THE PANDEMIC ONE CONCERN WE KEPT HEARING ACROSS THE STATE WAS CAN THE GOVERNOR BY EXECUTIVE ORDER GIVE LIABILITY PROTECTION TO THOSE FOLKS AT THE ONSET OF THE COVID-19 CRITICISM WORKING WITH THEIR LEGAL STAFF BY MID JUNE THEY SAID THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO DO THAT SO WE NEED TO CORRECT THAT VIA LEGISLATION AT THE FEDERAL OR STATE LEVEL.

AND THAT SAME ECHO CAME FROM NONPROFIT GROUPS FROM K-12 EDUCATION AND HIGHER EDUCATION AND IT WAS NOT JUST IN BUSINESSES IT WAS ALL POPULATION SEGMENTS OF VOLUNTEER GROUPS, EDUCATION AND BUSINESS AND REALLY AFFECTS EVERYBODY NOW THE MOST LIKELY TO GET SUED WOULD BE BUSINESSES -- SMALL BUSINESSES WOULD BE PUMMELED BY TRYING TO DEFEND A LAWSUIT.

LARGE BUSINESSES AND THE COST OF SETTLING COVID LAWSUITS WOULD STILL BE EXPENSIVE AND WHETHER YOU ARE A SMALL BUSINESS OR NONPROFIT GROUP IN ANY OF THOSE SITUATIONS JUST THE COST OF TRYING TO DEFEND A LAWSUIT WOULD BE ENOUGH TO PUT MOST OF THEM OUT OF BUSINESS.

>>: SO YOUR PHONE WAS RINGING FROM PEOPLE OF VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS WANTING THIS AND AT THE SAME TIME NOBODY -- NO LITIGATION.

>>: IN INDIANA NO ONE WAS SUED YET AND THAT WAS CONFIRMED IN TESTIMONY LAST WEEK BUT DOESN'T MEAN IT WON'T HAPPEN.

JUST THE PROSPECT OF HAVING THAT HANGING OVER A CLOUD, LOOMING OVER SOCIETY AS A WHOLE WILL BE PROHIBITIVE AND HAVING US EVER BE ABLE TO GET BACK TO WHAT WE ALL WANT.

WE DON'T WANT TO DO NORMAL.

WE WANT SOCIETY TO GO BACK TO NORMAL.

>>: AT THIS POINT, MORE ABOUT PREVENTIVE MEASURE AT LEAST AS IT WAS INITIALLY OFFERED IT WAS RELATED RETROACTIVE TO TWO PARTS.

>>: MARCH 1 WHICH IS TEN DAYS BEFORE IT WAS DECLARED A WORLD PANDEMIC BY THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION.

DAVID, YOU HAVE PEOPLE TALKING IN BOTH YEARS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER SO YOU ARE SAYING HOORAY BUT YOU'VE BEEN A LONGTIME CHAMPION OF ORGANIZED LABOR AND THE ONLY ENTITY I BELIEVE THAT TESTIFIED IN OPPOSITION TO THE BILL IN COMMITTEE WAS SECRETARY TREASURER OF THE AFL-CIO, WHICH YOU'VE HAD A LONGTIME ALLIANCE OF VIRTUAL VOICES WENT OUT.

WHISPERING IN YOUR EAR.

>>: YOU PUT THAT VERY WELL BECAUSE I'M DOING MY VERY BEST TO TRY TO FIND A MIDDLE PATH TO WHERE WE HAVE TO REALIZE THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IN OUR LIVES WE'VE EVER EXPERIENCED ANYTHING OF THIS NATURE.

I'VE ALWAYS BEEN A VERY STRONG ADVOCATE FOR WORKING PEOPLE FOUR ESSENTIAL EMPLOYEES BUT I AS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER RECOGNIZE THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF OTHER SMALL BUSINESSES OUT THERE AND SOME OF THEM HAVE NOT SURVIVED.

SOME ARE WONDERING HOW THEY WILL SURVIVE AND ACTUALLY WE ARE ACTUALLY -- I'M AN EMPLOYEE OF MY BUSINESS SO I AM ALSO -- >> PERFORMANCE REVIEWS ARE GLOWING BY THE WAY, I HERE FOR YOU.

