>> BANNING TRANS STUDENTS FROM SPORTS.

ABSENTEE MAIL-IN VOTING RESTRICTED.

PLUS, CHANGES TO THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM BILL AND MORE ON INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW FOR THE WEEK ENDING JANUARY 28, 2022.

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

>> THIS WEEK, PROTESTS ERUPTED IN THE INDIANA HOUSE CHAMBER FOLLOWING A COMMITTEE'S APPROVAL OF A BILL RESTRICTING TRANSGENDER GIRLS' ACCESS TO SCHOOL SPORTS.

THE VOTE CAME AFTER HOURS OF TESTIMONY FROM HOOSIERS WHO MOSTLY OPPOSE THE MEASURE.

>> THE LEGISLATION WOULD PROHIBIT TRANSGENDER GIRLS FROM JOINING GIRLS SCHOOL SPORTS TEAMS.

REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE MICHELLE DAVIS IS ITS AUTHOR.

>> REP. MICHELLE DAVIS (R-WHITELAND): THE PURPOSE OF THIS BILL IS TO MAINTAIN FAIR COMPETITION IN GIRLS SPORTS.

>> BUT MANY PEOPLE OPPOSED TO THE BILL SAY IT'S ANOTHER WAY TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST AN ESPECIALLY VULNERABLE GROUP OF CHILDREN.

CHRIS PAULSEN FROM INDIANA YOUTH GROUP JOINED SEVERAL OTHERS WHO POINTED OUT THE MENTAL HEALTH RISKS TRANSGENDER YOUTH FACE, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEIR IDENTITY IS TARGETED BY POLITICIANS.

>> CHRIS PAULSEN: THE TREVOR PROJECT'S 2021 SURVEY OF NEARLY 35 THOUSAND YOUTH AGES 13 TO 24 SHOW THAT MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF TRANSGENDER YOUTH HAVE SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED SUICIDE IN THE PAST YEAR.

>> THE BILL PASSED THE FULL HOUSE THURSDAY.

WHAT PROBLEM IS THIS BILL SOLVING?

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

ANN DELANEY, DOESN'T THE IHSAA ALREADY HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE?

DO THEY NOT?

>> THEY DO.

IT'S A VERY GOOD PROCESS, AS A MATTER OF FACT.

THIS ISN'T ABOUT FAIRNESS, IT'S ABOUT HATRED.

I THINK REPRESENTATIVE TONYA PFAFF SAID IT VERY WELL.

IT'S A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM.

THEY COULDN'T EVEN POINT TO SOMEONE DEFINITIVELY WHO FIT INTO THIS CATEGORY.

AND THE IDEA THAT YOU HAVE HUNDREDS OF TEENAGE BOYS LINING UP TO GET SEX CHANGE OPERATIONS, AND THE TRAUMA THAT THAT CHANGE -- THE CHANGES THAT THAT MEANS TO THEIR LIVES GOING FORWARD, ALL TO PLAY HIGH SCHOOL BASKETBALL IS RIDICULOUS.

I MEAN, SHE IS SINGLING OUT PEOPLE JUST TO SHOW THAT SHE IS, AGAIN, FAR TO THE RIGHT, WHICH IS WHERE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS ON THIS.

AND THE DEMOCRATS WERE UNANIMOUS ON OPPOSING THIS AS THEY SHOULD BE.

BECAUSE IT DOES DISCRIMINATE.

AND BY THE WAY, IT ONLY DISCRIMINATES ONE WAY, IT DISCRIMINATES AGAINST BOYS WHO HAVE THE SEX CHANGE OPERATION BECOME GIRLS.

WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER?

THAT DOES OCCUR.

ARE WE GOING TO SAY IT IS OKAY FOR THEM TO PLAY, OR ARE THEY SAYING WOMEN AREN'T VERY GOOD AT SPORTS ANYWAY, SO IT DOESN'T MATTER IN THAT CONTEXT.

THE WHOLE BILL IS RIDICULOUS.

ALL IT DOES IS STIR UP THE REPUBLICAN BASE TO HATE ANOTHER GROUP OF CHILDREN WHO HAVE THEIR PROBLEMS, AND HAVE THEIR ADVERSITY TO FACE ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT THIS ADDITIONAL BURDEN.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN, FAIRNESS AND COMPETITION IS WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE PROPONENTS OF THIS BILL.

ARE YOU BUYING THAT?

>> FIRST, I DON'T THINK THIS IS DRIVEN BY HATRED AT ALL.

I THINK IT IS DRIVEN BY MISUNDERSTANDING, FEAR, CONCERN FOR WHAT'S HAPPENING IN SOME SCHOOLS.

AND THE POLITICS OF THIS, ANN'S WRONG, THIS ISN'T FAR RIGHT.

WHAT IS DRIVING THIS ARE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE TRADITIONALLY MODERATE, DRIVING A LOT OF THE CONCERN HERE WHERE YOU HAVE A VERY VOCAL TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY.

I THINK IF YOU WENT TO PLACES THAT WE BELIEVE ARE TRANSITIONING FROM A REPUBLICAN TO A DEMOCRAT AREA, MAYBE PURPLE AREAS, THE -- THEY WERE MAYBE, I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE POLITICAL DIAGRAM OF THESE PEOPLE, FOR GAY MARRIAGE AND AGAINST TRANSGENDER ATHLETES.

IS THIS A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM?

THERE IS NO EXAMPLES OF THIS HERE.

I DO THINK REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS IS CORRECT THAT WE'RE HEADING THAT DIRECTION WHERE THIS IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM.

AGAIN, ANN, I STRUGGLE WITH THIS.

I WAS WAY OUT IN FRONT ON THE GAY MARRIAGE ISSUE, WORKED WITH CHRIS PAULSEN IF YOU LOOK AT PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THEY ARE NOT HATEFUL, VERY REASONABLE AND LOOK AT THIS ISSUE AND SAY I JUST DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT YET.

>> YOU THINK THAT'S THE MOTIVATING FACTOR FOR A SEX CHANGE OPERATION, TO PLAY SPORTS?

>> I THINK IF -- IT'S HARD ENOUGH TO BE A TEENAGER, IF YO'RE TRANSGENDER IT IS IMPOSSIBLE.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, IT'S -- THAT'S A MONUMENTAL THING IN YOUR LIFE, I DON'T THINK PLAYING MEN'S BASKETBALL IS THE NEXT THING ON YOUR LIST.

>> NIKI KELLY, AS WE'VE HEARD NOW, DEBATE IN THE COMMITTEE, AND THEN ON THE FLOOR, ARE REPUBLICANS WHO ARE PUSHING THIS BILL DOING A GOOD JOB TO INDICATING THIS IS -- THESE ARE THE EXACT REASONS WHY WE NEED IT?

>> WELL, I MEAN, THEY'RE FOCUSING ON ONE THING ONLY, WHICH IS THEY'RE SAYING THERE IS UNFAIR PERFORMANCE EDGES.

THAT SOMEONE WHO IS BORN A MALE, HAS BETTER LUNG CAPACITY, TALLER, MORE MUSCLE MASS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

THEY'RE FOCUSING ON SORT OF THE ADVANTAGES THAT THAT WOULD GIVE IF THEY WOULD THEN TRANSITION TO A FEMALE SPORT.

THE FASCINATING PART ABOUT MOST OF IT, THERE ARE EXAMPLES OUT THERE THAT CAUSE ISSUES, BUT MOSTLY IN COLLEGIATE SPORTS, THE BILL ORIGINALLY COVERED COLLEGE SPORTS, THEY TOOK IT OUT WITHOUT A WORD OF EXPLANATION.

I THINK WE CAN ALL SURMISE THAT THE NCAA WAS PROBABLY NOT A FAN OF IT.

THAT'S THE ARENA WHERE WE'RE SEEING SOME OF THESE ISSUES HAPPEN MORE THAN IN HIGH SCHOOL.

AND MIDDLE SCHOOL.

>> JON SCHWANTES -- WE'VE SEEN -- >> I WAS GOING TO SAY THERE IS NOTHING FAIR, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.

>> WE'VE SEEN OTHER BILLS LIKE THIS AROUND THE COUNTRY, SOME A LOT STRICTER THAN THIS ONE.

A LOT OF THOSE BILLS HAVE RECEIVED A LOT MORE NATIONAL ATTENTION THAN I FEEL LIKE INDIANA'S BILL IS GETTING.

NOT SAYING IT IS GETTING NO ATTENTION, BUT CERTAINLY NOT ON THE SCALE OF OTHER STATES.

WHY IS THIS ONE SORT OF FLYING UNDER THE RADAR?

