Good morning everyone. I'm so sorry, I'm just running a little bit on fumes this
 morning. Welcome everyone to the legislative update. Sorry, I have to take a
 breath. I had a phone call from a friend that needed some help this morning and
 it got me a little bit behind, but I just need to take a deep breath and I see
 Shelly's here and Matt Pierce is here and so I think we're ready to go unless
 somebody tells me otherwise. Good morning Shelly, good morning Matt. Good morning.
 This is our last legislative update for this legislative session and I
 know that you Shelly and Matt have been very busy and that you probably
 have a lot to say to us today. I'm just gonna as an introductory matter say that
 I am Sonia Lierkamp. I go by Sonny and I'm Vice President of the League for Brown
 County and we welcome as many questions as possible from the audience for our
 legislators once we get started and in order to ask a question as a member of
 the audience go into chat and just type in one question moderator and say I have
 a question and the question moderator will then make sure to give me your name
 and you will be put in a queue according to the time that you have expressed your
 desire to ask a question. So and we if we get through all of the the first
 questions that people have you can are welcome to ask more questions but just
 go into the queue to indicate that you have another question. Okay the first
 thing we will be doing is also assuring you that we always make sure to invite
 all of the legislators that represent the districts for Bloomington Monroe
 County, Johnson County, Brown County and we also have a few members of the Brown
 County League who are in Bartholomew County so we try to extend a an
 invitation to them as well. Matt and Shelley have been our faithful
 attendees since the beginning we that we started doing these legislative updates
 on zoom so we are so happy to have their participation. I want to just remind
 everyone a little bit of the ground rules this is an informative session not
 a debate we expect everyone to be civil and I'm gonna be honest with you I don't
 think we've ever had anybody get out of line but we just like to remind you of
 that. Each legislator will briefly summarize and have some opening remarks
 and after those opening remarks then we will be opening it up to questions so
 today I think we will start with Matt why don't you open us up with your opening
 remarks Matt? Okay well I think the probably the big news is the budget
 revenue forecast for the budget which you know we have a series of revenue
 forecasts throughout the year that are used to the basis for the budget kind of
 the idea of how much money the state might have and then we always wait for
 the very last one before the legislature is finished and it just came in and I
 think it said revenues are gonna be down like 2.4 billion or something you know I
 think basically all the Trump chaos on his economic policies are coming home to
 roost and then on top of that the fiscal policies which I think have been kind of
 irresponsible over the past decade are also coming home to roost so for the
 past decade the Republican supermajorities have been relentlessly
 cutting taxes for corporations financial institutions utilities you
 could kind of you know go down the list and they've also cut the the income tax
 I think what's at 3.4 it's now like a 3 they wanted to take it down to 2.9 this
 year I don't know if they'll do another couple rounds know if they'll do that or
 not but what they essentially have done is eroded the revenues coming in the
 state and that has been masked over the last couple budget cycles because of all
 the federal money coming in related to COVID and you know there there are
 argument is they believe in what's called the Laffer curve which goes back to the
 Reagan administration professor Laffer claims that the more you cut taxes the
 more your revenues will increase because the theory is people will be willing to
 participate in more economic activity if they can keep more of their money and
 therefore you actually get more money when you cut taxes and so that's been
 their they're basically mode of operation but now after we've eroded all
 those revenues for a decade now we're you know hitting the wall and so what
 will be interesting to see is I don't think there's a way for them to just cut
 their way out of this shortfall so I think that what's likely to happen is
 suddenly we're hearing discussions about increasing the cigarette tax alcohol
 tax taxes that people have suggested over the years be raised for specific
 purposes like funding mental health or drug treatment things like that I think
 they may be on the table to just try to figure out how to make the budget kind of
 work so that'll be interesting to see what happens over the next week with the
 governor and the Republican fiscal people what they're gonna decide to do
 on that budget but I think at the end of the day it's gonna be pretty ugly and I
 know I know in the house the Republicans kind of the rank-and-file Republicans I
 think they are a little bit in despair right now because I think they know that
 the budget is probably going to be pretty bad now that also will be
 compounded for our schools and people on the local level because of Senate bill
 one which was kind of a frustrating process point to make so what happened
 with that bill is it came over for you know the Senate made some significant
 changes just before past it it came over to the house was in ways and means
 committee they had a bunch of hearings on it they were kind of kicking around
 ideas people were trying to figure out how you gonna balance your desire to
 give tax relief to property tax owners while at the same time you know making
 sure local units of government have the revenue they need to provide the basic
 services that people rely on like police and fire road repair all that kind of
 good stuff and the solution they came up with their plan just appeared as a
 second reading amendment one day and we didn't really you know have any good
 fiscal analysis on it when we're voting on it so the second reading amendments
 the stage were on the floor of the house you can vote to change a bill and so
 they basically had a complete rewrite in a second reading amendment and so that
 went in one day and then the next day we had to vote on the final the final bill
 and then once it was passed out of the house it went over the Senate very short
 order the Senate concurred they basically voted to agree with what the
 house did went down to the governor and I think he signed it on the same day and
 quite honestly I think they wanted to get that all done so people didn't have
 time to really look at it and study it and so the governor didn't have to
 listen to people asking them a lot of questions about potential negative
 impacts of the bill but you know my bottom line I think first of all it's
 very complicated I don't claim to understand all the ramifications of that
 bill but generally what frustrates me is what has happened is the General
 Assembly has decided to be the hero and cut the property taxes and also
 significantly this business personal property tax which is like on equipment
 that's good that limits going like way up to like two million but anyway the
 General Assembly gets to say look at us we cut all your taxes aren't we that
 aren't we the great heroes and then they leave the schools and the local units to
 deal with the shortfalls in their funding and what they've essentially said
 is well if you need more money just raise the income tax on the local level
 so it's interesting that on the state level they've been talking about a
 limited the income tax they've been consistently reduced in the income tax
 and now it's like okay local units you just raise the income tax if you're
 short on money and so they're gonna turn the local officials into the villains
 who will probably have no choice at some point but to raise taxes to keep the
 services provided that people need the thing is I think it's gonna be a little
 bit like a slow-moving train wreck because property taxes you paid this year
 what the taxes were last year so it's gonna take a while I think for all of
 the ramifications of the bill to be gun become known but I think that's kind of
 the big story of the legislature is just these fiscal issues and we'll see how
 bad the budget ends up another interesting process point as well that
 relates to Monroe County House bill 1144 is a court's bill and last summer
 there's a summer study committee that studies the courts and how many courts
 each county needs and you go to them to ask for more and so that's kind of their
 job and so they announced a new policy last summer that they would no longer
 just add courts but they would look for places to remove courts to basically
 decide that there's not enough business for the court to be justified and they
 said they would be reallocating them and every time they added a court they
 wanted to remove a court and that's because there's some fiscal impact on
 the state which pays for some of those court officials and the thing was I
 don't think anybody expected that to be happening this session that was kind of
