Stay ahead of the curve as a political insider with deep policy analysis, daily briefings and policy-shaping tools.
Request a Demo
Higher education head Chris Lowery on what’s behind the low college-going rate and how to fix it
When Chris Lowery stepped into his role as the new commissioner of higher education in March of 2022, he had his work cut out for him. Indiana’s college-going rate was dropping every year when Lowery agreed to lead the Indiana Commission for Higher Education.
“Let’s not admire the problem,” he likes to say. “Let’s do something about it.”
The commission will release its annual College Readiness Report in the coming weeks, but Lowery has already shared the main takeaway: Still fewer Hoosiers are choosing to go to college. But, more than a year into his gig, Lowery, a former Ivy Tech administrator who oversaw the community college’s workforce initiatives, is optimistic change is on the way.
State Affairs spent an hour with Lowery talking about what’s keeping more Hoosiers from attending college and the major changes lawmakers approved regarding higher education this past legislative session.
The conversation has been edited for clarity, brevity and length.
Q. How did you land in this role?
A. Some time ago, I had breakfast with my longtime friend, [then Indiana Commissioner for Higher Education] Teresa Lubbers. She told me she was going to be stepping away, not retiring. [She] kind of hinted, “Hey, you ought to think about it, Chris.” I said, “Well, if somebody calls, I'll think about it.’ The rest is history, as they say.
It just felt right at the time. It's funny, Teresa and I both read Arthur Brooks’ book “From Strength to Strength.” It's very much about what you do with the second half of your life. I was going to be turning 60 when they were starting to recruit me. I don't know what retirement means.
I gave a lot of thought to it because again, I was doing something I just loved to do. But then also I thought there were more things we could do in Indiana. [We should improve] the college-going rate. People say what do you lose sleep over? I lose sleep over that. And our [college] completion rates, they've improved, but they're not good enough.
The governor and I've joked about this portion before: graduate retention. I said, “Do you think they could put up roadblocks in May after college graduation?” That’s probably a little too far. [Indiana State Police] Superintendent [Doug] Carter probably wouldn’t approve of that. But here we are 14th best in the nation at attracting people to our public and private universities, but we're 40th at retaining our grads. So let's close that gap.
There was something that brought students here, one of our institutions, one of the programs. Most students really like, oftentimes they loved, their collegiate experience. So how can we parlay that to keeping more of our graduates here in the state short of roadblocks and things like that? But, being more intentional about partnering with businesses to really let graduates know, ‘Hey, we want you here.’
Q. Why should the average Hoosier care about college attainment in Indiana?
A. I absolutely love that question. Educational attainment is ultimately about individual social and economic mobility and prosperity, and the numbers back it up. The degree to which someone has mobility during their life to see improvement in economic condition, social condition, and then to, by their own definition, have prosperity, [usually depends on educational attainment.]
In Indiana for someone with less than a high school diploma, the unemployment rate is [more than] twice as high as it is for folks with a bachelor's degree and higher. Indiana's labor participation rate is 63 or 64% today, just a little higher than the national average. The difference between less than a high school diploma and a bachelor's and higher is 28 points. That's stunning.
The median wage from a high school diploma to a bachelor's and higher — the difference 84%. Wow. Roughly [$40,000] to $72,000.
But then also on social outcomes, there are a whole host [of differences]. Not surprisingly, utilization of social assistance benefits [is impacted]. Imagine this: Smaller percentages as you go up the attainment level require [assistance] because they participate in the labor market and make better wages and have greater job security.
Infant mortality, that's a challenge in our state, and in certainly others. [That’s] two times higher in a household of — again, these are averages, this is not to cast anything on any individual — but twice as high for a high school diploma or less than a bachelor's degree and higher for a host of reasons: the ability to have a better job, better pay, better health benefits, not live in a food desert, not live in an exercise desert, all those things.
I am always really super careful never to cast aspersions on anyone. I have friends who literally are like the millionaire next door who didn't go beyond high school. They started a business, very successful, have employed a lot of people, and that's amazing. But for the average person the opportunities become multiplied [due to education]. The good things increase, the less good things decrease and literally, you can measure it in terms of economic and social outcomes.
