The results are in a primary round up.

Lilly opens a new facility in the LEAP district, and Hoosiers get a gas tax break for another month.

From the television studios at WFYI Public Media.

It's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending May 8th, 2026.

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

Additional support is provided by ParrRichey.

Trump got what he wanted in Indiana Tuesday night.

Indiana Senate Republicans who opposed congressional redistricting were largely defeated during the elections after President Donald Trump's call to oust him.

As Ben Thorp reports, the results show Trump's continued sway in Indiana.

A majority of incumbent Indiana Senators lost their primary elections after months of political threats and millions of dollars pitted against them.

Incumbents argued that their constituents didn't want redistricting during the vote last year, but now most of them have been voted out.

Laura Merrifield Wilson is a professor of political science at the University of Indianapolis.

She says in American politics, incumbents usually win.

It's highly unusual to see so many challengers just see incumbents.

And I think.

That has to be attributed at least to the current political dynamics.

Wilson says the night was a win for Trump and could mean Indiana revisits redistricting next year.

So will this significantly impact Indiana's General Assembly?

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

Democrat Lindsey Haake.

Republican Whitley Yates.

Oseye Boyd, editor in chief at Mirror Indy.

And Niki Kelly, editor in chief at Indiana Capital Chronicle.

I'm Jill Sheridan, managing editor at WFYI.

So, Lindsey, what was your reaction as other Democrats watching as a result is coming in?

Well, I mean, you had some pretty interesting results on Tuesday night.

I would just as yes, the national conversation is a big one, obviously.

it's that somewhat of a precedent for races after the redistricting issues have come about and all of a sudden, you know, let's see what the thumb that was put on this, by President Trump, how that resolves.

I would say I don't think it's a win for Trump.

I think it's a win for dark money.

just my take on it.

but I do think there's some pretty big losses too, at the statehouse.

I think losing Senator Travis Holdman in the tax conversation at the state House is a huge change.

It will be such a huge change.

And so I am eager to see how those conversations at the state House happen with tax and fiscal Committee especially, but more over just the whole conversation.

Definitely.

And we saw a number of incumbent Republicans lose their seats Whitley a lot of Republicans that have been in place for a very long time.

And we also have heard that, you know, maybe this wasn't really about redistricting, but more about records.

What was your take?

I would agree with that.

I would say promises made and promises kept.

We sat on this show and we discussed that there were some threats lobbied against Republican legislators that did not vote for redistricting.

And that is exactly what we witnessed.

Now, I'll also say that in the grand scheme of things, incumbency was like an armor specifically in Indiana, where since 2000, I think only five incumbent Republicans had lost a seat and that was completely shattered.

Then looking at the Braun administration, I think they endorsed 30 candidates, and 26 of the 31 two are in a race that's too close to call.

And so overall, people were saying, you know, that Braun didn't have the juice, but now he clearly has the squeeze because they are doing exactly what they said they were.

And you're seeing the benefits of that.

This isn't accountability vote, and I've said this before, but politicians don't do what you expect.

They do what you inspect.

And people were inspecting this vote and showed up to the polls to hold them accountable.

Do you think, Niki, this was about redistricting in the end or were there so many other factors at play?

I think redistricting started it all right without the Trump endorsement, you don't get the money, you don't get the huge, you know, outside groups coming in.

But once that all came in, all the votes were up, right.

There was an anti-incumbent fervor.

There were questions about taxes.

There were questions about property taxes.

There were, you know, they were really digging into their record.

And so it all started with redistricting.

But that's not the only thing that played a factor.

When we did start to see the results coming in and understood that, you know, a lot of these incumbents were going to be losing their seats.

What were you thinking Oseye?

And do you think, you know that this will have a major implication?

As you know, the legislature gets back together next year.

Yeah, I think what what I was thinking is, wow, that was watching the results come in Tuesday and thinking to some points that have been said, what has happened?

Redistricting then taxes.

We have a lot of people unhappy right now in the state of Indiana with the way things are going.

And people have been saying for a long time they want change and they are voting for change.

And so and also thinking ahead to the general election and what's to come, because that will really let us know just how much of a mandate and just how upset people are with what's going on.

Because who we put into, in the general election, we vote for us who will be in the state House.