>>: IN REALITY WE ARE NOT TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO WHERE WE ARE TRYING TO GIVE A PASS TO BAD ACTOR SO I UNDERSTAND THIS.

THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

THOSE THAT ARE BLATANTLY DOING AND GOING AGAINST ONE THE CDC RECOMMENDS OR STATE OR LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS, THOSE ONES SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE.

BUT THERE ARE SO MANY OUT THERE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NEXT STEP WILL TAKE OR WHERE THAT COULD TURN INTO SO THIS GIVES THEM SOME TYPE OF PEACE AND RESOLVE THAT GIVES THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO FORWARD.

>>: YOU LOOK AT THE TOTE BOARD OR THE TALLY BOARD AND YOURS WILL BE.

>>: THIS IS IN THE BEGINNING PROCESS IT'S BEEN AMENDED AND I UNDERSTAND THAT AND MAYBE THERE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE HELP THEY COULD GET ALONG THE WAY, BUT FOR RIGHT NOW I WANT TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS, BUT ALSO KEEPING IN MIND WE ARE PROTECTING WORKERS RIGHTS SO I THINK WE CAN ACCOMPLISH BOTH.

>>: I HAD TO TRY TO PIN YOU DOWN ONE WAY OR THE OTHER SO WE WILL CIRCLE BACK.

BARBARA, YOUR ORGANIZATION WAS ONE OF 20 OR SO THAT OFFERED FORMAL TESTIMONY OR CAME FORTH WITH THE POSITION DURING THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING AND A LOT OF THE PEOPLE YOU WOULD EXPECT THE CHAMBER AND MANUFACTURERS AND INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES.

WHY SO IMPORTANT TO YOU ALTHOUGH THE VARIATION -- >> I THINK BOTH SENATORS HAVE ARTICULATED THE ISSUE VERY WELL.

IT IS NO SECRET THAT SMALL BUSINESSES HAVE SUFFERED TREMENDOUSLY DURING THIS PANDEMIC.

I DON'T THINK WE ARE GOING TO SEE THE FALLOUT FOR SOME TIME.

WHEN WE ASKED OUR MEMBERS AND SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS WHAT THE OUTLOOK WAS, ONE IN FORCE SAID THAT THEY WOULD NOT LAST SIX MONTHS IF THE SITUATION DID NOT CHANGE DRAMATICALLY.

>>: WHEN YOU SAY SITUATION, DOES THAT MEAN PAYROLL SUPPORT AND SUBSIDIES OR ARE THEY SAYING -- >> SIGNIFICANT HEALTH.

THEY ARE -- AND THAT NUMBER HAS INCREASED OVER TH LAST FEW MONTHS BECAUSE THEY ARE WORRIED.

THEY ARE DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO STAY OPEN.

TRYING TO FOLLOW ALL THE GUIDANCE, WHICH, OF COURSE, CHANGES AND THE RULES WHICH SOMETIMES DEPEND ON THE MUNICIPALITY THEY ARE LOCATED IN.

THEY HAVE REALLY SUFFERED.

RESTAURANTS AND BARS, MY GOODNESS, SO WE DON'T KNOW -- IT WILL BE MONTHS OR YEARS BEFORE WE KNOW THE TOTAL ECONOMIC FALL OUT.

WHEN I SAY ONE IN FOUR I THINK IT COULD BE FAR WORSE THAN THAT BECAUSE SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS HANG IN THERE UNTIL THE VERY LAST -- THE LAST THING THEY WANT TO DO IS LAY ANYONE OFF OUR CLOSE DOWN.

IT WILL BE SOME TIME BEFORE WE KNOW THE TRUE PICTURE HERE.

ANY KIND OF GUIDANCE AND HELP WE CAN GIVE THEM THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, IF YOU TRY AND YOU ARE NOT IGNORING THE RULES, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE PROTECTED FROM A FRIVOLOUS LAWSUIT.

