Stay ahead of the curve as a political insider with deep policy analysis, daily briefings and policy-shaping tools.
Request a DemoLobbyists spent $20.7 million during session. Here’s which groups spent the most.
- Lobbyists in the health care, energy and education industries generally spent the most on lobbying this past reporting period.
- Hoosiers for Quality Education, which advocated for more funding for charter schools, reported spending the most on lobbying efforts.
- Out of the top 5 self-representing lobbyists with the largest wallets this past legislative session, four came from the health care industry.
Editor's note: This article is part of a series regarding influence in the Indiana Statehouse. Read more about which lawmakers received the most entertainment during the legislative session here.
By nearly all metrics, school choice advocates walked away from the 2023 legislative session as winners.
Lawmakers approved a massive expansion of the state-funded voucher system, enabling roughly 97% of Indiana students to use state money to attend the school of their choice. Likewise, charter schools will receive millions of dollars in future years, in some cases siphoning away money historically dedicated to traditional public schools.
One clue as to why school choice advocates were successful this year could be in the data compiled and recently released by the Indiana Lobby Registration Commission showing how much each lobbyist spent trying to persuade lawmakers between Nov. 1, 2022, through April 30, 2023 — the period covering the most recent legislative session.
Hoosiers for Quality Education, a school choice advocacy group, and its affiliate reported spending a combined $433,754 on lobbying over the course of six months, hundreds of thousands more than any organization spent lobbying for their own interests. Most of that stemmed from spending on a massive public-facing advertising campaign arguing that charter school students were being unfairly underfunded.
As part of a series tracking Statehouse influence, State Affairs sorted through lobbying data to determine which groups and industries reported spending the most. Altogether, lobbyists spent $20.7 million compensating lawyers, purchasing facetime via pricey meals and professional sporting event tickets or pursuing other lobbying-related expenditures, based on numbers provided by the commission at the close of June.
Out of the top 100 registered lobbyists representing their own organizations, those in the health care, energy and education industries spent the most.
Lawmakers rely on lobbyists for information on how laws will impact different professions or the well-being of Hoosiers. In fact, more than a thousand organizations and companies have filed with the lobbying commission, including some consumer advocates for Hoosiers in poverty or seniors.
“These guys are part-time legislators,” Betsy Wiley, president of Hoosiers for Quality Education, said. “They are not experts in health care, utilities, K-12 education, higher ed, welfare, corrections, DNR. They can’t possibly be, nor can their staff, so they have to find trusted resources to give them data and information to help them make an informed decision.”
But many of the top 100 biggest spenders came from industries that stand to gain or be harmed financially by the laws legislators pass, including those in state-regulated industries such as alcohol or gaming. The State Affairs analysis provides a window into who has enough resources to influence change at the Statehouse. Of course, there are other ways to attempt to garner influence that don’t show up in these numbers, including through campaign contributions.
“You’re talking about really, really large companies that just have enormous resources and deep pockets and with that comes an enormous amount of influence and access,” said Kerwin Olson, executive director of the consumer advocacy group Citizens Action Coalition.
The analysis also showed inconsistencies in which expenditures organizations and companies report as lobbying expenses, which means it’s challenging for every day Hoosiers to track who is actually spending the most money influencing lawmakers. It also might not capture all of the session-related spending if lobbyists were compensated after the fact due to the timeline of the reporting periods.
Top 10 lobbying spenders
- Hoosiers for Quality Education, Inc.: $390,238
- Indiana State Medical Association: $230,638
- Indiana Farm Bureau Inc.: $204,866
- Indiana Hospital Association: $193,700
- Indiana University Health (IU Health): $156,558
- Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce: $151,623
- Duke Energy Indiana LLC: $146,318
- St. Vincent Health, Inc: $142,157
- Americans for Prosperity: $127,416
- AFT Indiana: $126,645
Source: Indiana Lobby Registration Commission's 2023 employer lobbyist total spreadsheet combined with 2023 compensated lobbyist total spreadsheet, sorted by State Affairs. Lobbying firms with diverse clients were excluded.
