A property tax system, overhaul, an education campaign and pharmacy benefit managers, plus raising minimum teacher salaries and more.

From the television studios at WFYI, it's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending March 14th, 2025.

Indiana Week In Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting stations.

Additional support is provided by the Indy Chamber, working to unite business and community to maintain a strong economy and quality of life.

This week, House Ways and Means Chair Jeff Thompson proposed his version of property tax reform.

It's a dramatic overhaul of the property tax and local income tax systems, and it's left many, including some of his fellow Republican lawmakers, unclear about its full impact.

The changes, which include completely altering how homeowners property taxes are calculated, would be phased in over several years, and ultimately, it could reduce the property taxes homeowners pay by more than $200 million a year statewide.

But Thompson says people's property taxes would still go up.

This is going to be a decrease in that increase.

They're going to pay more.

That doesn't satisfy some legislators, like Democrat Ed DeLaney.

I'll be asking you to come to my district.

And tell my people to be happy, because.

I'm not sure that this is going to be easily understood.

Thompson acknowledges that his proposal isn't a final product.

Work on the major property tax reform bill will continue in the coming weeks.

Is Thompson's plan too big a lift for what remains of this legislative session?

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

Democrat Elise Schrock.

Republican Mike O'Brien.

Oseye Boyd, editor in chief of Mirror Indy.

And Niki Kelly, editor in chief of the Indiana Capitol Chronicle.

I'm Indiana Public Broadcasting Statehouse bureau chief Brandon Smith.

So, Mike, there's about six weeks left to go.

Is this a little too much to do with that time left?

If anyone could do it, it's Jeff Thompson, the physics teacher.

You know, it's really complicated, but it's also really hard to explain.

And I think what lawmakers, if you talk to lawmakers, it'll be interesting.

On Monday there's a rally a property tax rally on money.

It'll be interesting to see how well attended that is and who attends that.

Because one thing lawmakers are starting to kind of real over is like, this is really hard.

We're getting chewed on by our school systems and by our mayors and our county councils back home.

And no one's really asking me for this.

You know, and because the impact was, like, so far in the rearview mirror now, and there were two years removed from kind of that Covid spike, that inflation, the worst of it, the worst of it.

and certainly people need relief.

I don't disagree with, you know, Governor Braun's, you know, assertion that he's, you know, he ran on this and he's going to he wants to deliver it because people were, up in arms about it.

But it is different than I was around in 082.

That was like the big overhaul.

that was in the air.

That was like, every day you're going home, you're at your neighborhood, your grocery store, you're at church, you're like, you're going around and everybody's talking about their property taxes.

and so the political will and the mathematical ability to deliver anything that's that big, it's just hard.

And you even have six weeks to do it.

There's a lot of good ideas out there on how to do it, including the governor's plan.

And now Thompson's kind of pivot to a new system.

so I think they can certainly deliver it because they've been talking about it for so long.

but I think what I do, what I do think like, kind of like the school funding formula, this conversation here with the sales this week to schools know exactly what their number is like.

They run that formula through, they run a report.

Every school district in the state knows what the impact is going to be.

That's not the case with this.

And I think it's just leading a lot of a lot of uncertainty.

Mike talks about the political will of it is it's a really difficult balance to find between wanting to provide needed relief versus not I mean, just stripping so much funding away from local governments and schoo People are going to start getting their property tax bills for this year, and there's nothing lawmakers can do about the bills that are about to get.

But is that going to increase the volume of that side of the equation?

It could and I think that, you know, the legislature can tend to be in a bit of an echo chamber, and there is a lot of noise happening elsewhere.

the legislature is looking at the legislature, and the public is looking at what's happening federally.

It's looking at what's happening locally.

In 2008, we didn't have so much noise happening at the federal level.

We didn't have so much happening.

that could potentially affect Indiana.

That is now, you know, the capital Chronical reported we are one of the top three most, federal aid receiving states in the nation.

So, depending on what happens with federal cuts, kind of like what we do at the state level affects locals.

What happens at the federal level happens, it will affect the state level.

Are we going to have to make up for what happens if the Department of Education doesn't exist at the federal level anymore?

This keeps getting passed down at the local level.

Then where do we go from there?

And I hear people say, I don't know how people make it anymore.

They don't.

There are people, literally Hoosier families working poor.