 perspective going forward kind of thing and so in the Senate I guess in the
 appropriations committee they added in an amendment taking out a lot of courts
 including one here in Monroe County and again in the house we've had zero
 discussion about it in the house yet there's going to be a conference
 committee so the House and Senate conferees will have to decide how that
 bill is going to read at the end of the day I've been talking to people who are
 going to likely be controlling that conference committee about this
 situation and I think they're pretty hell-bent on eliminating the courts
 although they have allowed me to suggest some language that will try to limit the
 chaos because Bloomington or Monroe County is different because we have a
 unified court system so we have like three judges running in a year so I
 think it's a little bit trickier to figure out well who's actually going to
 get eliminated and so the language I'm suggesting is to and our understanding
 is one of the judges is going to retire at the end of the term so it would make
 sense if you're going to eliminate a court you would eliminate it from
 someone who doesn't wish to run for reelection so we'll we'll see there so
 there's two issues there one is just a process and is this the time to
 implement this policy and then secondly if you are hell-bent on implementing it
 how do you limit the disruption as best that you can so on small modular
 reactors who have been fighting this battle where the legislature really is
 just obsessed with small modular reactors nuclear reactors for electric
 generation and they have gotten signed into law in SB 424 now that a utility
 will be able to go out and expend hundreds of millions of dollars
 investigating whether they could make a small modular reactor actually work even
 though none is functioning anywhere in the United States my understanding is
 there two in the world one in China one in Russia which I think tells you
 something and so they will be able to recover all the costs those hundreds of
 millions always expended in planning costs just investigating whether or not
 it's really possible to do whether it's feasible and the thing that I've been
 railing against now for the entire session is these bills all say that if
 they expend hundreds of millions of dollars and they determine that it's not
 feasible to go forward with a small modular reactor they still get to
 recover all their planning costs so the ratepayers have the potential of paying
 for nothing getting you know paying something for nothing and I think this
 is really bad policy what it does is it shifts the risk from the shareholders
 the owners of the utilities on to the backs of the ratepayers and so there's
 nothing for utility to lose to go off on a really highly speculative venture that
 I think has a low percentage likelihood of panning out and the ratepayers will
 just pay for all that so that that's a little disappointing that's already been
 signed in another bill it's disappointing Senate bill 10 signed by
 the governor already is takes away the students ability to use their student ID
 to prove their identity on Election Day and I had quite a discussion with the
 author of that bill on the House floor and kind of walked him through the the
 fact that a student ID meets every single requirement in the statute for an
 ID that's considered good enough to prove you are who you are the author of
 the bill kept going off on students registering when they don't really live
 where they say they do and all these things and I said that's got absolutely
 nothing to do with the voter you know day student ID and I think at the end of the
 day they just don't like students voting because they think college campuses are
 some you know left-wing operation and so they just want to make it harder and
 they've accomplished to do that now so if you're a student and you decide you
 want to declare Bloomington to be your domicile because you figured out they
 live here nine months out of the year you're probably gonna have to make a
 trip to the BMV to get you know some kind of ID issued by the state unless you
 happen to have a passport maybe you might be okay but it's just you know one
 more hassle added into the process of voting for zero additional security
 there's no additional security or safety or whatever they want to claim they're
 trying to do those elections that's that's a problem well I guess the last
 bill I'll mention which I probably have some local interest is Senate bill 289
 which has been known as the anti DEI bill they're now in the house they're
 calling it the unlawful discrimination bill it was significantly rewritten in
 the house and while still bad I think less damaging than the Senate version but
 the Senate has dissented to the amendments or changes made in the house
 and I'm assuming there'll be a conference committee on that so it
 remains to be seen what the final form of this bill you know attacking diversity
 equity inclusion programs and so we'll just have to see how that plays out here
 in the upcoming week and I guess I'll stop and see what's happening in the
 Senate thank you so much Matt Shelley we would welcome your opening remarks thank
 you Sonny and welcome and good morning to all those in attendance thank you for
 inviting me here and thank you to representative Pierce for giving us a
 good not good outlook on the budget forecast that were received last
 Wednesday and he is correct it's a little over a 2.4 billion dollar
 shortfall I want to go over where the house where the biennium budget left the
 Senate and where we're going to be starting when it comes to creating a
 conference a committee report that both the House and the Senate will agree upon
 and that includes this 2.4 plus billion dollar shortfall when it left when House
 bill 1001 the biennium budget left the Senate it had one good thing it removed
 the universal vouchers and it did maintain the universal vouchers at the
 current level it also established a beginning farmer tax credit it that's
 the good like is there anything else no but here are things that continue to be
 a challenge when they when the house version came over to the Senate last
 biennium budget we created a fund for curricular materials to alleviate that
 extra amount on that extra payment on parents that was a big win however that
 was a push of our public schools across the state was to fund curricular
 materials for families and for students and for families but what ended up
 happening was it wasn't funded at a level that actually covered the curricular
 activities and the schools our schools were very concerned because now the
 messaging was curricular materials are going to be covered in the budget but in
 fact the amount was lower than what schools needed and that meant the they
 couldn't go back to parents because we had already told parents that it was
 going to be covered and schools ended up having to fill that gap and they were
 very concerned about this and went to Hoosiers and said that line needs more
 funding it's not truly being funded and this is going to actually be more
 harmful to our school funding formula because that means less funding for our
 schools because we have to make up that gap well apparently this really upset
 the the chair of appropriations in the Senate he felt that the schools were
 unappreciative of the amount they were given and so decided this biennium to
 actually have some retribution what they did is they zeroed out the curricular
 line and they moved it into the general school funding formula so now it's in
 the school funding formula which is even less funding for our public schools and
 you can begin sort of seeing the the politics and I don't want to say
 pettiness but pettiness harmful behaviors that happen when Hoosiers
 speak up and speak up loudly about what their needs are and if they don't show
 deference and complete appreciation for you know the little that they get so
 well it's not a little but you know they need more to actually meet their needs
 but I wanted to go return back to we also saw the removal of the menstrual
 cycle products the house had put the repeal of menstruation products removing
 that tax from those products in the House budget it came over to the Senate and as
 much as we tried to keep that in it was removed it saw a 25% increase in the
 governor's budget the lieutenant governor's budget and the secretary of
 state's budget even though the call when it went out for these agencies to create
 their budget and submit them to keep them flat or find remember all the all
 of us hearing again and again and again doing more with less but we saw a 25%
 increase and that 25% increase remains in the budget today and there were also
 sort of multi-billion dollar little projects here and there the state of
 Indiana has increased the funding to crisis pregnancy centers in the lot the
 line item of funding real alternatives which is a Pennsylvania nonprofit that
 Indiana we're trying to find out what other states other than Pennsylvania
 actually fund real alternatives out of Pennsylvania we cannot find another
 state that actually funds another state's nonprofit but we increased that