So that will definitely make a difference if the challengers actually make it in there.

And we're seeing redistricting now, Lindsey and so many other states as well.

Is this something that we're just today?

Yeah.

Is this something we're gonna have to deal with again next year?

here in the Indiana legislature?

Not convinced yet.

but, hey, I've seen crazier things.

You think so?

Okay, well, we might want to take some bet on that.

but.

Yeah, not that I gaming a thing.

but anyway, so you just saw out of Virginia today, changes you saw in Florida, and you've even had chit chat about South Carolina.

So, yes, I mean, I'm I'm ready for it if it happens.

I hope it doesn't.

But I feel like we've had this conversation.

But maybe I'm wrong.

You think we're going to be seeing again an effort next year?

Yeah.

Several bills will be filed.

And you know, if Rod Bray retains leadership, they can maybe fight it off.

But I you know, I don't know.

Because that's the other big question.

I don't I think.

I know he.

Won't.

He says he wants to do.

So yeah, I think it's going to be a hard climb for him to stand.

And that's yeah, that's the other big question.

Well President Pro Tem Rod Bray keep his seat.

You're saying that's very much at risk.

Very much.

We, obviously there were a million other, you know, races.

not a million.

But how was there anything else that stood out to you Whitley that, on election night as far as results?

Lots of results stood out.

I think that when looking at the congressional races, there are some that were a lot closer than people would have liked, which lets me know that going into the general, there needs to be strong campaigning and strong messaging from Republicans, specifically in congressional District five.

And we saw, you know, as well as some really tight races and voter numbers up a bit, you know, across the board in Indiana, which traditionally.

Does.

Very poorly in primaries.

It did.

And it was really yucky Turnout was.

That came out.

In seventh district specifically.

That was much higher.

And so I think that's an important takeaway too, that you did have some upsides for this, despite all the crushing, you know, blowback that, you know, primaries are bad for business or what have you.

But you saw a lot of turnout increase.

And and I think that that's a good thing.

But it also shows yet again, like, how does that thumb on the scale really work out for a leadership?

You know, that I'm still kind of weighing how that all happened with like the Mitch Daniels versus Mike Braun match up on some of these mailers that I'm I'm.

Also thinking that people are really beginning to be engaged in the primaries, like really understanding just how important the primaries are.

midterm elections, not just presidential, not just general, but people are really beginning to understand, okay, I need to be at the primary to get to make my voice heard.

So that's that's what I. That's what I hear in the in all of your civic engagement work.

And that counts.

I mean, we're still looking at district 23 where it's like there's no vote, literally.

I mean, the deadline.

For every vote for.

Recounts is May.

18th, May 15th, definitely.

But 15th, we'll.

Be literally counting those provisional ballots.

And, and that race still undecided up in west central Indiana.

And also northeast Indiana.

Senator Brown from district not quite as tight 15 votes.

But that's still something that's remarkable that.

I think a lot of people also, even to your point, a lot of people are pushing back, too on the primary structure and how it is.

Yeah, and a lot of people were still realizing that they couldn't vote for Secretary of State for they couldn't vote for their, and so there was a lot well, there's a lot of pushback on just the system of how it built here in Indiana.

And I think that's a larger conversation.

Or awareness of that as well.

Well, it's time now for viewer feedback.

Every week we pose an unscientific online poll question.

This week's question will Tuesday night's results when Trump backed candidates won.

So many races have a lasting impact in the General Assembly.

Vote yes or no.

And a parallel last question posed to viewers Will Trump's threat to get rid of senators who voted against redistricting be successful during the primary election?

8% saying no.

ninety or 8% saying yes.

92% saying no would not be successful.

So I think a lot of people were surprised on Tuesday night.

If you would like to take part in the poll, go to wfyi.org/IWIR and look for the poll.

Eli Lilly opened a new genetic medicine facility in Lebanon's LEAP District Innovation District this week.

Zak Cassel has more on the economic announcement.

Lilly Lebanon Advanced Therapies the new facility.

It's the pharmaceutical companies first to open in Lebanon's LEAP district.

Lilly will produce next generation medicines on the campus, including for weight management, obesity and heart disease.

The company is investing an additional $4.5 billion in the campus.