>>: LET'S SEE IF THERE'S A CONTRARY AND IN THE ROOM AND I SHOULD PREFACE THIS BY SAYING YOUR ORGANIZATION IS TECHNICALLY NEUTRAL ON THE BILL.

BUT YOU WERE IN COMMITTEE AND YOU DID HAVE SOME CONCERNS.

SHARE SOME OF THOSE.

>>: I THINK WE REMAIN IN THAT POSITION.

WE THINK -- THANK THE SENATOR FOR HEARING OUR CONCERNS AND REACTING ACCORDINGLY.

WE STILL HAVE SOME CONCERNS.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT AS TRIAL LAWYERS WHEN WE SEE A BILL WITH BROAD SWEEPING IMMUNITY IT RAISES CONCERN.

WE ARE ABSOLUTELY AND MANY OF US ARE SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS WITH LAW FIRMS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

WE STILL BELIEVE THERE ARE PROTECTIONS THAT PEOPLE DESERVE AS WELL.

NOT JUST SMALL BUSINESSES.

WORKERS, PATRONS, THOSE TYPE OF PEOPLE DESERVE PROTECTION.

SO THE BALANCE IS TO TRY AND PROVIDE SMALL BUSINESSES WITH THE PROTECTIONS THEY FEEL THEY NEED AT THIS TIME.

BUT IN A MANNER THAT DOES SO THAT PROMOTES GOOD PUBLIC POLICY.

BY THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THE BILL COULD STILL USE SOME TWEAKING ON IS AWARDING THESE COMMUNITIES TO PEOPLE WHO ARE FOLLOWING THE PROTOCOLS AND FOLLOWING CDC GUIDELINES.

THE STATE MANDATES.

ONE OF THE THINGS YOU DON'T WANT THIS BILL TO DO IS WATER DOWN THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE MANDATES.

RIGHT NOW AS PRESENTLY WORDED AND STILL IN THE PROCESS, IT WILL STILL GO THROUGH SECONDS AND THIRDS ON THE FLOOR.

BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS GIVING US A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN IS WHETHER YOU ARE A BAD ACTOR OR SOMEBODY WHO HAS GONE OVERBOARD, TRYING TO COMPLY, YOU ARE GETTING THE SAME IMMUNITY UNLESS YOUR ACTIONS ARE SO EGREGIOUS THAT IT RISES TO THE LEVEL OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE.

IF YOU LOOK AT CASE LAW THAT'S HARD TO DO.

COURTS ARE JUST NOT FINDING PEOPLE COMMITTING GROSS NEGLIGENT ACTS VERY OFTEN AND NOT COMPLYING WITH SOMETHING WE FEAR IS NOT GOING TO GO TO THE LEVEL THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PURSUE SOMEBODY LIKE THAT.

WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT BILL IS BALANCED IN A WAY THAT GIVES THE PROTECTION TO THOSE THAT DESERVE IT.

THE SMALL BUSINESSES THAT HAVE GONE OVERBOARD TO MEET THE MANDATES AND GIVE THEIR WORKERS THE PROTECTION THEY DESERVE DURING THIS PANDEMIC, BUT DOESN'T AWARD IMMUNITY TO BAD ACTORS.

>>: LET'S GET INTO THAT.

AS I UNDERSTAND THE BILL IS WRITTEN IT'S NOT ONLY ASK THAT PEOPLE COMMIT BUT OMISSIONS AND I FEEL LIKE A CHURCH.

ACTS AND OMISSIONS ABOUT THE CONCERN THAT'S BEEN ARTICULATED AS AN OMISSION IS IF A BUSINESS SAID DON'T FOLLOW THE MASK GUIDELINE.

THAT YOU'RE THINKING COULD BE COVERED BY THIS IMMUNITY IF THE BUSINESS TELLS ITS EMPLOYEES I DON'T LIKE THE LOOK IT MAKES OUR CUSTOMERS UNHAPPY.

FORGET IT.

