(Music) >> ILEARN scores show a slight improvement.

Todd Mikita threatens a doctor who performs abortions and more on "Indiana Week In Review," the week ending July 15, 2022.

(Music) >> ANNOUNCER: "Indiana Week In Review" is made possible by the supporters of Indiana Public broadcasting stations.

>> BRANDON SMITH: Indiana standardized test patient shows that most of Madrid and Bill schoolers are learning must act -- academically ethically it did before the pandemic.

But many students are still struggling.

From WFYI's education desk at the lowest performing students are losing ground.

>> DYLAN McCOY: Indiana students missed out on a lot of instruction because of the pandemic.

Now, it is a sprint to help them catch up academically.

But a new state study of ILEARN results shows that the lowest performing students actually made less progress this school here then before the pandemic.

>> SCOTT BESS: As a state get these kind of results should be a big Flashing Red light.

We have to do something because there is nothing that I think is more important.

>> DYLAN McCOY: Scott Bess is a member of the Indiana State Board of Education.

He says the state should consider increasing funding so schools can help students learn faster.

Education leaders say strategies such as tutoring, interest staff and summer school could help.

>> BRANDON SMITH: Are the latest ILEARN results a sign of optimism or concern?

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

The Democrat Ann DeLaney.

Republican Mike O'Brien.

Jon Schwantes, host of Indiana lawmakers, and Nikki Kelly, editor-in-chief for the Indiana Capitol carbonyl.

I am Bureau Chief Brandon Smith.

Mike O'Brien, how -- we talked a lot about education and recovery from the pandemic.

How should they feel about the latest numbers?

>> MIKE O'BRIEN: They have spent a lot of time investing and legislature spent a lot of time identifying dollars exactly for the purpose but I think you feel good about it.

I think if you rewind two years, one of the dynamics in remote said it was not equal across economic classes, certainly across school districts.

So I think what these numbers reflect is what I think the concern was at the time, that kids in lower income lower performing schools just don't have to resources to transition one day -- you are going to en the school and the next you are in the kitchen counter.

That is exacerbated by parents, they parents of those kids that could not remote work, you know?

It was very much during COVID like a problem of influence, if you cannot work from home, if you have a school district like my kids did that already had a robust e-learning classroom that they already knew, kids already knew.

It was like it was seamless.

They went through the e-learning the next day.

So the legislature generally invested in this and it looks like not be need specifically to invest in that population.

>> BRANDON SMITH: That is exactly what I was going to ask you.

We talked about how they be more investments needed in learning loss.

Is this essentially good news in that we now found a way perhaps we can better target that?

>> We got to put the money in.

We have to have the afterschool programs and to drink programs to catch these children up because you can ask any realtor and they can tell you by ZIP Code how the schools are going to be and how the schools are going to do by Lodge and dentistry here.

And we have a lot of the charter schools and the doctors and all of this without adequate supervision and a lot of the money that should be going into these kids in public education, 93% of them in regular public education is being diverted.

And we need to re-examine that and make certain that we put that resources behind the catching those children up.

This has been the problem all along.

I mean, granted, the pandemic has exacerbated it and brought it to our attention.

But these are the same schools that have been following behind forever.

And we talked about doing something about it and have forever and we have not done it.

And it is time.

We have the money.

>> BRANDON SMITH: It feels like there's been the building discussion at the state house over complex deep, which is the idea in the school funding formula debt where you have to set them at the coast of every kid and every schools no matter what but then you build in this complex the index that is supposed to give more dollars to gently lower income students to and Republican lawmakers have been drinking that entry, and that entry can that intriguing that in the air like -- and I think there's talk of shrinking it even further.

Does that stop some of that talk or does go on regardless?

>> Epidemic the last couple of years it is a bit about treating all the kids the same but not all the kids are the same.

I think what they have done recently is sort of cap it kept things like that.

But I hope.

Look closely at these scores because while there was improvement, if you are already behind and those are the kids who would get those complexity dollars they are the ones who need it even more and they need- sustained sort of targeted, you know, dollars like that.

So -- but we don't do a school Welt -- we will do one in January.

So in the meantime, though, there's probably another year before that would kick in.