CEO Dave Ricks says Lilly wants to be a good neighbor to Lebanon.

As we open this first production facility and announce this next phase of investment, I'd simply frame it as this.

Lilly's legacy a partnership in Indiana, continues.

Lilly will soon celebrate its 150th anniversary.

A second production facility will open in 2027.

So Whitley, as the LEAP district really starts to be built up, we see what's happening there in Lebanon.

Will this have an impact?

An economic impact on Indiana?

Absolutely.

I mean, this is a major investment, and it's not just an investment into Lebanon, it's investment into Indiana.

It is right in alignment with the Braun administration's initiative to invest over 1 billion into the life sciences category and to bring these high paying jobs.

And so, in a time where you're watching businesses being a little bit more sheepish about hiring, about building, about expanding, you see Lilly double down on investing in Indiana and investing in facilities that are going to bring high paying jobs to the community around them.

I think it's a win for Indiana.

It is a win for innovation through economic development.

I did think it was interesting, though, Lindsey, as we, you know, take a look at what's happening in the LEAP district and we see another gigantic data center that's happening up there with Meta, You know, right now building, I hear it's 24 seven around the clock, the building that's happening there, I. Mean, even some of that pipeline build out near her house is.

That innovation as well?

Oh well sure.

Yeah.

Obviously any economic activity is going to improve the economics scenario for Indiana.

But I'll tell you it comes at a cost.

It comes at a significant cost.

Eli Lilly is not the only tenant there.

There are more obviously more projects than just, than just didn't just Lilly significant, investment.

But no, I think you've got to weigh the pros and cons.

I think every, every opportunity for economic development needs to be weighted with those concerns in mind.

And you have a significant push amount of pushback on, the LEAP project just in general, based solely on the environmental impact and also the the activity around the site and building, you've got a lot of activity.

The lights are on constantly.

It's bothering neighbors.

You've got a lot of of concerns.

It is impacting folks negatively.

And so I think the whole conversation needs to be part of of the story.

I mean, Niki, you were there, you saw the facility.

And what they're trying to do is amazing.

The genetic medicine piece of it.

Absolutely.

I mean, I think people in their head, they have like an idea of manufacturing.

Right.

And an old school dirty kind of manufacturing floors.

And it's just so different than that.

It's so high tech.

they're putting $18 billion into that area so far.

There are certainly people aren't happy with it there, certainly people who say we shouldn't give up all that farmland.

and, and it's so, you know, it remains to be seen if it's ultimately a success.

I don't know how the Lilly part is, obviously, but they also are sitting still on thousands of acres, and they only have two tenants.

And that's just Meta and Lilly.

And so they're still going to have to find some other people to make it worth it.

And we're talking about that energy piece as well with this LEAP project.

Oseye.

And we're hearing recently that, a plan to maybe bring water from Eagle Creek and back that's on, that's not going to happen now.

But so many questions as well as, as it goes as far.

Yeah, it was definitely a win for the people who did not want the water to come back and be discharged into Eagle Creek.

but there are costs to progress and there are costs to, technology.

And so we have to figure out the balance of that.

There will be a thousand jobs with this Lilly, with this new Lilly, building and, life science.

I can't think of all the words.

Sorry.

The life sciences industry, life sciences industry.

so there's a thousand jobs and they matter will bring 300 more, right?

but there still need to be more tenants to actually get the rate of our investment on that, to make people feel like it's worth the cost because we are losing farmland.

And that also means, water, water lands that have been lost too.

So there's a lot there's a big cost.

But also we need jobs in this and we need good paying jobs in this in this state.

And the state invested a lot in these innovation districts.

Talking about LEAP for how many years.

Now?

It's been many.

It's been a lot of years.

It wasn't Brauns idea.

It's Holcomb's.

It's been around for a long time.

So it's good to see something that's.

Happening to come to fruition.

Well, as high gas prices continue to stress budgets across the state, Indiana Governor Mike Braun extended the gas tax break another 30 days as affordability continues to be a top priority, Governor Mike Braun suspended the usage and excise tax that adds up to a 12% discount at the pump.

He also plans to increase gasoline reimbursement rates for state employees.

We will continue to use every tool available to make life more affordable for Hoosiers.

