State budget a primary concern at Third House meeting
GOSHEN — Elkhart County residents say they're concerned about proposed tax cuts by the Indiana State Legislature. They brought those questions to the Goshen Chamber of Commerce's Third House meeting on Friday.
Local legislators Sen. Blake Doriot, R-Goshen, State Rep. Doug Miller, R-Elkhart, Rep. Joanna King, R-Middlebury, and State Rep. Dave Abbott, R-Rome City, attended one of the chamber's three scheduled Third House meetings this legislative session.
Third House meetings are an opportunity for community members to visit with elected officials representing them at the Indiana General Assembly, learn which bills legislators are working on, and discuss concerns or interests with leaders.
Residents who attended Friday's Third House were most concerned about tax cuts and services and supports that could be lost in the shuffle.
'We as citizens of the United States have to step up and figure out how we can be more responsible and expect less from the government and expect more from ourselves,' Miller said.
Goshen High School student Isaac Moore called the situation with the Department of Education an 'inevitable dismantling,' and asked about the state's plan to ensure schools like his are adequately funded for diverse learning needs currently supported by Title I.
'I don't know what's going to happen out in D.C. I have no control over what happens in D.C. What I do hope is that locally we have a little bit more autonomy to make decisions that are best for our kids,' King said. 'I don't know that many decisions that are made at the federal level, I don't know that those decisions can't be made — and be made better — here at the state level.'
King said she hopes that if the Department of Education is shuttered, the money will still be sent to the states to figure out what to do with it like they do in other areas with federal funding such as medicaid.
Moore asked if they had a plan for if the money wasn't sent to the states. King said when she was a school board member at Middlebury Community Schools, it wasn't a lot.
Both Goshen Community Schools Superintendent Jim DuBois and Concord Community Schools Superintendent Dan Funston were in attendance at the meeting.
'It is significant for Goshen,' DuBois said, and Funston said it was 4% of Concord's budget.
In addition, Funston shared his district's budget, explaining that 114% of Concord's operating budget funded by property taxes goes to property casualty insurance, transportation and utilities. He said since 2020, property casualty insurance premiums have increased 22%, transportation costs are up 64% — in large part because the cost of a bus has doubled — and utility costs have gone up 32%.
Former educator Tom Holtzinger said he's concerned about Medicaid funding.
'I feel like we're balancing the budget on the backs of the poor again,' he said.
Doriot explained that Medicaid is the fastest growing portion of the state's budget.
'I believe it may be pushing 18% if this keeps on, very quickly, and there's only one place we have big enough to get that money and that's the schools,' Doriot said. 'The schools are 50%, higher ed's another 10 to 12%, and we have to rein it in and get it back to where it is.
'We've been looking at waste and all that but that peak drive from COVID … COVID's over and people are able to get back out and there are some very able-bodied that have figured out a way to say on it and we've got to work through that and I'm sorry but there are going to be cuts on it. We can't increase without a massive tax increase and very few people in this room like those words—tax increase— we're going to do our best, but it's going to get streamlined.'
Aaron Stickel accused legislators of 'streamlining at the cost of people's health care.'
'You're proposing to cut 250,000 people in Indiana alone,' he said.
King said during COVID, people weren't denied Medicaid and since then, those people have continued to use it.
'We have people that desperately need it and I want to make sure that we have the funds to help those that do need that help,' King said. 'One of the things that we're going to have to do is go back to the drawing board and say 'What are the guardrails to make sure that the people that are getting this service are meeting so that we can have people that are able-bodied, that could be working, that should be working, that are using this system, gaming this system, are not doing that anymore?''
King said since 2020, Medicaid has almost doubled.
'It's about responsible governance,' King said. 'It's going to be painful for some people, but I would argue that the people that it's probably going to be painful for are those that have been gaming the system.
'I'm all ears,' she continued. 'If you have any ideas on how to solve this challenge, I am all ears. We are right in that process, but we have to figure out a way to get to a healthier place.'
One commenter proposed that people aren't able to go back to work and earn a wage that would allow them to leave Medicaid and asked what legislators could do ensure people could make enough money to finance their own health insurance.