How the education debate was impacted
Education spending makes up more than half of the state budget, which means lobbyists were unsurprised the industry as a whole spent more than most others. This year lawmakers not only dramatically expanded school choice, but they also pursued a host of other education-related bills, including those that increase work-based learning in schools, prohibit the teaching of human sexuality in K-3rd grade and reduce the power of teacher unions.
Hoosiers for Quality Education might have topped the list in part due to vagueness surrounding when advertising spending needs to be reported as a lobbying expenditure. The group claimed roughly $380,000 for an ad blitz on behalf of the Indiana Student Funding Alliance, which included a call to “close the gap” between funding for traditional public school students and those who attend charters.
“I’d rather air on the side of transparency,” Wiley from Hoosiers for Quality Education said of the decision to include the advertising spend in the lobbying reports. “I would rather over report than under report, so we just reported it all.”
Previously, only traditional public schools received local property tax dollars, while charter schools had to rely solely on state money. That led to a lack of parity between the two, Wiley said.
Because of changes in Senate Bill 391 and the budget — which was supported by Hoosiers for Quality Education, traditional schools in four counties will be required to share future referendum tax levy dollars and other property tax growth with brick and mortar charter schools in the area. Had the referendum sharing requirement alone been in effect in 2022, charter schools in those areas would have received $23.9 million in local taxes that otherwise would have been allocated to traditional public schools, according to an analysis from the state’s Legislative Services Agency. The state also increased its own spending on charter schools.
AFT Indiana, one of the groups representing teachers, also landed in the top 10 lobbyists representing their own interests, spending $126,645, the majority of which went toward paying lobbyists, according to records.
Sally Sloan, executive director of AFT Indiana, left a message for State Affairs saying the organization’s report was inaccurate and would be corrected, but didn’t return multiple followup calls seeking clarification.
Health care industry dominated top 100 spenders
When looking at the top 100 lobbyists, those from the health care industry spent the most — $1.92 million, or more than double what any other industry spent.
Out of the top 5 self-representing lobbyists with the largest wallets this past legislative session, three came from the health care industry. That’s unsurprising given the legislative leaders’ focus on health care-related issues this past legislative session, including increasing public and mental health spending and cutting health care costs for consumers.
The Indiana State Medical Association (ISMA), which represents physicians, spent the second most when excluding traditional lobbying firms with diverse clients, dedicating $230,638 toward its lobbying efforts. The majority of that funding went toward paying lobbyists, but ISMA spent an additional $14,786 on entertainment for lawmakers. The bulk of that entertainment spending came from a dinner hosted for all Senate and House health committee members, a spokesman for ISMA said.
The group, which declined an interview request, lobbied for enhancements to the state’s trauma care system and measures they argued would reduce costs, such as limits on physician noncompete clauses and a reduction in prior authorization requirements.
Such legislation passed, but in some cases with restrictive caveats. For example, as Senate Bill 7 crossed the finish line, it banned noncompetes for primary care physicians only.
Hospitals, which occasionally found themselves at odds with the goals of ISMA throughout the legislative session, weren’t far behind in spending. The Indiana Hospital Association ranked No. 4, spending $193,700, followed by Indiana University Health, which spent $156,558. St. Vincent Health, otherwise known as Ascension, ranked No. 8, spending $142,157.
All three were on defense much of the legislative session as lawmakers threatened to implement price caps in an effort to lower costs at the biggest hospital systems.
Lawmakers didn’t implement price caps, but they did pass legislation requiring nonprofit hospital systems to charge for services based on where the service is actually provided and implementing other reporting requirements. Advocates argued the initiative will lower health care prices, but hospitals warned it will have unintended consequences.
Brian Tabor, IHA president, called the bill “an unprecedented picking of winners and losers within an industry.”
Energy industry pays big
Following health care, spending by the energy and utility industry made up the next biggest category when looking at the top 100 lobbyists.
Duke Energy Indiana, an electric and natural gas company, ranked No. 7, spending $146,318 in the first reporting period of the year, mostly on its own lobbyists or reimbursing others.
Angeline Protogere, a spokesperson for Duke Energy, emphasized that the company complies with all lobbying laws.
“In Indiana, Duke Energy serves 69 counties, and we provide background and education on utility issues to not only legislators representing those counties, but across the entire state,” Protogere said in a statement.
