Indiana
Consider this curmudgeon confused on latest diploma move • Indiana Capital Chronicle
It finally happened — I have become my father. Specifically, I find myself talking about how things were when I was growing up. For instance, when I went to high school, everyone got the same diploma and it gave you a rounded knowledge base to prepare you for your future, whatever that may have looked like.
But diplomas have been specialized and complicated in recent decades. In some ways, the Indiana Department of Education’s move to streamline Indiana’s diploma system will alleviate some of that.
The state would move from four or five types of diplomas to two: Indiana GPS Diploma and GPS Diploma Plus.
State officials and stakeholders also want more kids taking more college classes and getting workplace credentials. It seems Indiana students are having trouble completing high school coursework proficiently and yet we are pushing them to do even more.
But the formula to earn a diploma would still be complex, involving words like pathways, work-based learning and apprenticeships. And slowly, education seems more about training workers than teaching students.
Pinning down students too early
My primary issue with the whole debate is that the system wants to pin down students so early in their K-12 careers. You pretty much must know what avenue you want to go down by 8th grade.
How many people knew exactly what they wanted to be at 14 years old? It happens, but it’s rare. It is much more logical that you use middle school and even the beginning of high school to learn a variety of things and see what piques your interest. We called those elective courses in my days (the early 1990s, if you must know).
You could take journalism or drama or industrial arts, for instance. I always knew I loved the written word, but my high school journalism class solidified how I wanted to move forward. Other students found that they loved working with their hands.
Nowadays, some of those elective courses might be more technical, such as computer programming and business classes. But the idea is the same — trying a variety of things to find your passion.
Is there even any room for electives anymore? State education officials say the proposed changes would actually allow electives to count toward other credits and make them more of a focus, not less. If so, I applaud that.
I also don’t know why, suddenly, young adults can’t seem to handle basic tasks. Or at least that’s what employers are saying. Going to school itself taught me about showing up on time, completing my work, communicating with others on projects and the consequences of a bad grade when I slacked off. All those things translate into the workforce.
But if they didn’t, that’s why we had part-time jobs. For me, it was dipping ice cream and ringing up gas sales at a convenience store or selling CDs and, gasp, vinyl records at a music store in the mall.
Why, suddenly, does that need to be part of my diploma?
Willing to learn
I have read so much on this topic because so many people I respect and admire are telling me this new path is necessary. So, I am trying to be open to the proposals. I know that some students learn better by actually doing an activity or task rather than sitting in a classroom hearing about it.
And I know Indiana is doing nothing different than other states. The Education Commission of the States reports that nearly all states have moved past simple minimum credit requirements to a focus on skills and college and career readiness.
For instance, at least 21 states have identified multiple diploma options or pathways to graduation in state policy:
- At least 46 states and the District of Columbia identify minimum credit requirements to earn a standard diploma.
- At least 44 states and the District of Columbia permit students to substitute specific courses, assessments or other experiences for existing credit requirements.
- At least 34 states require students to complete specific assessments as a graduation requirement.
I am a bit of an old dog, but am willing to learn new tricks. I will keep reading, learning and trying to understand how this will make Indiana students better and more prepared.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Gov. Mike Braun asked state regulators to reconsider their decision to greenlight a $71 million rate increase for AES Indiana, doubling down on his condemnation of a move that could leave Indianapolis residents with higher electrical bills for years.
Braun wrote in a June 18 news release that he had asked Indiana Utility Counselor Abby Gray, who heads the office representing ratepayers in proceedings before the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, to petition for a rehearing of the AES rate case.
Gray indicated in the release that her office would submit the petition shortly. No petition had been posted on the IURC’s online docket as of this story’s publication.
The rate increase, which was approved by the IURC on June 17, was substantially less than the $192 million increase that AES initially requested. It was also less than the amount proposed in a settlement last October between AES and major electricity consumers.
But the Office of Utility Consumer Counselor, which Gray leads, came out strongly against any increase to AES’s base rates. In September, the OUCC called for a $21 million reduction instead.