Q. The college-going rate is continuing to decline. What’s causing that?
A. As with most policies and strategies and so forth, there's reality, and there's also perception, and you have to address both. Affordability, quality and career relevance broadly across the nation are things folks who are considering post-secondary training and education have on their mind.
Can I afford to do it? Or, ‘Hey, I read this in The Wall Street Journal or The New York Times that if you go to college, it's going to cost a fortune and you're going to have a quarter million dollars in debt, and you won't be able to get a part time job.’ Well, that happens, but that's the unicorn as I've been referring to it, but we have to address it.
What are my opportunities to improve economically and socially, in my own life? Again, that data that I was mentioning a few moments ago, we just haven't been talking about that. Why on earth don't we make clear to folks that, yes, there's an investment of funding and time to go do this, but the outcomes, generally speaking, are really good.
On the affordability side of it, of Indiana's public institutions, Purdue gets a lot of credit and should because under [former] President [Mitch] Daniels, they held the line on tuition and fees that are applicable to all students. But our other institutions did, too. In the last decade, Indiana's public institutions are sixth best in the nation in holding down tuition and fees. Nobody has really been talking about it. Hoosiers should know that.
By the way, when you adjust it for inflation, even before this increase in inflation last year, our tuition and fees [decreased]. That's pretty amazing.
We've got to work to keep the cost down, but we've got to do a better job of letting Hoosiers know actually, we have really good institutions, and a good value.
The other thing is we are first in the Midwest, fifth in the nation, for need-based financial aid. We are a generous state when it comes to need-based financial aid. 21st Century Scholars Program, Frank O'Bannon, Workforce Ready Grants and so forth, and we’ve got to start talking about it.
Now, we've got to be vigilant and keep the pressure on. Let's keep it affordable. Like this year with 21st Century, it was around 32 years, and we said, ‘It's great, we can't reach enough kids, let's make it auto-enroll.’ It passed with bipartisan support, with maybe a stray vote here or there that didn't go for it, because we said here's the payoff.
I think we also have to recognize that reaching people takes an effort that's broader than just the Commission, or just the universities and colleges.
Q. You mentioned the automatic enrollment of 21st Century Scholars, which provides low-income students with free college tuition. What other changes are there in the pipeline that could improve that declining college-going rate?
A. We're so excited about this, Kaitlin. Someone who does public commentary a month or two ago referred to the 21st Century Scholars Program as the most significant economic development legislation in 50 years. We went from roughly 20,000 kids or half the kids who are eligible to now all of them, over 40,000. That's amazing that we're more than doubling the number of low-income kids who are going to get the opportunity to go through the scholar success program.
Last fall our staff and I were talking about the Frank O'Bannon Scholarship, which is geared toward low to middle income students. [It’s a] wonderful program that actually wasn't being utilized enough. These cuts had been made back in the Great Recession in 2009 and never restored. And I went, ‘Well, shouldn’t we suggest they be restored?’ The state budget committee last year gave us the green light and it’s a 35% increase. I think it's the second largest financial aid program we have behind 21st Century in the state.
The FASFA, the federal financial aid form that [people] had tried for a number of years in the Llegislature to make [completing] that mandatory for kids to graduate from high school. It had failed, and we put it forward again this year, and again, it passed almost unanimously. With FAFSA our students were leaving approximately $70 million on the table, having not completed [the form].
Other things to come, we have something that I just love this idea, and it's called a pre admissions strategy. We [told higher education institutions], give us what you think would basically be a GPA and/or SAT, that would allow [someone] to know she could go to your institution, and we're going to send to incoming high school seniors, beginning of September, a notification with a list of institutions into which they are pre-admitted and information on how to then go apply.
The other thing I'm really, really excited about, is the Indiana College Core. That's the block of 30 hours that the state figured out a long time ago that with dual credit students have the possibility by the time they graduate to get this block of 30 hours, one year, fully transferable to all of our state institutions and a lot of the privates. So you could start college with a year done, which of course as we know [leads to] better rates of completion and all those wonderful things.