>>: I THINK THE BILL LACKS SOME REQUIREMENTS THAT A BUSINESS WHO RECEIVES THE IMMUNITY ACTS IN A REASONABLE MANNER AND I ALSO THINK THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A GAP HERE WHERE WE ARE TREATING EVERYBODY THE SAME.

WE ARE TREATING A MOM-AND-POP ACE HARDWARE TYPE SITUATION WHERE I GO INTO BY A SHOVEL AND THEY HAVE A DUTY TO RECEIVE IMMUNITY BUT PEOPLE ARE FOLLOWING UNDER THE DEFINITION LIKE A NURSING HOME THOSE ARE THE MOST VULNERABLE PEOPLE.

I WOULD CONTEND THAT SOMEBODY WHO PLACES A FAMILY MEMBER IN A NURSING HOME WILL HOLD THAT NURSING HOME TO A HIGHER STANDARD TO PROTECT THAT INDIVIDUAL THAN ME BUYING A SHOVEL IN A HARDWARE STORE.

>>: SO NORTHERN INDIANA THERE WAS A NURSING HOME WHERE A FAMILY WAS TRYING TO FIND SOMEBODY RECOVERING FROM SURGERY AND WITH AS I UNDERSTAND THAT THE NURSING HOME WAS ASKED DO YOU HAVE ANY CASES THAT APPARENTLY MISREPRESENTED THE SITUATION AND SAID THERE WERE CASES.

>>: THE BILL HAS BEEN ADJUSTED TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT WHICH YOU RATION.

LET ME GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF ONE THAT MAYBE STILL FALLS IN THAT UNCLEAR AREA, WHICH WOULD BE A NURSING HOME IS FAILING TO ADEQUATELY TEST THE PEOPLE COMING IN, RESIDENTS AND TYPICALLY TOO RESIDENTS IN A ROOM IN MOST NURSING HOMES.

THAT PERSON IS NOT PROPERLY TESTED PLACED IN A ROOM WITH SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T HAVE COVID.

AND THEN THE PERSON WHO WAS NOT ILL BECOMES ILL AND PASSES.

I DON'T THINK ANY COURT IS GOING TO CONSIDER THAT GROSS NEGLIGENCE THAT STRAIGHT UP NEGLIGENCE.

>>: NURSING HOMES ARE GOOD TO TALK ABOUT BECAUSE WE'VE HAD EIGHT DEATHS AND HAVE HAVE BEEN IN LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES AND NO ONE SUGGESTING IT'S BECAUSE OF MISCONDUCT.

BUT THAT IS WHERE A LOT OF HOOSIERS ARE PERISHING.

IS THAT A LEGITIMATE CONCERN.

>>: IT IS I'M WE ARE MORE THAN WILLING TO REFINE THOSE DEFINITIONS BUT I THINK THE LEVEL OF EXPECTATION AND THE MEDICAL CARE FACILITY FOR GROSS NEGLIGENCE WOULD BE CLEARLY A DIFFERENT STANDARD THAN YOU AT YOUR OFFICE OR A RETAIL STORE AND THE STANDARD OF CARE EXPECTATION IN MEDICAL FACILITY IS HIGHER AND ULTIMATELY ALL OF THESE -- WE ARE ABSOLUTELY WILLING TO LOOK AT HOW TO REFINE THE DEFINITIONS AND THE EXPECTATIONS BUT ONE A RETAIL STORE AND A HARDWARE STORE AND WHAT A NURSING HOME, WHAT THEIR STANDARD OF CARE AND WOULD HAVE TO MEET A HIGHER EXPECTATION IS A REASONABLE ISSUE.

>>: SOME SUGGEST INSTEAD OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR WANTON DISREGARD IT MIGHT BE SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE AND I'M NO ATTORNEY I WILL NOT PRETEND I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ALTHOUGH I KNOW IT WHEN I SEE IT [OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS] >>: IT'S BY COURT PRECEDENTS AND NEGLIGENCE AND GROSS NEGLIGENCE, THOSE ARE ALL THINGS WE CONTINUE TO NUANCE ON THAT BILL.

>>: LET'S EXPLAIN WHAT ENTITIES ARE AFFECTED.