So I hope they find something in the meantime.

>> And targeted.

>> BRANDON SMITH: So Jon, to return some of my first question at the pocket which art, art these scores a sign of optimism or concern, it is probably both, right?

Because for a lot of kids got at least seem to have gotten back to quick wheat or which is better than maybe -- >> JON SCHWANTES: We were better than that year.

I mean, then the immediate past.

But we have still shown an inability as a state to recover to the point where we were.

At let's keep in mind that this is a relatively new test.

It is not like we can do apples-to-appless.

It appears that we are not back even to look and we were before.

And even if we were, should we celebrate the fact that 30% of kids can pass both the mass and the English portions of this?

And say, well, we are doing better.

And I understand that progress is something to cherish.

But if I went out and ran a mile mile, I could maybe do 15-minute mile.

If I drink I could probably cut that to 14.

That is not a reason to celebrate.

It shows you how pathetically slow I am and I'm not competitive in any arena running think fleet that is not the arena in which I compete.

We can't with the celebrate 3% passage great.

Let's keep that in mind.

At the kids who are you know, that 30% is the universe.

If you look at kids under three lunch program that it comes down to 17% passing both.

42% on the wealthier districts and that is why you get that.

So really, it is the disadvantage of getting more disadvantaged and I guess that is -- >> And we are getting fewer students going onto higher education, too, which is another one of the supposed goals of the Republican party.

We are not meeting that either.

>> BRANDON SMITH: Time now for viewer feedback.

We pose an unscientific and online poll.

Are the latest ILEARN test scores a sign of optimism or concern?

Optimism, concern, both, as I just posited, or neither.

Last week's question was, both to hundred $25 in the proposal Mickey difference to Hoosiers who are struggling with high inflation?

Just 19% of you said yes.

81% say no.

Every like to take part in the poll go to WFYI.org/IWIR and look for the poll.

The Biden and administration this week told hospitals nationwide that they must provide abortion services if the life of the pack in person is at risk.

Department of Health and Human Services that federal law on emergency treatment guidelines preempts state laws that now ban abortion without any exceptions following the same court's decision eating the guaranteed abortion rights.

HHS cited requirements on medical facilities in the emergency medical treatment and labor act.

The law requires medical facilities to determine whether a person seeking treatment may be in labor or whether they face an emergency health situation, or one that could develop into an emergncy, and to provide treatment, including if that requires an abortion.

Ann DeLaney, Texas has already sued that Biden administration with destructive.

I'm guessing it won't be the only state to do so.

Will this hold up?

>> TODD ROKITA: -- >> ANN DeLANEY: I think it will because this is a directive from Joe Biden.

This is part of a law that says that if you're receiving federal dollars that you have to provide the services and as we have seen in a number of cases before, of course, this is a Supreme Court Donald Trump and I suppose anything can happen if -- and the president does not matter at all potentially speaking, when it is federal money involved and the federal government can call the shots as they do in title IX and speeds on highways and all these other criteria that they have established over the years.

If your federal dollars in debt, you know, but that is not going to stop the governor of Texas and probably the Attorney General of Indiana and all of those politicians who all they want to do is get headlines that will fire up their base.

That is all they care about.

They don't care about whether they have a leg to stand on or anything else.

So they will be more suits like this.

But I think this will be different in that it is federal dollars.

Hospitals are free to say no.

You know?

If they don't want to provide that service.

>> BRANDON SMITH: , I'm not going to protect you don't pretend you are tapped into the progressive wing.

>> ANN DeLANEY: You are it, towards.

>> BRANDON SMITH: A lot of people have been buried in that does have been very frustrated with what they perceive is a lack of action from the Biden administration.

Is this going to be enough to satisfy folks?

>> No.

Not at all.

There is no attention of criticism from Democrats.

Progressive Democrats on my Congress did not -- Joe Biden is going to say we are going to short court -- short-circuit the Senate rules.

Why did not leave do that when we had huge majorities?

>> Because they thought that they could rely on this up in court nominees telling the truth.

>> That was a mistake.

>> That was a mistake.

>> So they all live.

>> On this, I mean, look up the largest purchaser of healthcare says this is how we are going to do it.