Two years ago in August when school started, only 84 out of roughly 500 high schools offered everything or offered it in partnership with Ivy Tech and Vincennes and others. We will be over 240 this August, and our target is to be over 500 in two more years.
Q. Indiana lawmakers also passed a bill limiting universities from withholding transcripts from students who owe money. Do you expect that to make it easier for adults to get their degree too?
A. Absolutely. We think it's a big deal. When I was at Ivy Tech, [it] was the first higher ed institution to say, ‘Look, we're not going to withhold [transcripts] because the student owes something.’ [There’s] a whole lot of reasons that they may not be able to pay. One of the most compelling things I've heard is this person owes a bit of money, they need their transcript because what they're trying to do is further their education, get a better job so they can pay you back.
I think any of those things where we can streamline a process for students where we can open up more opportunities [are good]. FAFSA was one of those interesting ones. There were some folks I would talk to, and they’d go, ‘Well, are there drawbacks [to requiring students to complete the FAFSA?]’ Look, the federal money, it's going to go somewhere. I just don't want it to go to California or New Jersey or Illinois. I want it to come to Hoosiers, and of course, there's an opt out provision if a family doesn't want to do it. Nobody's going to be draconian about this. But gosh, these federal dollars are going somewhere, let's just bring them to Indiana.
Q. The annual college readiness report hasn’t been posted yet. I know you already shared the college-going rate, but is there anything else interesting in that that you’re able to share now?
A. I do think what is interesting is it's the least amount of decline that we've recorded in many years. Last year it was 53.4%. This year is 52.9%. So it did decline very marginally. When you dig down into the data, whether it's by race, ethnicity, gender, income, socio economic status, there was very little fluctuation within those also.
Part of what I'm seeing is some hopefulness. Have we sort of hit the bottom there? And then if it would otherwise remain there, now we have these things jumping in and supporting an increase: The Frank O’bannon, 21st century, FASFA, Indiana college core, the pre-admissions, the transcript. All of those things ought to be very positive to help us reverse that decline.
That's going to be the headline: The smallest decline at least in the last five years.
Q. We have to talk about the change in how colleges and universities are funded by the state. What are those changes and what impact could that have?
A. A Senate bill from last year, and then a working group that transpired said, ‘Hey, Commission of Higher Ed, you’ve got to take a new look at this.’ We have had a performance funding formula for many, many, many years.
My understanding is, back in the Great Recession [lawmakers] took the pie and they pulled a piece out of it to reallocate it based on performance. [This time] rather than pulling a piece out, the legislature said do a new formula, but base it on new money.
The other thing that they were very clear about was to make sure we focused on mission differentiation. We have seven state institutions, we've got the regionals. Their missions differentiate; they are different. The economy needs something different. People who are attending the institutions need and want something different.
The other thing that we were able to do, rather than focusing only on completions, which is where it had been for many, many years, we said, ‘Hey, you'll remember that we really identified three key things the college going-rate, completions — still the bulk of it there, but also graduate retention.’ So in a nutshell, on the [college-]going rate, we said, let's focus on at-risk, low-income youth, and then on the adult population. We still have nearly 2 million Hoosiers without a post secondary credential as adults. So what do we do about them?
Then on-time completions, we've been improving, but we've got to do better. On time is about 45%, I think extended time, which is six years, we're about two thirds of students today. I want us to do better. We have to do better.
And then on graduate retention, it's just basically as simple as it sounds, how well have you been doing at keeping our graduates?
And then the other one we tucked in there, because we think it's really important as a state for IU Bloomington, and Purdue West Lafayette to focus on research. It's not a big part of their pie around performance, it’s 5% out of just the performance side of it. It gives focus to it. Can, one of those institutions, they may do this in working with a private corporation in Indiana, pooling their money together, innovating on something that doesn't exist today, then take it to market and create economic opportunity here in Indiana.
Q. You’ve mentioned we’re good at attracting out-of-state students. Some economists argue that maybe we aren't keeping enough students in-state after graduation because we aren't keeping enough of our high school students in-state, and that some universities are over-prioritizing out-of-state students instead. Is this a problem that you see? Is it tied to a lack of state funding?