>> I THINK IF INDIANA HAD BEEN THE FIRST STATE TO ADDRESS THIS IN A LEGISLATIVE FASHION OR AT LEAST THROUGH A PROPOSED LEGISLATION, IT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN A PROMINENT NATIONAL STORY.

YOU KNOW, WE COULD GET IN DISCUSSIONS OF WHY VARIOUS EDITORIAL DECISIONS ARE MADE AND WHAT CONSTITUTES NEWS.

AS EACH STATE WRESTLES WITH THIS, IT PROBABLY BECOMES -- I'M NOT SAYING IT IS ANY LESS SIGNIFICANT TO THE PEOPLE AFFECTED BY THE POTENTIAL LAW, BUT IN TERMS OF IT BEING A NATIONAL NEWS STORY, IT STARTS TO DIMINISH A BIT.

AND I THINK IT'S MORE -- IF YOU LOOK AT IT NARROWLY ABOUT THE COVERAGE IT RECEIVED, IT IS MORE ABOUT THAT PROBABLY THAN ANYTHING MORE NUANCED ABOUT THE FINE POINTS OF THE BILL HERE ARE HOW IT'S BEING DEBATED.

>> I WANT TO JUST MAKE ONE POINT, THERE IS NOTHING FAIR ABOUT SPORTS RIGHT NOW.

IF YOUR PARENTS HAVE THE MONEY, THEY PUT YOU ON A TRAVELING TEAM AND TAKE YOU PLACES, PAY FOR SUMMER CAMPS, YOU HAVE A TREMENDOUS ADVANTAGE OVER KIDS WHOSE PARENTS DON'T HAVE THOSE RESOURCES.

NOBODY IS WORRIED ABOUT THE FAIRNESS OF THAT PART OF IT, WHICH I FIND REALLY KIND OF IRONIC >> I AM SURPRISED THAT ANN MADE THE POINT EARLIER ABOUT HOW THE BILL IS CRAFTED SO IT DEALS ONLY WITH INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE ARE BORN GENETICALLY BORN AS MALES, AND ARE TRANSITIONING TO FEMALE.

IT DOES SEEM THAT IF IN FACT THIS IS ALL ABOUT FAIRNESS, ONE COULD ARGUE THAT THE BILL SHOULD BE BROADENED, AT LEAST THE LANGUAGE, TO SAY IF YOU'RE COMPETING OUTSIDE THE SPORT CLASSIFICATION IN WHICH YOU WERE BORN.

I CAN SEE PEOPLE SAYING THIS IS PICKING -- NARROWLY DEFINING THE LAW IN A WAY IT SHOULDN'T BE.

>> TIME NOW FOR VIEWER FEEDBACK.

EACH WEEK WE POSE AN UNSCIENTIFIC, ONLINE POLL QUESTION.

THIS WEEK'S QUESTION: SHOULD TRANSGENDER STUDENTS BE BANNED FROM PARTICIPATING IN GIRLS' HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS?

A, YES, OR B, NO.

LAST WEEK'S QUESTION: WILL THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ELIMINATE INDIANA'S LICENSE REQUIREMENT TO CARRY A HANDGUN THIS YEAR?

THIS ONE WAS CLOSER THAN I WAS EXPECTING, 44% YES, 56 NO.

I SUGGEST THE CHANCES ARE A LOT HIGHER THAN THAT, BUT WE'LL FIND OUT IN THE COMING WEEKS.

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

CHANGES TO AN ELECTIONS BILL IN A HOUSE COMMITTEE THIS WEEK WILL MAKE IT HARDER FOR HOOSIERS TO VOTE ABSENTEE BY MAIL.

>> THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE APPROVED LANGUAGE THAT SAYS, IF YOU WANT TO VOTE ABSENTEE BY MAIL, YOU MUST ATTEST THAT YOU WON'T BE AVAILABLE ON ELECTION DAY OR - AND THIS IS THE NEW PART - ANY TIME IN THE 28 DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION, WHEN EARLY VOTING IS AVAILABLE.

REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE TIM WESCO.

>> REP. TIM WESCO (R-OSCEOLA): I BELIEVE THE BEST POLICY IS TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO VOTE IN PERSON, WHETHER ON ELECTION DAY OR IN PERSON EARLY, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

>> DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE ED DELANEY SAYS THAT PUTS A GREATER BURDEN ON VOTERS, PARTICULARLY IN COUNTIES WITH FEW EARLY VOTING LOCATIONS.

AND HE QUESTIONED WHY THE CHANGE IS NECESSARY.

>> REP. ED DELANEY(D-INDIANAPOLIS): I THINK THE ANSWER'S APPARENT.

THE ANSWER IS, WE WANT TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF VOTERS.

WHY DON'T YOU JUST SAY THAT.

>> THE BILL IS UP FOR PASSAGE IN THE HOUSE NEXT WEEK.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN, WHY NOT JUST GET RID OF ABSENTEE MAIL-IN VOTING ENTIRELY?

I'M NOT GOING TO BE AVAILABLE ELECTION DAY OR 28 DAYS BEFORE.

>> I ALWAYS THOUGHT THIS WAS A WEIRD DEAL, THIS -- BECAUSE I ALWAYS VOTED ABSENTEE, OR VOTE IN PERSON EARLY.

I WAS NEVER AVAILABLE ON ELECTION DAY.

I WAS ALWAYS WORKING ELECTIONS, MIGHT AS WELL TAKE THE EASY WAY OUT HERE AND -- NOW I CAN'T ANYMORE WITHOUT JUST STRAIGHT UP BEING -- VIOLATING THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW BEFORE.

THE ACTUALLY LETTER.

THAT WAS THE POINT BEFORE, BEING UNAVAILABLE WHEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY IN PERSON.

I'M A TRADITIONALIST, I THINK -- I WOULD THINK WE MADE IT WIDELY AND WILDLY AVAILABLE VOTING IN THE LAST 20 YEARS IN THIS STATE, CONTRARY TO WHAT DEMOCRATS THINK, WHETHER VOTE CENTERS OR SATELLITE VOTING, EARLY VOTING FOR 30 DAYS, OR VOTING ON ELECTION DAY, WHICH IS WHAT WE DID TO START, IT WASN'T THAT LONG AGO THAT WE DID THAT.

VAST OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE IN THIS STATE.

FRANKLY I DON'T HAVE SOME IDEOLOGICAL RIGID -- AS TIM WESCO SAID, WE HAVE BEEN LIVING ON THE HONOR SYSTEM FOREVER, I THINK IT HAS WORKED.

BOTH PARTIES HAVE THEIR OWN OPERATIONS THAT RECRUIT THEIR OWN VOTERS TO VOTE ABSENTEE AND VOTE EARLY.

SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THAT, THEY'RE TRADITIONALISTS WHO WANT VOTING ON ELECTION DAY, THE ELECTION OSTENSIBLY ENDS 30 DAYS BEFORE ELECTION DAY FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE, CAMPAIGNS DON'T LIKE THAT, CANDIDATES DON'T LIKE THAT, THE ENVIRONMENT CAN CHANGE, THIS AND THAT.

I DON'T THINK THIS WAS NECESSARILY BROKEN IN INDIANA.

BUT I DO THINK CONTRARY TO WHAT DEMOCRATS THINK, WE HAVE MADE IT MUCH EASIER TO VOTE IN INDIANA OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS.

>> [LAUGHTER] HOLD THAT THOUGHT.

>> I KNOW YOU DISAGREE WITH WHAT MIKE SAID.

TIM WESCO REFERENCED.

INDIANA DOES THIS ABSENTEE VOTING LARGELY ON THE -- NOBODY IS CHECKING THIS.

IS THIS REALLY GOING TO AFFECT HOW VOTERS VOTE?

>> WELL, YOU COULD HAVE A SITUATION WHERE SOMEBODY FINDS OUT THAT THE PERSON WHO SENT IN AN ABSENTEE BALLOT WAS PRESENT AND HAS A GRUDGE AGAINST THAT PERSON.

THERE ARE CRIMINALS -- IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND OR YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE HERE, OR YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE GONE AND YOU'RE HERE, THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF THINGS WHERE SOMEBODY COULD MAKE TROUBLE BASED ON A CRIMINAL PROSECUTION NOW, THE HONOR SYSTEM APPARENTLY IS NO LONGER GOOD ENOUGH FOR THIS STATE REPRESENTATIVE.

HE WANTS CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.

BUT IT'S INTERESTING THAT THIS CAME OUT THE SAME WEEK THAT THE CIVIC HEALTH INDEX CAME OUT, AND INDIANA, DESPITE WHAT MIKE SAID, HAS GONE FROM BEING 41st IN THE STATE -- AMONG THE STATES TO 46th IN THE STATE.