That is how you're going to do it and -- but if I'm a hospital -- if I'm a general counsel or hospital, hospital system, now I got to think about about, what is the head of CMS telling me?

What is my local prosecutor doing?

What is the state legislature think?

>> That is true everywhere.

>> What they need is regardless of your position, they need clarity on what they are permitted to do, however this shakes out.

>> BRANDON SMITH: Jon, that is something I wanted to see.

This direction makes a lot of sense.

It is not trying to put of this existing law to -- you have to provide emergency medical care.

Abortion care is medical care.

If that is altered -- if that is what it takes to save he left, that is what you have to do.

It is very straightforward.

I don't know if it holds up in the court, but it seems pretty straightforward.

But to the point that might just make a if you're the doctor in the room, you are terrified about being prosecuted just even if you end up getting off because of what the federal government says.

Is this going -- is this really going to save lives it is intended to save?

>> JON SCHWANTES: I don't know.

It is hard to -- a lot of people don't feel much sympathy for hospital administrative because they say I go in there for my broken finger and I come out with a 20,000-dollar bill.

But as you both have suggested, this is a reason to feel sorry for hospital administrative and physicians especially because they are the ones who will be targeted.

But it does make the question, in the states such as Texas, will we see, you know, Texas law enforcement, I know now if we have guards now to protect people, you know, in the hospital from gang violence and so forth in many places.

But now that we have law-enforcement in the E.R., the operating room to basically see if the person who is going in for a "emergency" meets whatever the staff at the statutory definition is.

That seems to me to be you know, when you talk about the health of a mother or -- one person's emergency is not somebody else's.

I'm sure there are statutory guidelines or at least rules that have been promulgated over the last -- >> That is a layperson standard.

(Overlapping speakers) >> I don't think for the reasons, what we all thought was, let's call it, you know, settled law.

And settled rulemaking.

If you rely on -- (Overlapping speakers) >> Let's try to rely on some conservative principles with this.

>> Stay with me.

>> This is a market that is going to have to decide economically what the trade-off is here because the federal government purchases more healthcare than any other -- anybody in the country.

>> Some questions are going to be easy.

Some questions are going to be easy.

I think one content pregnancies is the topic and that woman dies and defeatist guys.

>> These are -- >> Well -- >> You have to remember the Biden administration is saying that they can't interfere with the postal ability to send the pills in which is how that ten-year-old had the -- if you are in the first early I can see, you can do it by Postal Service.

You don't need to have a hospital but there are things that they are not going to be able to control.

>> The other complex the may just be those healthcare providers and we have sent -- seen this come up from time to the ten where they don't feel they have conscientious objections to perform these and now they are going to be emboldened and empowered and take a look at the state, I mean, the Supreme Court is on my side.

So if you don't have -- >> Fine.

>> If you are thinly staffed anyway and you are a hospital in a rural area and you have this life or death emergency but you also have the staff that has, I'm not going to do it, that is like -- >> That they will have dead people on their hands and they will have losses.

>> I just wondered it how much of a threat this really is because your talk about the Biden administration can take -- we are talk about Medicare funding.

Away from a hospital and Medicaid.

>> Medicaid.

>> But that means tens and hundreds of thousands of people don't get care.

I'm not sure that that is a threat that they are going to be able to follow through on.

>> Will day really yanked -- >> They only have to do it once.

>> It is a big gamble because other people will die.

>> All right.

>> People are going to die as a result of the Supreme Court's decision, period.

They are going to.

Okay?

And they don't care.

>> BRANDON SMITH: Speaking of abortion, I feel like I'm going to say that a lot in the next few weeks.

An Indiana doctor is considering legal action against Attorney General Todd Ricky to after he went on national television to take basis accusations against her.

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning abortion rights, a star story went viral that a ten euro girl had to travel from a how to Indiana to get an abortion after being allegedly raped can conservatives decried it as false after police arrested a man Wednesday for the crime.

Todd Ricky went on Fox News to make basis accusations about the doctor that performed the abortion.

>> TODD ROKITA: We are gathering the information, we're gathering the evidence as we speak and we are going to fight this to the end.

Including looking at the licensure.