 to eight million dollars we didn't even keep that line flat we also saw the
 creation of a telecare women's crisis line pilot program not telehealth
 telecare we have a nonprofit all options has a health has a like a phone line a
 hotline that they fund with their own money that they raise for people to call
 if they're experiencing any need of support or care they can call this
 hotline that's funded separately the state budget does not fund them this
 telecare pilot creation is to sort of be a response to that because all options
 does provide all options and they the telecare pilot would be a an anti
 abortion and anti abortion anti-choice option and that's getting funded in this
 budget so when we talk about the 2.4 billion dollar shortfall we certainly
 have some places where we can start in addition to those lines I our Senate
 Democratic caucus we actually offered and it was in excess of 2.4 billion
 dollars of where we could make up that revenue one we have been talking about
 that Senate that cigarette tax increase for years but we really leaned in this
 year so the cigarette tax increase a slight increase in the alcohol tax we
 have not seen an increase in the alcohol tax in over two decades we are actually
 you know really pushing to go a little bit further with our choice vouchers and
 maintain at the 2021 biennium funding levels or remove them all together but
 if we just return to the 2021 levels that would get free up millions of
 dollars additionally asking the governor the lieutenant governor and the
 Secretary of State to do what every other Hoosier is being asked to do and
 that is to do more with less and get rid of that 25 percent increase and finally
 creating an MCAF so the hospital assessment fee hospitals pay an
 assessment fee on services to the state on services that they do and a small
 percentage comes back to the state when we rolled out our pathways program and
 we created the managed care entities for the state of Indiana to manage our
 Medicaid for the aging and disabled Hoosiers we did not institute a managed
 care assessment fee which goes to insurance companies that they have to
 pay a small percentage on the care that the money that they're making off of
 Hoosiers and creating this MCAF would help alleviate this gap and so that's
 close to a four billion dollar revenue source with all of those ideas put
 together and we'll be really pushing for those policy changes in House Bill 1001
 so that's House Bill 1001 which is the biennium budget I wanted to touch
 briefly on House Bill 1002 it went to Conference Committee just like 1001 but
 1002 was labeled the deregulation of education bill and it was thicker than
 the budget actually it cleaned up some duplicative language it took out some
 lines from education code that are no longer being used and it also removed
 requirements of degree or residency for the appointee for the secretary of the
 Department of Education no longer does the appointee for being the leader of
 education in Indiana need to have any degree whatsoever not a master's not a
 bachelor's not high school nothing it removes it all together in addition to
 that it removes the requirement that while the secretary serves Indiana that
 they live in Indiana that has been removed entirely they don't need to live
 in Indiana they don't look need to live in the United States they actually can
 live wherever they want and this is their idea of deregulating that this is
 going to be a positive step for education in the state of Indiana and of
 course the Senate Democratic caucus fiercely fought that as well as in
 committee they removed the requirement that teachers have training in social
 emotional learning that that is a value of our state all of that language was
 gutted from education code and while it as they as Republicans said it still
 will let schools individual schools if this is a value they want to have they
 are free to do it but we are not going to say as a state that we value anything
 other than reading writing and arithmetic I mean that you know we're
 gonna get back to the basics in Indiana we're gonna get back to the basics and
 not have all this fluff that detracts from a good education and so they
 stripped SEL from education code and that is currently in House Bill 1002 and
 it is in conference committee so we're going to continue working to put that
 language back in House Bill 1004 House Bill 1004 was an attempt to address
 health care costs in Indiana but the provision in 1004 that has many
 individuals very concerned is it has price caps it has price caps on services
 rendered for non just the the big five nonprofit hospitals and if they don't
 meet those price caps on services then they will lose their nonprofit status
 the challenge there is there are some services that just cost more money and
 cardiology labor and delivery it's very difficult and our nonprofit hospitals in
 the last two years have were seriously charged with bringing down their costs
 and submitting these reports on how they're bringing down the cost and now
 with the price caps and the threat of losing their nonprofit status it is what
 we're doing to education we are now seeing the push in our health care and
 that is pushing to privatization because there's this idea that a private entity
 could do a better job in serving users than our nonprofit hospital systems in
 Indiana and there was fierce debate on the Senate floor on House Bill 1004 and
 that is currently I'm not sure what actually if that got signed by the
 governor if that's in do you know well we can get back to that I'm not sure on
 the bill on that bill if it got signed by the governor and finally House Bill
 1008 the one that creates this Commission to study moving the border of
 Indiana to include 33 Illinois counties that in a referendum they voted to secede
 from Illinois this we have seen economists Michael Hicks said this would
 be come at a price tag of two billion dollars to Hoosier taxpayers because the
 counties they want to bring in are among the poorest counties in Illinois that
 that actually pulled down the majority many of the services and from Medicaid
 to snap benefits so the impact that it would have on our state revenues and
 expenses would be about a two billion dollar price tag so if we're gonna be
 short two billion dollars we could start there by not even having the
 conversation of bringing in 33 other counties because they voted in a
 referendum to secede from Illinois and our Republican leaders in this state are
 saying we're gonna listen to Illinois voters because they voted in a ballot
 initiative to secede and we want to let them know that Indiana is a hospitable
 home and open to them and at the same time refused to let Hoosiers have a
 ballot initiative it's outrageous and I do want to just before I conclude my
 remarks and opening I want to say that Senate bill one we had second reading
 amendment our deadline was on Monday third reading deadline the deadline was
 on Wednesday and then for the next until we have to sine die on April 29th
 we can argue and pass or defeat our the concurrences the remaining bills that
 the House and the Senate are working out Senate bill one was one of those bills
 and so it came over the Senate concurred so it was on our agenda on Monday so we
 fought the budget we it was about 12 midnight I mean it was midnight it was
 Tuesday morning and the Republicans decided to suspend the calendar hop over
 the rest during the third reading amendment the third reading bills and
 take one concurrence and it was Senate bill one at 1230 in the morning that's
 when we heard the most controversial bill this session was in the middle of
 the night technically the morning and it went directly over to the governor and
 was signed not because it had to not because we were on a deadline because of
 timing so that's what happens when there is not balance when there is not check
 and balance because we could not say no they had enough votes to alter the
 agenda and hear that bill at 1230 in the morning Tuesday morning and so I'll
 conclude my remarks with that thank you for your advocacy and drawing attention
 to these really important matters that are impacting all Hoosiers and with that
 I will be quiet and I'm excited about hearing your questions thank you both
 for your opening remarks and trying to explain what's going on with with our
 Senate and House we do have two people in the queue I want to tell everyone so
 you need to be thinking of your questions and go into chat and direct
 those to one question moderator all you have to say is I have a question and the
 question moderator will let me know and I will put you in the queue our first
 individual that has a question is Jerry Brown Jerry I would ask you to unmute
 and ask your question and then when you've concluded your question make sure
 to read mute this question will be directed first to Shelley Jerry can you
 unmute and ask your question yes I just unmuted Shelley I'm a retired
 teacher and very concerned along with other retired teachers where there'll be
 any kind of a pension supplement usually in the past it's been in the news some
 but this year with Senate bill one and luxury vehicles for our state officers
 and that kind of thing it's kind of got lost so he got any prediction on whether