WE SAY WE'VE ALL USE THE TERM SMALL BUSINESSES AND HOSPITALS AND HEALTHCARE FACILITIES AND RETAILERS BUT THE DEFINITION OF PERSON, WHICH IS HOW IT'S WORDED IT IS IT COULD BE A PERSON, COULD BE A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION OR SOMEBODY IS LITTLE LEAGUE AT SOME ACTIVITY.

IT REALLY IS VIRTUALLY ANYTHING [OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS] ANIMAL THE NEURAL MATCHED -- ANIMAL IN A REAL VEGETABLE.

>>: IS THE DEFINITION TO BROAD?

IF YOU ARE A NONPROFIT OR VOLUNTEER GROUP OR A CIVIC ORGANIZATION, A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION TELL ME WHICH GROUP YOU WANT TO EXCLUDE WOULD BE EASIER THAN TRYING TO ITEMIZE EACH GROUP SO IT MADE THE DEFINITION BROUGHT TO COVER EVERY PERSON IN ANY SCENARIO BECAUSE THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME CONCERN.

HOW MANY CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS CANCEL EVENTS ACROSS THE STATE THIS YEAR.

IT COULD'VE BEEN A COMPLETELY OUTDOOR EVENT WHERE TRANSMISSION RATES HAVE PROVEN TO BE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE, BUT THEY CANCELED OUT OF FEAR OF THEIR ORGANIZATION BEING SUED AND BEING RUINED.

IT AFFECTS EVERYBODY AND THE DEFINITION IS BROAD BECAUSE OF THAT, BUT I WANT TO ADDRESS A COMMENT THAT THE SENATOR POINTED OUT A CONCERN ABOUT WORKING FOR PROTECT HER RIGHTS WE DON'T INFRINGE ON OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY HEALTH RULES AND NO UNEMPLOYMENT ROLES.

>>: THAT [OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS] >>: ABSOLUTELY SO ALL THOSE THINGS ARE LEFT UNPROTECTED UNTOUCHED SO WE DON'T INFRINGE ON SAFETY RULES AT WORK OR ANY TYPE OF BENEFITS THAT AN EMPLOYEE MIGHT BE ALLOWED TO IF THEY GET SICK FROM COVID OR FIRED BECAUSE THEY GOT COVID, LEAVING ALL THOSE THINGS UNTOUCHED AND UNPROTECTED BY THIS BILL BECAUSE I'M EQUALLY AS CONCERNED THAT WE PROTECT THE EMPLOYEES OF THESE BUSINESSES BUT AN EMPLOYER GETTING PUT OUT OF BUSINESS HURTS HIS EMPLOYEES AS MUCH BY THEM LOSING THEIR JOB SO THIS BILL PROTECTS NOT ONLY THE WORKER SAFETY RIGHTS BUT THE ABILITY FOR A CUSTOMER UNFOUNDED LEASE ASSUMING AN EMPLOYER AND THEN PUTTING DOZENS OR HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE OUT OF WORK WITH AND DON'T HAVE ANY ABILITY TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR FAMILIES.

IT IS A DUAL LOOK AT HOW YOU PROTECT THAT WORKER.

>>: YOU MENTIONED THE WORD TWEAKING.

>>: ABSOLUTELY AND WHAT I APPRECIATE IS YOUR WILLINGNESS YOU WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THIS BECAUSE I LOOK AT THIS WHOLE SITUATION LIKE THIS, NO ONE HERE IN AMERICA OR INDIANA ASKED FOR THIS VIRUS TO VISIT THEM, BUT IT HAS COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR ANY OF OUR FEELINGS.

HAVING SAID THAT, I MEAN WE HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO NOT TRY TO GET MUDDLED UP IN THE MIDDLE OF ALL OF THIS BUT TRY AND DO SOMETHING THAT WILL MOVE FORWARD.

I THINK THERE ARE FEW PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT WANT TO CAPITALIZE ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND YOU HAVE BUSINESSES THAT DON'T KNOW IF THEY WILL CONTINUE TO EXIST AND PEOPLE THAT CAN'T PAY THEIR RENT OR MORTGAGE AND THEY ARE IN SUCH A HARD WAY DIFFICULT TIMES.