Abbott said every business owner he's spoken to said they couldn't find employees to fill positions. Caleb Miller, president of Viewrail, said that's not the case for him. All 375 of his employees make at minimum $25 per hour and Miller said his company also does workforce training.
'I think a lot of this does come down to an ability to offer living wages,' Miller said. 'People aren't going to come back if they aren't going to get a living wage.'
Stickel asked why legislators are talking about tax cuts at all if Medicaid and education are underfunded.
'We all want less taxes personally, but it's your responsibility to make the hard decisions,' Stickel said. 'Why are we talking about tax cuts if we're talking about this critical infrastructure — our kids, people that need health care — those things are underfunded.'
Abbott noted that it's not about income taxes — which are lowering slightly — but property taxes and it's because residential property taxes pick up such a high amount of that cost.
'People are getting priced out of their homes,' he said. 'The cuts, at least as far as property taxes, are trying to balance it so it's fair. You have businesses, you have caps, you have TIF districts, a lot of those things play into how we generate our revenue for the local communities. We're not targeting the state so much as we're targeting the local.'
Miller reminded those in attendance that the federal deficit is $37 trillion.
'We're all in the same ship and that ship is causing a myriad of problems for states and local government,' he said. 'We have now a very active leadership that's doing a lot of things and we're all very, very nervous about that. And for us at the state level that's been a trickle-down effect. We are sandwiched between the federal government and what they're pushing down the pipeline and have traditionally and programs they've put in place.'
Miller said the extra COVID money from the federal government allowed for many opportunities and when the money was gone, the state legislature has been expected to maintain those opportunities without it.
'It's straining us and it's strangling states,' he said. 'Our budget is hugely impacted and it affects every Hoosier.'
Clerk-Treasurer Richard Aguirre argued that the state proposing local tax cuts was no different than the federal government cutting state funding.
'As much as I've heard legislators for decades when I was a reporter complain about the federal government taking away the state's ability to do things, I'd ask you to continue to consider that issue and when you're doing things like requiring local police to enforce immigration law,' he said. 'When you're limiting our income, the state is not cutting its state taxes and then having to deal with that impact.
'I've told all of you: the greatest gift you could give local government is just leave us alone for one session.'
HEART OF THE HOOSIER
King also presented Vince Turner with the Heart of the Hoosier Award, saying she'd been waiting to present it since a teen at the Statehouse told her that he wanted to be 'just like Vince Turner.'
'I realized Vince has impacted many lives,' she said.
The award comes from King's office and is given to people in the community she represents who have impacted the area.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Biggest Boondoggles in Trump's Big Beautiful Bill
The House reconciliation bill — officially known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — is extraordinary in how much it robs from the poor to boost the rich. Its tax cuts for the wealthy are financed by cuts to health care coverage (both in Medicaid and Obamacare) that will help Republicans swell the ranks of the uninsured by 16 million, according to the Congressional Budget Office. But the Big Beautiful Bill is not just an ugly tax bill where society's less fortunate are made to sacrifice for the benefit of the wealthiest. It's also a spending bill that steers hundreds of billions of dollars into new pet projects. This is financed with debt. All in, the BBB will spike deficits by $2.4 trillion over 10 years, according to CBO, likely increasing the national debt by $3 billion when interest payments are included. The bill's spending has angered budget hawks in the Senate like Rand Paul (R.-Ky.). It has been part of the public split between Donald Trump and Elon Musk, who calls the bill a 'disgusting abomination' that will squander any supposed savings imposed by DOGE, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency. Conservative budget analysts are sounding the alarm: 'This inability to set priorities is going to bring a debt crisis,' Jessica Riedl, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute tells Rolling Stone. In fact, the bill would create so much new debt that it risks triggering a mechanism called 'sequestration,' which would impose deep, mandatory cuts to Medicare. These cuts to the health care of America's seniors would start next year, and rise to half-a-trillion dollars over ten years. The BBB's spending provisions have received far less scrutiny than the tax cuts and safety-net slashes. But the bill lards new funds on a range of already-fat-cats — from the military-industrial complex and Big Tech to private prisons and construction concerns. Below we survey the biggest boondoggles of the Big Beautiful Bill: The BBB proposes spending nearly $50 billion for construction of Trump's border wall with Mexico. Sen. Paul, in an appearance on Face the Nation last week, accused the administration of waste. He cited an existing Customs and Border Patrol estimate that wall construction should cost only about $6.5 billion over 1,000 miles: 'They have inflated the cost of the wall eightfold,' said Paul. (After his TV hit, CPB appears to have scrubbed the construction cost estimate Paul quoted from its website.) Paul even questioned the need for more wall, at all, given his view that Trump has 'essentially stopped the border flow without new money and without new legislation.' Offering just a small taste of the anticipated building bonanza, the Trump administration awarded a $70 million, 7-mile wall-construction contract to California-based Granite Construction in March. The bill includes $45 billion for 'Adult Alien Detention Capacity' and 'Family Residential Centers.' This funding would enable the administration to ramp up its mass deportation program for undocumented immigrants. As the nation has seen from recent high-profile Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids at restaurants, this involves ripping productive members out of society and making them wards of the state, at great public cost, until they can be deported. The money would be a boon to private prison contractors and construction firms. For a taste of where this is headed, consider that the administration has already inked a 15-year, $1 billion deal with GEO Group to house ICE detainees at Delaney Hall, a 1,000 bed facility in Newark, New Jersey. The mayor of the city was arrested by ICE amid a recent protest at the facility. The private prison company is well connected to the Trump administration. As Rolling Stone has reported, Attorney General Pam Bondi is a former lobbyist for GEO Group, which also made a $500,000 donation to the Trump inaugural committee. A GEO subsidiary donated $1.3 million to a Super PAC that backed Trump's 2024 election. The BBB puts up nearly $25 billion for the Golden Dome. The satellite-based missile defense project builds off the branding of Israel's 'Iron Dome,' a ground-based defensive system that can intercept rockets and missiles launched from local militants or state actors like Iran. 'To the extent we match Iron Dome technology, we will be well protected from a missile attack from Canada or Mexico,' says Riedl of the Manhattan Institute, sarcastically. 'But not necessarily from Russia, North Korea or China.' In reality the Golden Dome appears to be Trump's revival of the Ronald Reagan era Strategic Defense Initiative, or SDI — a hugely expensive, largely ineffective space-based missile-defense system derided in the 1980s as 'Star Wars.' 'Ultimately this is $25 billion more for SDI' says Rieidl. 'This is a noble idea — but a lot of spending up until now hasn't brought a lot of success.' Trump envisions the BBB as a downpayment on a total investment of $175 million. The Golden Dome promises to be a golden goose for defense contractors. SpaceX, the rocket company founded by Trump's billionaire benefactor Elon Musk, who's currently feuding with Trump, is reportedly vying for a contract. So are the Peter Thiel-linked tech firm Palantir and longtime military-industrial heavyweights like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. Including the Golden Dome, the Big Beautiful Bill increases America's Pentagon spending by a colossal $150 billion. 'This is a bill from the military-industrial complex advocates who are padding the military budget,' according to Paul, who has long criticized the Defense Department for failing to pass every audit to which it's been subjected. Budgets are moral documents. And metaphorically people often speak of the tradeoff between 'guns and butter' — or programs that defend the public and those that keep the public out of misery. The guns side of the Big Beautiful Bill is financed entirely by cuts to butter. The bill strips $128 billion in funding to the states for the SNAP food assistance program that keeps American families from going hungry. It also aims to avoid another $92 billion in spending by knocking people out of the program with red tape and work requirements, including for parents of argues that the Pentagon should be forced to achieve cost efficiencies before it receives any new federal dollars. 'One of DOGE's great failures was essentially ignoring the enormous waste and cost overruns inside the Pentagon. There is a reason the Defense Department cannot pass an audit. There is so much waste. It has significant cost overruns — particularly in government contracts and procurement — that absolutely must be addressed before we further increase defense spending,' says the Manhattan institute fellow. The House bill steers new money to more than a dozen weapons systems, including many dogged by cost overruns, construction delays, performance issues, and questions of combat capability. On the airplane side, this list includes: $4.5 billion for the B-21 Raider, the Air Force's newest long-range stealth bomber, which cost nearly $700 million per aircraft to produce. The two-person Northrup Gruman-built plane may be poorly suited to modern warfighting, where swarms of unmanned drones are becoming the dominant air threat. $3.2 billion for