This latest extension is the last the governor can make.

He would have to call a special legislative session to further suspend the tax.

Indiana gas prices are well over $4 a gallon.

Braun pointed to factors besides the Iran war, including the annual switch to a summer blend, which is more expensive.

So, Niki, was this a no brainer for the governor to move?

It was certainly a no brainer to extend the sales tax suspension, but he went much further.

We've never had a governor suspend the full gas tax before, so that's an additional $0.36 per gallon that Hoosiers are going to save on top of the sales tax.

That was a big move.

You know, a month ago, he said they didn't have the authority for it.

And, you know, then he said, you know, we got to do this to help out because, you know, we're seeing such spikes due to the Iran war.

He wants to give something to Hoosiers.

And, you know, he took a chance and did this one.

I didn't think it was interesting that he pointed out that, you know, and it wasn't just a war, you know, summer fuel and a lot plays into.

Obviously, I don't think dissecting that right now would be helpful for anybody.

But I do want to take issue with the Hoosiers point, because there's actually no proof that this will impact Hoosiers.

Only many people come through Indiana's backward, disproportionately impacted state for for a revenue stream like this because we have so many commute once.

Scuse me, not commuters, but folks on our, freeway system that are traveling through the state.

And so because we have more of those, individuals buying gas, we will then be impacted.

The revenue stream will be impacted to benefit those of us who are not Hoosiers.

And so I do worry that, yes, this is nice to have a 36, $0.36, knocked down on on the cost.

But I think about the long term or the long term economic impact.

I think you're robbing Peter to pay Paul here.

Well, we are probably not going to see, you know, gas prices go down too much any time in the future.

I mean, maybe we will.

But the governor, in order to lift this brake, what they would have to call another, special session, as I understand.

Do you think that's going to be something that happens?

I think if we continue to see the long term increases in the price of fuel, then something will have to be done that is more sustainable for Hoosiers.

However, you want a governor that looks at where we are in society and where we are as a state and is agile enough to respond.

His agility to respond to the needs of Hoosiers is important, and in doing that, he's doing things that no other governor has ever done.

And so I think it's really great for us to be able to see that level of leadership on a state level.

As someone who drives quite far to go to Costco to get $0.10 off of gas, $0.36 is huge.

When gas is sitting at $4.

When you add.

That, yeah.

Yeah, like you can talk.

We are Braun into getting this taxation on marijuana because then we would have some revenue stream to talk about.

We got to fix the fuel and and affordability has been something that he has discussed.

We are so used to politicians saying one thing and doing absolutely nothing.

Open to it.

And he said as much.

And in fact, I think he said that in his availability last week, I forgive me, I but anyway, what.

He's doing is, you know, during this announcement, he talked a lot about affordability.

Oseye.

I'm pointing to other things that, we're making an impact on Hoosier lives.

Do you think that that Hoosiers are feeling that as well, or do you think that at least that's something tangible issues.

Right.

We can talk up here, high level about the decisions made and the reasons why.

But at the end of the day, regular Hoosiers don't care about anything but the bottom line and the bottom line is I'm paying less for gas and that makes me happy.

And so for them, whatever the motivation behind Governor Braun's decision, that's all they care about.

He made the decision to lower their cost, and that will help them in other areas so that at the end of the day, we can talk about all the things, but regular people, just like my gas is cheaper now.

Thank you.

And first, one thing to that I notice from the elections as well into this issue, because finally, every single person on the ballot, I think, agreed that affordability was a thing, you know, and that that was a top issue for them.

So it is interesting how this whole I'm I'm glad you said that.

Well, if we only have 30 days though, and we still are seeing really high prices a next month, I mean, what what move can the governor make at that point?

He could call a special session, but that costs money too.

And so I'm not sure he would be willing to go there.

Well see everyone keeping their eyes on those pumps.

Indiana high school athletes can now profit off their name, image and likeness.

The Indiana High School Athletic Association Board of directors approved the new rule this week.

Samantha Horton reports.

The state becomes the latest to allow monetization, with some limitations to the college at the collegiate level.

The new Personal Branding Activity rule allows student athletes to capitalize on their individual skills through commercial activities such as appearances, social media, branding, and endorsements.