They're just not making it anymore.

So we have to look at if we're going to affect our tax base so drastically when it when these federal funds are going to affect educators, farmers, working poor, low income renters the most, maybe that's where we should be, prioritizing our work.

You know, this felt to a lot of people, a little, I mean, a little out of the blue.

Thompson's proposal he had authored at the beginning of the session that was out there, but he never took a hearing on it or anything like that.

I mean, I think those of us on the inside, we we knew it was coming in.

A lot of this was based on testimony he gave to the two year tax committee.

So it wasn't out of the blue in that realm.

But yeah, to toss out this massive proposal in the second half, I didn't even hear it in your own chamber in the first half.

you know, it's a much more holistic approach, which also means that it affects even more parts of the property tax system that they have to watch.

If you touch this, then it's going to affect this.

and so it would actually hurt businesses.

and it would help homeowners.

So I think the Monday rally will be interesting.

I believe Governor Braun is now going to speak at the rally that it was announced on ABC this morning, and that's where a lot of that pressure is coming.

But I cannot remember, and I'm sure I'll get them now.

But I cannot remember the last time I got an email from a reader concerned about their property taxes.

and I certainly don't have friends and family asking about them, but the numbers are there.

It's clear they've risen dramatically.

It's just lost in the mix of everything else.

Yeah, I think that maybe is what it was.

To that end.

I mean, I do think like folks are going to start getting their bills in the next few weeks.

They will get their property tax bills likely before lawmakers finish this session.

And again, there's nothing lawmakers can do about the bills they're going to get this year.

But will that in those final maybe couple of weeks of session put way more pressure on lawmakers to deliver the kind of broad relief that, like Governor Brown has talked about?

I think something is going to top of mind for people, because what you're saying is, I got my bill last year, so I was upset last year.

I was upset when I get the bill, then I go ahead and pay it.

I forget about it.

The anger is not there that it once was.

Now I'm angry about egg prices, things like that.

Yeah.

Yes, it's egg prices and the economy and all that.

But when you get the bill, then you're worried about it.

So then it's going to put pressure on them.

I do think I really appreciate the holistic approach, because I think it's like, past time we've done something that is really comprehensive and holistic.

But my concern is it just happened so late into the session.

We have just six weeks last.

How much can you really accomplish when you're doing something comprehensive that really makes a difference in six weeks?

Yeah I do, to be fair.

It is gradual.

It is a it takes over.

And I do want to add one thing that was very interesting.

Both Speaker Houston and Senate President Pro Tem Bray said the same thing on Thursday, which I think is the first of this session, which is they are committed to not just decreasing the increase, but homeowners actually seen a cut in 26 than what they what we're going to pay for.

They used almost the exact same.

Exactly.

And so as an.

Answer to my question, feel.

Like they've now set that gantlet out and it has to be some sort of actual physical cut for Brian to accept it.

Yeah, but it seems like they're all on board on the goal.

They're talking to the governor, to those ten.

Oh, absolutely.

It was the words they used were we want the 2026 bill to be at.

Six weeks is actually a really long time like legislative and legislative time.

I mean, you pull things together.

The pressure of the deadline is what actually motivates the change.

Often times in the session.

All right.

Time now for viewer feedback.

Each week we post an unscientific online poll question.

And this week's question is does Indiana's property tax system need a major overhaul, a yes or B no?

Last week we asked you whether all the money for the leap district is worth a 22% of you say yes, 78% say no.

If you'd like to take part in the poll, go to fiy.org/eyewear and look for the poll of pharmacy benefit managers or PBMs are meant to lower drug prices by acting as a middleman between drug manufacturers and either insurance companies or employers who sponsor health plans, Indiana Public Broadcasting's Abigail Rubin reports.

Advocates say many employers and consumers don't understand what PBMs are and how they work.

Prescription Benefits Matter is a new educational campaign looking to change that.

Joey Fox has testified on behalf of the Association of Health Plans and the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association.

He also directs the campaign, which he says is designed for people to better understand the role PBMs play in the price they pay at the pharmacy counter.

It's a part of the health care system that consumers don't.

Necessarily interact.

With on a personal level every day.

And so we want them to know that we are involved, and we are advocating for them and want them to have a better understanding of the value that they're getting.