 we'll get some kind of a 13th check as they call it or a stipend amount thank
 you yes so we passed the the bill got passed but it was not funded in the
 budget so we offered two amendments to reinstate the 13th check it was the
 exact same amendment we started we had over 60 amendments all of them were
 defeated that we heard on Monday and we started our support for working families
 and those who have supported Indiana so well and that was our first amendment
 and then we said at the very end you've got one more shot to get this right on
 the 13th amendment and it also was voted down I'll just we will continue to fight
 for it it's gonna be tough because of the $2.4 self-inflicted wound that we're
 seeing with tariffs with all of the firings at the federal level the
 services that have ended at the federal level there is so much destabilization
 that has happened that it's it is really impacting this year's budget in a way
 that we've not seen since 2009 but no Jerry we're still fighting it and we know
 how important it is the bill passed we just have to fund it in 10-01 oh thank
 you I can't kind of thought you'd say what you said given the budget deficit
 but I wanted to hear it from a legislator so thank you that's all we
 would like to turn to Matt now Matt do you have any additional response to that
 particular question yeah just it's frustrating that we make the retirees
 have to come and beg us every year the these pensions are not very generous in
 our state to begin with over time they really erode from inflation and so these
 you know 13 checks or some kind of increase is really critical for people
 to just be able to meet the cost of living which has really been you know
 pretty high in the past you know three or four years whatever it's been so you
 know this is just extremely frustrating and I think it also shows that there
 really is no accountability left at the State House because these districts are
 so gerrymandered and everyone most everyone there are few exceptions but
 most everyone is in a super lopsided district and you know there was a time
 when the political rule was don't mess with the senior citizens right because
 they pay attention they vote unlike other constituencies are very liable
 voters and like that's the last thing you want to do as a politician is
 disappoint you know seniors with whatever the issue might be and now at
 the General Assembly there they're perfectly happy to just disappoint
 senior citizens and I to me it just shows that there's really not any
 accountability left at the State House there's no sense that you're accountable
 to the people and I find that frustrating because I don't know where
 you find the leverage to try to make things happen well thank you you said
 something that's really hit home with a lot of my friends that we feel like we
 have to go begging every year just to get really a small amount so I I'm glad
 somebody feels that way that's involved with the government because God's so
 that's kind of the way we feel so thank you okay Jerry thank Jerry thank you for
 your question and if you would remute please and we will go to the next
 question Mary Coy I believe that you have a question and would you direct it
 first to Matt Pierce
 Mary you are still muted
 I didn't unmute sorry about that Matt my question is about SB 224 the small
 modular reactors this bill and a few others that are already passed what is
 the everyday citizens next path of you know objection is is litigation the only
 recourse that you see and and I'll add this I had a personal conversation with
 Craig Haggard about the small modular reactors this was at a legislative
 session that Johnson County aspires sponsored and he said oh all of that
 research is just so erroneous he said I was on a naval ship and we use you know
 small modular reactors and I know they can be adapted and and they're safe safe
 safe and the the residents don't have to worry about picking up any extra you
 know cost of this because it's just not gonna happen and and I felt so
 frustrated because it's a small perspective but they nevertheless passed
 it so my question to both of you is what do we as citizens do for the next step
 thank you Mary yes sure the so the answer is the battle will now move to
 the Indiana utility regulatory Commission so in order for these utilities to get
 reimbursed for these small modular reactor planning costs they will have
 to get approval from the IURC now the problem is the legislature sent a pretty
 strong signal that we really want this to happen so I think and the statutes are
 written in ways that I think kind of boxes them in a little bit but they they
 do have the ability to say this is just not going to make economic sense I think
 and not approve the project and so whenever a filing actually happens on
 that then that will be an opportunity for people to get involved I don't know
 if they'll have public hearings but there'll be an opportunity to file
 written comments and I think that's probably where people have to weigh in
 now let me just to represent Haggard's point and and the chairman of the House
 Utilities Committee makes the same point it's like oh we've had small nuclear
 reactors on submarines for decades and they're absolutely right the thing is
 that all that stuff is top secret I have no idea what's going on in those
 nuclear subs when I worked for a member of Congress I actually got to be on a
 nuclear sub underneath the ocean in the Pacific and I remember I went back to
 the back of the submarine I talked to the nuclear officer and I said hey can I
 look in at the nuclear actor and he said nope that's top secret nobody gets in
 there right so who knows what the technology is it's actually being used
 by the military but all I can tell you and I read this information to the
 members of the House on the floor in excruciating detail there have been two
 attempts to build and put in operation a small modular actor one like starting
 back in 2007 it was abandoned because it got too expensive the most recent one
 was just a couple years ago out in Idaho the cost just kept escalating and it got
 to the point where all the utilities are a lot of rural electric cooperatives to
 people involved in that out West they just said the cost of per kilowatt
 electricity is going to be too expensive to justify so they pulled the plug on it
 and so I don't understand the optimism of people thinking that it's gonna work
 what I've said is like I hope it works it would be great to have a non carbon
 emitting you know theoretically safer than a large nuclear reactor you know
 one a generation but let the private sector people fund that research and
 development improved the technology works and once the Wall Street venture
 capital you know crowd has you know done their work and they have a product that
 actually meets the expectations then it's okay let's go for it but what they're
 doing is they want the rate payers in Indiana the utility customers to kind of
 be the guinea pigs to be the people who are kind of the test rats and we're
 gonna end up paying a lot of money for something that I think has a high
 likelihood of not actually panning out so we'll just have to see maybe I'll be
 proven wrong but I'm just looking at the track record of things I'm not very
 optimistic at all thank you Matt Shelley would you like to address that question
 I would say that when I believe it was 420 so we had 423 and 424 one of them
 and I've lost track of which is which but there was one that I actually
 supported I've always voted down these bills for the very reasons that
 representative Pierce said it was all on the backs of ratepayers on something
 that has not happened and or has tried and has been unsuccessful so this bill
 the way it was written when it left the Senate it just allowed for two pilot
 programs and there were some added protections in there it gave some
 serious guardrails and it allowed to try to see if this could happen while
 putting the responsibility where it should be on those who are on the
 private sector or the individuals or who are trying to put forth the pilot so it
 had some serious guardrails but when the bill came back and we heard it after it
 went through the house the number of all that language was out and had to put it
 down but I'm with representative Pierce I mean it would be amazing if we could
 come up with something that doesn't be that isn't put on the backs of our rate
 payers and the the pilot piece of it actually the responsibility is placed on
 those who are responsible for raising the revenue doing the doing the actual
 project but that's kind of that's not where we ended up and we had several
 bills like that that I think we're gonna see I don't know if in the end if they'll
 all be put together into one bill or not but I'd have to go online and see if
 those bills were concurred and I think maybe 424 was concurred so that should
 be on the governor's desk yeah 424 was actually already signed Shelley oh so
 maybe it's 423 yeah and yeah they're like three different nuke bills and that
 one is all the way through the process and so the utilities have their law
 that lets them recover these costs and so like in 1007 in the Senate my