Meanwhile, the Indiana Energy Association, which advocates for utility companies, topped a different list by spending $45,613 on entertainment-related expenses, the fourth-highest spend on entertainment for lawmakers. The association spent $33,182 on at least one unspecified function every lawmaker was invited to and more than $11,000 on tickets and refreshments for sporting events for 22 lawmakers and some of their family members. Half of those lawmakers sit on committees passing laws regarding utilities or the environment.
“Advocacy is centered around issues affecting the energy transition and what it means for our customers and their constituents,” Danielle McGrath, president of IEA, said. “Given the complexity of our issues and the speed at which things are changing, it's imperative to communicate on the issues and provide opportunities for others to learn and ask questions.”
Olson, from Citizens Action Coalition, called the legislative session “one of the most successful sessions in a very long time,” for utility companies.
House Bill 1420, for example, allows the state’s existing utility companies, such as Duke Energy, to have first dibs on potentially billions of dollars worth of new electricity transmission lines. Likewise, House Bill 1421 enables utility companies to charge ratepayers for projects associated with natural gas before the infrastructure comes online.
“The influence and the reach of utilities was extraordinary,” Olson said. “The results speak for themselves.”
Other prolific spenders
The Indiana Farm Bureau and The Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce, known as the Indy Chamber, also ranked high on the list, coming in at No. 3 and 6, respectively.
A majority of the Indiana Farm Bureau’s $204,866 lobbying expenditures came from compensating lobbyists. But the organization also spent $44,900 on at least one event every lawmaker was invited to and $10,798 worth of other entertainment and gifts.
Top 10 gift and entertainment providers
1. Accelerate Indiana Municipalities: $69,185
2. Indiana Farm Bureau Inc.: $55,701
3. Indiana Manufacturers Association: $55,636
4. Indiana Energy Association, Inc: $45,613
5. Indiana Association of Realtors: $37,500
6. The Corydon Group: $29,927*
*non-client expenditures plus reports listing The Corydon Group as a client
7. Indiana Electric Cooperatives: $27,889
8. Association of Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys, Inc.: $27,063
9. Krieg DeVault LLP: $25,115*
*non-client expenses plus reports listing Krieg DeVault as a client
10. Bose Public Affairs Group LLC: $21,829*
*non-client expenses plus reports listing Bose Public Affairs Group as a client
Source: Indiana Lobby Registration Commission's 2023 employer lobbyist total spreadsheet combined with entertainment and gift expenditures on behalf of clients listed on the 2023 compensated lobbyist total spreadsheet, sorted by State Affairs.
The organization, which represents 260,000 member-families, focuses on issues that impact agriculture and rural communities. This past legislative session it weighed in on everything from property taxes to utilities to public health funding. It did not respond to a request for an interview.
Meanwhile, the Indy Chamber reported spending $151,623 on lobbying, the majority of which was for paying lobbyists. Unlike some other organizations, the chamber includes the total salary for its two staff lobbyists in that figure, despite it only making up a portion of thost staff members’ jobs. The chamber, which represents businesses and economic development in central Indiana, also provided $726-worth of Pacers suite tickets to lawmakers.
“With the Indy Chamber being headquartered in Indianapolis and representing the businesses of the nine-county Indy region,” said Adam Burtner, vice president of government affairs for Indy Chamber, “it’s important to ensure legislators from across the state who are here during legislative session can experience what makes Indy the economic driver of the state, including showcasing the events and cultural assets only Downtown Indianapolis can offer.”
Americans for Prosperity, an influential political advocacy group that often contributes to Republican campaigns, also ranked in the top 10, spending $127,416 on its lobbying efforts. Josh Webb, Indiana state director for Americans for Prosperity, said the organization lobbied in favor of expanding the school voucher program and supported many of the major health care cost-cutting bills in their final form this year. The organization is trying to increase its lobbying presence in Indiana.
“We’re not really there to serve any one special interest or one group,” Webb said. “We’re really there to advance these principles of freedom that we believe in.”
The largest ‘entertainment’ providers
Some lobbyists relied more than others on providing entertainment to lawmakers, but it’s challenging to get a complete picture of who was really treating lawmakers the most due to differences in how each lobbyist reports entertainment expenditures.