Fox says the main function of PBMs is to negotiate for lower drug prices.

Some Indiana lawmakers have questioned whether PBMs are effective, which led to the Senate approving some of the most aggressive reforms earlier this legislative session.

Elise, can this campaign have an impact on legislation before the end of session?

well, I mean, like we talked about in the last topic, the deadline is going to be here before we know it.

but I think, you know, I know why the intent to educate is there in the Health Care Oversight Committee.

I think, these types of, PBMs have been referred to as, like, almost like a black box, I think is what they said.

Oh, yeah.

So so folks don't really know much about them.

So I get why people want to know, but it does seem like with this type of and I do think it is an aggressive, reform, there's a lot of a lot going on in the Senate bill.

but the, the people offering it seem pretty hell bent on moving it forward.

That we've seen it on a lot of health care issues.

But this is one of the big ones.

They've been talking about this for years.

It feels like not a lot is going to slow this train down at this point, right?

Oh no, no, no one understands it because they don't care to understand it, because it's easy to beat up.

but it's also really complicated.

so I think any effort to try to, like, pull the curtain back and explain the step that process and why PBMs sit between the, you know, the employer in the manufacture is important.

The attenders are really been in touch with the manufacturer, you know.

So that's always been like one of the rubs with, you know, in these health care debates.

you know, part of that's understandable.

We have like the most valuable healthcare company in the world sitting down the street.

Like a lot of people who are integrated and making a lot of money.

I mean, we're talking about vertical integration.

So you've got a lot of people making money, like sometimes twice over because.

But the bottom line is like what a chairman of the Senate Health Committee chairman said a couple of years ago, we were in a PBM committee and he kind of stopped.

The conversation goes, hang on, what happens between the time a drug is made?

And I put it in my mouth and like three hours later, we didn't get answers.

That's the problem on.

This issue, though, to something that John Schwantz has said a lot on this show.

When we talk about the health care costs debate in the state is it's hard to pick the bad guy, right?

Because everybody has a part to play.

The insurance companies, the doctors, the, the, the hospitals, the, you know, everybody has a part to play in.

Why all of these costs are going up.

Does it feel like without understanding really what they do?

Does it feel like PBMs are the easy bad guy?

Yes, because count me among the Hoosiers who don't know and understand what a premium does.

And so when you add that additional layer, that's what it seems like an additional layer, a middleman in the system.

It seems like there's another additional cost.

So if you are talking about all this to reduce cost, well then someone has to get paid.

So then it looks like an increase to the average person.

I have no idea what people need to do.

To kind of help me to go back to the original.

So the the original question, do you think this can have an impact on maybe.

I mean, obviously Joey and his group want to scale that bill back a little bit.

Do you think it can have that impact?

I don't know, I think all the many of the lawmakers have bought into them being kind of the the bad guy in the middle.

And I do think one thing that would help PBMs is if they didn't I mean, if they truly are the middlemen and they're supposed to be, you know, trying to do something good in the middle, then don't have them own all the pharmacies, too.

You know, I mean, it it complicates the whole picture.

In a lot of cases they are at pharmacy.

In almost all cases they are a pharmacy.

I mean, if you go to Express Scripts up in in Zionsville or CVS on the, on the east side, you know, Butler and Farm and pretty or educating a lot of pharmacists to go work in those places.

You know, that's that part of the story is not being told at all.

Like the economy really kind of depends on that that integrates with Lilly and that.

But but it gets a lot of it just it's just so abstract at the state House.

And and it just gets complicated because you have people complain about the cost.

And I totally get it.

Yeah.

I seem to have an unpopular opinion to some, but it's almost like we will over complicate our health care system.

And I to avoid payer, to avoid single payer.

Unlike most other advanced countries in the world who have figured it out, even with other major pharmaceutical companies still doing business in their country, like the tax code.

Someone should design it like they did on purpose.

This should look like someone designed it on purpose.

Just does it just look.

Like the minimum pay for Indiana teachers could rise to $45,000 a year under a proposal that received support in the House this week, but some lawmakers and education leaders worry there's not enough money in school budgets to make the change.

The bill would raise Indiana's minimum teacher pay by $5,000 a year.

Indiana Secretary of Education Katie Jenner says higher pay attracts and retains more teachers.

She says the move would cost less than half $1 million for each public school district in the state, except one, and some districts wouldn't have to spend anything extra at all.