A. Our percentage of our own students who end up going out-of-state has been virtually unchanged for years. This most recent group of graduates who we're going to go do something, it's roughly 7% or 8%, has been for years hasn't really changed. It hasn't really affected the [college-]going rate, and I think it's very similar to a lot of other states.
My take on it is, first and foremost, I want more students, residents here who are graduating to go to college. I want them to go in Indiana. They have very good reason to go here, public or private, great schools.
However, let's also attract folks from out of state. We don't have mountains. We don't have ocean beaches. I've lived here all but one year in my life, I think it's the best place on the planet to live. But if that's a way we can bring talent to our state and grow our state, then let's do it. Let's not make it an either or. Let's think of it as an and. We have the ability to bring talent in. I just want to keep them all too; I just can’t do a roadblock in May.
The Chris Lowery File
Title: Indiana Commissioner for Higher Education
Residence: Batesville
Education: Bachelor of Science in public affairs from Indiana University and a Master of Science in management from Indiana Wesleyan University
Career: Prior to his appointment to lead the Commission in 2022, Lowery was a senior vice president at Ivy Tech Community College. Before that, Lowery led public policy and engagement for Hillenbrand, Inc. and was an aide to former Gov. Robert Orr and then-Sen. Dan Quayle.
Family: Wife Jerilyn, daughter Jordan, son Jarrod and two granddaughters
Contact Kaitlin Lange on Twitter @kaitlin_lange or at [email protected].
Twitter @stateaffairsins
Facebook @stateaffairsin
Instagram @stateaffairsin
LinkedIn @stateaffairs
Header image: Indiana Commissioner for Higher Education Chris Lowery talks to a reporter in his office. (Credit: Kaitlin Lange)
Read this story for free.
Create AccountRead this story for free
Create your free account or login to continue reading.
By submitting your information, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy.
Latest Stories
New EPA rules would force Indiana to hasten its energy transition
Indiana is probably the type of state that the Environmental Protection Agency had in mind when it proposed a new set of rules that target fossil fuel-fired power plants.
Not only is the state still reliant on fossil fuels for most electricity — more than two-thirds is generated by coal (47%) and gas (29%), data show — Indiana has some of the worst air quality and is one of the most polluted states in the country. The primary focus of the new EPA rules, though, is an attempt to significantly reduce the amount of carbon dioxide released by those plants. Fossil fuel-fired power plants are responsible for about a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions, according to the EPA, and for about a third of the nation’s carbon dioxide emissions that are heating the planet.
Yet while Indiana has been slow to adopt renewable energy sources, the pace of the state’s transition away from fossil fuels has been picking up steam in recent years.
But not fast enough for the EPA.
President Joe Biden’s aggressive climate agenda would require states like Indiana to hasten their energy transitions considerably. The draft power plant rules, released in May, would broadly require utility companies to cut their dependence on coal and gas, and to adopt emerging technologies that would enable the use of carbon storage and hydrogen.
Now Indiana government leaders and electric utility companies are raising concerns. They say the plans would force Indiana power plants to retire early, which could substantially increase the cost of electricity for Hoosiers while risking the reliability of the electric grid. And they say the technology cited by the EPA is not ready for widespread adoption.
“For carbon capture, while this is a technology that the state is invested in, it is not yet at the scale needed to accommodate all the utilities in the state,” Brian C. Rockensuess, commissioner of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, told lawmakers during a committee meeting this month.
Environmental advocates, however, are characterizing the concerns as overblown. They point to two federal bills — the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law — that contain grants and incentives for power plants to transition away from coal and gas. And they say the power industry always raises concerns about any new regulations but always finds a way to comply.
“They are like the boy who cried wolf,” said David Doniger, a former EPA official and current senior strategic director at the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council. “If you look at the track record, they say this every time and then, if the regulations are in fact adopted, the compliance goes smoothly.”
Indiana agency head raises concerns
Rockensuess voiced his concerns about the new EPA rules to Indiana lawmakers during an Interim Study Committee on Energy, Utilities, and Telecommunications meeting this month.