YEARS AGO, YEARS AGO, WE WERE IN THE TOP 10 IN TERMS OF TURNOUT.

NOW, NOT ONLY THE BOTTOM 10, WE'RE IN THE BOTTOM 5.

SO WE HAVE NOT MADE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO VOTE.

WE HAVE PUT REPEATED OBSTACLES IN THE WAY OF PEOPLE VOTING.

>> THOSE STATS DON'T MATTER.

>> PARENTS DON'T -- REPUBLICANS DON'T WANT EVERYONE TO VOTE.

>> WHAT'S THE NUMBER ONE FACTOR IN VOTER MOTIVATION?

>> AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

AND THE CIVIC HEALTH INDEX ITSELF SHOWS HOW MUCH WE'VE SLIPPED.

>> I THINK IT SHOWS HOW WE HAVE NO COMPETITIVE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IN INDIANA.

BECAUSE THE NUMBER ONE REASON TO GO VOTE IS BECAUSE IT'S COMPETITIVE, NOT BECAUSE OF GERRYMANDERING.

>> IT IS EXACTLY BECAUSE OF GERRYMANDERING.

THAT IS WHY THERE IS NO COMPETITION.

BECAUSE YOU GERRYMANDERED IT SO WELL.

>> YOU'RE A THIRD PLACE PARTY, ANN.

WE HAVE TO COMPETE WITH OTHER CONSERVATIVES >> YOU WOULD THINK THAT YOU WOULD BE HAPPY ENOUGH THAT THE GERRYMANDERING RESULTS THAT YOU WOULD ALSO HAVE TO RESTRICT REGISTRATION AND VOTING, BUT THAT IS NOT ENOUGH FOR YOU GUYS.

>> YOU'RE JUST ABSURD.

>> JON SCHWANTES, DO YOU FEEL LIKE THIS IS -- I FEEL LIKE I'M ASKING A SIMILAR QUESTION THAT I ASKED ON THE LAST TOPIC.

WHAT IS THE NEED FOR THIS LEGISLATION?

>> PROBABLY NO NEED.

THE MOTIVATION, I THINK, IS CUT AND DRIED.

REPUBLICANS WANT FEWER PEOPLE TO VOTE.

THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

LET'S NOT BEAT AROUND THE BUSH.

IT'S -- I AGREE WITH MIKE THAT IDEALLY WE'D ALL -- I LOVE THE TRADITION OF EVERYBODY GOING TO THE POLLS ON ELECTION DAY.

IN FACT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A BIPARTISAN COMMISSION, FEDERAL COMMISSION, I THINK IT WAS CO-CHAIRED MAYBE BY GERALD FORD AND JIMMY CARTER, LET'S MAKE THIS SOMETHING SPECIAL THAT EVERYBODY WORKS TOGETHER.

I WOULD LOVE THAT, WE DON'T LIVE IN LA LA LAND.

SEEMS TO ME, WELL, WE CAN DEBATE THE VOTER SECURITY.

BUT WE CAN'T DEBATE THE MOTIVATION HERE, WHICH IS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE VOTING.

THAT IS PRETTY CLEAR.

>> NIKI KELLY, TIM WESCO KIND OF INDIRECTLY CAST SOME DOUBT ON THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF MAIL-IN VOTING DURING THAT HOUSE COMMITTEE.

IS THERE ANY WIDE EVIDENCE OF WIDESPREAD VOTER FRAUD WHEN IT COMES TO MAIL-IN VOTING.

WE HAVE STATES WHO FOR TWO DECADES HAVE BEEN DOING EXCLUSIVELY MAIL-IN VOTING?

>> NO, THERE ISN'T.

SURE, YOU CAN ALWAYS FIND AN OCCASIONAL INSTANCE HERE OR THERE.

SOMETIMES IT IS ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE AND SOMETIMES ON THE DEMOCRAT SIDE.

ONE THING I DO WANT TO NOTE WITH THIS WHOLE NOTION OF THE ENTIRE MONTH BEFORE YOU CAN VOTE.

THIS 28 DAYS THING.

FOR A LOT OF COUNTIES, THOUGH, THAT -- YOU CAN'T VOTE ALL 28 DAYS.

A LOT OF COUNTIES JUST HAVE SATURDAY VOTING.

REALLY THAT'S FOUR ADDITIONAL DAYS YOU CAN VOTE.

NOT 28.

SO REALLY IS A WIDE VARIETY, DEPENDING WHERE YOU LIVE.

>> YEAH.

NOT JUST WHAT DAYS, EVEN WHAT HOURS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SOME DAYS IT'S FOUR HOURS IN THE MORNING.

>> WE SHOULD PROBABLY POINT OUT DONALD TRUMP RELIED ON MAIL-IN VOTING MOST OF HIS LIFE, CERTAINLY IN THE LAST ELECTION.

>> PROBABLY CORRUPT >> THE INDIANA HOUSE APPROVED A CONTROVERSIAL SCHOOL CONTENT AND CURRICULUM BILL THIS WEEK.

INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING'S JEANIE LINDSAY REPORTS, LAWMAKERS PASSED THE MEASURE AFTER MORE THAN AN HOUR AND A PHALF OF DISCUSSION ON THE HOUS FLOOR.

>> LAWMAKERS MADE A FEW CHANGES TO HOUSE BILL 1134 BEFORE THE HOUSE APPROVED IT.

BILL AUTHOR REP. TONY COOK SAYS THEY AIM TO ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT THE BILL WOULD ADD ONTO SCHOOLS' WORKLOADS OR PREVENT TEACHERS FROM CONDEMNING RACISM.

BUT CONCERNS PERSISTED FROM SOME LAWMAKERS, LIKE REPRESENTATIVE CAROLYN JACKSON, ABOUT HOW THE OVERALL LEGISLATION COULD IMPACT SCHOOLS - ESPECIALLY AS THE PANDEMIC CONTINUES.

>> REP. CAROLYN JACKSON (D-HAMMOND): I THINK WE NEED TO STEP BACK AND LOOK AT THE SITUATION BEFORE WE CREATE ANOTHER OBSTACLE AND FALL ON OUR FACE.

>> MANY LAWMAKERS OPPOSED TO THE BILL WORRY IT COULD REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TEACHERS WILLING TO WORK IN THE STATE.

THE HOUSE APPROVED THE LEGISLATION 60 TO 37.

IT NOW HEADS TO THE SENATE.

>> NIKI KELLY, BEFORE THEY PASSED THE BILL OVER TO THE SENATE, THEY CHANGED THE BILL IN A NINE-PAGE AMENDMENT.

ANY TIME YOU HAVE A NINE-PAGE AMENDMENT TO A PIECE OF LEGISLATION, THAT'S A GOOD BILL.

CAN YOU GIVE US A SENSE OF THE CHANGES TO THE BILL?

>> MOST WERE TWEAKING, IT LIMITS THE DAMAGES, IT WAS TEACHERS HAVING TO POST CURRICULUM, IF THEY STUMBLED UPON AN ARTICLE THE NIGHT BEFORE, DO THEY HAVE TO RUN IMMEDIATELY AND POST IT BEFORE CLASS, OR WILL THEY BE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW?

THEY BACKED THAT DOWN A LITTLE TO BE A LITTLE LESS, I GUESS, ONEROUS, ON THAT SIDE.

BUT FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, IT IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME BILL IT'S BEEN THE WHOLE TIME.

THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN CHANGING THE DIVISIVE CONCEPT LANGUAGE IN THE BILL, WHICH IS THE WHOLE REASON THERE IS DIVISION ON THE BILL.

>> JON SCHWANTES, TO THAT END, THE SENATE KILLED OFF ITS VERSION OF THIS MEASURE.

IT SAID THERE WAS NO PATH FORWARD.

THAT'S WHAT THE VERY BRIEF 4:00 P.M. ON A FRIDAY STATEMENT SAID.

IF THERE IS NO PATH FORWARD ON THAT BILL, WHY WOULD THERE BE A PATH FORWARD ON THIS BILL?

>> THIS ASSUMES THERE IS.

I MEAN, I THINK THE SENATE CAN MAYBE SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE HERE.

I THINK THERE IS CLEARLY ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORT.

VARIOUS BILLS HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED, SOME DEAL WITH NARROW PORTIONS OF THIS WHOLE REFORM PACKAGE WITH PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT AND PARENTAL INPUT.

OTHERS ARE MUCH BROADER.

SO WHAT I THINK WE COULD SEE COME OUT OF THIS IS ATTEMPTS AT MORE TRANSPARENCY.

FORMALIZED POSTING OF COURSE LESSONS AND COURSE MATERIALS, CURRICULA.