SO IT SHOULDN'T BE A MEANS WHERE SOMEONE SAYS THIS IS THE ONLY THING I HAVE LEFT I WILL TRY AND SUE MY BOSS.

AGAIN THAT WILL BE A MORE RARE SITUATION BUT THE WHOLE POINT IS THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE NEVER EXPERIENCED IN OUR LIFE AND WE HAVE TO DO OUR BEST TO FIND THAT MIDDLE GROUND AND SO WE CAN ALL WALK FORWARD GO AHEAD.

>>: THIS EFFORT TO PROTECT SMALL BUSINESSES IS REALLY CRITICAL AND WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL FOR THIS EFFORT.

WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT SMALL BUSINESSES CREATE MOST OF THE NET NEW JOBS.

THEY ALSO LEAD US OUT OF THE RECESSION'S AND IF THE SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS AREN'T THERE -- THE JOB CREATORS ARE NOT THERE, THE ECONOMY OF THE ENTIRE STATE WILL BE IN EFFECT IN THOSE JOBS THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WON'T BE THERE.

I THINK THAT KEEPING THAT IN MIND IN LOOKING AT -- WE'VE BEEN TRACKING SMALL BUSINESS ISSUES FOR MANY DECADES AND OUR SMALL BUSINESS ECONOMIC TRENDS REPORT CAME OUT THIS WEEK AND FOR DECEMBER AND IT SHOWS THAT THE OPTIMISM INDEX FOR SMALL BUSINESS DECLINED DRAMATICALLY IT JUST TANKED AND WE ARE GOING TO FIND THAT IF SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS AREN'T OPTIMISTIC AND READY TO GROW A BUSINESS WHERE IS THE STATE GOING TO BE?

>>: THAT'S ONE REASON THIS WAS WRITTEN TO BE RETROACTIVE AND FORWARD LOOKING TO 2024 THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR THAT'S ANOTHER THING YOUR ORGANIZATION THE TRIAL ATTORNEYS WOULD SUGGEST WHICH IS LET'S GO 2022 VERSUS 2024 AND WHY DOES THAT MAKE A DIFFERENCE?

>>: ONE THING WE REVIEWED WHEN WE WERE TAKING A LOOK AT SENATE BILL ONE IS CALLED THE PREP ACT COMING OUT OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND HOW THEY HAVE PUT SON SAID TIME PERIODS ON THESE COMMUNITIES.

AND WHAT YOU DON'T WANT AGAIN WE AGREE THAT SMALL BUSINESSES WHO ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING SHOULD BE PROTECTED.

YOU ARE SEEING THAT LAWYERS DO TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT SAYING THERE'S NOT ONE SINGLE CASE OUT THERE RIGHT NOW AGAINST THE MOM AND POP HARDWARE STORE OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S BEEN USED IN OTHER STATES AS WELL WHEN WE REVIEWED THEIR LAWS THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH SIMILAR LAWS.

>>: SOUTH CAROLINA OHIO IOWA UTAH ALL FAIRLY CONSERVATIVE STATES.

>>: CORRECT AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE NOTICED WAS THIS WOULD BE THE FURTHEST IF IT ACTUALLY DID IN DECEMBER OF 24.

>>: IN TERMS OF THE DEADLINE FOR SUNSET IF YOU WANT TO CALL AT THAT.

>>: WAS GOING TO BE THE LONGEST ONE WE SAW OUT THERE AND I THINK IT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO SAY UNTIL THE EMERGENCY OF THIS PANDEMIC IS DECLARED NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR A CERTAIN DATE AND THAT IS HOW THE PREP ACT THAT CAME OUT OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS WORDED.

I THINK IT IS GIVING A CARTE BLANCHE IMMUNITY TO A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS AND WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WILL BE PLAYED OUT YET.