Unlike similar offerings at the collegiate level with the NCAA, Indiana's rules will not allow high school athletes use their school affiliation or facility in their personal branding.

IHSAA Commissioner Paul Neidig says it aims to clarify what high school student athletes are permitted to do.

People own their name, we recognize that for a long time, and I think most people understand that.

But then what can you do in promoting your name or using your name to promote other activities?

The policy goes into effect immediately.

So Oseye is this good policy for this is high school athletes.

High school I think the high school students, some of them will say yes, it is because there are already students doing these things.

as a mom of two student athletes and one who played elite at the elite level, you're in that sport year round.

Summer's conditioning fall is to school season.

From that you go into clubs.

If you have AAU you have travel, you have all these things where kids who play sports don't get the time to do some of the to do, to have jobs, to do some of the things that other students do.

So and they're always asked to, hey, come to this camp, we're going to use your name to help promote this camp.

We're going to use your name to help promote this thing.

So it makes sense that they would get paid for it.

It makes sense that IHSAA, its a long one.

actually put some parameters and give guidelines.

And I think what we're the 46th state to finally do this.

So we're a little bit behind the eight ball.

And we do need some guidance and and leadership.

And they're not using the school's name.

They can't be in the school uniform.

but I also have concerns about those sports that are not the big money earned in sports.

That's where we're going to have, probably see some, unfairness there, some other way to be different.

Because my son played football.

He was not the elite athlete.

Sorry, son.

no, my daughter played volleyball.

That's the elite.

But that's not the same.

They're not the same level.

Yeah, they're not the same.

They don't get the same attention.

Basketball and football is where we're going to see a lot of attention.

Well, Niki, we saw, you know, Indiana again, one of the last states to implement this policy.

Do you think they're just trying to get their arms around this issue now, at this point.

Probably, I personally like I don't necessarily know that I have a problem with it, but I just I feel like we did this in college and it's gotten out of control.

And and to me, it's kind of ruining college sports because we're just paying people to change teams every, every year.

And and so I worried that that's kind of the same stuff.

That's going to happen.

Well, right.

But that was the reason.

Right.

But that was the reason we did in college was, oh, this is happening already under the table.

But legalizing it didn't, I think I don't think it it has improved to college sports.

So we'll see how the high school goes.

Do you think that's put too much pressure maybe on high school student athletes or.

Absolutely not.

I think that there's already pressure on high school athletes to perform, to get scholarships and to go to college.

And I want to frame this in another way for underprivileged and underrepresented students and athletes, this could change generational poverty within their family to have the ability to be able to be paid for their name, image and likeness, and to get sponsorships and contract deals and their family may be, I don't know, a family that is relying on entitlements.

This is major in massive, and I think we really need to honestly take it a step further, and it should actually provide some type of reprieve to the school.

So when the school's facilities or athletic facilities need to be upgraded, it's not a burden necessarily on the taxpayers, and it could be utilized and funded in tax through the athletes of the school that are engaging with these potential potentially large donors and vendors.

Yeah, well, the policy does say that athletes cannot, you know, use the schools.

Yes.

the athletes.

But the schools might benefit.

In order to have their athletes participate.

We could have within the policy.

The details matter.

Details matter.

We could have made it to where it benefited the athletic program, even if it's just the athletic program that a portion, 5%, 10% of whatever the athlete is making that the companies have to pay back to the school system or athletic.

I just want as a consumer advocate, I just worry about that kid who doesn't have the representation or the know how to be able to negotiate that scenario to make sure that positive outcome economically for that family is going to happen.

That's all I just want.

And that's in the minutia.

And that's where that's where the the devil is.

I mean, certainly it's already happening for some student athletes, high school student athletes especially, like the Olympic level, to be able to put some, yes, guardrails up.

Admittedly, this is not my expertise like it is yours.

So.

Well, that is Indiana Week in Review for this week.

Our panel has been Democrat Lindsey Haake, Republican Whitley Yates Oseye Boyd, editor in chief at Mirror Indy.

and Niki Kelly, editor in chief at Indiana Capital Chronicle.

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

I'm Jill Sheridan, managing editor at WFYI.

Join us next time because a lot can happen.

And in 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 ParrRichey.