AND INVOLVEMENT, MANDATORY INVOLVEMENT OF THE PUBLIC AND SCHOOL BOARD MEETINGS IN TERMS OF THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A SAY WITHOUT IMPOSING VERY SPECIFIC BUT STILL SUBJECT TO DEBATE GUIDELINES ABOUT WHAT CAN BE TAUGHT OR THE REVIEW PROCESS.

BECAUSE WE'RE FOCUSED SO MUCH ON SOCIAL STUDIES, AND LANGUAGE ARTS IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT THAT WAY.

IF YOU PUT THE WHOLE CURRICULA TO AN ADVISORY PANEL, I CAN SEE CREATIONISM VERSUS EVOLUTION CREEPING IN.

I CAN SEE WHEN YOU HAVE A PERSONAL FINANCE CLASS AND STUDENTS ARE GIVEN A FAKE POT OF MONEY TO LEARN HOW TO INVEST IN THE STOCK MARKET, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO SAY YOU ARE CREATING A BUNCH OF CUTTHROAT CAPITALISTS WITH NO HEART.

THIS WHOLE THING POTENTIALLY, THAT'S A BIT OF AN EXAGGERATION IN TERMS OF REALITY.

IT DOES SEEM THAT CRITICS ARE WORRIED A LOT ABOUT GRIDLOCK HERE, AND THE BURDEN THAT WOULD BE CREATED BY THIS MULTI-LAYERED APPROACH TO CURRICULUM APPROVAL.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN, IF THE SENATE TOOK OUT THE DIVISIVE CONCEPTS LANGUAGE AND WE WERE LEFT WITH A LITTLE MORE TRANSPARENCY FROM TEACHERS IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY HAVE TO POST ONLINE AND THESE PARENT -- THESE CURRICULUM COMMITTEES THAT PARENTS WOULD PLAY A MAJOR ROLE IN AT THE SCHOOL BOARD AND DISTRICT LEVEL.

IF THAT'S ALL THE BILL WAS LEFT WITH, DOES THIS HAVE IS A MUCH EASIER PATH FORWARD?

>> PROBABLY.

BUT I THINK THE GOAL NEEDS TO BE TRANSPARENCY AND NOT CONTROL FOR PARENTS.

AND TAKE THIS OFF THE TEACHER'S PLATE ENTIRELY.

MOVE THIS ENTIRELY TO A SCHOOL BOARD, YOU KNOW, SOME KIND OF PARENTAL COMMITTEE ADVISORY ROLE.

BUT WHERE ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE ELECTED SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS ULTIMATELY.

LET THEM POST WHAT -- LET THEM DIRECT THE CORPORATION POST WHAT THEY WANT TO POST IN THE LEAST ONEROUS WAY POSSIBLE.

PUTTING TEACHERS IN THIS SITUATION, THEY AREN'T PREPPING MONTHS IN ADVANCE, THEY ARE PREPPING THE NIGHT BEFORE, 11:00 OR 12:00 AT NIGHT, ONCE THEY GET THEIR OWN KIDS TO BED.

THIS HAS GOT TO BE ON TRANSPARENCY.

THE ONEROUS HAS GOT TO BE ON THE PARENTS TO DO THE WORK TO GO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS, A LOT OF THEM ARE DOING THAT.

THEY'RE DOING IT IN A PRETTY HOSTILE WAY, I WISH IT WAS MORE THOUGHTFUL AND CONSTRUCTIVE.

TO PUT THIS ON TEACHER'S PLATE IS TOO MUCH.

>> ANN DeLANEY, TO WHAT MIKE JUST TALKED ABOUT, IF THE SENATE CANGES THE BILL TO BE WHAT MIKE JUST INDICATED, TAKING IT OFF THE TEACHERS, FOCUSING ON TRANSPARENCY, IS THAT A GOOD PIECE OF LEGISLATION?

>> CERTAINLY BETTER PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THOUGHT CONTROL, AN EQUAL APPROACH TO ANY ISSUE NO MATTER HOW HORRIFIC THAT HAS BEEN IN THE PAST HISTORY OF THE WORLD IS RIDICULOUS.

I AGREE WITH MIKE.

WE'VE PUT ENOUGH BURDEN ON TEACHERS.

IT IS ALREADY A DIFFICULT ENOUGH PROFESSION, MADE MUCH MORE DIFFICULT BY THE PANDEMIC, NOW WE'RE GOING TO ADD ANOTHER LAYER ON THAT, IT'S CRAZY.

IF PARENTS WANT TO HAVE A CURRICULUM ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN THEIR DISTRICT WHERE THEY CAN DISCUSS A TIME, PARENTS CAN ALREADY PICK UP THE TEXTBOOK, THEY CAN ALREADY TALK TO THE TEACHERS, OR EMAIL THE TEACHERS AND ASK ABOUT THE CURRICULUM.

THERE IS NO BARRIER TO THAT NOW.

AND IF THEY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT, THEY CAN GO TO THE PRINCIPAL OR THE SUPERINTENDENT, OR THEY CAN GO TO THE SCHOOL BOARD.

WHY THE LEGISLATURE HAS TO GET IN THE MIDDLE OF ISSUES WHERE THEY CAN BE DEALT WITH ON A LOCAL LEVEL IS BEYOND ME.

AND ANYTHING THAT PUTS MORE ON THE TEACHERS' PLATE IS A BAD IDEA.

WITH THIS BILL AND THIS CONCEPT, WE'RE ALREADY THE LAUGHINGSTOCK OF THE COUNTRY.

WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THAT AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE TRYING TO RECRUIT NEW BUSINESS INTO THIS STATE.

LOTS OF LUCK WITH THAT.

>> INDIANA LEGISLATIVE LEADERS INDICATED RECENTLY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY WILL LIKELY HOLD OFF ON ANY MAJOR ANTI-ABORTION LEGISLATION THIS SESSION.

LAWMAKERS WANT TO WAIT FOR THE US SUPREME COURT TO RULE ON THE ISSUE LATER THIS YEAR BEFORE TAKING ACTION.

>> THE FUTURE OF ABORTION RIGHTS MAY BE DECIDED BY THE SUPREME COURT THIS YEAR.

AND INDIANA SENATE PRESIDENT PRO TEM RODRIC BRAY SAYS IT'S BEST TO WAIT FOR THE DECISION BEFORE PASSING LEGISLATION.

>> SEN. RODRIC BRAY (R-MARTINSVILLE): TO TRY AND ANTICIPATE WHAT THAT MIGHT SAY AND DRAFT LEGISLATION TO ANTICIPATE EVERY POSSIBLE SOLUTION OR OPINION THAT THEY COULD COME OUT WITH JUST LOOKS COMPLETELY UNDOABLE TO ME.

SO, I DON'T THINK IT'S WISE TO TRY.

>> BUT ONCE THE COURT RULES, BRAY SAYS HE MIGHT ASK THE GOVERNOR TO CALL A SPECIAL SESSION.

>> SEN. RODRIC BRAY (R-MARTINSVILLE): I THINK WE'LL HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE ADVOCATING THAT WE DON'T WANT TO WAIT ANY LONGER THAN WE HAVE TO TO MAKE A CHANGE HERE IN THE STATE, IF THERE'S A POSSIBILITY.

>> THE COURT'S RULINGS COULD MEAN EVERYTHING FROM BANNING ABORTION OUTRIGHT TO RESTRICTING HOW LONG INTO PREGNANCY PEOPLE CAN ACCESS ABORTION CARE.

>> JON SCHWANTES, WILL GOP CONSTITUENTS FOR WHOM ABORTION IS ONE OF, IF NOT THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE BE OKAY WITH THIS WAIT-AND-SEE APPROACH?

>> THEY'LL BE DISAPPOINTED.

IF THERE WERE LEGISLATION, IT WOULDN'T TAKE EFFECT UNTIL JULY 1.

THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IS EXPECTED IN LATE JUNE.

AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, IT MAKES SENSE TO WAIT AND SEE.

>> NIKI KELLY, CHANCES VERY HIGH WE'LL HAVE A SPECIAL SESSION LATER THIS YEAR ON ABORTION?

>> WELL, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY ALL DEPENDS ON HOW THAT RULING COMES DOWN.

IF THEY IN ANY WAY GIVE STATES MORE RIGHT TO CURTAIL ABORTION, ABSOLUTELY.

THAT'S INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW FOR THIS WEEK.

OUR PANEL IS DEMOCRAT ANN DELANEY.

REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIEN.

JON SCHWANTES OF INDIANA LAWMAKERS.

AND NIKI KELLY OF 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.

>> BANNING TRANS STUDENTS FROM SPORTS.