He didn’t dive into the pros and cons of the environmental impacts; rather, he focused on the difficulty for policymakers and regulators in Indiana who will be tasked with enforcing the final rules adopted by the federal government.
Among the difficulties, he said, are requirements for some power plants to use hydrogen to generate electricity or rely on carbon capture and storage to reduce emissions. Both technologies, he said, are not ready for wide use, yet the federal government would require Indiana to explain how the state would implement the new federal rules within 24 months.
“Bottom line is they are asking for a lot in too short of a time,” he said. “Indiana and other states are being set up to run afoul of that timeframe from the start.”
Those concerns were echoed in a joint letter sent to the EPA by his department, the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission and the Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor.
The study committee also featured an out-of-state speaker who shared fiery testimony in opposition to the EPA proposal. By the end of the presentation, Rep. Matt Pierce, D-Bloomington, questioned whether the Republican leaders considered inviting anyone with a different viewpoint.
“I was just kind of curious as to whether the chairman attempted to invite testimony from anyone in support of the rules, such as the Clean Air Task Force or the Natural Resources Defense Council, people along those lines?” Piece asked.
Committee chair Sen. Eric Koch, R-Bedford, said that such viewpoints were already well-known because of the EPA’s plans, but he would consider Pierce’s request if lawmakers take up legislation on the matter when the legislative session begins in January.
Koch, who also leads the Senate utilities committee, later confirmed to State Affairs that he was unsure what actions the Indiana General Assembly might take in response to the federal rule, but he does not plan to file legislation this year.
The chair for the House utilities committee — Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso — told State Affairs he did not yet know if he would file anything.
Environmental advocates push back
While they were not invited to speak at the public meeting, many environmental advocates in Indiana are supportive of the president’s efforts to curb carbon emissions.
“Probably what you didn’t hear in the testimony at the Statehouse was the cost of mitigating and addressing issues related to climate change. And you probably didn’t hear the effects of air pollution and how that contributes to asthma and other diseases,” said Sam Carpenter, executive director of the nonprofit Hoosier Environmental Council. “In the big picture, all those things need to be considered.”
The Biden administration estimates up to $85 billion in environmental and public health benefits over the next 20 years.
Indiana once relied almost exclusively on coal for electricity. And while the state continues to be a top-five consumer of coal for electricity, the major utility companies have started shifting away from coal in recent years. They’ve largely replaced that fuel source, though, not with renewables but with natural gas. That’s because gas is relatively affordable, and it easily enables utility companies to both meet the daily electricity demands but also rapidly ramp up production during cold snaps and heat waves.
Some utilities are seeking state approval to build new gas plants even now. Indiana customers will be on the hook for whatever is constructed now — such as a gas plant — even if those plants are rarely used or even shut down because of federal regulations. And then Hoosiers will also have to pay for whatever the utility companies build next.
“This continued investment into fossil fuels is going to be a stranded investment,” Carpenter said. “Down the road that’s not going to be paying off. That’s just a bad path to take.”
Future battles
If enacted, the new EPA rules are sure to draw litigation from Republican officials.
Attorney General Todd Rokita has already promised Indiana’s involvement: “Fortunately, the courts will almost certainly strike down these new EPA mandates — and on behalf of Hoosiers, I’ll do everything in my power to ensure that happens,” Rokita said in a statement about the proposed rules.
His comments align with those made by Indiana’s major utility companies. They accuse the EPA of overstepping — arguments that were at the center of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2021 that said the EPA lacked the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon emissions.
Others aren’t as confident as Rokita and utility companies.
Rockensuess, the state environmental management department commissioner, noted in his testimony that the EPA does have the authority because of new language contained in the Inflation Reduction Act, which Congress passed after the Supreme Court decision.
“It clarified and granted them the authority to regulate greenhouse gasses,” Rockensuess told lawmakers.
Rockensuess said he expected to see the final EPA rule by next May.
Contact Ryan Martin on X, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, or at [email protected].