Big name lobbying firms would have topped the entertainment-providing list, but State Affairs counted entertainment and gifts purchased on behalf of a client toward the client’s total. Still, some groups like Corydon Group, which paid for lawmakers to eat and golf while on out-of-state trips to Hawaii and Arizona, graced the top 10 list when including entertainment not attributable to any particular client.
Accelerate Indiana Municipalities, which speaks on behalf of more than 460 cities and towns, was associated with the highest dollar amount of entertainment in the last reporting period: $69,185. But most of that, the organization said, was due to one $65,000 legislative dinner every lawmaker was invited to.
That number was the total cost of the event and included the expenditures of others in attendance, such as leaders of cities and towns who capitalized on the opportunity to speak with the lawmakers. Some organizations appear to only report the cost associated with the lawmakers.
“We try to be obviously meticulous in our reporting and err on the side of transparency, so I guess we’re a little confused on what the reporting process is for everyone else as well,” said Matt Greller, chief executive officer of AIM. “We’re not the only ones who have these big dinners.”
The Indiana Manufacturers Association, which was associated with $55,636 worth of entertainment spending, shared a similar story. The organization, too, has one high-priced legislative reception each year in which every lawmaker is invited. Andrew Berger, senior vice president of governmental affairs for the Indiana Manufacturers Association, said the majority of people at the event are IMA members. But, the trade organization still reports the cost of the entire event.
“I know there’s events that are not showing up on those reports. I don’t know why; I don’t want to speculate on what other people do,” Berger said. “But I’m confident we’re doing it the right way.”
Neither organization shared specific examples of organizations reporting large functions differently.
Still, both argued the receptions — and lobbying in general — were vital to achieving their goals.
“The lobbying team here at the IMA are well known at the Statehouse,” Berger said. “But the best lobbyists for a trade association like us are our members, the people who actually are paying the taxes, are hiring people in Indiana or paying health care costs.”
Contact Kaitlin Lange on Twitter @kaitlin_lange or email her at [email protected].
Twitter @StateAffairsIN
Facebook @stateaffairsin
Instagram @stateaffairsin
LinkedIn @stateaffairs
Header image credit: Brittney Phan
Read this story for free.
Create AccountRead this story for free
By submitting your information, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy.
How this year’s race for lieutenant governor bucks tradition
The usually quiet process of selecting party nominees for lieutenant governor has taken on additional intrigue, as a controversial Republican outsider has challenged the status quo and the Democratic gubernatorial nominee is keeping her options open.
For years, parties have typically rubber-stamped their gubernatorial candidate’s choice for lieutenant governor.
Republican nominee Mike Braun in May announced his choice: state Rep. Julie McGuire, R-Indianapolis. But she will face a challenge from pastor Micah Beckwith, who has campaigned for the nomination for more than a year and claims to have secured support from nearly half of the majority he would need from the party’s 1,800 nominee-deciding delegates.
As Republicans have not lost a statewide election contest in more than a decade, whoever prevails for the lieutenant governor nomination at the June 15 GOP convention will likely become the state’s next number two.
Democrats appear to have a smoother road ahead of their July 13 convention, but gubernatorial candidate Jennifer McCormick has not yet offered up a candidate and recently told State Affairs that “nothing’s off the table,” including selecting a Republican running mate.
Beckwith’s push
Beckwith, pastor of Life Church’s Noblesville campus, told State Affairs he would be campaigning daily for the next five weeks.
“We’re going to try to hit two counties in a day — one in the morning, one in the afternoon. We’ll just be going to county chairs and delegates and letting them ask all the questions,” he said.
He has run for formal office in the past, finishing third in the 2020 Republican primary for the state’s 5th Congressional District. The seat was ultimately captured by Rep. Victoria Spartz.
Beckwith is also a podcast host and may be best known for a tumultuous tenure on the Hamilton East Public Library Board of Trustees, where he pushed for an audit of children’s books. The unpopular plan ultimately collapsed, and the trustees who pushed for it soon left the board.
