Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
Criticisms continued to mount Monday even after a sweeping committee amendment rolled back significant portions of a bill that seeks to limit diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in schools and state government.
Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee additionally spoke out after the Republican-dominated panel approved major additions to a separate proposal — weaving in contentious criminal penalties for “street camping” that seemingly died in an earlier bill — without taking public comments beforehand.
Among the original DEI-focused provisions removed from Senate Bill 289 were provisions concerning university diversity committees, as well as an extensive, four-pronged definition of DEI “effort(s)” that included a ban on “differential treatment” or “special benefits” on the basis of “race, sex, color or ethnicity.”
Instead, key language was largely rewritten to more specifically outlaw “discrimination” in state education, public employment and licensing settings that is “based on a personal characteristic of the person.”
Added, too, were revised civil penalties that could be imposed by the Indiana attorney general for violations: $50,000 for a first offense; and $100,000 for a second or subsequent offense.
Committee chairman Rep. Chris Jeter, R-Fishers, said his goal was to “focus the bill a little bit” and “make it a little bit more workable for some of the folks that they’re going to have to abide by it.”
“I think it can be difficult to legislate words and acronyms, and so we really tried to hone in on the actions that we are trying to address,” said Jeter, who offered the amendment.
He said the bill, overall, “is an effort to sort of codify” and “be consistent” with executive orders issued by President Donald Trump and Gov. Mike Braun.
The governor’s order replaced DEI throughout state government policies and programming with “merit, excellence and innovation.” It also closed the Office of the Chief Equity, Inclusion and Opportunity Officer created by former Gov. Eric Holcomb.
The committee advanced the bill to the House floor in a 7-3 vote, along party lines. The measure must get the OK from the full chamber by April 15, the third-reading deadline.
It previously passed out of the Senate 34-13, with four Republicans unfavorable.
Before Monday’s vote, more than two hours of committee testimony was dominated by medical students and professors from Indiana University and other Hoosier colleges. Many said they appreciated elements of Monday’s amendment but remained opposed to the underlying bill and its implications.
“Opponents of DEI will have you believe that we are integrating a radical curriculum and training for health care professions that promotes racist and sexist ideas about some burden that falls chiefly on white male students to correct historical injustice. And I understand that’s a concerning possibility, but I’m here today to express that’s simply not true. We actually have a lot to agree on,” said IU medical student Amina Dalal.
“DEI actually protects a merit based system. I don’t believe that we need South Asian physicians like myself because of some diversity quota,” she continued. “I believe that we need diverse physicians because anyone that is qualified and passionate about medicine should have a fair opportunity to become a physician.”
Medical students push back
The latest draft expands certain carveouts, explicitly exempting “employment action(s) concerning participation in a public contract by a minority business enterprise, women’s business enterprise, or veteran business enterprise, if the employment action is authorized by law.”
Colleges and universities can also make decisions around grants, scholarships or fee remissions on the basis of “personal characteristic(s)” as long as those awards do not include any “state funds or resources.”
But state offices and universities would not be allowed to require employees to complete training — or licensing — “asserting that, or endorsing the theory that,” a person with a certain personal characteristic:
- is inherently superior or inferior to a person with a different personal characteristic;
- should be blamed for actions committed in the past;
- or has a moral character that is determined by a personal characteristic of the person.
Jeter said fines for violations “are significantly larger than we normally see in bills that we do — and that was by design.”
“We are not, in this bill, telling any school or anybody else that they have to close any offices or reorder the way that they’re doing things as far as what type of personnel they have doing what,” Jeter said. “We wanted to make sure that if some of these offices continued … there is a significant financial disincentive for them to try to do this in another way, or through another office, or through another program.”
While bill author Republican Sen. Gary Byrne, R-Byrneville, conceded that issues stemming from DEI “have not been rampant at the state level,” Byrne said his constituents “want to make sure that everyone is treated equally — they don’t want Indiana government to engage in discrimination, whatever the intentions may be.”
He pointed to prior Senate committee testimony from IU medical students about “problems they’ve seen in the university.”
Dr. Cindy Basinski, an adjunct OB-GYN clinical professor, contended that many medical students oppose DEI policies and instruction but are afraid to voice their opinions publicly.
“They’re forced to use pronouns. … There are also students who are not allowed to speak against minor-informed care. They’re also not allowed to speak against other politically divisive issues, like maybe there are some students who think there are only female and male as genders,” Basinski told the committee. “These are important topics that are important to discuss scientifically among students. And if students do not feel empowered by administrators or other students to speak up, then we are not going to have the most robust educational system that we can have in Indiana.”
Nearly a dozen medical students said they disagreed, however, and argued that Basinski’s testimony, in particular, was inaccurate.
“Everybody at my school is allowed to express their opinions about different aspects of medical care. IUSM encourages students to actively discuss medicine with their peers. There are clubs of students who support the pro-life movement, various religious movements, and even Republican ideals,” said Laney Cordell, a fourth-year IU medical student. “Many, if not most, of the positions claimed about my school are completely unfounded.”
Homelessness amendment adopted — but no public comments
Also headed to the House floor is Senate Bill 197, originally a measure to address building safety laws.
But multiple GOP amendments reshaped the bill entirely, including revived language from House Bill 1662, which sought to tackle homelessness before dying mid-session in the House.
Tweaked provisions from that legislation were added to the Senate bill, stipulating that “a person may not camp, sleep, or use for long term shelter a public right-of-way or public land unless authorized for that use by the state or political subdivision, as appropriate.”
Those who have not moved from a public right-of-way within 24 hours of a law enforcement officer’s warning — or from public land within 72 hours — could be arrested and charged with a Class C misdemeanor. The charge carries a maximum penalty of 60 days in jail or a $500 fine.
Before an arrest can be made, though, new bill language would require officers to first determine “if there are reasonable grounds for an emergency detention of the person.” Transportation would must offered to a shelter, mental health service or other housing facility within five miles, as long as one exists and has space available. “Crisis intervention teams” could be called to assist officers, too.
If an arrest is made, legal proceedings would be referred to a problem solving court “to make sure that these individuals are getting the necessary services to get them housing and treatment — and trying to be as humane as possible to make sure that they are getting the care that they deserve,” Jeter said.
Even so. Rep. Victoria Garcia Wilburn, D-Fishers, questioned the “germaneness of this bill and the time in which it dropped.”
“I just haven’t had enough time to digest it and even to put my hands around it,” she said before voting against the amendment.
Rep. Maureen Bauer, D-South Bend, took issue with the lack of public engagement on that change and others.
“I think some people would have liked to have testified on this,” Bauer said. “The amendment was added on a short notice, without stakeholders being able to provide input. I’m kind of disappointed that we won’t have the opportunity for public testimony on this.”
The House-version of the bill mirrored model legislation from the Cicero Institute, a Texas-based think tank which has lobbied in roughly a dozen states for homelessness policies that shift money away from housing initiatives and instead direct dollars toward substance abuse and mental health treatment.
Nearly all who testified spoke out against the earlier proposal, with advocates arguing that it “wrongly criminalizes homelessness.”
The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, nonprofit news organization that covers state government, policy and elections.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.