Many are at zero.

They don't have any teachers below 45,000.

Many state education leaders say they support higher teacher pay, but are concerned about how districts will pay for salary increases without additional state funding.

Representative Vernon Smith says the cost could jeopardize struggling districts, especially since lawmakers also plan to add a minimum for paid parental leave to the bill.

That cost would also land on schools.

I think we're putting the cart before the horse if we haven't given the funding for and we're making it mandatory, and you have some school corporations that that that are just not thriving, just surviving.

Some state education leaders worry struggling districts could raise starting pay without adjusting other salary levels, driving out more experienced teachers.

Niki, is it fair to pass this sort of mandate, when so far the budgets that we've seen have provided education funding increases that don't even meet inflation?

That's the rub.

When they put the minimum 40,000 in, it was when they had this largesse of money and they gave them five and 6% increases.

Now we're talking about 2% increases.

And and it also be fair.

It is kind of a recommendation.

There isn't a technical law that they have to meet it.

But if your minimum pay at your school district doesn't meet the 45,000, you then have to basically like explain in a paper to, you know, the state why you're not medium.

And I'm sure a lot of school districts would be like, well, we didn't meet a $5,000 increase because you guys only gave us 2%.

Because it's not and really because this funding conversation, normally it's about the budget.

It's well, let's look at the budget.

Let's see how much schools are getting.

But this year it's let's look at the budget, see how much schools are getting.

Let's also look at the property tax bill and see how much schools might lose their.

Let's look at the bill to share money with charter schools.

See how much public schools might get their budgets reduced there.

So with all of that, is passing this bill a good idea this year?

I don't think so.

Not this year.

It feels like to me, it's a conversation to have after.

We know after we have some all these unknowns, we have.

I don't know how we then make the recommendation, but it seems like it would be an unfunded recommendation.

how do we know the schools can afford this?

There's a lot of schools who will not be able to for this at this point.

there's a lot of small districts, you know, that their their property taxes, what they get from the state.

will they be able to fund that?

Are we push are also I wonder, are we pushing things down to referendums?

Are we going to see more referendums come which taxpayers don't like that either.

And well, and that's led to some of the property tax increases.

And they're talking about restricting referendums.

how often you can do them, when you can do them, etc..

I don't think there's, there's anybody out there really who doesn't want to see teacher pay increase.

We understand how vital it is to have people in these professions who can stay in these professions, because it's desperately needed.

But as this year, the year for this bill, given all of, you know, the unknowns that's also.

Going on, it's an interesting like conversation because you have people that traditionally were always for and still are for raising teacher pay, but but are saying, don't do this.

And it's also a it's always like an aspirational effort too.

It's like it's like like a recommendation.

Right.

So a few years ago, let's go to $40,000.

we like it if you went to 40 because they don't actually the state doesn't actually have control over this.

We collectively bargain these things and they've reduced what you can actually bargain the salaries are still the the central thing.

so short of and we talked about this few years ago, we were going through this before which no one likes, which is if the state wants to take this over and say, we're paying teachers $45,000, we're going to there's not going to be any bargaining.

This is going to be this will be what the budget says.

This this money is for salaries.

This money is for operations and other things.

And they already do some of that.

They already do, do, say like certain percentages have to be spent in the classroom.

But is this the year for this bill?

I mean, it should be because we keep hearing that people want to do it, but they have to walk the walk.

And I would also add that the the livable salary in Indiana is around $37,000.

The minimum is $40,000.

If you're accounting for extra school supplies, the extra things that teachers generally have to take on, when they are in this profession, teachers are already barely getting by.

so it's it's already not good that this is where we're at.

so if, if, if people want to fully fund education, they're going to have to walk the walk.

They can't just say this in a state of the state address and then not put the money where their mouth is.

But so, you know, I would love to say, let's pass this bill, but not if it means giving my brand, the governor, the ability to just have a checklist.

And that's checked off at the end, you know, on Shiny Dei.

Like he doesn't get to have that when it's not funded.

Yeah.

Because it doesn't actually raise the pay.

Yeah.

It says, you.

Know, talking points only action.

Of no talking points, only actions.

There we go.

Governor Mike Braun signed two executive orders this week, one aimed at reducing environmental overregulation to help businesses grow and another aimed at cutting environmental justice out of decision making.