ONE OF THE THINGS I SAID IN MY TESTIMONY BEFORE THE COMMITTEE IS THIS IS UNIQUE AND WE DO COMMEND THE AUTHORS OF THIS BILL FOR COMING FORWARD WITH SOME PROPOSED SOLUTIONS ON HOW TO PROTECT SMALL BUSINESSES AND HOW TO PROTECT PEOPLE FROM RUNNING AMOK AND TRYING TO USE THE LEGAL SYSTEM TO THEIR BENEFIT WHICH MOST LAWYERS ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO DO IS MAKE SURE IT IS NARROWLY TAILORED ENOUGH THAT IT SERVING THE PURPOSES INTENDED.

>>: I WAS A TARGET.

THIS IS SOUNDING FLIPPANT WHEN I ASKED THIS, BUT I WANT TO UNDERSTAND AND MAYBE HELP VIEWERS UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GROSS NEGLIGENCE WANTON AND WILLFUL.

IF YOU WORK FOR ME AND I'LL JUST SAY THE SENATOR.

OR I'M A CLIENT.

SNEEZE ON ME.

SO YOU DO THE RIGHT THING BY SNEEZING BUT STILL THE BUG GETS OVER YOUR ARM AND YOU HAVE NOT ENGAGED IN WILLFUL MISCONDUCT.

IF YOU SNEEZE AT ME WITHOUT A MASK, RIGHT NOW YOU COULD SUE ME OR I COULD SUE YOU DEPENDING ON WHO IS THE SUBORDINATE AND THE BOSS IS IT AS CLEAR-CUT AS THAT.

>>: IF YOU KNEW YOU WERE POSITIVE FOR COVID AND YOU POTENTIALLY COUGHED OR SNEEZED OR WHATEVER, I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD SHOW DISREGARD.

>>: RIGHT NOW THAT'S AN EXAMPLE FOR PEOPLE.

>>: OBVIOUSLY ALL THESE TERMS AND DEFINITIONS HAVE TO PLAY OUT IN COURT OR IN FRONT OF A JURY.

>>: I THINK THAT IS PART OF THE DISTINCTION BECAUSE THERE ARE THOSE OUT THERE THAT ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE SITUATION WHETHER BUSINESSES OR EMPLOYEES AND WE HAVE SEEN SOME OF THAT SO IF IT'S A ONE TIME INSTANCE OR SOMETHING THAT OCCURS AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE JUST DON'T REMEMBER.

IT JUST HAPPENED SO QUICKLY, BUT IF IT'S A SITUATION WHERE THEY ARE IN COMPLETE DISREGARD SOMEONE ELSE IS GOING TO SAY I HAVE SEEN THIS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN SINCE THE BEGINNING THEY HAVE NOT ABIDED BY ANY REGULATIONS AND IT WILL BE MORE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

>>: IF ANYBODY WHO COMPLETELY DISREGARDS INTENTIONALLY AND WE ADD INTENTIONAL ACTS IF YOU INTENTIONALLY IGNORE PROPER SAFETY PROTOCOLS I WOULD NOT WANT THIS BILL TO GIVE YOUR PROTECTION.

>>: TIME GOES FAST UNFORTUNATELY AND OUT OF TIME AND APPRECIATE THE ALL OF YOU HAD AND JUST AS A CODICIL TO THIS.

>>: WE DON'T GET VERY MUCH IN THE PUBLIC WHEN WE SNEEZE OR COUGH I'LL TELL YOU THAT.

>>: THE MASK IN BROWN COUNTY LAST FALL, A PRICE TO PAY.

THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING PART OF THE DISCUSSION.

>>>AGAIN, MY GUESTS HAVE BEEN: REPUBLICAN SENATOR MARK MESSMER OF JASPER, DEMOCRATIC SENATOR DAVID NIEZGODSKI OF SOUTH BEND, BARBARA QUANDT OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES , AND KATHY FARINAS OF THE INDIANA TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION.

>>>ON THE NEXT INDIANA LAWMAKERS...FRESH OFF OF HIS STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS, OUR ANNUAL DISCUSSION WITH GOVERNOR ERIC HOLCOMB.