 understanding is they pulled out kind of the rate part because they don't need it
 anymore so I think that they may be trying to make the other bills still in
 the process more palatable by taking some of the rate stuff out since they
 already got what they already have it they already have it so they can take it
 out of the islands now so I think there's a little bit of shenanigans going
 on on that so I appreciate that information but I still and I heard a
 little bit from Matt that that we need to go to the regulatory that citizens to
 want to monitor this stuff need to go to the Regulatory Commission but are there
 any other suggestions I think there's a sense of frustration it's a done deal
 where you know we we have to just live with it well I would say that there's an
 organization called the Citizens Action Coalition and they're a nonprofit and
 they fight on behalf of ratepayers are very engaged at the State House very
 knowledgeable and they also are very engaged in the proceedings at the
 utility Commission so I would urge you to get involved with that organization and
 so what will happen is at some point a utility is going to come forward and say
 we want to use this new law to recover these costs and then there's going to be
 a whole regulatory proceeding and the Commission will have to vote on whether
 or not to prove that based on whatever the law is telling them are their
 criteria and that's where I know the CAC will likely be there fighting and
 encouraging the public to weigh in on that and then oftentimes when the
 utility Commission makes a decision if the CAC or other groups feel that they
 didn't follow the law the way they should have and what they approved then
 they often do go into the court system and they you know asked the Court of
 Appeals of the Supreme Court to overturn what the utility Commission did so
 that's that's basically the pathway that's open you know now that the
 legislature has put that provision into law Matt thanks a lot for that I know
 about that organization and that's a great suggestion I appreciate it thanks
 thank you Mary for your question and the legislators for answering the next
 individual in the queue is Amy Oliver Amy I think you've already unmuted I'd ask
 you to go ahead and pose your question we will be asking Shelley to answer
 it first all right well thank you to Matt and Shelley for being here again
 today I really appreciate your updates and I really having watched legislature
 on online this year really appreciate the advocacy that our Democrats have been
 doing I've been watching the fiery speeches and the 60 amendments and you
 know you're you are really working for your issues and and it's it's just been
 great to watch I am a school board member in Brown County schools so first
 question is just kind of an update on Senate bill 287 partisan school boards I
 understand it's gonna go to conference committee I think tomorrow and then the
 second question is just it's a big picture question what do you think is
 gonna be the impact of funding cuts from both property property taxes and the
 budget you know on schools like what can we expect
 shall we question to you first um yeah Amy thank you we had heard originally
 that 287 was dead and then it got a hearing so I just want to reiterate that
 they are hearing you on this bill they're having a hard time getting this
 bill through because of who's your speaking out and making their voices
 heard so don't give up I'm not a comfrey or an advisor on that bill as a matter
 of fact I'm not sure who has I mean I individual it's there are so many bills
 that we still have to wrap up and I'm not sure who the two individuals are on
 that one it might be Codora and Ford but reach out to them tell them
 specifically what you want them to fight for look online you can see who the
 advisor and comfrey are in the house for both Republican and Democrats you can
 see who they are in the Senate for both Republicans and Democrats and focus
 your add your mobilization on those individuals they they will get your
 emails calls that's important so that's the update on 287 I think a good
 argument is why would we spend more money on school board races which is
 what this is going to result in if with wherever they end up if it's primaries
 or permitting people to declare a party it's only going to create spending more
 money at a time when our local governments and Hoosiers are really
 feeling more than a pinch it's you know feeling the squeeze so I think that's an
 important argument right now considering the 2.4 billion dollar
 budget forecast shortfall the other bell the other question you have is just
 outlook Senate bill one within that language was 518 Senate bill 518 which
 will require the sharing of property tax dollars with all you know charter
 schools with traditional public schools as well as you know having communities
 who have already passed referenda being forced to make other decisions on those
 and it might be more difficult for communities to pass referenda when they
 know those dollars are going to be shared the messaging is going to be
 difficult and so the outlook to be quite frank it's it's bleak and the only
 positive is I have seen movement because of Hoosiers coming to the state house or
 even from the you know your own houses emailing and writing letters and calling
 your representatives and organizing you know events like this but making your
 voice heard it does make a difference so while it seems bleak and the hardship on
 our local governments is real and our on our schools we cannot be quiet in making
 sure that we say exactly how we got here and I know there's been a push to say
 this is all you know Biden's administration but this is squarely on
 state house you know Republicans for the last two decades and now the current
 administration some of the decisions that are being made so that's my outlook
 okay well so first of all on 287 I looked it up here I've got two computers
 going which is really helpful so on to set 287 the conferees Republican is
 Senator Byrne Democrat is Senator JD Ford and then on the House side the
 conferee is the Republican is representative Prescott and the
 Democrat is representative Carolyn Jackson and so those are the people who
 will be involved in that now the thing to remember about conference committees
 is that if the Democratic or the whoever the minority member is at the time in
 this case Democrats if they choose not to sign the conference report and it
 requires four signatures for the bill to come before the House then the
 leadership of the House or the Senate can remove those Democrats and replace
 them with the Republican who's willing to sign so normally what happens in
 this process if they're really insistent on passing the bill the Democrats will
 often hold out and just say this is not ready for prime time and they'll just
 get removed and a new person will be put in there now Shelley is correct that
 this bill's got a lot of drag on it but it's managing to kind of limp along so
 in the house it had 54 votes in favor you need 51 is the bare minimum you need
 to pass it got 54 so it was 54 to 40 keep in mind there are 70 Republicans in
 the house so there are the big chunk of Republicans who heard enough from their
 constituents they decided they didn't want to be voting for that so there's
 still possibility if the Senate is absolutely wanting it to go back to
 something you know more stringent the house may just walk away from it because
 they're only you know they got three votes so they're the version the
 theoretically watered-down version if you want to call it that the Senate
 doesn't like could only get 54 votes so if they appease the Senate and make it
 worse they may end up losing another three or four votes in the house so this
 this thing is like unlike most bills this one is definitely in play so that's
 so that's one thing and then the other thing is if you want to try to
 understand the impacts of Senate bill one if you go to the Indiana General
 Assembly website which is IG a.in.gov and click on legislation and then Senate
 bill one on the left they've got a whole bunch of menu items and one is called
 latest fiscal statement and if you click on that there's a very lengthy fiscal
 impact statement I don't have yet if you've had a chance to look at that but
 in that they actually have done calculations of what the impact will be
 on each individual school system and local unit of government and so you can
 kind of see they've got a couple different kind of metrics there and it's
 not good I think Monroe County Community Schools they lose like four to five
 percent during each of the first couple years I think they lose like ten percent
 in that year and I just tried to bring up the to look at it by my computer to
 behave here so I was just looking at Brown County School Corporation it's
 like the first year it's minus 3.1 second year minus 3.2 and then the third
 year minus 4.6 so it's it's not a good situation for our local units and
 particularly our schools our schools are being totally hemmed in between SB 1
 locking them out of potential property tax gains making it harder to pass