Facebook @stateaffairsin
Instagram @stateaffairsin
LinkedIn @stateaffairs
Header image: A row of solar panels sits outside AES Indiana’s Harding Street power plant. (Credit: Ryan Martin)
Eric Doden says school district consolidation is ‘death knell’ for rural Indiana
Republican gubernatorial candidate Eric Doden is calling on the Indiana Chamber of Commerce to end its support for school district consolidation in rural Indiana.
In a letter sent today, the Fort Wayne businessman labeled the business group’s position as “damaging.”
“While the stated aims of this position are laudable, the message sent to our small towns and rural communities is damaging,” Doden wrote. “Proposing to do away with small public school districts through consolidation will be seen as a death knell for the millions of Hoosiers who live in small towns and rural communities.”
For years, the Indiana Chamber has advocated for fewer school districts across Indiana. A 2017 study commissioned through Ball State University identified worse educational outcomes for students in smaller districts in several categories, including scores for state standardized testing and the SAT, as well as the pass rates for Advanced Placement classes.
The Indiana Chamber re-upped its position last month when it released its long term economic development plan. Among the listed policies was a goal to “reduce by half the number of very small school districts with enrollments below 2,000 students to provide much stronger educational opportunities for rural students and communities.”
More than half of Indiana’s school districts have fewer than 2,000 students.
In a statement to State Affairs, Indiana Chamber President and CEO Kevin Brinegar said the state is providing a “two-tiered educational system” depending on income and ZIP code.
“Hoosier students should not be limited academically solely due to where they live. And that’s the case now in some of the smaller school districts where students are not afforded the opportunity to take a full array of STEM, Advanced Placement or college preparation courses,” Brinegar said in the statement. “The Chamber’s stance on smaller school district consolidation is rooted in wanting to lift up young Hoosiers in these rural communities, so they have a better chance at prosperity by properly preparing them for the state’s current and future job opportunities.”
The statement also contained a specific response to Doden’s criticism.
“We would be happy to sit down with Mr. Doden and go through the research and show him why we have adopted this position for the betterment of the academic and economic opportunities for our young people,” Brinegar said in the statement. “The status quo that Mr. Doden is championing has and will continue to leave small communities, schools and students behind. That’s not acceptable.”
But whereas the business group sees consolidation as one way to improve life in rural Indiana, Doden sees the opposite.
“Across our state it’s easy to see the remnants of a school consolidation push that began in the 1950s,” Doden wrote in his letter. “Too many towns that lost their local school to consolidation dried up and were virtually swept from the maps while other towns kept their schools and their identities. These communities had a better opportunity to survive.”
Doden also cited one of his policy proposals, which would redirect $100 million in state money toward small towns — in an effort to address declines in populations and quality of life.
“With local leadership and local control, we can revitalize our small towns and hometowns with a fraction of the investment we give away in the form of incentives,” Doden wrote.
Doden addressed the letter to Vanessa Green Sinders, who will replace Brinegar as the Indiana Chamber’s leader. Her tenure will begin in January, so she was unavailable to provide comment to State Affairs. Either way, the Indiana Chamber’s members are the ones who suggest policy positions for the board of directors to approve before each legislative session.
In addition to Doden, the crowded Republican field for governor includes U.S. Sen. Mike Braun, former Commerce Secretary Brad Chambers, Lt. Gov. Suzanne Crouch and former Attorney General Curtis Hill.
Jennifer McCormick, the former state superintendent of public education, has emerged as the leading Democratic candidate. Instead of school district consolidation, the state should reevaluate its expansion of school choice vouchers, McCormick has previously said.
Contact Ryan Martin on X, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, or at [email protected].
Facebook @stateaffairsin
Instagram @stateaffairsin
LinkedIn @stateaffairs
Header image: Eric Doden, 2024 Republican candidate for governor of Indiana (Credit: Eric Doden for Indiana Governor/Facebook)
Attorney general faces misconduct allegations in handling of high-profile abortion case
The Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission today filed a formal complaint against state Attorney General Todd Rokita that alleges three violations of attorney professional conduct rules.
Rokita faces official allegations that he committed professional misconduct with his public comments about Dr. Caitlin Bernard after she provided an abortion to a 10-year-old Ohio rape victim last summer.