ABSENTEE MAIL-IN VOTING RESTRICTED.

PLUS, CHANGES TO THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM BILL AND MORE ON INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW FOR THE WEEK ENDING JANUARY 28, 2022.

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

>> THIS WEEK, PROTESTS ERUPTED IN THE INDIANA HOUSE CHAMBER FOLLOWING A COMMITTEE'S APPROVAL OF A BILL RESTRICTING TRANSGENDER GIRLS' ACCESS TO SCHOOL SPORTS.

THE VOTE CAME AFTER HOURS OF TESTIMONY FROM HOOSIERS WHO MOSTLY OPPOSE THE MEASURE.

>> THE LEGISLATION WOULD PROHIBIT TRANSGENDER GIRLS FROM JOINING GIRLS SCHOOL SPORTS TEAMS.

REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE MICHELLE DAVIS IS ITS AUTHOR.

>> REP. MICHELLE DAVIS (R-WHITELAND): THE PURPOSE OF THIS BILL IS TO MAINTAIN FAIR COMPETITION IN GIRLS SPORTS.

>> BUT MANY PEOPLE OPPOSED TO THE BILL SAY IT'S ANOTHER WAY TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST AN ESPECIALLY VULNERABLE GROUP OF CHILDREN.

CHRIS PAULSEN FROM INDIANA YOUTH GROUP JOINED SEVERAL OTHERS WHO POINTED OUT THE MENTAL HEALTH RISKS TRANSGENDER YOUTH FACE, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEIR IDENTITY IS TARGETED BY POLITICIANS.

>> CHRIS PAULSEN: THE TREVOR PROJECT'S 2021 SURVEY OF NEARLY 35 THOUSAND YOUTH AGES 13 TO 24 SHOW THAT MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF TRANSGENDER YOUTH HAVE SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED SUICIDE IN THE PAST YEAR.

>> THE BILL PASSED THE FULL HOUSE THURSDAY.

WHAT PROBLEM IS THIS BILL SOLVING?

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

ANN DELANEY, DOESN'T THE IHSAA ALREADY HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE?

DO THEY NOT?

>> THEY DO.

IT'S A VERY GOOD PROCESS, AS A MATTER OF FACT.

THIS ISN'T ABOUT FAIRNESS, IT'S ABOUT HATRED.

I THINK REPRESENTATIVE TONYA PFAFF SAID IT VERY WELL.

IT'S A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM.

THEY COULDN'T EVEN POINT TO SOMEONE DEFINITIVELY WHO FIT INTO THIS CATEGORY.

AND THE IDEA THAT YOU HAVE HUNDREDS OF TEENAGE BOYS LINING UP TO GET SEX CHANGE OPERATIONS, AND THE TRAUMA THAT THAT CHANGE -- THE CHANGES THAT THAT MEANS TO THEIR LIVES GOING FORWARD, ALL TO PLAY HIGH SCHOOL BASKETBALL IS RIDICULOUS.

I MEAN, SHE IS SINGLING OUT PEOPLE JUST TO SHOW THAT SHE IS, AGAIN, FAR TO THE RIGHT, WHICH IS WHERE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS ON THIS.

AND THE DEMOCRATS WERE UNANIMOUS ON OPPOSING THIS AS THEY SHOULD BE.

BECAUSE IT DOES DISCRIMINATE.

AND BY THE WAY, IT ONLY DISCRIMINATES ONE WAY, IT DISCRIMINATES AGAINST BOYS WHO HAVE THE SEX CHANGE OPERATION BECOME GIRLS.

WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER?

THAT DOES OCCUR.

ARE WE GOING TO SAY IT IS OKAY FOR THEM TO PLAY, OR ARE THEY SAYING WOMEN AREN'T VERY GOOD AT SPORTS ANYWAY, SO IT DOESN'T MATTER IN THAT CONTEXT.

THE WHOLE BILL IS RIDICULOUS.

ALL IT DOES IS STIR UP THE REPUBLICAN BASE TO HATE ANOTHER GROUP OF CHILDREN WHO HAVE THEIR PROBLEMS, AND HAVE THEIR ADVERSITY TO FACE ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT THIS ADDITIONAL BURDEN.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN, FAIRNESS AND COMPETITION IS WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE PROPONENTS OF THIS BILL.

ARE YOU BUYING THAT?

>> FIRST, I DON'T THINK THIS IS DRIVEN BY HATRED AT ALL.

I THINK IT IS DRIVEN BY MISUNDERSTANDING, FEAR, CONCERN FOR WHAT'S HAPPENING IN SOME SCHOOLS.

AND THE POLITICS OF THIS, ANN'S WRONG, THIS ISN'T FAR RIGHT.

WHAT IS DRIVING THIS ARE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE TRADITIONALLY MODERATE, DRIVING A LOT OF THE CONCERN HERE WHERE YOU HAVE A VERY VOCAL TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY.

I THINK IF YOU WENT TO PLACES THAT WE BELIEVE ARE TRANSITIONING FROM A REPUBLICAN TO A DEMOCRAT AREA, MAYBE PURPLE AREAS, THE -- THEY WERE MAYBE, I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE POLITICAL DIAGRAM OF THESE PEOPLE, FOR GAY MARRIAGE AND AGAINST TRANSGENDER ATHLETES.

IS THIS A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM?

THERE IS NO EXAMPLES OF THIS HERE.

I DO THINK REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS IS CORRECT THAT WE'RE HEADING THAT DIRECTION WHERE THIS IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM.

AGAIN, ANN, I STRUGGLE WITH THIS.

I WAS WAY OUT IN FRONT ON THE GAY MARRIAGE ISSUE, WORKED WITH CHRIS PAULSEN IF YOU LOOK AT PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THEY ARE NOT HATEFUL, VERY REASONABLE AND LOOK AT THIS ISSUE AND SAY I JUST DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT YET.

>> YOU THINK THAT'S THE MOTIVATING FACTOR FOR A SEX CHANGE OPERATION, TO PLAY SPORTS?

>> I THINK IF -- IT'S HARD ENOUGH TO BE A TEENAGER, IF YO'RE TRANSGENDER IT IS IMPOSSIBLE.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, IT'S -- THAT'S A MONUMENTAL THING IN YOUR LIFE, I DON'T THINK PLAYING MEN'S BASKETBALL IS THE NEXT THING ON YOUR LIST.

>> NIKI KELLY, AS WE'VE HEARD NOW, DEBATE IN THE COMMITTEE, AND THEN ON THE FLOOR, ARE REPUBLICANS WHO ARE PUSHING THIS BILL DOING A GOOD JOB TO INDICATING THIS IS -- THESE ARE THE EXACT REASONS WHY WE NEED IT?

>> WELL, I MEAN, THEY'RE FOCUSING ON ONE THING ONLY, WHICH IS THEY'RE SAYING THERE IS UNFAIR PERFORMANCE EDGES.

THAT SOMEONE WHO IS BORN A MALE, HAS BETTER LUNG CAPACITY, TALLER, MORE MUSCLE MASS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

THEY'RE FOCUSING ON SORT OF THE ADVANTAGES THAT THAT WOULD GIVE IF THEY WOULD THEN TRANSITION TO A FEMALE SPORT.

THE FASCINATING PART ABOUT MOST OF IT, THERE ARE EXAMPLES OUT THERE THAT CAUSE ISSUES, BUT MOSTLY IN COLLEGIATE SPORTS, THE BILL ORIGINALLY COVERED COLLEGE SPORTS, THEY TOOK IT OUT WITHOUT A WORD OF EXPLANATION.

I THINK WE CAN ALL SURMISE THAT THE NCAA WAS PROBABLY NOT A FAN OF IT.

THAT'S THE ARENA WHERE WE'RE SEEING SOME OF THESE ISSUES HAPPEN MORE THAN IN HIGH SCHOOL.

AND MIDDLE SCHOOL.

>> JON SCHWANTES -- WE'VE SEEN -- >> I WAS GOING TO SAY THERE IS NOTHING FAIR, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.

>> WE'VE SEEN OTHER BILLS LIKE THIS AROUND THE COUNTRY, SOME A LOT STRICTER THAN THIS ONE.

A LOT OF THOSE BILLS HAVE RECEIVED A LOT MORE NATIONAL ATTENTION THAN I FEEL LIKE INDIANA'S BILL IS GETTING.

NOT SAYING IT IS GETTING NO ATTENTION, BUT CERTAINLY NOT ON THE SCALE OF OTHER STATES.

WHY IS THIS ONE SORT OF FLYING UNDER THE RADAR?