 referendums and communities want to make sure the schools are properly funded then
 even if you get that done forcing you to share that money with charter schools
 they're getting you from all angles excuse me and I guess the pollen's
 getting in my room down here so they're really hemming them in on things to do
 and then they're gonna underfund them in the school funding formula so it I it's
 I'm very pessimistic about how this is all gonna all gonna work out I think it's
 gonna be very tough upcoming couple years for schools across the state and you
 know the voters will have to decide whether they are okay with that or not
 when we get to the next election here and in another year and a half or so
 thank you Matt and we will now turn from Amy to Kathy roundtree Kathy would you
 please unmute and direct your question first to Matt Pierce I thank you both
 for being here I was interested in updates on House bill 1004 the hospital
 pricing bill where that is and what your thoughts are on it at this point yeah
 2004 is in conference committee let me see if I can bring that up and just see
 who the conferees are so that's you know that's a classic bill I I actually
 support the underlying kind of premise of the bill which is we have these large
 nonprofit hospitals that I think are not really behaving like nonprofits so much
 and so I'm kind of open to getting their attention on that the difficulty is to
 make sure that in the process of trying to to get not the big nonprofit
 corporations to act like they're actually nonprofits is if you don't do
 it right you will kind of blow up the rural hospitals and so you know this is
 where the big debate is it's like is the bill actually on point enough that it's
 not going to cause collateral damage that's basically what's going on and so
 actually we were at the point where the dissent was just filed on April 17th so
 conferees have not been appointed yet so we'll have to figure it out next week
 another thing I should mention is the the target date to try to be finished is
 actually Thursday April 24th now under the law we can be in until April 29th so
 it's going to be interesting to see whether they're able to actually get
 everything done by the 24th or whether these issues are particularly the budget
 are difficult enough that it's going to force them to hang around longer to get
 to some kind of consensus so we'll have to see but right now I think they're
 trying to get done by Thursday and so all this conferencing and everything
 will have to be finished by then if that's the date they stick to thank you
 Matt Shelly would you please address that question I think I did in my opening
 remarks I think I actually am the conferee it just doesn't post it yet and
 well I think the frustration about this if you want if you want good something
 good to watch you can watch the floor debate on this because the Democrats
 really didn't have to say anything it was a fight among the Republicans and it
 got pretty heated the concern is how do we bring down costs in our nonprofit
 health care system I mean they came out strong two years ago requiring our top
 five nonprofit hospitals to bring down those costs ours IU health here I mean
 they have been working their plan to bring down those costs and the price caps
 that now on 1004 will mandate the concern and if hospitals don't do that
 by a certain time or they fall short then they will lose their nonprofit
 status the concern about that is if our hope is to bring down costs why would a
 nonprofit hospital want to be a nonprofit hospital I mean because why not
 just say you know we're gonna let go of some of these more expensive services and
 areas of care and departments and we're just gonna focus on those that actually
 aren't as expensive don't impact the bottom line and we already are seeing
 throughout Indiana rural hospitals closing throughout Indiana labor and
 delivery units closing it's harder to keep those cardiology departments open
 and fully staffed because those are more expensive to do and 1004 the way it is
 written brings more destabilization to that area and the debate was are we
 ready are we ready to move to have more hospitals closed as a result of 1004 and
 move to more for-profit a stronger for-profit hospital system in Indiana I
 think that's the real question and you know what 1004 is really looking to
 accomplish holding our nonprofit hospitals accountable that at the same
 time providing a real avenue to becoming a for-profit institution and I think
 that's a philosophical debate of what we want to do but the idea of putting in
 guardrails for our nonprofit are you know leading nonprofit hospitals that
 are they actually nonprofit I mean the Senate Democratic caucus we had a bill
 that actually would define what in order to have a nonprofit status what what
 that nonprofit hospital system would need to do but that bill did not get a
 hearing and so 1004 has many of our non-profit nonprofit hospitals concerned
 but who has been absent from the last three years from this conversation of
 drawing down health care expenses are the insurance companies they have not
 been at the table they have not been in our committee hearings and I think they
 have to be at the table and part of this conversation so that's kind of where we
 are with 1004 I am the conferee and just want to make sure that if we are coming
 after our nonprofit hospitals we do so in a way that doesn't create greater
 access problems for people living in more rural communities in Indiana but
 even in some of our counties who are already struggling with their health
 care access because it will most likely what they're saying is cause more
 closures throughout Indiana thank you Shelly the next person in the queue is
 Julie Hardesty Julie I would ask you to unmute and direct your question first to
 Shelly Yoder okay thank you both for being here my question is about students
 and voting IDs so it's mostly clarification I think with this bill
 that's been passed so if students are registered to vote in like Bloomington
 or West Lafayette or Terre Haute but their driver's license or a state ID or
 passport has a different address on it does that matter or does having a
 doesn't having a student a driver's license or a state ID or passport work
 to present when voting where your sleep as a student in Indiana so my
 understanding is that the presented ID when you're voting is just for name and
 photo identification but if student IDs from Indiana colleges and universities
 aren't allowed anymore does the address on that ID come into play now does that
 matter thank you Shelley yes I think that's what was so aggravating about
 Senate bill 10 is it wasn't talking about registering to vote it was talking
 just about ID when you go to vote and that's why so many students use their
 student ID because if you know we have curbed and made it so difficult to vote
 in Indiana that if a student can get themselves to the polls on you know on
 any day and then go to find their state issued ID the one ID they always have to
 have to get into buildings to you know to make their way around campuses their
 student IDs so that's what made it so convenient because many students would
 say oh I don't have my state issued ID but to answer your question yes I think
 that I don't I don't believe it's gonna disturb that although you would still
 have to show proof of residency with mail when you do go to register so
 something there would have to be some proof of residency when that student
 goes to register to vote yeah I can jump in because I kind of little I kind of
 brushed up on this law when I was debating on the house floor so there are
 two distinct things one is what you have to prove when you're registering and
 that includes a component of things proving you live actually where you want
 to register then we have the second thing that got created about 20 years
 ago called voter ID where when you show up at the polls you have to present
 some identification to prove you are who you say you are and it doesn't matter if
 the address is different the key thing is the ID has to meet these like four
 requirements which the student ID did but the key thing is it has to be
 issued by the state of Indiana or the federal government and so what that
 means is if you're a student say from you know Illinois Ohio Kentucky some
 other state and you decide to declare Indiana your domicile and register here
 you may have ID that's all been issued by out-of-state and so that would not be
 allowed so you could have you could have an ID that meets all four of the
 requirements you know with the photo and the expiration date and all the things
 that they require but if it's issued by another state it doesn't count and so
 what that means is the students are gonna have to make sure that they go and
 they get something issued by the state of Indiana if they don't happen to have
 a passport that's on them and so that's just gonna create another trip where
 they're gonna have to go to the BMV and try to get that ID but this was the
 thing that was just intensely frustrating to me about the debate is
 they kept saying oh we have to eliminate this because students are registering
 where they don't live and then someone even suggested students were voting in