Rokita is defending his actions, saying that state confidentiality laws shouldn’t apply to him because Bernard was the first to talk in the news media about the girl’s treatment. It could take months before the state Supreme Court decides whether Rokita will face any punishment.
What’s Happening
The commission didn’t ask for a specific punishment against Rokita, asking simply that he be “disciplined as warranted for professional misconduct” by the state Supreme Court.
Commission Executive Director Adrienne Meiring filed the complaint that focuses on actions by Rokita and his office between early July 2022 and Nov. 30, 2022, when the attorney general’s office filed a misconduct complaint against Bernard with the state Medical Licensing Board.
Bernard drew national attention in the days after a July 1, 2022, story by The Indianapolis Star quoting her about the young girl’s abortion just days after the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade.
The complaint against Rokita highlights his July 13 appearance on a Fox News program, during which he said he would investigate Bernard’s actions and called her an “abortion activist acting as a doctor — with a history of failing to report.”
It also points to his office’s unusual action of publicly releasing on July 13 a letter to Gov. Eric Holcomb that named Bernard in seeking records from two state agencies and a July 14 press release from his office about the investigation.
The complaint alleges Rokita’s actions violated confidentiality requirements of pending medical licensing investigations under state law and by doing so Rokita “caused irreparable harm to Dr. Bernard’s reputational and professional image.”
Rokita responded Monday with a legal filing saying that the confidentiality requirements shouldn’t apply to him because Bernard had already gone public about the girl’s medical treatment.
Rokita also argued that “The Attorney General, an elected official who answers to the public, has a duty to keep the public informed of the Office’s actions and decisions.”
The state Medical Licensing Board voted 5-1 in May to reprimand Bernard and fine her $3,000 for violating patient privacy laws. The board, however, voted unanimously to reject allegations from the attorney general’s office that Bernard violated state law by not reporting the child abuse that led to the girl’s pregnancy to Indiana authorities and did not issue any restrictions on Bernard’s medical license.
Why It Matters
The Disciplinary Commission’s complaint carries the potential of forcing the Republican attorney general from office.
State law requires that the attorney general be “duly licensed to practice law in Indiana.” The state Supreme Court, which has the final say over attorney disciplinary matters, has wide discretion, with options all the way up to permanently stripping an attorney of his law license.
Rokita won the Republican nomination for attorney general in 2020 over then-Attorney General Curtis Hill after Hill faced allegations that he drunkenly groped four women at a party celebrating the end of the 2018 legislative session.
The Supreme Court suspended Hill’s law license for 30 days, saying that “by clear and convincing evidence that [Hill] committed the criminal act of battery.” The court rejected the hearing officer’s recommendation of a longer suspension that could have forced him from office. Hill is now seeking the Republican 2024 nomination for governor.
Rokita has sought to burnish his anti-abortion and national profile with the Bernard case. Besides challenging Bernard’s medical license, his office last week filed a lawsuit against the doctor’s employer, Indiana University Health, alleging it violated federal law by allowing Bernard to disclose information about the Ohio girl’s treatment. The girl’s mother brought her to Indiana to receive abortion drugs because an Ohio ban on abortions after six weeks had taken effect after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last summer.
What’s Next?
Rokita is entitled to defend himself with a hearing before a judicial officer appointed by the Supreme Court, who would then submit a recommended punishment to the court.
In Hill’s case, it took about 14 months from the time that the disciplinary complaint was filed against him for the court’s five justices to receive the case and make their decision.
Rokita’s defense lawyers include two from the Washington, D.C., firm Schaerr-Jaffe. The firm also assisted the attorney general’s office with the case against Bernard under a contract allowing it to bill the state $550 an hour for work by the firm’s attorneys.
“This is a complaint against the official duties of the Attorney General and is an attack against his official capacity, so this is paid by the office,” Rokita’s office said.
Rokita isn’t backing down in the political battle, either, as he released a statement Monday calling himself “a passionate fighter” who “is beating back the culture of death, grievance and transanity being pushed by radicals in workplaces, schools, media and government.”
Democrats argue Rokita is using the Bernard case “to further his own personal political ambitions.”