>> BRANDON SMITH: Less than a day after Ricky had made those threats, multiple media outlets reported that the doctor had properly filed her report.

Works with the state.

On top of which, she has no discipline on her medical license.

Yet Rokita told the Indystar that he plans to continue with his investigation.

>> BRANDON SMITH: Nikki Kelly, I'm going to ask this question as a taxpayer.

So I'm curious, what other perfectly legal activity is Todd Ricky to going to waste my money on?

>> NIKI KELLY: He is a surprise but you can come up with something.

I don't know where this is all heading.

Clearly, you know, he saw an opportunity because this issue became a flashpoint, you know, this issue of the ten-year-old and having to come here and the opportunity to get involved.

I think he got ahead of himself, you know?

Like actually doing the background, the work to see if any laws were broken before accusing someone of breaking laws.

And so that was, I think that you know, maddening to a lot of people and he would have been within his job to make sure, I mean the Attorney General's office handles medical licensing.

A file complaint against doctors who don't do the potent -- that is totally within his realm if he had just done it in a proper order and gotten some actual facts before spouting off on national television.

>> BRANDON SMITH: I mean, it does not the first time we talked about.

Eta on this show, an area, it feels like this.

If -- it feels like he just wants to get on TV.

And that is the motivation behind what he does.

I don't know if that is true or not.

It sure is what it feels like to.

>> I think that is more statement in question.

>> It is.

I'm making a statement.

What are you toasty think about the statement.

>> I agree with your statement.

Clearly, that is the case because if you want it to simply follow the law wherever the law leads you and if in fact this doctor had not lived up to the responsibility that comes with the medical license and state statute in terms of reporting these things, there would have been a mechanism for that.

But that is not nearly as sexy.

You don't need the national news that way.

So we have seen this over and over again.

Now the doctor in question has retained a very good attorney and I can't remember the name.

What is the name again?

>> Very funny.

My daughter.

>> It is Ann's daughter.

Drop your own conclusions but she is very good.

Has a track record to show it.

But the problem for her comment that yes, could -- Todd Rokita face may be displayed reaction from the Supreme Court disciplinary commission?

As a member of the bar.

It maybe.

About in terms of any sort of liability for defamation, and I'm not an attorney.

But my reading is there basically is blanket immunity based on a Supreme Court decision.

I guess now all is subject to change.

Putting the '70s caps where a police department was putting up flyers of known shoplifters and guess what, there it was somebody in the fire that was not a known shoplifter.

But they said -- even in a supercheap -- situation like that but I don't think that is the avenue for regrets or satisfaction as much as perhaps this other -- >> It is always the question of whether it was asking in the scope.

He went on national television before he began his investigation.

Because if he had done it the way.

Niki suggested that there would not have been -- >> He is an elected official.

He is held to a different standard.

>> There is malice involved in this because he lied but he lied in that threat.

It is not all that difficult.

And the thing that gets me is that this shows what we talked about him but it shows that there is no barrier for him.

He will go as low as he can to get on the television.

He is a demagogue posing as a lawyer.

And we elected him.

I thought we had a really bad one last time, who groped women.

Now he is going to make women and children victims.

>> BRANDON SMITH: In a vacuum, well, we have talked about this sort of thing with Todd Mikita and some people find it very annoying and frustrating and all of that and fine.

But in this case, we are talking about an issue in which the -- this doctor used to practice in the South Bend clinic and had to stop for a while because she was getting death threats.

She would not be the first abortion in this document killed for performing abortions.

This sort of stuff can get someone killed, that Todd Rokita is just starting off on TV about about.

>> Well, look at the problem for me in this is in talking to the legislators as we are pushing the special session, there is a sense that they do want -- the Senate is Senate is going to be stricter on distant the house, I think.

If I'm just predicting based on conversations.

Having a bill that does have exceptions, this Ricky to approach is the Richard Murdoch approach politically.

The politics of this are not theoretically.

We have had a hold election on this exact appointment in abortion.

>> Yes, but a decade ago.

And thinks -- >> It should make it worse.

But it has not.

And the problem with it and I understand why Republican leaders are those have a lot of these conversations behind closed doors.

>> All of the conversations.