Indiana Public Broadcasting's Rebecca Thiele reports.

It's not clear how much would change.

Among other things, the orders say Indiana can't have new environmental rules stricter than federal ones unless they're in state law, or the governor himself considers them necessary.

Governor Brown says only having to follow one set of rules will encourage businesses to invest and grow in Indiana.

Where they know the compliance framework already by not having to guess what it might be.

But Indiana doesn't have many environmental rules that go beyond federal law.

Few of them get past state lawmakers who are notified when a proposed rule would be stricter.

Environmental agencies also can't use environmental justice as a reason to grant or enforce a permit to pollute, something, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management has said.

It doesn't do any way.

The Trump administration is clearly interested in eliminating a lot of federal regulations, particularly in the environmental space.

So does this executive order partnered with that effort risk jeopardizing state level protections?

I think if you're someone who works in this space, if you are an advocate for the environment, I think you think, yes, it will put things at risk.

I don't consider Indiana to be, a state that has, really strong environmental, laws and rules and regulations to begin with.

So I think if you're a nice place, like I said, you are already concerned if you see what's going on, I think about wetlands.

that we're talking about also, removing the word justice, environmental justice from the language.

So what about, low income neighborhoods on the West side?

They deal with air pollution, their ground soil contaminants, cancer causing agents in the air.

So that is no longer something that we're concerned about now.

it seems like based on the language of the executive order.

We talked about this with some of the other executive orders.

Some of the executive orders Mike Braun has issued, and there have been a lot of them in his first couple of months.

do a lot of stuff.

They do significant things.

Others feel a little more performative, more like or sending a message.

This is feel more like the former or the latter.

I think it feels like the former to me.

I am especially interested to see the report they come up with, because lawmakers have been pushing back on on rules that Idem has had as being more stringent than federal for several years.

That is not a new topic.

And so I would really like to see actual examples of all the ones that are more stringent than the federal.

And so and if, if you know, that's immediately those are out, I think that could have a real impact.

Finally, Indiana Week in Review was mentioned in the House Ways and Means Committee this week by friend of the show representative Jack Jordan.

I've watched probably 90% of Indiana Week in Review over the last 30 or 40 years, and there was a member of the media that said they watched Hoosier way back and said, that's a ho hum movie, and I just don't know what to do with that information.

But, anyway, I just again.

I it was a concern, Elise Shrock it has been at least a decade since I watched Hoosiers.

And that is despite not mentioning me by name, definitely who he was talking about.

Should I give that movie another try?

I think it might be time.

The entire.

Especially thankful that.

I've been called.

Out for professional development sake.

It could be.

Professional.

You can rewatch it with Kayla from last week.

I have never watched it.

I know she who has never watched.

The viewing party Hoosiers.

This wasn't brought up in committee, but I do need to take this opportunity to publicly apologize to the trefoil.

Yes, you.

Do, Girl Scout.

Yes, community.

when I trash the trefoil a couple weeks ago, trying to say it has a much bigger fan base than I expected, I.

Really.

I need to say I'm a Muncie Central Bearcat, so I think that's why I have not watched Hoosiers You know, I will just say I, I do find it fascinating that it's the lighthearted topics at the end of the show.

I never about property taxes.

Generated by fashion and conversation.

We hear from people.

Yeah, that's not what I would have expected when coming up with that question next week.

Last week about best sports or movie from Indiana, by the way, in terms of movies that filmed in Indiana, the nets weren't necessarily set here.

I think A League of Their Own might be like the top of the list.

We talked about that.

that I didn't come up with that.

well, there was that, but it felt like.

Yeah.

All right.

That's Indiana Week in Review for this week.

Our panel is Democrat Elise Schrock.

Republican Mike O'Brien.

Oseye Boyd of Mirror Indy.

And Niki Kelly of the Indiana Capitol Chronicle.

You can find Indiana Week In Reviews podcast and episodes at wfyi.org/iwir or on the PBS app.

I'm Brandon Smith of Indiana Public Broadcasting.

Join us next time because a lot can happen in an Indiana Week.

The views expressed are solely those of the panelists.

Indiana Week In Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting stations.

Additional support is provided by the Indy Chamber, working to unite business and community to maintain a strong economy and quality of life.