Beckwith went public with his lieutenant governor candidacy as he left the board and has since barnstormed the state hoping to court potential delegates. His website stresses he is seeking to give Republicans another choice.
Some 1,600 Republican delegates were selected in the May 7 primary election. Every county is represented by a different number of delegates relative to its population, with some fielding only a handful while larger counties field more than 100 each.
Most delegates are elected, but party leaders must sometimes fill vacancies to reach the 1,800 number.
Beckwith said some 400 of the 1,600 newly elected delegates had already pledged to support his bid.
Though Braun selected McGuire, the nominee said last week he welcomed competition for the spot as his running mate.
He told IndyStar: “I think that we’ll win that competition, and if by chance that doesn’t work, which I think is very slim, I’ll deal with it.”
McGuire fits recent trend
McGuire, a one-term legislator from Indianapolis, fits into a recent trend of Republican lieutenant governors: women with legislative backgrounds who represent a different geographical part of the state from their running mate.
Former Lt. Govs. Becky Skillman and Sue Ellspermann and outgoing Lt. Gov. Suzanne Crouch each fit that description.
McGuire defeated state Rep. John Jacob, a staunch anti-abortion activist who clashed with party leadership, in the Republican primary on her way to winning election to the Statehouse in 2022.
She authored one bill signed into law this past session centered on voiding parental rights over children sexually abused by a parent. She co-authored several education bills.
McGuire may be best known as the former author of a proposed bill to block a new tax district in downtown Indianapolis meant to pay for city services. A compromise was ultimately reached to allow the plan. McGuire removed herself as the bill’s author and voted against it.
Braun’s campaign and McGuire did not respond to requests for an interview.
Braun told IndyStar that he recruited McGuire due to her knowledge of health care policy and that he would campaign on her behalf with delegates.
Two state constitutional officers threw their support behind McGuire on Monday: state Treasurer Daniel Elliott and Secretary of State Diego Morales.
“Indiana Republican Convention delegates will have their choice as to who they will support, as do I,” Morales said in an X post. “I will be supporting Julie for Indiana lieutenant governor.”
“Delegates will have a choice at this convention, and I encourage them to choose Julie McGuire as our Republican nominee for lieutenant governor,” Elliott said in a similar post.
Not the first contested race
This year’s competition harks back to the ’90s, when Republican delegates last oversaw several contentious lieutenant governor nomination processes.
In 1996, GOP gubernatorial nominee and Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith left the selection entirely up to delegates.
Four years earlier, Attorney General Linley Pearson, the Republican nominee, nearly quit the convention over nominations for lieutenant governor and attorney general that he did not agree with.
Both tickets ended up losing in the general election.
In the ’80s, the GOP experimented with the idea of allowing voters to select the lieutenant governor nominee. John Mutz won a five-way primary in 1980 and eventually served two terms.
Mike McDaniel, a former state GOP chairman who served as Mutz’s campaign manager and chief of staff, said the party returned to the convention system in 1984 because leaders believed a lieutenant governor primary wasted campaign money.
McDaniel, a previous delegate of some 15 state and national conventions, supports the tradition of selecting the gubernatorial candidate’s choice for lieutenant governor.
“I think that’s important because the governor has to serve with this person for four or maybe eight years, and you want somebody you can trust, work with and be part of a team with to get things done,” McDaniel said.
McDaniel called Beckwith’s campaign, launched well before the gubernatorial race came into focus, “very, very unusual.” He said Braun will be the party’s new leader at the convention, so backing his choice is a sign of unity.
“If [Braun] has a preference, we should give him his preference,” McDaniel said.
Holcomb weighs in
More recently, delegates have shown themselves willing to break with the gubernatorial candidate on selections for other constitutional offices. In 2022, the convention chose Diego Morales over Gov. Eric Holcomb’s pick, Holli Sullivan, for the secretary of state nomination.
Holcomb, who briefly served as lieutenant governor under former Gov. Mike Pence, weighed in on this year’s competition on Tuesday, telling reporters that delegates should be the ultimate decision-makers on the nominee.
“And we have a history in Indiana of some tickets being blessed and some not,” he said. “And so that’s very instructive going into this convention and [it’s] incumbent upon the gubernatorial candidate to make their pitch to the convention delegates of their preference. And so I’ve been there, done that. And it worked out OK for me.”
