Errington votes ‘no’ on budget, acknowledges cigarette tax increase and cites concerns on funding cuts
Today, April 25, the Indiana General Assembly approved the final version of House Bill 1001, advancing the state's next two-year budget to the governor's desk. State Rep. Sue Errington (D-Muncie) voted against the bill, acknowledging the positive step of increasing the cigarette tax but raising concerns about significant cuts to public health and higher education funding.
“Raising the cigarette tax is a long-overdue move that can discourage smoking and generate essential revenue for our state’s health initiatives,” Errington said. The budget includes raising the per-pack cigarette tax to $2.99, expected to generate approximately $800 million over the next two years. “However, it’s disheartening to see that while we take this step forward, we’re simultaneously undermining our public health infrastructure and educational institutions. This budget reduces funding for local public health grants by $120 million over the next two years, leaving only $40 million annually for health departments across the state.”
“Ball State University and other public universities are vital to our state’s future, providing education and driving economic growth,” Errington said. “Cutting their funding sends the wrong message about our commitment to higher education. Additionally, I am particularly concerned about the language that micromanages our university and faculty affairs. By requiring tenured faculty to prove their worth through rigid productivity checklists, this bill undermines academic freedom and weakens the foundation of our higher education system. Tenure was designed to protect intellectual independence — not to be used as a tool for political oversight. Our professors should be encouraged to pursue bold research and mentor students, not worry about ticking boxes to keep their jobs. This legislation devalues their work and opens the door to censorship in the classroom.”
Errington emphasized the need for a balanced approach that invests in both public health and education — and one that respects university faculty, rather than politicizing their work.
“We should be investing in our communities’ well-being, and this budget falls short of that goal.”