As the Republican Party grapples with rising discontent over affordability, Braun has used opposition to rising utility rates to telegraph that he’s committed to keeping costs down for Indiana residents. He signed a law in February that allows the state to make rate-setting decisions that reward or penalize utilities based on metrics including affordability.
In March, he told reporters that he would take on Indiana’s five investor-owned utilities, describing himself as the “new sheriff in town.”
And after the IURC voted 3-1 to approve the AES rate increase, he wrote in a post to X that he was “deeply disappointed.”
Braun wrote in the June 18 news release that he had appointed Gray, a longtime OUCC lawyer and judge, to her current post because he knew she “would help me fight for Hoosiers.”
According to AES’s estimates, the rate increase will cost households an additional $5 per month for every 1,000 kilowatt hours of electricity they use, beginning in July. A second hike will take effect in January.
Tilly Robinson is a Pulliam fellow for the Indianapolis Star. She can be reached at tilly.robinson@indystar.com.
The Protect College Sports Act, legislation meant to introduce and codify sweeping reforms related to college athletics, passed out of the Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday morning.
It now heads to the Senate floor.
The bill passed out of committee by a 19-9 vote. Indiana Republican Sen. Todd Young voted no, his decision reflecting Big Ten concerns over the bill.
A spokesman for Sen. Young told IndyStar, “Senator Young hopes that additional changes can be made to the bill to address concerns raised by the Big Ten.”
Co-sponsored by Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Maria Cantwell (D-Washington), the Protect College Sports Act represents Congress’ most substantial success so far in a yearslong effort to bring legislative reform to college athletics. Since before the COVID-19 pandemic, leaders in college sports — including the NCAA, member conferences and schools, and other major players — have lobbied for national solutions to what have become state and regional problems.
Several pieces of legislation have been introduced across the last several years, only to fizzle long before reaching the floor of either chamber. The SCORE Act, introduced last year in the House of Representatives, gained some traction and passed out of committee, but was never brought to the floor.
Which makes Thursday’s news meaningful. Moving the Protect College Sports Act to the Senate floor, while not a guarantee of any outcome, potentially takes the bill past a threshold no other such piece of reformative legislation has yet been able to cross.
Cruz told Yahoo! Sports’ Ross Dellenger on Thursday that Cruz believes Sen. Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) is committed to introducing the bill to the Senate floor soon.
The bill provides a legal framework for a host of potential reforms and protections for college sports. It grants limited antitrust protection to the NCAA, places limits on certain things including potential conference realignment, builds safeguards meant to protect non-revenue and Olympic sports, addresses potential broadcast rights reforms, and more.
It enjoys significant backing, and not just among leaders in college sports. This week, the NFL, its players’ association, the National Basketball Players Association and Major League Baseball all voiced their support for the bill.
Two key constituencies not in lockstep on the bill voiced their own concerns Thursday.
In a joint statement issued just after 10 a.m. Thursday, the Big Ten and SEC — far and away the two most powerful conferences and arguably two greatest power centers, full stop, in college athletics — suggested they still hold significant reservations over the bill.
“From the outset, we identified a set of essential revisions to the PCSA necessary for the long-term sustainability of college athletics,” the statement read. “We have worked with both majority and minority staff to advance those revisions, which focus on better supporting student-athletes and stabilizing the college sports environment. We continue to believe revisions are needed to secure our support for the bill.
“Despite our sustained engagement and good faith efforts, these critical revisions have not been accepted.”
The statement went on to note the “several Commerce Committee members that share our concerns and support these recommendations.”
Young is one of several members of the committee representing a Big Ten state, including one of three Republicans. He is the only Republican member of the committee whose state contains multiple schools in the conference.
Allowing for those reservations, Thursday’s news is still significant. It marks the first time a bipartisan bill on the subject has reached this point in the Senate and, should it be brought to the floor, it would be the first such legislation to reach that stage, in either chamber.
The bill could be brought to the Senate floor as early as July, though that timeline remains fluid.
(INDIANA CAPITAL CHRONICLE) – The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission voted 3-1 Wednesday to approve a $71 million electricity rate increase for AES Indiana customers.
That is about 37% of what the utility initially requested and lower than a settlement agreement proposed in October.
Neither Gov. Mike Braun nor consumer advocates are happy with the outcome.