 two places at once that they were voting at you know some other out-of-state you
 know home address or something and then voting on the college campus and you
 know the registration and verification of residency is completely different
 from this one discrete prove to us you are who you say you are when you show up
 to vote in person and they've just completely I think that the ability to
 answer that basic question because one thing he kept saying is like well I guess
 I should go back they were a little bit surprised when they passed the first law
 and they said it had to be issued by the government ID issued by the state they
 didn't realize the state universities would count as a government agency
 basically and so that those student IDs if they had the four required elements
 they would be able to work and so I think that they were a little frustrated
 that it ended up being allowed in the first place and then finally they just
 got frustrated enough they said they would remove it now the the again
 revealing the hypocrisy they said oh we can't have trick students get special
 treatment have special things they their ID they should have to have the same ID
 as anybody else which basically is a drive they're thinking it's gonna be a
 driver's license what but they ignored and they couldn't answer that is that if
 you look at the statute they put in a specific exception for IDs issued to
 veterans and the military that don't have expiration dates because for some
 reason they felt was really important to have an expiration date on the ID but
 there's this particular exception they put in for veterans and military who
 have an ID with no expiration on it so they're willing to be special for one
 class of people but then they claim they had to change a lot of make sure another
 class of people you know aren't special so it's frustrating but it's pretty
 transparent they just want to try to keep the number of students voting down
 and we'll just have to hope that they get angry enough that they will do the
 extra things required so they can vote and then they can choose the people they
 think best represent them thank you Matt we'll turn to our last person in the queue
 who is Pamela Davidson and ask her to unmute and ask your question and
 following Pamela's questions we'll move into closing remarks so Pam would you
 like to ask you can't thank you enough Matt and Shelley you just shine the
 state's going to hell supermajority rule is not good for good governance it's
 obvious all day long every day my question is with our budget in such
 shambles with cutting core services has the state has it all grappled with the
 mystical potential of tariffs which are going to kick us in the teeth I heard we
 are number three in the states to be hurt by that and also the loss of these
 federal jobs and workers I saw a stat that said if Kansas City fired all of
 its federal workers it would be like closing a huge automotive plant so I
 wonder about those two things if they've talked about them because you know in
 DC I love this I heard Steve Sanders say yesterday we're governed by a man who's
 governed by his id I'd never heard that before and I just loved it so much so
 it's quixotic don't know but are they threatened about that to any chatter
 about it and thank you thank you thank you I will direct that question first to
 Matt yeah the hardest thing you can get to have happen is to try to have a
 Republican actually comment on President Trump and the state house they're just
 kind of like we know nothing you know there there are some who are you know
 true believers but you know for example that we had a bill that would create a
 special fund for cancer research but there's no money in the fund it just
 creates the shell of a fund and sets it up and so I asked the author I said is
 there any money going to be appropriated into this thing and he kind of admitted
 no but he said that there could be like private you know or philanthropic
 donations and so I made the point that we're gonna have to step up and put some
 money in this thing because President Trump is basically destroying the
 university system of research and particularly medical research and so if
 you want to continue to have progress in trying to find cures and treatments for
 cancer and these other medical issues then you know we're gonna have to step
 up because the federal government is basically just destroying the entire
 system and not a single person I thought somebody might get up and defend the
 whole thing and not a single person got up and said anything about about it it
 was just you know deafening silence now the fact that the forecast came
 in at 2.4 billion below that is because of the Trump tariffs so those people
 the the forecast group the economists who kind of figure it all out they're
 looking at it and they know we're headed for a recession they they are analyzing
 the impact of the tariffs on prices on consumer purchasing you know on on trade
 on farms you know they're not the soybean market you know the China has
 evaporated so those commodities are gonna come down for the for the farmers
 so so no no one is no one is uttered like oh gee these tariffs are screwing
 us we're gonna have a real problem but they have said obliquely yes it looks as
 if we are going to have some difficult economic times so that's as close as you
 can get to an acknowledgement of where these problems are coming from thank you
 Matt Shelley would you like to address that question yes I had a budget
 amendment that would create a tariff Commission it was budget-neutral it
 would do similarly that what 1008 creating that boundary Commission
 looking at bringing those Illinois counties over into Indiana I use the
 exact same framework of that Commission and created a tariff Commission
 because that actually is going to directly impact these tariffs are going
 to directly impact Indiana's economy from our farmers our ag to our
 manufacturing US steel you know of all the soybeans that we actually export out
 of Indiana 60% of what China imports with their soybeans comes from Indiana
 farmers and so the fact that we are not able to have this conversation around
 something that is directly impacting Hoosiers I'm going to actually they
 asked us to put forth our suggestions for the House bill that were budget
 neutral I'm going to suggest it again because we hadn't had the budget
 forecast but they know it was actually reported when they heard the budget
 forecast that the number one reason were these tariffs and the economic
 instability that they're causing so they are fully aware of it number two I have
 a resolution that I filed last week that is directing our Indiana federal
 delegation of congressional leaders to invoke their constitutional right and
 that is to step in and override these tariffs they could actually do something
 so how resolutions work I don't know if it will actually be assigned it could be
 I mean I've talked with the pro tem pro tem Bray about hearing the resolution I
 was very diplomatic in how I wrote it I did not I was just very clear to say we
 need our leadership in Washington I'm not the president but our congressional
 leadership to do something for Hoosiers you are representing us and you have a
 constitutional right to override this and that is what that resolution is going to
 do and I'm asking the pro tem to hear the resolution and let it be read across
 the desk we all vote on it and you can just blame it on me you don't have to
 say that you did it but that you know the Democrat Senate minority leader she
 demanded that we pass this there's nothing we can do so we're gonna send
 this resolution to our Indiana delegation I don't know if that will
 happen but I'm working hard to make sure it does but that's what I have to say
 about tariffs we're sort of two-pronged approach and just having some
 recognition of its impact on Hoosiers would be nice okay thank you so much for
 that answer Shelly we are going to go ahead with concluding remarks and just a
 personal request I'm wondering if each of you could address whether or not you
 see anything positive that has come or is coming from this legislative session
 and Shelly I would ask you first to go forward with your closing remarks Oh
 Sonny that's a tough one my closing remarks I think I spoke to there there is
 recognition that going to universal vouchers even though we're so close to
 being at universal vouchers that those few additional percentage points has a
 very crucial impact on school funding and so every every expansion in choice
 scholarships and right now going to families who are earning more than
 $250,000 a year is directly impacting what we're able to do with our public
 school education system in the state and the fact that the Senate is recognizing
 that and saying I think that's a step too far we aren't we we don't have the
 money or the revenues to be able to do that I mean that's a positive we're
 gonna work hard to maintain it at the 2021 level but we'll see where that is
 you know I want to speak to the visit of RFK jr. this week to the great state of
 Indiana the governor made nine executive orders to make any to make America to