What does a lieutenant governor do?
Whomever the voters select in November will have a role to play in the Legislature and within state agencies.
The lieutenant governor presides over the Indiana Senate and may cast a tiebreaker vote if needed. The position also fills in for the governor if the latter becomes incapacitated or dies.
The lieutenant governor oversees four state agencies: the Indiana State Department of Agriculture, the Indiana Housing & Community Development Authority, the Indiana Office of Tourism Development and the Indiana Office of Community & Rural Affairs.
Finally, the position chairs the Indiana Mental Health Roundtable, the Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Task Force and the Civics Education Commission.
Democrats prepared to back McCormick’s pick
Delegates for the Indiana Democratic Party are preparing to support their nominee’s pick for governor, Chairman Mike Schmuhl told State Affairs.
“It really falls to [McCormick] to make that selection over the next few weeks,” Schmuhl said, adding that both parties have typically backed the governor’s selection and that Republicans are “upending tradition” with Beckwith’s candidacy.
“We really do envision it as the pick of the gubernatorial nominee,” he said. “Not only is it a convention pick, but it’s also who the governor wants as a governing partner if elected. It’s a pretty serious responsibility.”
Asked about McCormick possibly backing a Republican for the Democratic lieutenant governor nomination, Schmuhl said he could not comment on her process directly.
“I think my recommendation is when you’re picking someone for this spot, you want to find somebody who expands your appeal and your campaign’s reach,” Schmuhl said, “and who doesn’t limit you or harm you in any way.”
Contact Rory Appleton on X at @roryehappleton or email him at [email protected].
Indiana appeals court chief judge on AI, mental health, and the state’s dwindling number of lawyers
Many Hoosiers may be familiar with their local courts or hear about the opinions of the Indiana Supreme Court, but a middle tier in the state’s judiciary system shapes justice through some 2,000 rulings a year.
The 15 judges of the Indiana Court of Appeals dole out opinions on everything from murder and fraud to civil and child welfare cases. Every Hoosier has the right to appeal a conviction or ruling, and the Court of Appeals, the second-highest court in the state, takes up each case sent its way.
Chief Judge Robert R. Altice Jr. has analyzed thousands of cases since being appointed by Gov. Mike Pence in 2015. Prior to that, he spent 15 years as an elected judge in Marion County.
Altice sat down with State Affairs for a discussion on the ins and outs of his court, how changes in technology and mental health care have impacted his work and what he sees as a major problem facing the nation’s judicial system.
This conversation has been edited for clarity, brevity and length.
Q. What sort of cases does the Court of Appeals hear?
A. We hear really everything except death penalty cases. If there’s a death penalty case, it goes straight to the [state] Supreme Court. Otherwise, we get it.
I’ve had to publish an opinion on a traffic court case. About 65% of our cases are criminal. Every, everything under the sun: murders, rapes, robberies, child molestation.
Then there are civil cases. We do medical malpractice suits, traffic accidents, you name it. Complex business litigation? Our court was involved.
Q. How does the appeals process work? There’s not a new trial, right?
A. I’ll give you an example. Let’s say you got a murder case and the defendant gets convicted and gets 65 years, which is the max for a murder conviction. Everybody in the state of Indiana has got an automatic right to appeal. Not everybody takes that right, but most criminal defendants do.
Somebody will write his brief for him. That attorney will find three issues that they think will result in a new trial if we rule in their favor. That’s really what the appellate process is: Are the errors committed at the trial court level significant enough to warrant a new trial?
And then the attorney general in the criminal cases will write a brief in opposition, then the appellant or the defendant can file a reply brief as well.
We sit and read transcripts and their briefs and do our own research and come to a decision as to whether or not there was error at the trial court level that warrants a new trial.
Q. How many of the 2,000 cases your court receives a year, how many are taken up by the Indiana Supreme Court?
A. It is rare. You start with the proposition that trial courts throughout the state are doing about 2+ million cases a year. That’s everything. We do 2,000 opinions a year. I think the Supreme Court writes about 60 opinions a year. That’s what their taking of ours.