the Boeing-built F-15EX. The planes cost $90 million a pop, making them more expensive than the notoriously costly F-35A. Unlike that fighter, the F-15EX is not a stealth aircraft. And production has been snarled by manufacturing problems. A recent federal assessment put it bluntly: 'Boeing has experienced increased quality deficiencies.' Ships include: $4.6 billion for Virginia Class submarines. The nuclear submarine program has a reported cost overrun of $17 billion and has delivered boats massively behind schedule. The contractors are General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries. The Pentagon already has 23 of these submarines. $2.1 billion for San Antonio Class 'amphibious transport docks.' This ship was put on production pause in 2023 because of massive cost overruns. The boats are supposed to land Marines into onshore combat, but have been found by DOD testers to only be suitable 'in a benign environment' because the ship is 'not effective, suitable and not survivable in a combat situation.' Huntington Ingalls Industries is the contractor. The Pentagon already has 13 of these boats. More from Rolling Stone Donald Trump Is Destroying the Economy and Waging War on the Poor Trump Moves to Deploy National Guard to L.A. Over ICE Protests 'Dejected' Trump Says Relationship With Musk Is Over; Calls Him a 'Big-Time Drug Addict': Report Best of Rolling Stone The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump's war against DEI isn't going so well in Virginia
Apparently when President Trump says 'illegal DEI,' he means lawful and common-sense efforts to integrate public schools. At least, that's the takeaway from the Department of Education's new investigation against Fairfax County Public Schools. Trump officials claim Fairfax County violated federal law when it adopted an admissions policy designed to 'change the demographic make up' of its most competitive high school. This theory, which equates integration with segregation, dates back to Barry Goldwater, who remarked in 1964 that 'the Constitution is color-blind … and so it is just as wrong to compel children to attend certain schools for the sake of so-called integration as for the sake of segregation.' It seems Trump agrees. Unfortunately for him, the Supreme Court does not. Just last year, the court declined to overturn a ruling for Fairfax County. As I explained at the time, that decision made sense. Even as the Supreme Court has shifted hard right, decades of conservative case law — including from Chief Justice John Roberts — condone racial goals such as diversity, equality and inclusion. The new investigation tracks Trump's disregard for courts and his tendency toward bluster over substance. But in important respects, it also exposes that Trump's war on DEI lacks any moral and legal basis. Some context is helpful. For decades, Black advocates sought to desegregate Thomas Jefferson High School, one of the nation's top-ranked public schools. As recently as 2012, the NAACP filed a civil rights complaint alleging that the school's admissions policies discriminated against African American and Hispanic students and students with disabilities. Things shifted in 2020. As racial justice protests erupted across the globe, local leaders grappled with the fact that in a county with roughly 100,000 Black residents, Thomas Jefferson High School admitted so few Black students that the number was too small to report. The state convened a task force to examine the causes of this ongoing exclusion at Thomas Jefferson and other Virginia schools. Following a series of hearings, the board revised the school's admissions process, eliminating a $100 application fee and a standardized testing requirement. Contrary to ongoing claims that the new policy compromised 'merit,' the board raised the minimum GPA for admission from 3.0 to 3.5 and added an honors course requirement. The new policy also implemented a holistic evaluation that included new 'experience factors,' such as whether the applicant qualified for reduced meals or is an English language learner. The updated process also ensured that each middle school receive a number of seats equal to 1.5 percent of its eighth-grade class. The school board resolved that '[t]he admission process must use only race-neutral methods that do not seek to achieve any specific racial or ethnic mix, balance or targets.' This means that admissions officials are not told the race, ethnicity, sex or name of any applicant. In Supreme Court parlance, the entire admissions process was 'colorblind.' The new process produced promising results. In its inaugural year, Thomas Jefferson High School received 1,000 more applicants than the prior cycle. This larger applicant pool also 'included markedly more low-income students, English-language learners, and girls than had prior classes at TJ.' Consistent with the heightened GPA requirement, the admitted class's mean GPA was higher than in the five preceding years. The new process also yielded greater racial diversity. Black students comprised 10 percent of the applicant pool and received nearly 8 percent of offers and Hispanic students comprised 11 percent of the applicant pool and received over 11 percent of offers. The overall percentage of Asian American students decreased from the preceding year, but Asian Americans continued to enjoy the highest percentage yield of all racial groups. And as the Fourth Circuit detailed, Asian American students from historically underrepresented middle schools 'saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020.' In short, Thomas Jefferson High School adopted a 'race-neutral' process to pursue a set of goals that included increasing Black and Hispanic representation. This is the precise type of practice the Trump administration denigrates as 'illegal DEI.' Efforts to promote racial diversity do constitute DEI. But they are far from illegal. In fact, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard — the 2023 decision striking down Harvard University's formal consideration of applicant race — supports most of the DEI policies Trump now targets. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts deemed Harvard's underlying goals as 'worthy' and 'commendable.' Justice Brett Kavanaugh made the point more directly; writing for himself, Kavanaugh noted that 'racial discrimination still occurs and the effects of past racial discrimination still persist' and that 'universities still can, of course, act to undo the effects of past discrimination in many permissible ways that do not involve classification by race.' The actions of the high school square with Kavanaugh's call for policies that attend to race but do not differentiate between individual students on this basis. This should short-circuit the Department of Education's investigation against Fairfax County. But it is unlikely to stall Trump's desire to outlaw integration. The Pacific Legal Foundation, which initiated the lawsuit against Fairfax County and remains a force on the right, wants to revive Goldwater's hostile approach to integration. Consider the following FAQ on Pacific Legal's website: 'schools may use or not use standardized tests, essays, interviews, or auditions, as long as their reasons for using or not using them are not racial.' By this logic, a high school could lawfully eliminate an admissions fee if motivated by public relations concerns, but it would be unlawful to take that same action if done to decrease racial barriers that exclude low-income Black and Hispanic students. Now consider higher education. Per Pacific Legal, Harvard University could eliminate admissions preferences for the children of alumni and wealthy donors if done to appease alumni pressure. But it would be unlawful for Harvard to take the same action if the goal is increasing the number of Asian American students or mitigate unearned racial preferences that flow to wealthy white applicants. The upshot is that affirmative efforts to reduce racial inequality — everything Trump dubs 'illegal DEI' — remain legal and morally just. So, at least for now, integration does not equate to segregation. Jonathan Feingold is an associate professor at Boston University School of Law. He is an expert in affirmative action, antidiscrimination law, education law, and critical race theory.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Nearly 11 million Americans would lose insurance under Trump's tax bill, analysis says
About 10.9 million Americans would lose health insurance coverage under the President Donald Trump's tax cut bill that cleared the House but faces a tough test in the Senate, a new analysis shows. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said about 10.9 million Americans would lose health insurance coverage through 2034 under the bill, including 1.4 million undocumented residents who get coverage through state-funded programs. The legislation that cleared the House would require nondisabled Americans on Medicaid to work at least 80 hours per month or qualify for an exemption, such as being a student or caregiver. The bill also would strip coverage to immigrants who get Medicaid through state-funded programs. The analysis said the bill would cut federal spending by about $1.3 trillion through 2034. But it would also deliver tax cuts of $3.75 trillion, and the federal deficit would increase nearly $2.4 trillion over the next decade. Health analysts said if the Medicaid changes as well as tweaks to the Affordable Care Act marketplace clear Congress, the effects on health insurance coverage would be significant. The CBO earlier estimated nearly 4 million people would lose health insurance coverage through 2034 if Congress did not extend sweetened COVID-19 pandemic-era tax credits that have made ACA plans more affordable for consumers. Trump's Medicaid overhaul as well as the expiration of the more generous ACA tax credit could jeopardize health insurance coverage for nearly 15 million people, said Kathy Hempstead, a senior policy officer at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. "We're making a giant U-turn here," said Hempstead. "Are we really going to be a thriving, productive society if we have a huge share of our population uninsured?" Hempstead said the uninsured might delay care and accrue more medical debt. She also said hospitals and doctors also will take a financial hit as uncompensated care rises. "There's going to be a big hit on on the health care economy as people stop getting care and start trying to get care that they can't pay for," Hempstead said. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: CBO says 10.9 million to lose insurance under Trump tax bill