>> I THINK IF INDIANA HAD BEEN THE FIRST STATE TO ADDRESS THIS IN A LEGISLATIVE FASHION OR AT LEAST THROUGH A PROPOSED LEGISLATION, IT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN A PROMINENT NATIONAL STORY.

YOU KNOW, WE COULD GET IN DISCUSSIONS OF WHY VARIOUS EDITORIAL DECISIONS ARE MADE AND WHAT CONSTITUTES NEWS.

AS EACH STATE WRESTLES WITH THIS, IT PROBABLY BECOMES -- I'M NOT SAYING IT IS ANY LESS SIGNIFICANT TO THE PEOPLE AFFECTED BY THE POTENTIAL LAW, BUT IN TERMS OF IT BEING A NATIONAL NEWS STORY, IT STARTS TO DIMINISH A BIT.

AND I THINK IT'S MORE -- IF YOU LOOK AT IT NARROWLY ABOUT THE COVERAGE IT RECEIVED, IT IS MORE ABOUT THAT PROBABLY THAN ANYTHING MORE NUANCED ABOUT THE FINE POINTS OF THE BILL HERE ARE HOW IT'S BEING DEBATED.

>> I WANT TO JUST MAKE ONE POINT, THERE IS NOTHING FAIR ABOUT SPORTS RIGHT NOW.

IF YOUR PARENTS HAVE THE MONEY, THEY PUT YOU ON A TRAVELING TEAM AND TAKE YOU PLACES, PAY FOR SUMMER CAMPS, YOU HAVE A TREMENDOUS ADVANTAGE OVER KIDS WHOSE PARENTS DON'T HAVE THOSE RESOURCES.

NOBODY IS WORRIED ABOUT THE FAIRNESS OF THAT PART OF IT, WHICH I FIND REALLY KIND OF IRONIC >> I AM SURPRISED THAT ANN MADE THE POINT EARLIER ABOUT HOW THE BILL IS CRAFTED SO IT DEALS ONLY WITH INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE ARE BORN GENETICALLY BORN AS MALES, AND ARE TRANSITIONING TO FEMALE.

IT DOES SEEM THAT IF IN FACT THIS IS ALL ABOUT FAIRNESS, ONE COULD ARGUE THAT THE BILL SHOULD BE BROADENED, AT LEAST THE LANGUAGE, TO SAY IF YOU'RE COMPETING OUTSIDE THE SPORT CLASSIFICATION IN WHICH YOU WERE BORN.

I CAN SEE PEOPLE SAYING THIS IS PICKING -- NARROWLY DEFINING THE LAW IN A WAY IT SHOULDN'T BE.

>> TIME NOW FOR VIEWER FEEDBACK.

EACH WEEK WE POSE AN UNSCIENTIFIC, ONLINE POLL QUESTION.

THIS WEEK'S QUESTION: SHOULD TRANSGENDER STUDENTS BE BANNED FROM PARTICIPATING IN GIRLS' HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS?

A, YES, OR B, NO.

LAST WEEK'S QUESTION: WILL THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ELIMINATE INDIANA'S LICENSE REQUIREMENT TO CARRY A HANDGUN THIS YEAR?

THIS ONE WAS CLOSER THAN I WAS EXPECTING, 44% YES, 56 NO.

I SUGGEST THE CHANCES ARE A LOT HIGHER THAN THAT, BUT WE'LL FIND OUT IN THE COMING WEEKS.

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

CHANGES TO AN ELECTIONS BILL IN A HOUSE COMMITTEE THIS WEEK WILL MAKE IT HARDER FOR HOOSIERS TO VOTE ABSENTEE BY MAIL.

>> THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE APPROVED LANGUAGE THAT SAYS, IF YOU WANT TO VOTE ABSENTEE BY MAIL, YOU MUST ATTEST THAT YOU WON'T BE AVAILABLE ON ELECTION DAY OR - AND THIS IS THE NEW PART - ANY TIME IN THE 28 DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION, WHEN EARLY VOTING IS AVAILABLE.

REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE TIM WESCO.

>> REP. TIM WESCO (R-OSCEOLA): I BELIEVE THE BEST POLICY IS TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO VOTE IN PERSON, WHETHER ON ELECTION DAY OR IN PERSON EARLY, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

>> DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE ED DELANEY SAYS THAT PUTS A GREATER BURDEN ON VOTERS, PARTICULARLY IN COUNTIES WITH FEW EARLY VOTING LOCATIONS.

AND HE QUESTIONED WHY THE CHANGE IS NECESSARY.

>> REP. ED DELANEY(D-INDIANAPOLIS): I THINK THE ANSWER'S APPARENT.

THE ANSWER IS, WE WANT TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF VOTERS.

WHY DON'T YOU JUST SAY THAT.

>> THE BILL IS UP FOR PASSAGE IN THE HOUSE NEXT WEEK.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN, WHY NOT JUST GET RID OF ABSENTEE MAIL-IN VOTING ENTIRELY?

I'M NOT GOING TO BE AVAILABLE ELECTION DAY OR 28 DAYS BEFORE.

>> I ALWAYS THOUGHT THIS WAS A WEIRD DEAL, THIS -- BECAUSE I ALWAYS VOTED ABSENTEE, OR VOTE IN PERSON EARLY.

I WAS NEVER AVAILABLE ON ELECTION DAY.

I WAS ALWAYS WORKING ELECTIONS, MIGHT AS WELL TAKE THE EASY WAY OUT HERE AND -- NOW I CAN'T ANYMORE WITHOUT JUST STRAIGHT UP BEING -- VIOLATING THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW BEFORE.

THE ACTUALLY LETTER.

THAT WAS THE POINT BEFORE, BEING UNAVAILABLE WHEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY IN PERSON.

I'M A TRADITIONALIST, I THINK -- I WOULD THINK WE MADE IT WIDELY AND WILDLY AVAILABLE VOTING IN THE LAST 20 YEARS IN THIS STATE, CONTRARY TO WHAT DEMOCRATS THINK, WHETHER VOTE CENTERS OR SATELLITE VOTING, EARLY VOTING FOR 30 DAYS, OR VOTING ON ELECTION DAY, WHICH IS WHAT WE DID TO START, IT WASN'T THAT LONG AGO THAT WE DID THAT.

VAST OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE IN THIS STATE.

FRANKLY I DON'T HAVE SOME IDEOLOGICAL RIGID -- AS TIM WESCO SAID, WE HAVE BEEN LIVING ON THE HONOR SYSTEM FOREVER, I THINK IT HAS WORKED.

BOTH PARTIES HAVE THEIR OWN OPERATIONS THAT RECRUIT THEIR OWN VOTERS TO VOTE ABSENTEE AND VOTE EARLY.

SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THAT, THEY'RE TRADITIONALISTS WHO WANT VOTING ON ELECTION DAY, THE ELECTION OSTENSIBLY ENDS 30 DAYS BEFORE ELECTION DAY FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE, CAMPAIGNS DON'T LIKE THAT, CANDIDATES DON'T LIKE THAT, THE ENVIRONMENT CAN CHANGE, THIS AND THAT.

I DON'T THINK THIS WAS NECESSARILY BROKEN IN INDIANA.

BUT I DO THINK CONTRARY TO WHAT DEMOCRATS THINK, WE HAVE MADE IT MUCH EASIER TO VOTE IN INDIANA OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS.

>> [LAUGHTER] HOLD THAT THOUGHT.

>> I KNOW YOU DISAGREE WITH WHAT MIKE SAID.

TIM WESCO REFERENCED.

INDIANA DOES THIS ABSENTEE VOTING LARGELY ON THE -- NOBODY IS CHECKING THIS.

IS THIS REALLY GOING TO AFFECT HOW VOTERS VOTE?

>> WELL, YOU COULD HAVE A SITUATION WHERE SOMEBODY FINDS OUT THAT THE PERSON WHO SENT IN AN ABSENTEE BALLOT WAS PRESENT AND HAS A GRUDGE AGAINST THAT PERSON.

THERE ARE CRIMINALS -- IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND OR YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE HERE, OR YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE GONE AND YOU'RE HERE, THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF THINGS WHERE SOMEBODY COULD MAKE TROUBLE BASED ON A CRIMINAL PROSECUTION NOW, THE HONOR SYSTEM APPARENTLY IS NO LONGER GOOD ENOUGH FOR THIS STATE REPRESENTATIVE.

HE WANTS CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.

BUT IT'S INTERESTING THAT THIS CAME OUT THE SAME WEEK THAT THE CIVIC HEALTH INDEX CAME OUT, AND INDIANA, DESPITE WHAT MIKE SAID, HAS GONE FROM BEING 41st IN THE STATE -- AMONG THE STATES TO 46th IN THE STATE.