But we’re considered an error-correcting court, whereas that’s really not their role. Their role is more jurisprudential. It’s “should we look at changing in this regard or changing precedent.”
It’s really an inverse pyramid, with the trial courts, I always say, doing the heavy lifting.
Our turnaround time is very quick. It’s about three months. Some states require oral arguments in every single case, but we don’t.
If you ask for an oral argument, we will sometimes grant that. We do a lot of oral arguments, but most of our oral arguments are traveling oral arguments. We travel all over the state and do live arguments. And we do those in front of high schools, small colleges, bigger schools.
We answer questions or ask questions like we normally would do, and then once we’re finished, then we have a question and answer session with the students.
Q. One thing we heard about at the State of the Judiciary is there’s an attorney shortage in the state, particularly in rural areas. How has that affected your work?
A. I think we’re seeing more pro se litigants, people representing themselves, and that can be difficult because we hold them to the same standard that we would hold a lawyer to. It can be really difficult for them. So in that regard, it has hurt.
We’ll go to traveling oral arguments in some rural county, and the bar association will host a lunch for us. We’ll go and there’ll be six lawyers in the room and I’ll say to somebody, “So how many people are in the bar?” And they’ll say, “Well, you’re looking at it.”
That access to justice is a really difficult thing that I think the state of Indiana is dealing with now. The Supreme Court has just set up a task force to look into how we can improve that. I believe law schools are looking at incentivizing young kids to go practice in rural areas.
It’s a real issue. I think a lot of it stems from the low bar passage rate of the last 10+ years. It’ll be interesting to see what the task force thinks.
Q. How has technology impacted the court?
A. Technology has been huge. All our work is done online now. The briefs are filed online.
The technology that we have to keep an eye on, and we’re already looking at, is artificial intelligence. What impact is that going to have on the courts, especially our courts?
You can punch a button and write an opinion. It’s probably not going to be very good, but as technology improves, it’s going to be. We’re kind of leery of that.
But at the same time, from a research standpoint, it’s been a very valuable tool. We’ve been using AI in that regard for researching for some time now, with Westlaw and Lexus as they’ve come out with those kinds of tools.
Q. There have been changes in how the world views mental health. How has that impacted the court?
A. I see it primarily in the sentencing arena. Before every defendant is sentenced by a trial court, a pre-sentence investigation is prepared on them. And so that’s where you see a lot of that because it discusses their entire background, and the number of people with mental health issues coming through has really increased greatly.
I think the pandemic had a lot to do with that as well. But again, the mental health issues are very much creeping into the system, and one of the things that we’re constantly working on trying to be aware of and trying to, to the extent we can with alternatives to incarceration, assist people.
Q. Are there any other challenges facing today’s judiciary?
A. I guess not necessarily my court, but courts in general. It appears to me that Congress is broken. They’re not passing laws.
So, what are we doing? We have to rely on the other two branches of government to kind of take up the slack, and that’s why you’re seeing tons of executive orders.
That’s not traditionally their job, and then you’re seeing the courts being called upon to determine whether or not those regulations are enforceable.
I see that as a long-term problem that we’ve got to get corrected.
Contact Rory Appleton on X at @roryehappleton or email him at [email protected].
How McCormick, Braun view abortion, taxes and other key issues
A Democrat-turned-Republican and Republican-turned-Democrat will soon face off in the race to become Indiana’s next governor.
Sen. Mike Braun, who voted as a Democrat prior to 2012, captured the Republican nomination in Tuesday’s primary. Jennifer McCormick, formerly a Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction, will represent the Democrats.
Voters will decide the state’s next chief executive in November.
A State Affairs analysis of the candidates’ campaign platforms and public statements found key differences — and a few similarities — in their planned approaches to a variety of issues impacting Hoosier voters.
Here is how they match up.
Abortion
Braun: As a senator, Braun has long supported abortion restrictions.
In 2020, he called for the Supreme Court to re-examine Roe v. Wade.
In 2023, he proposed federal legislation that would have required parental notification before any unemancipated minor could seek an abortion. He said at the time: “Hoosiers put their trust in me to stand up for the unborn, and that’s what I’ve been proud to do every day in the Senate.”