 make Indiana healthy again and it's it's definitely loud and clear that the body
 police are stronger than ever whether it's policing women's bodies or trans
 bodies or in this case individuals who are on snap so there were nine executive
 orders the first one putting more work requirements on our snap recipients
 number two cracking down on that snap fraud with more income verifications for
 individuals we thought we fought so hard to remove asset verification on snap
 especially for those with long-term disabilities and senior citizens but we
 are we're gonna come after snap fraud with more income verification and asset
 verification number three we're going to try to get Indiana our congressional
 federal delegation to allow states to cut back on snap and put stronger
 guardrails in on accessing nutritious food number four the the governor removed
 the ability to use snap on candy and soft drinks and I just want to speak to
 this I got permission my legislative assistant she sat down with me and she
 said Shelley I've been on every I got pregnant young and I have been on every
 program out there I'm not on any of them anymore but when my kids were little I
 would use those when we would have to put you know fill their stockings or
 something special for you know here we are Easter weekend or and she said I
 just it breaks my heart because you know as a mom I made those good decisions for
 my kids on what they needed but every so often it was nice to be able to give
 them a little treat and so while it sounds good that we're gonna remove the
 ability for snap to be used on candy and soft drinks and she reminded me and I
 think reminded us all we should be educating and empowering parents to be
 able to make those decisions themselves number five removing food dyes from food
 number six make sure we study diet related chronic illnesses and I think
 those two are actually really good I think we should be looking at the way
 dyes are impacting our food systems and studying diet related chronic illnesses
 see Sonny came up with two good things another one creating more market
 competitive markets for farmers to be able to connect directly to Indiana
 consumers with their fresh-grown produce that's a win this one I'm sorry I hate
 this one but it's creating one of those governor's fitness tests in public
 schools so students can line up and be humiliated if they don't pass that test
 have I don't know if any of you have trauma from those tests from when you
 were younger but we're gonna have one in the state of Indiana the governor's
 fitness test is going to be employed and finally more Medicaid fraud crackdown
 we know that that's where they're really cracking down assuming that Hoosiers are
 trying to take advantage of accessing Medicaid when they don't deserve
 Medicaid and so that was number nine and those were the nine making Indiana
 healthy again executive orders not exactly legislative but I had thought
 about bringing those to our meeting today and wanted to draw attention to
 them and there are a couple good ones but a couple that I have real problems
 with but wanted to bring everybody's attention to these nine executive orders
 that happened on Tuesday I think it was I can't even remember I think it was
 Tuesday yeah so thank you so much for having me have a great rest of your
 weekend thank you Shelley and I just wanted to ask you very briefly before
 Matt begins his final statements is there a number on the resolution that
 you're proposing that is to go to our federal congressional people we're just
 wanting to be able to ask our personal representatives to support the
 resolution yeah let me look that up while Matt goes okay thank you Matt your
 closing remarks yeah well I have to admit it's a little hard to be positive
 you know it's interesting because in this last week I would seem like I have
 voted no more times than I can remember like in a single day I mean all these
 bills they come back even the ones that look like you take first look like well
 that seems like a reasonable policy and then you start reading the bill and you
 get in there and there's always like a poison pill stuck in there and and that
 the kind of hypocrisy driven by this like culture war ideology is what is
 most dismaying so we had a parental rights bill right it declared out you
 know an ultimately parents have the right to direct the raising other
 children an old thing and you get the bottom of the bill but this right
 doesn't extend to anything related to their trans kids you know so we want
 parents to be in absolute control particularly in the way they raise their
 children but if they're trans kids no the state's going to decide for you on
 that and so there's a lot of nos along those lines and on this budget stuff I
 just think that the people ultimately decide to them it's not people it's
 numbers on a page and I don't know if the humanity of the situation will
 finally you know impress itself upon someone before this whole thing's over I
 hope so but I'm a little cynical about that but I would say if I had to end on a
 happier note a couple positive things you know there was a bill passed that
 encourages utilities to find ways to upgrade their existing electric
 transmission lines so one of the big problems we have is we have a lot of
 renewable energy that wants to come on to the grid but they have to be able to
 find a place to plug in and you need these high transmission lines in order
 to you know move the electrons you know all the way across the country in some
 cases and so there's kind of emerged that there's new technology you can put
 new wires on the towers that exist you can kind of manage those wires better on
 those towers and if you implement those things you can end up getting more
 electricity moving through the lines and so there's a bill to create some
 incentives and study that that I think is on the governor's desk right now and
 so that that's you know and all the work I do in the utility area that's like the
 one single thing I can point to that I think is positive there and then another
 thing that I think is kind of positive for Bloomington is someone who teaches
 in the media school we have some film credits that encourage film production
 to be done here in Indiana they're pretty anemic compared to other states
 but worse yet they're they're kind of unworkable for people who make these
 financial decisions about film production and so there's a bill moving
 through the process that will allow the film credits to be reassigned to other
 people basically you can kind of market them and I think that will make them
 more attractive to the people making decisions about whether they make a film
 in Indiana or some other place and so I think that's assuming that gets all the
 way through the process think that will be a positive thing that might make it a
 little bit more likely that we have some economic activity here and some
 opportunity for you know Indiana citizens who want to be involved in film
 production to have some opportunity to maybe do it here and not have to go to
 Atlanta or up to Chicago or someplace to have very robust film production tax
 credits so those are a couple positive things I just want to thank you both for
 being faithful in always participating in our legislative updates and coming to
 us with so much information and knowledge so that we can be better
 informed and I want to thank all of the participants in our legislative update
 be paying attention be be reaching out to your legislators to express your
 opinions on these bills that are going through the General Assembly we still
 have a little bit of time left and we need to show the energy to follow
 through on things that Matt and Shelley have made us aware of we want to thank
 our legislators we want to thank everybody for joining us we also want to
 thank CATS the Community Access Television Services for allowing us to
 record this and then publish the session after we finish we want to thank all of
 our team members for being present and helping to sponsor and get the word out
 about these legislative sessions the Bloomington Monroe County League of
 Women Voters Brown County League of Women Voters and Johnson County League
 of Women Voters the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce the NAACP Monroe
 County branch and the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Columbus we
 appreciate our sponsors very much in participating in these legislative
 updates I wish you all a happy Easter weekend may you go forth and enjoy the
 holiday and in your own way thank you again for joining us wait Sonny you
 forgot to let Shelley tell us about the number of her house resolution okay
 Shelley did you were you able to find that number or filed it but it hasn't
 been issued a number yet because what happens with these resolutions they're
 typically like memorializing this person honoring this project celebrating this
 team but this one has a little bit of meat and I was warned that it might not
 be assigned because of the nature of it so if it does I will immediately reach
 out to the League of Women Voters and if y'all can spread the word we will thank
 you well thank you both very much
 (upbeat music)
 (upbeat music)
 (upbeat music)
 (upbeat music)