“My top priority is affordability, which is why I am deeply disappointed by the IURC’s approval of another AES rate increase,” he said. “Hoosiers have spent years tightening their belts and making tough financial decisions. It’s time for utility companies to do the same.”
Members of the commission didn’t explain their votes Wednesday. IURC Chair Andy Zay focused his remarks on the process.
“There’s a lot of eyes on this order and what we’re doing today,” he said. “What is before you on the floor is a nearly a year’s worth of work, evidence, deliberations, and considerations that bring us to this moment in this decision. None of this was taken lightly. I want to thank my colleagues for the patience and working through this amongst the auspice of affordability, which is certainly a hot topic now, as well as the resiliency, reliability that we see in this increased demand in electricity.”
The Office of Utility Consumer Counselor last year recommended that state regulators deny AES Indiana’s request for a $193 million base rate increase — instead proposing a $21 million reduction in current rates.
“The AES rate order issued today is an outrage and Hoosiers deserve better!” Counselor Abby Gray said in a statement Wednesday. “Governor Braun has made it clear that ratepayer affordability is a priority, far more than just a ‘hot topic’ as described by the chairman of the IURC today. This order fails the governor’s call to overhaul how utilities are regulated in order to lower bills for ratepayers.”
Gray’s office represents Hoosier ratepayers in regulatory cases.
“The order approves a substantial profit margin for shareholders in addition to a rate increase for customers,” she continued. “It even requires ratepayers to pay approximately $3 million to AES lawyers and experts.”
AES Indiana provides electricity service to about 490,000 homes and businesses in Indianapolis and some nearby areas.
The utility originally sought $193 million in rate increases. The previously proposed settlement agreement dropped that to $91 million, while the final, approved settlement agreement lands at $71 million.
Three IURC members supported the increase: Zay, David Veleta and David Ziegner.
Commissioner Bob Deig voted no. A fifth member, Anthony Swinger, recused himself because he worked on the case previously when he was on the consumer counselor’s office staff.
Ben Inskeep, program director for ratepayer advocacy group Citizens Action Coalition, said utilities across the country often ask for a larger increase than they need, knowing that regulators will disallow “roughly half” of it.
“The latest AES Indiana fuel adjustment clause proceeding shows AES Indiana is actually not only earning all of their allowed profit but over-earning by $19 million their return amount,” he said. “They’re already extremely financially successful at this moment in time, so it’s rather bizarre to even get an extra $71 million dollars approved here.”
Inskeep also noted that the increases will fall disproportionately on residential customers over commercial and industrial users.
Brandi Davis-Handy, president of AES Indiana, said the company has maintained some of the lowest rates in the state for more than a decade “through disciplined planning and a focus on efficiency. We applied the same approach here by working closely with stakeholders to make balanced decisions that keep the system reliable, limit customer impact, and align with the state’s energy pillars.”
AES said for a typical residential customer using 1,000 kilowatt-hours per month, the increase will be less than $5 per month per phase. Phase one rates will be implemented in July 2026 and phase two rates will be implemented in January 2027.
The final order says the utility “will not seek to implement a change in basic rates and charges as a result of its next base rate case before January 1, 2030.”
A new law, however, requires all utilities to file a multi-year rate case in 2029, though implementation wouldn’t happen until 2030.
-
World5 minutes agoUS tells ASML it is concerned China may have top chip tool, Bloomberg News reports
-
News8 minutes agoSan Francisco Film Patrons Are Found Dead on Side of Highway
-
Politics13 minutes agoVideo: Reflecting Pool Turns Green, Paint Peels After Renovation
-
Health28 minutes agoNew At-Home DNA Test Reveals if GLP-1 Weight-Loss Drugs Will Work for You
-
Lifestyle43 minutes agoWhat does freedom actually look like? : It’s Been a Minute
-
Technology52 minutes agoBarret Zoph is out at OpenAI again after just five months
-
World58 minutes agoIran hardliner behind US deal warns Tehran won’t honor agreement if Trump fails to deliver
-
Politics1 hour agoTop GOP lawmaker rallies around conservative school board member facing calls to resign