He has since signaled support for the state’s abortion ban. His platform reads: “State lawmakers must work to ensure the gains we have made to protect life are secured and strengthened.”
McCormick: In a Tuesday interview with State Affairs, McCormick said her candidacy represented a referendum on reproductive rights.
“I’m going to fight to restore those rights under any authority I can, working in a bipartisan fashion, using our committees, board and our agencies. I also know, too, what everybody’s fear is: that they’re [Republicans] not going to restore those rights and will take [restrictions] further.”
From her platform: “Indiana’s Republican-led extreme abortion ban has taken away the right of women to make deeply personal decisions regarding their own health care.”
Marijuana
Braun: At a March 26 Republican primary debate, Braun suggested an openness to legalizing medicinal marijuana.
“It’s gonna hit all of us. I’m gonna listen to law enforcement — they have to put up with the brunt of it,” he said. “Medical marijuana is where I think the case is best made that maybe something needs to change. But I’ll take my cue from law enforcement there as well. … I hear a lot of input where [medical marijuana is] helpful, and I think that you need to listen and see what makes sense.”
McCormick: The Democrat’s platform also addresses medical marijuana legalization, while speculating on possible recreational use.
“We will fight for the legalization of medical marijuana as a source of state revenue established on a well-regulated marketplace and monitored by a Cannabis Task Force in order to study the issues, opportunities and potential obstructions associated with recreational marijuana legalization.”
McCormick said she would also support expunging low-level marijuana-related convictions.
Taxes
Braun: At a March 19 National Federation of Independent Business forum, Braun said the state’s property tax system “went out of whack because it couldn’t respond to inflation like we’ve never seen before.”
“The way you finance any lower taxes would be to bank on the government being run more efficiently,” he said.
His platform also calls for government spending cuts to finance lower taxes: “Reducing the size of government is the key to cutting taxes, and Mike Braun will work through every state agency to find ways to save money while delivering high-quality services to taxpayers.”
McCormick: McCormick also spoke about taxes at the March 19 forum.
“I agree with a revamp of our taxing system,” she said. “But also it’s about not just how we’re getting our revenue, it’s about our expenditures. Yes, we need to fix our gas tax. Yes, we need to look at the income tax. But here’s the thing: There are hidden taxes we’re not having a conversation about.”
Her platform also references the possibility of combining state agencies as a way to save money.
Education
Braun: In his platform, Braun supports broadening school choice and parental rights.
“As a former school board member, Mike Braun knows parents are the primary stakeholders in their children’s education and every family, regardless of income or zip code, should be able to enroll in a school of their choice and pursue a curriculum that prepares them for a career, college or the military,” the platform reads.
Braun also pledged to ensure critical race theory and discussions about gender are banned in public schools.
McCormick: Education is one of McCormick’s primary issues, according to her platform.
She calls for the elimination of statewide testing, increased early childhood reading and child care options and a minimum base salary of $60,000 for all K-12 teachers.
McCormick also addresses the state’s school choice movement.
“We will call for a pause in the expansion of school privatization efforts while requiring fiscal and academic accountability and transparency for all of Indiana schools that receive public tax dollars,” her platform reads.
U.S.-Mexico border
Braun: Braun’s television ads have touched on border security, and his platform calls for increased focus on the area.
“Joe Biden and the left have created a humanitarian and national security crisis on our southern border,” the platform reads. “As governor, Mike will continue to support and enact the America First policies that were working. Otherwise, every town will become a border town.”
McCormick: McCormick’s border-related plans are more focused on facilitating legal immigration.
“We will work with local, state and federal officials in supporting an immigrant system that creates a safe, timely, orderly and humane pathway for those seeking legal immigration while keeping our communities and those responsible for border security safe,” her platform reads.
Contact Rory Appleton on X at @roryehappleton or email him at [email protected].
Spartz, Shreve, Stutzman win Republican congressional primaries
A central Indiana congresswoman successfully fought off eight primary challengers, while crowded races for three other Republican-leaning congressional districts began to clear in Tuesday’s primary election. And in northeastern Indiana, a former congressman held on in a tight race as he seeks to return to Congress. All of the state’s nine U.S. House of Representatives …