Back and try to get ready and figure out where everyone is at an operate in what is the realm of the possible here and what is acceptable?

Just give me a second.

And I understand why they are doing that.

The problem, though, is in that vacuum, it is being filled right now with Todd Rokita who is gaslighting a ten-year-old who got raped and Jim Bob who is espousing this fantasy where this kid wakes up and goes, mankind glad that happen.

Thank God the government forced me to have that kid.

And that is the problem with trying to craft an abortion bill that makes sense for the vast majority of Hoosiers and Americans.

This is not a mystery where people are on this.

Now that we are in it.

And it is getting extreme, and there's going to be a consequence for that.

>> BRANDON SMITH: Pete Buttegieg is no longer a Hoosier.

The U.S. transportation secretary and former South Bend mayor is officially moving to Michigan.

With a Judge and his has been Chaston bought a house in Traverse City, Michigan, two years ago.

Now the former Hoosier presidential candidate says he plans to vote in the Wolverine State this fall.

A spokesperson told politico, which first reported the story that the couple wants to be closer to Chaston's parents, something increasingly important after the they had adopted twins last year.

Many indeed Democrats throughout put a judge's name as a potential candidate, everything from governor to Senate to the Congress.

And Jon Schwantes, realistically, is this a blow for the Indiana Democratic party?

>> JON SCHWANTES: More broadly, it is a blow for the Indiana and the Hoosiers.

It is kind of, to be able to have people of prominence on the national legal stage.

And I guess we can always say we did that with Abraham Lincoln.

>> His formative years.

>> JON SCHWANTES: We will do that of course with Pete Buttegieg.

I understand he wants to be closer to the in-laws and grand parents who can be there to do that.

All well and good.

It is also 16 electoral votes.

11 for Indiana.

>> Swing stay.

>> JON SCHWANTES: And eight swing stay.

I'm sure that is not factored in.

They would put make that out.

And yeah.

They are in Ohio or Florida.

You hate to see that and for the state party, it is also a sting because the care of the state party now is from -- that is where he hails from ten South Bend.

You hate to see someone who is -- a comrade in arms, yeah.

>> BRANDON SMITH: Does this highlight a problem for Democrats?

Crossing him off the list.

>> And I wrote about that today in a column.

He is the young sort of progressive youthful guy and people were looking forward to him running for governor or U.S. Senate and now that is not going to be likely.

I think it has been since 2012 since the Democrats won a statewide election and I thought -- think he was definitely the best hope and now it is not there anymore.

>> BRANDON SMITH: Several sports books issued refunds over some wagers on the Famous hot dog eating contest after a protester interfered with champion.

If you are betting on the hot dog eating contest, should you look into problem gambling sources?

You are not putting any pets down on the hot dog eating contest?

>> No.

And problem gambling services, some kind of a medicine for your stomach after the fact.

I don't get that.

I just don't get that.

>> I'm taking bets.

>> I will take that bet.

>> We will see.

>> We will do that.

>> We will see if the gaming commission will allow that sort of thing.

Is this more a surprise that we allow that hot dog eating contest than anything else?

>> Who does that?

>> There's literally no limit on things I will bet on.

Certainly.

>> What you that on -- (Overlapping speakers) >> A competition with rules?

>> If someone runs onto a football field and catches a football in the middle of a play catch every play.

Does that those are they going to vacated those pets, which week?

>> Absolutely.

>> In some cases.

>> That could be a betting in and of itself.

>> It depends on how much it includes the outcome, theoretically, you could.

>> Wow.

>> I think you guys need -- >> We could end on a high note.

>> That is "Indiana Week In Review" for this week.

Our panel is Democrat Ann DeLaney Republican Mike O'Brien, Jon Schwantes of the Indiana Lawmakers and Nikki Kelly of the Indiana Capitol Chronicle.

If you would like a podcast of this program you can find it at WFYI.org/IWIR.

Or starting Monday you can stream it.

We will get it On Demand from Xfinity on the WFYI app.

I'm Brandon Smith.

Join us next time.

A lot can happen in an Indiana Week.

(Music) >> The opinions oppressed -- express artfully those of the palace.

"Indiana Week In Review" is a WFYI pro