YEARS AGO, YEARS AGO, WE WERE IN THE TOP 10 IN TERMS OF TURNOUT.

NOW, NOT ONLY THE BOTTOM 10, WE'RE IN THE BOTTOM 5.

SO WE HAVE NOT MADE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO VOTE.

WE HAVE PUT REPEATED OBSTACLES IN THE WAY OF PEOPLE VOTING.

>> THOSE STATS DON'T MATTER.

>> PARENTS DON'T -- REPUBLICANS DON'T WANT EVERYONE TO VOTE.

>> WHAT'S THE NUMBER ONE FACTOR IN VOTER MOTIVATION?

>> AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

AND THE CIVIC HEALTH INDEX ITSELF SHOWS HOW MUCH WE'VE SLIPPED.

>> I THINK IT SHOWS HOW WE HAVE NO COMPETITIVE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IN INDIANA.

BECAUSE THE NUMBER ONE REASON TO GO VOTE IS BECAUSE IT'S COMPETITIVE, NOT BECAUSE OF GERRYMANDERING.

>> IT IS EXACTLY BECAUSE OF GERRYMANDERING.

THAT IS WHY THERE IS NO COMPETITION.

BECAUSE YOU GERRYMANDERED IT SO WELL.

>> YOU'RE A THIRD PLACE PARTY, ANN.

WE HAVE TO COMPETE WITH OTHER CONSERVATIVES >> YOU WOULD THINK THAT YOU WOULD BE HAPPY ENOUGH THAT THE GERRYMANDERING RESULTS THAT YOU WOULD ALSO HAVE TO RESTRICT REGISTRATION AND VOTING, BUT THAT IS NOT ENOUGH FOR YOU GUYS.

>> YOU'RE JUST ABSURD.

>> JON SCHWANTES, DO YOU FEEL LIKE THIS IS -- I FEEL LIKE I'M ASKING A SIMILAR QUESTION THAT I ASKED ON THE LAST TOPIC.

WHAT IS THE NEED FOR THIS LEGISLATION?

>> PROBABLY NO NEED.

THE MOTIVATION, I THINK, IS CUT AND DRIED.

REPUBLICANS WANT FEWER PEOPLE TO VOTE.

THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

LET'S NOT BEAT AROUND THE BUSH.

IT'S -- I AGREE WITH MIKE THAT IDEALLY WE'D ALL -- I LOVE THE TRADITION OF EVERYBODY GOING TO THE POLLS ON ELECTION DAY.

IN FACT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A BIPARTISAN COMMISSION, FEDERAL COMMISSION, I THINK IT WAS CO-CHAIRED MAYBE BY GERALD FORD AND JIMMY CARTER, LET'S MAKE THIS SOMETHING SPECIAL THAT EVERYBODY WORKS TOGETHER.

I WOULD LOVE THAT, WE DON'T LIVE IN LA LA LAND.

SEEMS TO ME, WELL, WE CAN DEBATE THE VOTER SECURITY.

BUT WE CAN'T DEBATE THE MOTIVATION HERE, WHICH IS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE VOTING.

THAT IS PRETTY CLEAR.

>> NIKI KELLY, TIM WESCO KIND OF INDIRECTLY CAST SOME DOUBT ON THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF MAIL-IN VOTING DURING THAT HOUSE COMMITTEE.

IS THERE ANY WIDE EVIDENCE OF WIDESPREAD VOTER FRAUD WHEN IT COMES TO MAIL-IN VOTING.

WE HAVE STATES WHO FOR TWO DECADES HAVE BEEN DOING EXCLUSIVELY MAIL-IN VOTING?

>> NO, THERE ISN'T.

SURE, YOU CAN ALWAYS FIND AN OCCASIONAL INSTANCE HERE OR THERE.

SOMETIMES IT IS ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE AND SOMETIMES ON THE DEMOCRAT SIDE.

ONE THING I DO WANT TO NOTE WITH THIS WHOLE NOTION OF THE ENTIRE MONTH BEFORE YOU CAN VOTE.

THIS 28 DAYS THING.

FOR A LOT OF COUNTIES, THOUGH, THAT -- YOU CAN'T VOTE ALL 28 DAYS.

A LOT OF COUNTIES JUST HAVE SATURDAY VOTING.

REALLY THAT'S FOUR ADDITIONAL DAYS YOU CAN VOTE.

NOT 28.

SO REALLY IS A WIDE VARIETY, DEPENDING WHERE YOU LIVE.

>> YEAH.

NOT JUST WHAT DAYS, EVEN WHAT HOURS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SOME DAYS IT'S FOUR HOURS IN THE MORNING.

>> WE SHOULD PROBABLY POINT OUT DONALD TRUMP RELIED ON MAIL-IN VOTING MOST OF HIS LIFE, CERTAINLY IN THE LAST ELECTION.

>> PROBABLY CORRUPT >> THE INDIANA HOUSE APPROVED A CONTROVERSIAL SCHOOL CONTENT AND CURRICULUM BILL THIS WEEK.

INDIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING'S JEANIE LINDSAY REPORTS, LAWMAKERS PASSED THE MEASURE AFTER MORE THAN AN HOUR AND A PHALF OF DISCUSSION ON THE HOUS FLOOR.

>> LAWMAKERS MADE A FEW CHANGES TO HOUSE BILL 1134 BEFORE THE HOUSE APPROVED IT.

BILL AUTHOR REP. TONY COOK SAYS THEY AIM TO ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT THE BILL WOULD ADD ONTO SCHOOLS' WORKLOADS OR PREVENT TEACHERS FROM CONDEMNING RACISM.

BUT CONCERNS PERSISTED FROM SOME LAWMAKERS, LIKE REPRESENTATIVE CAROLYN JACKSON, ABOUT HOW THE OVERALL LEGISLATION COULD IMPACT SCHOOLS - ESPECIALLY AS THE PANDEMIC CONTINUES.

>> REP. CAROLYN JACKSON (D-HAMMOND): I THINK WE NEED TO STEP BACK AND LOOK AT THE SITUATION BEFORE WE CREATE ANOTHER OBSTACLE AND FALL ON OUR FACE.

>> MANY LAWMAKERS OPPOSED TO THE BILL WORRY IT COULD REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TEACHERS WILLING TO WORK IN THE STATE.

THE HOUSE APPROVED THE LEGISLATION 60 TO 37.

IT NOW HEADS TO THE SENATE.

>> NIKI KELLY, BEFORE THEY PASSED THE BILL OVER TO THE SENATE, THEY CHANGED THE BILL IN A NINE-PAGE AMENDMENT.

ANY TIME YOU HAVE A NINE-PAGE AMENDMENT TO A PIECE OF LEGISLATION, THAT'S A GOOD BILL.

CAN YOU GIVE US A SENSE OF THE CHANGES TO THE BILL?

>> MOST WERE TWEAKING, IT LIMITS THE DAMAGES, IT WAS TEACHERS HAVING TO POST CURRICULUM, IF THEY STUMBLED UPON AN ARTICLE THE NIGHT BEFORE, DO THEY HAVE TO RUN IMMEDIATELY AND POST IT BEFORE CLASS, OR WILL THEY BE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW?

THEY BACKED THAT DOWN A LITTLE TO BE A LITTLE LESS, I GUESS, ONEROUS, ON THAT SIDE.

BUT FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, IT IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME BILL IT'S BEEN THE WHOLE TIME.

THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN CHANGING THE DIVISIVE CONCEPT LANGUAGE IN THE BILL, WHICH IS THE WHOLE REASON THERE IS DIVISION ON THE BILL.

>> JON SCHWANTES, TO THAT END, THE SENATE KILLED OFF ITS VERSION OF THIS MEASURE.

IT SAID THERE WAS NO PATH FORWARD.

THAT'S WHAT THE VERY BRIEF 4:00 P.M. ON A FRIDAY STATEMENT SAID.

IF THERE IS NO PATH FORWARD ON THAT BILL, WHY WOULD THERE BE A PATH FORWARD ON THIS BILL?

>> THIS ASSUMES THERE IS.

I MEAN, I THINK THE SENATE CAN MAYBE SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE HERE.

I THINK THERE IS CLEARLY ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORT.

VARIOUS BILLS HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED, SOME DEAL WITH NARROW PORTIONS OF THIS WHOLE REFORM PACKAGE WITH PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT AND PARENTAL INPUT.

OTHERS ARE MUCH BROADER.

SO WHAT I THINK WE COULD SEE COME OUT OF THIS IS ATTEMPTS AT MORE TRANSPARENCY.

FORMALIZED POSTING OF COURSE LESSONS AND COURSE MATERIALS, CURRICULA.