“Todd Rokita’s actions toward Dr. Caitlin Bernard over the past year brought shame and ridicule upon our state,” Indiana Democratic Chairman Mike Schmuhl said in a statement. “Now, he is starting to see the consequences of making baseless claims regarding a medical professional on national television.”
Check out our summary on TikTok:
Tom Davies is a Statehouse reporter for State Affairs Pro Indiana. Reach him at [email protected] or on X at @TomDaviesIND.
X @StateAffairsIN
Facebook @stateaffairsin
Instagram @stateaffairsin
LinkedIn @stateaffairspro
Header image: Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita speaks during the America First Agenda Summit organized by America First Policy Institute. (Photo by Oliver Contreras/SIPA USA)(Sipa via AP Images)
Sen. Jon Ford confirms move to coal industry group upon resignation
Republican Sen. Jon Ford of Terre Haute confirmed Friday that he is resigning from the Legislature to become leader of an association that promotes the coal industry and other fossil fuel producers in Indiana.
Ford told State Affairs that he will join Reliable Energy this fall after his Senate resignation takes effect Oct. 16.
“I’ll be running the association, the business side of it,” said Ford, who faces a one-year prohibition on being a paid lobbyist after leaving the Legislature.
What is Reliable Energy?
Reliable Energy was incorporated as a nonprofit corporation by prominent lobbyist Matt Bell in 2020 with the same downtown Indianapolis address as his Catalyst Public Affairs Group.
In testimony to a legislative committee last year, Bell described the group’s members as “fossil fuel producers and the Hoosier businesses supporting the fossil fuel industry.”
“Reliable Energy advocates for policies that ensure an abundant supply of available, affordable and dependable energy in Indiana and across the country,” Bell’s testimony said.
The organization is an offshoot of the Indiana Coal Council.
“I think it really grew out of that group and is really a group made up of membership of people involved in energy in a lot of different ways,” Ford said. “Many of the members are vertically integrated power companies. Some produce coal, some produce energy. Most are involved in alternative energies, as well.”
Ford’s reasons for resignation?
Ford, who was first elected to the Senate in 2014, won reelection last November to a four-year term. His resignation will result in a new senator serving for three legislative sessions without appearing on a general election ballot.
Ford cited personal reasons for deciding to resign less than a year after winning his new Senate term.
“Some things in my life have changed that made me think, you know, the passing of friends and other life events made me rethink what I wanted to do in my life and what I had achieved in the district,” Ford said. “I just felt it was time to move on.”
Ford said the Reliable Energy position didn’t prompt his Senate resignation.
“The job really came after the decision that it was time to move on,” he said.
Ford hasn’t specialized in energy-related issues while in the Legislature and hasn’t been a member of the utilities or environmental committees that consider most such legislation.
Ford has been business development director for the economic and community development group Thrive West Central, based in Terre Haute.
Will Ford become a lobbyist?
State law prohibits members of the General Assembly from lobbying former colleagues for one year after leaving office.
Ford said that even after that time he was not sure he would become an advocate for Reliable Energy in the Statehouse hallways.
“This group has had a hired lobbyist for a while that’s worked with them, so I don’t know,” Ford said. “I would see it playing a similar role to many other associations that are out there, but, you know, main focus will be to grow it and to focus on where Indiana goes forward with energy.”
Involvement in selecting replacement?
Ford was noncommittal on whether he would endorse a candidate to replace him ahead of the caucus of Republican precinct committee leaders who will make that decision in the coming weeks.
“I don’t know at this time, it really depends, I guess, on who steps up,” Ford said. “I don’t foresee myself being at the vote, to be quite honest. I think it’s a decision of the precinct committeemen.”
Check out our TikTok summary:
Tom Davies is a Statehouse reporter for State Affairs Pro Indiana. Reach him at [email protected] or on X at @TomDaviesIND.
X @StateAffairsIN
Facebook @stateaffairsin
Instagram @stateaffairsin
LinkedIn @stateaffairspro
Header image: Republican Sen. Jon Ford speaks in the Indiana Senate chamber. (Credit: Indiana Senate Republicans)