>>>TIME NOW FOR OUR WEEKLY CONVERSATION WITH INDIANA LAWMAKERS ANALYST ED FEIGENBAUM, PUBLISHER OF THE NEWSLETTER INDIANA LEGISLATIVE INSIGHT, PART OF HANNAH NEWS SERVICE WERE YOU SURPRISED HOW MUCH AGREEMENT THERE SEEMS TO BE ON THE IMMUNITY BILL?

>>: THIS WAS A BILL THAT STARTED OUT WITH A GREAT CONCEPT AND EVERYBODY WANTED TO FIND A SWEET SPOT AND THEY STARTED CLOSER TO SWEET SPOT THEN WITH MOST BILLS OF THIS KIND BUT YOU SEE THE DEBATE ON THE FLOOR IN BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE YOU HEAR A LOT OF INDIVIDUAL KIND OF VIGNETTES THAT QUESTION WHETHER IT'S WORKABLE AND ENFORCEABLE AND WE WILL HAVE TO FIND A BALANCE OF THE EQUITIES FOR THIS THING TO PASS WITH CLOSE TO UNANIMOUS SUPPORT.

>>: AS I MENTIONED IT CAME OUT OF JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WITH A PAST RECOMMENDATION, BUT HARDLY THE ONLY THING HAPPENING.

THE GOVERNOR WEIGHED IN AND PUT MORE MEAT ON THE BUDGETARY BALANCE.

WHAT YOUR TAKE ON THAT.

>>: THE GOVERNOR PROPOSED HIS STATE BUDGET AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE SURPRISED AND THE GOVERNOR SURPRISED HIMSELF.

HE THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE A LIEN YEAR AND I REMEMBER I'M OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THE APPROPRIATIONS CHAIR SAYING IF WE FLATLINED EDUCATION THAT WOULD BE A WIN IN THIS BUDGET AND ALL OF US ON THE GOVERNOR IS COMING UP WITH ANOTHER $377 MILLION OF NEW MONEY FOR EDUCATION IN HIS BUDGET AND HE'S MANAGED TO FIND A WAY TO PAY DOWN $300 MILLION IN BONDS THAT ARE OUTSTANDING AND HE BELIEVES WE ARE GOING TO BE BACK IN OUR PRE-PANDEMIC SURPLUS LEVEL BY THE END OF JUNE OF THIS YEAR.

>>: IS THE AVAILABILITY OF SOME FOUND MONEY A WINDFALL TO MAKE IT EASIER OR TOUGHER.

NOW EXPECTATIONS ARE HERE ARE UP THERE.

>>: YOU ARE STILL GOING TO HAVE ESSENTIALLY A FLATLINED BUDGET OUTSIDE OF EDUCATION.

THERE ARE SOME THINGS THE GOVERNOR IS THROWING IN LIKE MORE MONEY FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND A FEW DIFFERENT KINDS OF AREAS THAT HE'S PLACING A PRIORITY ON.

THEY WILL BE SOME ARGUMENTS AT THE MARGINS AND HE WANTS TO PUT $50 MILLION TO THE FALL CREEK PAVILION AT THE STATE FAIR GROUND THAT GOT PULLED A YEAR OR SO AGO BECAUSE OF LACK OF FINANCING AND FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM THIS IS THE SWINE BARN AND THERE WILL BE LEGISLATORS THAT WILL WANT TO CAST SWINE AND SOME -- >> YOU JUST HAD TO DO THAT.

THAT'S WHY WE LOVE YOU.

THE WORD SMITH ALWAYS WHETHER YOU ARE HERE IN STUDIO OR ON VIDEO LIKE.

I APPRECIATE THAT AS ALWAYS.

ADD FOG AND BOMB, APPRECIATE YOUR INSIGHT.

>>: FOR MORE INFORMATION AND CONTENT VISIT US ON THE WEB AT WFYI.ORG/LAWMAKERS >>>WELL, THAT CONCLUDES ANOTHER EDITION OF INDIANA LAWMAKERS.

I'M JON SCHWANTES, I THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

UNTIL NEXT WEEK, TAKE CARE.