AND INVOLVEMENT, MANDATORY INVOLVEMENT OF THE PUBLIC AND SCHOOL BOARD MEETINGS IN TERMS OF THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A SAY WITHOUT IMPOSING VERY SPECIFIC BUT STILL SUBJECT TO DEBATE GUIDELINES ABOUT WHAT CAN BE TAUGHT OR THE REVIEW PROCESS.

BECAUSE WE'RE FOCUSED SO MUCH ON SOCIAL STUDIES, AND LANGUAGE ARTS IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT THAT WAY.

IF YOU PUT THE WHOLE CURRICULA TO AN ADVISORY PANEL, I CAN SEE CREATIONISM VERSUS EVOLUTION CREEPING IN.

I CAN SEE WHEN YOU HAVE A PERSONAL FINANCE CLASS AND STUDENTS ARE GIVEN A FAKE POT OF MONEY TO LEARN HOW TO INVEST IN THE STOCK MARKET, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO SAY YOU ARE CREATING A BUNCH OF CUTTHROAT CAPITALISTS WITH NO HEART.

THIS WHOLE THING POTENTIALLY, THAT'S A BIT OF AN EXAGGERATION IN TERMS OF REALITY.

IT DOES SEEM THAT CRITICS ARE WORRIED A LOT ABOUT GRIDLOCK HERE, AND THE BURDEN THAT WOULD BE CREATED BY THIS MULTI-LAYERED APPROACH TO CURRICULUM APPROVAL.

>> MIKE O'BRIEN, IF THE SENATE TOOK OUT THE DIVISIVE CONCEPTS LANGUAGE AND WE WERE LEFT WITH A LITTLE MORE TRANSPARENCY FROM TEACHERS IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY HAVE TO POST ONLINE AND THESE PARENT -- THESE CURRICULUM COMMITTEES THAT PARENTS WOULD PLAY A MAJOR ROLE IN AT THE SCHOOL BOARD AND DISTRICT LEVEL.

IF THAT'S ALL THE BILL WAS LEFT WITH, DOES THIS HAVE IS A MUCH EASIER PATH FORWARD?

>> PROBABLY.

BUT I THINK THE GOAL NEEDS TO BE TRANSPARENCY AND NOT CONTROL FOR PARENTS.

AND TAKE THIS OFF THE TEACHER'S PLATE ENTIRELY.

MOVE THIS ENTIRELY TO A SCHOOL BOARD, YOU KNOW, SOME KIND OF PARENTAL COMMITTEE ADVISORY ROLE.

BUT WHERE ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE ELECTED SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS ULTIMATELY.

LET THEM POST WHAT -- LET THEM DIRECT THE CORPORATION POST WHAT THEY WANT TO POST IN THE LEAST ONEROUS WAY POSSIBLE.

PUTTING TEACHERS IN THIS SITUATION, THEY AREN'T PREPPING MONTHS IN ADVANCE, THEY ARE PREPPING THE NIGHT BEFORE, 11:00 OR 12:00 AT NIGHT, ONCE THEY GET THEIR OWN KIDS TO BED.

THIS HAS GOT TO BE ON TRANSPARENCY.

THE ONEROUS HAS GOT TO BE ON THE PARENTS TO DO THE WORK TO GO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS, A LOT OF THEM ARE DOING THAT.

THEY'RE DOING IT IN A PRETTY HOSTILE WAY, I WISH IT WAS MORE THOUGHTFUL AND CONSTRUCTIVE.

TO PUT THIS ON TEACHER'S PLATE IS TOO MUCH.

>> ANN DeLANEY, TO WHAT MIKE JUST TALKED ABOUT, IF THE SENATE CANGES THE BILL TO BE WHAT MIKE JUST INDICATED, TAKING IT OFF THE TEACHERS, FOCUSING ON TRANSPARENCY, IS THAT A GOOD PIECE OF LEGISLATION?

>> CERTAINLY BETTER PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THOUGHT CONTROL, AN EQUAL APPROACH TO ANY ISSUE NO MATTER HOW HORRIFIC THAT HAS BEEN IN THE PAST HISTORY OF THE WORLD IS RIDICULOUS.

I AGREE WITH MIKE.

WE'VE PUT ENOUGH BURDEN ON TEACHERS.

IT IS ALREADY A DIFFICULT ENOUGH PROFESSION, MADE MUCH MORE DIFFICULT BY THE PANDEMIC, NOW WE'RE GOING TO ADD ANOTHER LAYER ON THAT, IT'S CRAZY.

IF PARENTS WANT TO HAVE A CURRICULUM ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN THEIR DISTRICT WHERE THEY CAN DISCUSS A TIME, PARENTS CAN ALREADY PICK UP THE TEXTBOOK, THEY CAN ALREADY TALK TO THE TEACHERS, OR EMAIL THE TEACHERS AND ASK ABOUT THE CURRICULUM.

THERE IS NO BARRIER TO THAT NOW.

AND IF THEY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT, THEY CAN GO TO THE PRINCIPAL OR THE SUPERINTENDENT, OR THEY CAN GO TO THE SCHOOL BOARD.

WHY THE LEGISLATURE HAS TO GET IN THE MIDDLE OF ISSUES WHERE THEY CAN BE DEALT WITH ON A LOCAL LEVEL IS BEYOND ME.

AND ANYTHING THAT PUTS MORE ON THE TEACHERS' PLATE IS A BAD IDEA.

WITH THIS BILL AND THIS CONCEPT, WE'RE ALREADY THE LAUGHINGSTOCK OF THE COUNTRY.

WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THAT AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE TRYING TO RECRUIT NEW BUSINESS INTO THIS STATE.

LOTS OF LUCK WITH THAT.

>> INDIANA LEGISLATIVE LEADERS INDICATED RECENTLY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY WILL LIKELY HOLD OFF ON ANY MAJOR ANTI-ABORTION LEGISLATION THIS SESSION.

LAWMAKERS WANT TO WAIT FOR THE US SUPREME COURT TO RULE ON THE ISSUE LATER THIS YEAR BEFORE TAKING ACTION.

>> THE FUTURE OF ABORTION RIGHTS MAY BE DECIDED BY THE SUPREME COURT THIS YEAR.

AND INDIANA SENATE PRESIDENT PRO TEM RODRIC BRAY SAYS IT'S BEST TO WAIT FOR THE DECISION BEFORE PASSING LEGISLATION.

>> SEN. RODRIC BRAY (R-MARTINSVILLE): TO TRY AND ANTICIPATE WHAT THAT MIGHT SAY AND DRAFT LEGISLATION TO ANTICIPATE EVERY POSSIBLE SOLUTION OR OPINION THAT THEY COULD COME OUT WITH JUST LOOKS COMPLETELY UNDOABLE TO ME.

SO, I DON'T THINK IT'S WISE TO TRY.

>> BUT ONCE THE COURT RULES, BRAY SAYS HE MIGHT ASK THE GOVERNOR TO CALL A SPECIAL SESSION.

>> SEN. RODRIC BRAY (R-MARTINSVILLE): I THINK WE'LL HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE ADVOCATING THAT WE DON'T WANT TO WAIT ANY LONGER THAN WE HAVE TO TO MAKE A CHANGE HERE IN THE STATE, IF THERE'S A POSSIBILITY.

>> THE COURT'S RULINGS COULD MEAN EVERYTHING FROM BANNING ABORTION OUTRIGHT TO RESTRICTING HOW LONG INTO PREGNANCY PEOPLE CAN ACCESS ABORTION CARE.

>> JON SCHWANTES, WILL GOP CONSTITUENTS FOR WHOM ABORTION IS ONE OF, IF NOT THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE BE OKAY WITH THIS WAIT-AND-SEE APPROACH?

>> THEY'LL BE DISAPPOINTED.

IF THERE WERE LEGISLATION, IT WOULDN'T TAKE EFFECT UNTIL JULY 1.

THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IS EXPECTED IN LATE JUNE.

AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, IT MAKES SENSE TO WAIT AND SEE.

>> NIKI KELLY, CHANCES VERY HIGH WE'LL HAVE A SPECIAL SESSION LATER THIS YEAR ON ABORTION?

>> WELL, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY ALL DEPENDS ON HOW THAT RULING COMES DOWN.

IF THEY IN ANY WAY GIVE STATES MORE RIGHT TO CURTAIL ABORTION, ABSOLUTELY.

THAT'S INDIANA WEEK IN REVIEW FOR THIS WEEK.

OUR PANEL IS DEMOCRAT ANN DELANEY.

REPUBLICAN MIKE O'BRIEN.

JON SCHWANTES OF INDIANA LAWMAKERS.

AND NIKI KELLY OF 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